On 26 March, the Department of English celebrated over coffee and cake the latest publication of the Early Modern Graphic Literacies (EModGraL) research project: an edited peer-reviewed volume entitled Graphic Practices and Literacies in the History of English. The 350-page book is published by the Belgium-based international academic publisher Brepols and edited by Matti Peikola, Jukka Tyrkkö and Mari-Liisa Varila. The chapter authors come from Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and USA. They include Aino Liira, Matti Peikola, Janne Skaffari, Hanna Salmi and Mari-Liisa Varila from the Department of English at the University of Turku.
Editors Mari-Liisa Varila and Matti Peikola celebrated the publication of their new book, ‘Graphic Practices and Literacies in the History of English’, over coffee and cake.
Work towards the book started already in 2021 with the workshop ‘Graphic literacy in the history of English’ that we organised in the 21st International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL) in Leiden – or, more precisely, in a virtual conference space provided by the University of Leiden during the COVID-19 restrictions. At the time of the conference, EModGraL had not yet started, but we had already received the great news about our four-year funding from the Research Council of Finland. This allowed us to plan the book thematically as a project publication from the start.
A potential reader who comes across the book in the Utrecht Studies in Medieval Literacy series (vol. 61) might think that it focuses on the Middle Ages. The chronological range of the contributions, however, spans from the fourteenth to the eighteenth century. In addition to Middle English, also Early and Late Modern English materials are discussed in the volume with regard to their graphic practices and literacies. It was important for us to find a publishing series that would allow us to foreground themes that run across the chapters without requiring us to confine ourselves to a specific historical period or a specific medium like manuscript or print. We are grateful to Professor Marco Mostert for providing us with a place in his renowned Utrecht series.
Like the whole EModGraL project, also the new book starts from the premise that graphic features of communication (such as tables or diagrams) require literacy skills and competencies that differ from the reading of ‘monomodal’ verbal text. In the context of the project and the book, we are particularly interested in finding out how and for what purposes graphic features of communication were historically used in texts targeted at English-language readers. We also want to see how readers were instructed in these graphic practices and in the acquisition of the literacy skills they entail. In addition to finding out more about the history of multimodal communication in English, our research also targets the early history of data visualisation in a vernacular context. At the same time, we also learn more about how various graphic practices were instrumental in the transmission of information and the construction of knowledge in late medieval and early modern English books.
The new volume may be placed under the broad umbrella of historical pragmatics, a developing and expanding multidisciplinary field. The book has two main parts plus an introductory chapter by the editors and an afterword by Professor Emeritus Jeremy J. Smith (University of Glasgow). Part I (five chapters) addresses graphic features of text that in various ways contribute to the construction of meaning and the organisation of information on the page, such as layout, colour, punctuation and abbreviations. Part II (six chapters) focuses on the use of specific graphic devices like tables, diagrams and representative images. Overall, the chapters examine an impressive range of primary sources of different domains: medical texts, history writing, instructive and didactic texts, administrative accounts and letter-writing.
Those interested in the topic area of this book are warmly welcome to attend the Reading Visual Devices in Early Books conference organised by the EModGraL project on 22–24 May 2025 in Turku. For further information about the programme and registration, please see https://blogit.utu.fi/emodgral/events/.
The TiTaRa: Between Science and Magic Symposium was a great success! The symposium was held on 10–11 October here in Turku together with the Finnish Network of Magic Studies to explore topics such as Western esotericism, magic, witchcraft and early sciences bordering them (such as alchemy and astrology). Participants arrived from around the world, and the topics varied from medieval England all the way to Finland in the 19th century and everything in between.
There were three of us assistants, and in addition to assisting at the symposium, there was a variety of things to do both before and after the event: checking the symposium’s emails, designing and setting up signposts and nameplates, compiling a book of abstracts of all the presentations and making social media posts… Some of these sounded a little intimidating at first for someone with no prior experience on such things but it turned out to not be too difficult after all because we had such a great team. Help was always available, and it was easy to divide some of the work between the three of us. During the symposium, our main responsibilities were working at the reception and assisting with the technology (thankfully no issues arose with the computer!).
The signpost guiding our guests in
Day 1 of the symposium started bright and early on a rainy October morning for us assistants and other organizers of the event. The first things to do were putting up signs outside so that all of our guests could find their way in and making sure the presentations of the day were set up and ready to go. Attendees started arriving a bit before 9 a.m., and our job was to welcome everyone at the reception and hand out nameplates. At 9:15 it was time to officially start the symposium! The first presentation was one of our two keynote speakers, Professor Egil Asprem from Stockholm University. The presentation was about Romani magic and the sexism & racism involved in it with most fortune tellers at the time being women, as well as the stereotypes surrounding it being fraud.
After the first presentation, we had a quick coffee break and then continued with two more presentations before lunch. As assistants, we divided the work so that one or two of us stayed at the reception and the other(s) helped with setting up the presentations (and had the perk of listening to them!). Hearing many of the presentations was honestly one of the best parts about being an assistant at a symposium with such an interesting theme! After lunch, there were three more presentations, and then it was time for coffee once more, followed later in the evening by a City of Turku reception and a dinner at Brewery Restaurant Koulu. After the coffee, we made sure everything was in order for the second day. The first day went by very quickly and left me more excited.
Day 2 started quite similarly for us as the first day. Friday’s first presentation was another one of our keynote speakers, Carla Suhr from the University of Helsinki, whose topic was witchcraft and medicine in early modern English witchcraft pamphlets. The presentation focused on the visual features of the pamphlets, advertisements of proprietary medicines and how they were presented to the audience. The second day passed by just as quickly as the first, with a total of six presentations in addition to Carla Suhr’s presentation. There was so much to learn, and everyone’s presentation added new perspectives to the theme of the symposium; I learned about the role of magic (and science) in astronomy & astrology, dance, dreams & nightmares and so much more! In a flash, the second day was finished too. Everything went even better than I had anticipated; we had no major issues and everyone seemed to enjoy themselves.
The schedule of day 2
It was a great experience to learn about all that goes into organizing an event like this, and it felt inspiring to see how passionate everyone seemed to be about their own presentations, and all the discussion each presentation sparked among the attendees. During coffee breaks, it was nice to hear bits and pieces of conversations the attendees were having, often inspired by the previous presentations. I would recommend an assistant internship like this to everyone! It was such an interesting way to meet new people and to learn how academic events are organized. The topics were interesting, everyone was extremely kind, and it hardly felt like work at all. A big thank you to everyone who was part of the symposium!
On a warm Saturday morning, on 24 August 2024, a small audience gathered to celebrate Amin Beiranvand as he defended his doctoral dissertation Gendered Sexual Violence and Complicity: A Postcolonial Study of Selected Works by J. M. Coetzee. Professor Joel Kuortti acted as custos and adjunct professor John Stotesbury from the University of Eastern Finland as the opponent.
The viva began with Amin’s lectio praecursoria, in which he outlined the historical and cultural context and the main research questions of his dissertation. He ambitiously investigates the fiction of the critically acclaimed Noble Prize winning Coetzee, whose fiction has dealt with, among other themes, the legacy of colonialism and its violent power relations in human and animal encounters. This underlies also Amin’s research, in which he focuses on Coetzee’s portrayals of gender-based violence against racially and ethnically marginalised women in three novels, Dusklands (1974), Waiting for the Barbarians (1980) and Disgrace (1999).
All’s well that ends well. The opponent accepts the PhD dissertation.
The opponent presented his questions and criticisms in an approachable and captivating way. The questions began with a lengthy discussion on the dissertation title and specifically the many implications of the word complicity. The effects of colonial violence and its legacy are more far-reaching than those confined into the pages of Coetzee’s novels. This inspired the opponent to ask about Amin’s choice of the term “gender-based” when discussing violence in a setting where it springs as much from the colonial power structures and the racial hierarchies portrayed in the fiction.
The rest of the viva dealt with each novel individually and focused specifically on themes of violence, imagination, history, anger and the effects of silences that deny the voice of the oppressed. On this point, the opponent created an immersive experience for everyone in the room by staying silent for a disturbingly long time. Overall, the atmosphere of the viva was relaxed and the opponent told many entertaining anecdotes from his own career, for example being invited to dinner at Coetzee’s house and the introverted author then failing to show up.
The successful viva resulted in an accepted doctoral dissertation and we congratulate the new Doctor of Philosophy, Amin Beiranvand.
As part of my postdoctoral research period in the Research Council of Finland funded project Fluency and Disfluency Features in L2 Speech (FDF2; 2020–2024, PI Pekka Lintunen), I spent six months as a visiting researcher at Philipps University Marburg in Germany during January–June 2023. The main purpose of this research visit was to facilitate collaboration with a member of the project’s international advisory board, Professor Sandra Götz.
It’s all about collaboration
My six months in Germany ended up, indeed, facilitating the collaboration with Prof. Götz in various ways. I appreciated the opportunity to discuss various research-related and other matters with her in our weekly meetings. Working in adjacent offices also allowed us to deepen and extend our existing collaboration, notably on a study addressing the speaking style and task mode effects on L2 speech fluency. I am also grateful to Prof. Götz and the Department of English and American Studies for making it possible to invite one of our collaborators, Dr. Loulou Kosmala from Université Paris Nanterre, for a short visit to Marburg. Her visit greatly facilitated the progress of our collaborative work on the links between fluency and gesture, which is based on the interactional data collected in the FDF2 project. Our pilot study has been published as part of the DiSS workshop 2023 proceedings. My research stay in Marburg, therefore, not only facilitated the collaboration with German colleagues, but also brought me closer to my other central European colleagues, including Dr. Kosmala.
Happy hosts (me and Prof. Götz on the left) and our visitor, Dr. Kosmala (on the right)
Getting to know the department
While working at the Department of English and American Studies, I had the privilege to get to know the department’s wonderful staff. I familiarized myself with the research done in the department by participating in their Linguistics colloquium research meetings and got to present our FDF2 project to the group. During lunches and other casual meetings, I learned that one of my colleagues, Aoife Holmes-Rein, hosts a podcast called Grandiose Grammar, including 45 episodes (and counting!) on various aspects of English Grammar.
During my stay in Marburg, I also got to witness the beginning of a great new practice facilitating casual encounters among the department’s students and staff, namely the Language lovers’ lunch club (3LC), launched by Holmes-Rein, Kathrin Kircili and Prof. Götz. The department has an Instagram account (@iaa_marburg) where they post about the lunch meetings and other activities at the department.
In the first 3LC meeting, the topic was language change and lexical innovation. Finnish “sisu” mentioned!
Teaching benefits research
While my visit was focused on research, I was happy to get the chance to give some guest lectures as well. I talked about social approaches to language learning on a course focusing on linguistic theory and the history of linguistic ideas. In addition, I gave fluency-themed talks on two different courses: one focused on spoken English and another focused on English as a foreign language. The participants on the latter course were future teachers of English, so we focused especially on the teaching of speech fluency. Getting to reflect on these topics with various groups of students gave a lot of food for thought also for my own research. I am grateful to all students in Marburg who attended these classes and to Prof. Götz and my dear “roommate” at Marburg, Kathrin Kircili, who kindly gave me the chance to join their courses as a visiting lecturer.
Other activities
A lot of my spare time during the visit was spent exploring my hometown, Marburg, as well as the cities nearby. To make the most of the central European rail network, I travelled both within Germany (for instance to Cologne, Hamburg, and Berlin) and to neighboring countries (France). In addition to these non-work-related trips, I also travelled outside Europe during my stay to participate in the annual conference for the American Association for Applied Linguisticsin Portland, Oregon. At the conference, I presented preliminary findings on the effects of L1 speaking style and task mode on L2 fluency and got to meet colleagues especially from outside Europe.
The Old Town of Marburg.
All in all, the six months I spent in Marburg were really enjoyable and rewarding, both from personal and professional perspectives. I learned a lot during my stay. I know that our collaboration will continue at least remotely, but I hope I can return to Marburg for another visit sometime in the future.
Thank you to Prof. Sandra Götz, the Department of English and American Studies at Philipps University Marburg and the Research Council of Finland for making this visit possible.
Text by Pauliina Peltonen
First photo by Sandra Götz, second and third photos by Pauliina Peltonen
Switzerland. The home of cheese, chocolate, the Alps… and a bustling English Department at the University of Zurich with an overwhelmingly well-stocked library that I could have lived in for the entirety of my four-week stay and I still wouldn’t have even scratched the surface, and a staff that welcomed me with open arms?
As it turned out, yes.
After two years of part-time PhD work, the stars finally aligned and as funding was secured, the distant dream of a research visit to the home Department of one of my supervisors came to fruition. I arrived in Zurich in late April and was immediately met with extreme kindness and willingness to help with anything and everything from everyone I met at my host Department.
A view of the Limmat river from Lindenhof, the former site of a Roman fort and, later, Charlemagne’s grandson’s palace.
My weeks were spent with my nose firmly planted in both primary and secondary sources of my dissertation as well as discussing my research with my supervisor and getting to know some of the rest of the staff more closely. I also had a chance to present my research at one of the Department’s Lunch Talks, where the audience enjoys their lunch while listening to presentations.
The rooftops and church towers of Zurich.
The weekends were for exploring. I wandered the streets of the medieval Altstadt (Old Town) and visited its various churches, including the Fraumünster, the founding charter of which is from 853 and on display in the church’s crypt (not going to lie, this was maybe the most exciting single thing I encountered). I explored the National Museum, the Kunsthaus (art museum), and paleontological and archeological museums, as well as the local zoo. Venturing south, I visited the town of Rapperswil to get a better view of the Alps. Fun fact: Rapperswil is home to the longest wooden bridge in Switzerland!
Lake Zürich, the Rapperswil-Hurden wooden bridge, and the Alps in the distance.
Another fun fact: If you decide to cross Lake Zürich via said bridge and take the train back to Zurich from the other side, once the wooden bridge ends after 841 meters, you are actually nowhere near the closest train station and you might find yourself walking for 5 kilometers in 23 degree heat, growing increasingly desperate and losing hope of ever reaching your destination with each step.
Against all odds, I survived to tell the tale.
All in all, I enjoyed my visit immensely. In addition to achieving all of my academic goals, I became a huge fan of Swiss bakery culture and the efficiency of public transport, expanded my knowledge of Swiss chocolate brands, and discovered that melted cheese, mashed potatoes and pickled onions make a delicious combination.
I would like to thank the English Department of the University of Zurich and the Kone Foundation for making this visit possible.
When the staff of the English Department have just moved into their brand-new premises in the newly renovated Arcanum building on the University’s lower campus at the beginning of 2023, this may be a convenient moment to take a brief look at the previous oases on the itinerary of the departmental caravan from its beginnings to the present day. There have been altogether five stops on the way to Arcanum.
Taking the founding of the chair for English Philology in 1945 as the date of the founding of the Department, it was first located, together with the entire academic community of the new Finnish-speaking university of Turku, in the premises of the old Hotel Phoenix, a colossal late nineteenth-century building on the market square. Phoenix itself no longer exists, for it was demolished 1959.
The building Phoenix in springtime in mid-1950s (photo from the Central Archives of the University of Turku)
Any available space for the departments in the building, originally designed for an entirely different purpose, must have been very limited, for the many functions of the new establishment, including teaching, administration and library, were housed under the same roof. As a result, there was a pressing need for expansion.
In the next phase, the University makes a move closer to the location of the old Academia Aboensis (1640) around the Cathedral. The oldest of the modern buildings on the current University hill date back to the 1950s. The Library was completed 1954 and the Main building 1958. From the mid-fifties until the mid-seventies, the English Department had its own library in three of the seminar rooms on the top floor of the Library building, within the space of present Feeniks library. In addition, there may have been some temporary space available for office hours, and the like, on the second floor of the Main building until the early 1960s.
Along with the increasing numbers of students and staff in the English Department during the 1960s, there was an acute need for more office space. At this point in the mid-1960s, the premises in Hämeenkatu 1, previously occupied by the Department of Dentistry, became available when a new building for dentistry was completed in Lemminkäisenkatu 2 in 1965.
The premises in Hämeenkatu 1 consisted of one long corridor with a number of rather small rooms on either side, originally designed for the needs of dental practices. The rooms were shared between several humanities departments, including history and philosophy. English had four rooms. One of them was the department office, and another was reserved for a visiting Fulbright professor. The other two were mostly used for office hours and consultation. Working at (and from) home was very much the norm for the staff at the time, and any joint meetings of staff and students were held elsewhere on campus.
Many of the long-standing problems of inadequate facilities and insufficient working and teaching space were resolved when a whole new building was constructed for the Humanities in Henrikinkatu 2 in 1975. The H-shaped building was originally called Humaniora II, Humaniora I having been Fennicum in Henrikinkatu 3, completed 1969. Humaniora II was renamed Juslenia, and it became a home for the Department until 2012. For the first time, most of the Indo-European language departments came to be in the same building, together with several other humanities subjects from archaeology and history to literature and cultural studies.
Having individual offices for the members of staff was one of the highly appreciated innovations of Juslenia. Also, having several teaching rooms close by in the same corridor was another welcome novelty we had not experienced earlier. Similarly, there was an easy access to the seminar library on the same floor as the Department. Yet another big change was the much-needed social space for the staff in the form of a coffee-room. With its iconic round table, this new facility had a lasting and enormously important positive impact on our social and academic interaction.
Over the years, with our initial enthusiasm gradually waning, we became more and more aware of the shortcomings of the building. Many of these had their origin in the stark contrast between the original design of the building and its practical realisation. As a result of an economic setback coinciding with the building project, the University was unable to carry out the construction, as originally envisaged. Among other things, one entire floor, containing a cafeteria/restaurant, had to be deleted from the plan altogether. Also, the surface area of each of the remaining floors had to be drastically reduced. Consequences of such dysfunctional adjustments could not pass unnoticed. They would be apparent, for example, in an awkward organization of the space, just as well as the crudish design of the interior and the limitations of available facilities. In the end, the pros for tearing down the entire building outweighed the cons for repairing it.
Still, in spite of its unevenness and roughness, Juslenia always brings to mind happy and pleasant memories, probably because we stayed there for such a long time, close to forty years. The final fall of Juslenia was complete in 2019, but in the Department, we had already lived through the upcoming loss by ceremonially cutting a gingerbread replica of the building into pieces of cookies at a Christmas party before leaving the building.
Gingerbread Juslenia (photo by Mari-Liisa Varila)
Our penultimate stop before Arcanum takes us to Rosetta and its sister-building Signum, both charming old buildings from the turn of the twentieth century. After the property had become part of the University, it was renovated on several occasions for different purposes, most recently for housing the departments of English, French and German translation. Both buildings had offices and teaching rooms, and a joint library of the translation departments in Signum. After the merger of the translation departments with the respective philologies in 2010, the latter, with English among them, moved into Rosetta/Signum a couple of years after. All departments moved out of these premises by the end of 2022.
There are many positive things to be said about Rosetta/Signum as a workplace. First and foremost, there was an atmosphere of a handsome old building about them, which was very nice. The staff rooms varied in size, but were on the whole quite comfortable, and much the same can be said about the teaching rooms. There was also a joint common room for those working in the building. My impression is that colleagues were generally quite pleased with the place and what it had to offer.
One aspect of the Rosetta building that was sometimes criticised had to do with the interior of its architecture, especially the number of doors everywhere. With the offices aligned along both sides of the numerous corridors with separating doors at both ends made the building a bit like a labyrinth, where students and visitors might have had difficulties finding their way around.
Aerial view of Rosetta and Signum (behind). Photo by Hanna Oksanen, copyright University of Turku Communications
Finally, we’ll get to Arcanum. From what I have seen so far, the building is superior to all the earlier ones in a number of ways. It is not only a modern building to begin with, but one that has been very recently renovated and refurbished completely for the needs of its users. Everything is conveniently accessible and close at hand. The teaching rooms are pleasant and spacious with excellent, up-to-date facilities. Another truly great improvement is the fact that all departments of the current Faculty of Humanities are for the first time in the very same building. This is a tremendous asset for the spirit of cross-disciplinary interaction and cooperation and will, no doubt, amply prove its worth in the years to come.
Arcanum in winter. Photo by Suvi Harvisalo, copyright University of Turku Communications
It has sometimes been said that the walls are less important in Academia; it’s more important what goes on within the walls. This is true, of course, but only up to a point. The splendid premises of Arcanum rather indicate a very close interaction between the outside and inside. When the walls are constructed in harmony with the wishes, efforts and needs of the people inside, they connect rather than separate. It is a great joy to see that our long journey from Phoenix has been brought to such a happy close in Arcanum.
P.S. I am grateful to Teppo Jakonen and Janne Skaffari for their help in the preparation of this contribution. Teppo very kindly assisted in finding the photographic illustrations.
Nana Arjopalo gave an outstanding performance defending her doctoral dissertation Narrating Deliverance: The Literary Double in the Writing of Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni, Jhumpa Lahiri, and Bharati Mukherjee on Friday, February 24, 2023. The viva was a true celebration of literature and the impact it has on humanity.
Professor Joel Kuortti testing the connection, picture and sound. Screenshot by Olga Harrison
The event was kindly streamed online via Echo360, the connection allowing remote viewers such as I to watch and listen to it closely. The broadcast began around 30 minutes before the actual event, and the early viewers had a chance to follow final preparations of the ceremony. The defense itself began at 12:15 with Nana Arjopalo proceeding to her microphone, followed by Professor Joel Kuortti acting as custos and Professor Jena Lee Habegger-Conti as the opponent.
Doctoral Candidate Nana Arjopalo giving her lectio praecursoria. Screenshot by Olga Harrison
Arjopalo gave the lectio praecursoria in Finnish, covering both personal and theoretical aspects of her dissertation. Arjopalo has been an avid reader ever since discovering the fascinating world of fairy tales in her childhood. In her speech she emphasized the significance of literature to humanity. The viewers learned how fiction may offer a space to process life even better than biographical literature, as it helps one to work on personal and collective trauma, and offers a connection to others, even if one is physically away from a community. Arjopalo concluded that the right answers emerge when one asks the right questions.
The questions followed, in English, as the opponent presented her assessment and critique of the dissertation. Professor Habegger-Conti was interested in an array of subjects from the positioning to critical regionalism. Despite the range of the issues covered, the conversation flowed smoothly. There was a great deal of agreement between the opponent and the doctoral candidate, and even some terminology discrepancies were resolved without a major dispute. In her concluding words, Arjopalo stated that the discussion was reflective of the work that she had done, and that she had succeeded in making the reader draw specific conclusions from her dissertation.
Professor Jena Lee Habegger-Conti discussing Positioning. Screenshot by Teppo Jakonen
Professor Habegger-Conti was evidently pleased to read and discuss the thesis, and ultimately recommended the faculty to accept the doctoral dissertation. As there were no questions from the audience to add to an hour-and-a-half long discussion, Professor Kuortti declared the event concluded. The newly-proclaimed Doctor of Philosophy Nana Arjopalo received congratulations from the numerous audience members on-site, and invited everyone present to further celebrate outside the lecture hall, where Echo360, unfortunately, did not follow.
That set aside, it was, indeed, a pleasure to follow the doctoral defense in literature and to be reminded about the importance of asking the right questions. Congratulations to Nana Arjopalo, Ph.D., and best wishes for her future endeavors!
This autumn, the School of Languages and Translation Studies has had a visitor from the University of Namibia (UNAM), Dr Meameno Shiweda, who is a specialist in teacher education. In this blog post, Meameno and Janne Skaffari talk about similarities and differences in what and whom they teach and, more broadly, in the educational systems of our two countries.
Janne: How does one become an English teacher in Namibia?
Meameno: Anyone with an interest in teaching English can enrol in a teacher training program for junior/senior primary or junior/senior secondary levels, provided that they have good grades in five subjects, and a minimum of a C grade in English at Namibia Senior Secondary Certificate. A minimum C grade in another language is also a requirement. C is roughly the same as cum laude or magna in your matriculation exam.
J: It is quite different from Finland, where you apply to study English as your major or minor at university, and teacher training is basically a minor subject that corresponds to one year’s work. It is often completed as part of the MA degree. This route is for secondary-school English teachers, but for primary schools, you do not necessarily need more than a primary-school teacher’s university degree in Education. When does English begin in your program? Our majors do English Department courses from the first semester on.
M: Throughout their four years of teacher training, our students receive a mix of English modules and teaching-methods training. English majors also commence from the first semester onwards, and they are taught by English subject specialists from various departments in the School of Education. The first year begins with phonetics, phonology and children’s literature, and in the second year they focus on speaking and youth literature. The third year is reading and writing, while the fourth and final year is adult literature and grammar.
J: Oh, grammar comes that late! What kinds of observations have you made about teaching and studying during your visit?
M: The length of time a student studies English before having to determine whether or not they want to become English instructors is an important observation I have made here. Additionally, I have learned that prospective teacher-training students are interviewed to gauge their level of preparedness for the teaching profession, as opposed to our practice at UNAM.
J: We think it is important that students have time to become familiar with their major and minor subjects at the BA stage and then focus more on a particular career during MA studies.
M: I’ve learned from my experiences here and from talking to colleagues that getting extensive English training before concentrating on a teaching job is more realistic.
J: Yes, we really hope it helps! Students also get to see that there are other career opportunities.
M & J: We wish all our students – in Namibia and Finland – good luck with their studies and future careers!
Susanna Mäkinen defended her doctoral dissertation, Stability and variation in the genre of runaway slave notices in American newspapers 1704-1865, on Friday 20 May 2022. While the never-tiring doctoral researchers of the English department have produced quite a few dissertation and vivas to accompany them in the recent years, Susanna was the first one to enjoy the full traditional experience of a doctoral defense, complete with the opponent actually present in the same room and a karonkka (held at the iconic Turku Castle, an excellent choice of location by the way), since the beginning of the pandemic.
The opponent, custos, and candidate
The viva took place in the Tauno Nurmela hall and drew in quite a crowd. The viva was also streamed on Echo for those unable to attend in person. The viva started right on time at 12.15, with Professor Matti Peikola as custos, even though the arrival of the opponent Professor Terry Walker (Mittuniversitetet, Sweden) had been slightly delayed (if nothing goes wrong, did the event even happen?).
With everyone present and accounted for, Professor Peikola welcomed everyone to the viva. Susanna delivered the lectio praecursoria, a short oral presentation of the research and its significance. Susanna and Professor Walker then proceeded to have a lively discussion on the dissertation. The discussion ranged from the terms used in the dissertation to the choice of a chapter title and the reasoning behind choices made regarding the material (which includes 2603 runaway slave notices), methods and analysis. While Professor Walker presented Susanna with several tough questions, Susanna handled them beautifully. The discussion was relaxed throughout the defense and both the opponent and the doctoral candidate seemed to truly enjoy themselves, which was a joy to watch. The discussion took about an hour and a half, but the time seemed to fly by (at least for yours truly, whether the candidate agrees is unclear at this time).
Defending your dissertation is fun!
The viva marks the end of an often long and significant period in a researcher’s life. Years of work has been poured into the dissertation, which is then publicly defended. When asked what she would do differently now that she has gone through those years of labor, Susanna lamented on her apparently less than ideal note-taking, but noted that when it comes to the dissertation itself, “I’m pretty happy with what I’ve done.”
What more could a researcher at their doctoral defense ask for than a dissertation they are happy with? Not much comes to mind.
Congratulations to Susanna on this amazing achievement and the best of luck in your future endeavors!
Sirkku Ruokkeinen defended her doctoral dissertation,Historical appraisal analysis: evaluation of the book in sixteenth-century England, on Saturday 4 December 2021. The defense is a culmination of years of work, and as such, often a stressful event. While the dissertation itself is naturally the focus of the years prior, the event itself has its own traditions and challenges, especially during covid. Below, Sirkku Ruokkeinen writes about defenses, traditions, and her experiences thereof.
My defense in December 2021 was the sixth the University of Turku English department has had during covid times. The pandemic influences any events at the university, and the defenses are no exception, so there were some minor changes to the defense to follow the University Covid guidelines.
Preceding the defense, there is a long list of practical matters to tend to. The candidate must have the dissertation printed and distributed. The press releases are written by the candidate and delivered to the university communication services. The electronics and connections in the space reserved for the defense have to be checked. There is also some limited communication between the candidate and the opponent – in this case Prof. Claudia Claridge of Universität Augsburg – about the practicalities such as setting up the defense practice Zoom event and the defense Zoom event itself. The opponent also needs to be informed of any changes to the dissertation made based on the pre-examiner comments, so that they know how the issues pointed out have been resolved, and may address them further in the defense with the full knowledge of what the candidate has said on the topic.
The defense itself took place through Zoom, but also had open admittance for a live audience. This two-media aspect brought its own challenges. For example, the traditional formulae of the lectio praecursoria and defense invitations had to be well thought out, with special consideration given to who is being addressed: the audience in the room, the audience at home, or the opponent in zoom. Issues of digital and technical nature had to be considered in advance, so as to be prepared to fix any issues as quickly as possible. I was fortunate to have knowledge and experience on my side, as the custos and marshal (Prof. Matti Peikola and Dr Janne Skaffari) had participated in several pre- and post-covid defenses and could advise me on best practices.
The defense is a rather formal affair, which I always felt was a quite sharp contrast to the generally laid-back atmosphere in the Finnish universities. This, of course, reflects the importance of the event as the threshold to the highest available academic degree. The customs are largely dictated by the university. For example, the presence of a custos, who acts as the master of ceremonies, is degreed by the University guidelines. Other customs are more specific to the department or school, such as agreements about the dress code and the setup of the auditorium.
There are some traditions for the evening party as well. The karonkka – a party thrown by the candidate in celebration of the opponent – is traditional in all Finnish universities. Unfortunately, my opponent could not be present, and hence no karonkka in her honor could be arranged. Instead, I enjoyed some bubbly after the defense with my closest colleagues and friends. Although the karonkka could not be arranged due to the present situation, I was able to enjoy the English department traditions. Firstly, I received a most magnificent new cover design for my dissertation from the department. The new design is made with one goal in mind: to joke around with the doctor in spe under the guise of popularizing the research. The alternative covers have been prepared for all new doctors within the department since 1983 – a tradition that began with Professor Emeritus Risto Hiltunen’s cover. I also got to enjoy Historical Appraisal Analysis: THE MOVIE, prepared by the Philological Colloquium. This tradition, particular to the philologists of the department, involves the preparation of a play or other new rendition of materials found within the dissertation.
All in all, although the pandemic offered some complications to the arrangements, the event itself went well, the celebration afterwards was lovely. Most importantly, the evaluation committee recommended that the dissertation be awarded the grade “pass”, and I could begin my Christmas holidays.
