I have a new work strategy that is working moderately well. Certain activities--writing on different projects, my admin job, grading--are allotted certain time slots. If that work is not completed during that time, it happens during the next allotted time. In other words, if I don't finish all the emails I need to send during the 30 minutes earmarked for email, well, it waits until tomorrow. Like I said, working moderately well. I'm less good about respecting boundaries for my own writing; that is, while I'm pretty good about preserving my writing time in general, I do not always stick to the plan about what it is that I will work on. This is fine as long as all projects get some airtime during the week.
As I've said before, Laura Vanderkam makes me a bit nutty. Thinking about my week in terms of 168 hours has been somewhat helpful. But what's more realistic is thinking about my week in terms of hours with children and hours without children. Yes, we all have 168 hours, but it's really not realistic to think that we control what happens in all those hours, particularly when children are involved. I might decide that 10-6:30 are for SLEEP but Tiny Boy starts crying about his teeth and needs to sleep on my body (the subject of another post), he wins. I have a certain number of hours with childcare--I've been having about 4-5 weekend hours per month to do work, on top of daycare/school--and realistically that's when I need to plan on working. NOT after kids go to bed. Because while that's nice in theory, in practical terms, well, I know it doesn't work, at least not with a toddler. (I did work at night when I could count on LG going to bed at 7:30 or earlier, which maybe was around 3.5-7.5 [and then her brother showed up]). Right now I'm not going to give up any of my potential relaxation/sleep time to work. It just doesn't make any sense. Yes, nice to be on the other side of tenure. Yes, nice to be teaching material I could probably do in my sleep (ha!).
I am also trying to be aware of my energy (and anxiety) levels and capitalizing on them. This morning was stuttery and somewhat depressive so I went to the library and picked up some books. That needed to happen anyway. Keeping a mental if not physical list of stuff--little things, that is--that can make me happy in a given day. Today it was drinking cider while giving feedback to a grad student about his comps proposal (the cider was the treat, of course).
Anyway. Must do other things now. And if Tiny Boy would agree to sleeping somewhere other than my body, tonight might be better.*
* the result of the latest illness. Ear tubes still good, but now he's got a sinus infection and cough. I almost cancelled class yesterday. But didn't. Sometimes just showing up is enough.
As I've said before, Laura Vanderkam makes me a bit nutty. Thinking about my week in terms of 168 hours has been somewhat helpful. But what's more realistic is thinking about my week in terms of hours with children and hours without children. Yes, we all have 168 hours, but it's really not realistic to think that we control what happens in all those hours, particularly when children are involved. I might decide that 10-6:30 are for SLEEP but Tiny Boy starts crying about his teeth and needs to sleep on my body (the subject of another post), he wins. I have a certain number of hours with childcare--I've been having about 4-5 weekend hours per month to do work, on top of daycare/school--and realistically that's when I need to plan on working. NOT after kids go to bed. Because while that's nice in theory, in practical terms, well, I know it doesn't work, at least not with a toddler. (I did work at night when I could count on LG going to bed at 7:30 or earlier, which maybe was around 3.5-7.5 [and then her brother showed up]). Right now I'm not going to give up any of my potential relaxation/sleep time to work. It just doesn't make any sense. Yes, nice to be on the other side of tenure. Yes, nice to be teaching material I could probably do in my sleep (ha!).
I am also trying to be aware of my energy (and anxiety) levels and capitalizing on them. This morning was stuttery and somewhat depressive so I went to the library and picked up some books. That needed to happen anyway. Keeping a mental if not physical list of stuff--little things, that is--that can make me happy in a given day. Today it was drinking cider while giving feedback to a grad student about his comps proposal (the cider was the treat, of course).
Anyway. Must do other things now. And if Tiny Boy would agree to sleeping somewhere other than my body, tonight might be better.*
* the result of the latest illness. Ear tubes still good, but now he's got a sinus infection and cough. I almost cancelled class yesterday. But didn't. Sometimes just showing up is enough.
When you have children, especially but not only, as a single mother it is reasonable only to assume you have a max of 50 hours for work per week. And, I include commute, groceries, cooking, cleaning, paid work in this 50 hour category. So divy up those hours only across the 7 day week. Then see what your real choices are. 168 really really really isn't true! The 118 other hours are child focused and sleep and restoration NEEDS. 168 hour assumptions are not based on reality for single working mother lives.
ReplyDeleteYup.
ReplyDeleteI figure my flexible time--barring illnesses and other random urgent things--is basically 9:00 (when I get home from drop off) to 4:45 (when I leave to pick up people most days) five days per week. I have about 30-45 minutes at night to do any sort of work, including the domestic (mostly when I'm dealing with bottles and laundry). Weekend nap time is becoming usable, too, if LG is out of the house or completely occupied. But that's roughly the 50 hours you suggest above.
Yeah, that's my issue with whole "168 hours" thing...yes those hours are technically THERE, but if they happen to be at 10 pm or 5 am, they are not going to be good for anything except reading stupid stuff on the internet or watching TV. I can't control my sleep times, they revolve around my children (oh my god I wish my 3.5 year old would go to bed by 7:30. its closer to 9 these days!). I guess you have to think about the hours you REALLY have that could be productive or enjoyable, and fill those in...
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you called LV out on the "single mother" thing. I noticed it, but as a partnered mom, I figured it wasn't my place to bring it up. it irks me when people say this, I know true single mothers and the complete lack of financial and emotional support is so much more debilitating than simply not having someone on hand to help with diaper changes.
That being said, Laura does write some thought-provoking stuff, some of which makes a ton of sense and makes me wonder why I never thought about it that way before. I like her e-book about "what successful people do at work". The idea of thinking in terms of "Goals" rather than tasks was a game-changer in terms of my motivation to get annoying stuff done.
ana, yeah, clearly I find value in LV's work generally or I wouldn't bother reading her blog...just wish she'd be more aware of how her advice is very much colored by--and geared toward--her own (privileged) status.
ReplyDeleteLG didn't go down that early until she dropped the nap. That was the best thing ever. She went from having a crappy nap at daycare and sleeping maybe 9 hrs at night (she also went down after 9:00) to sleeping 12 hrs at night, roughly from 7-7 (sometimes 6:30-6:30!). She's going to bed later as she ages, though...total sleep needs come in at around 10.5 hrs for her now.