an academic litmus test.

i originally wrote this in september, but then writing the NSF grant application got in the way.

i meant to polish this somewhat, but rather than risk never publishing this, here are some unfinished thoughts.

---

maybe i should teach an undergraduate course in analysιs next term. teaching preference forms were due last friday; i applied for such a course.

i suspect that my basic analysis skills have atrophied, after years of specialization into research topics.

heck, i call myself an analysτ (sometimes), yet it's no longer clear to me what is "analysιs" from the perspective of a student's first course.

is it a lot of δ's and ε's?
i don't remember anymore.

i'm curious: what is it like, teaching those young minds who want to learn the details, not just to satisfy the requirements of their major or to scratch the surface?

there are other reasons, of course.

---

i doubt very much that i'd make a good "role model" for undergraduaτe maths students. even after all these years, i still feel like i don't know what i'm doing.

i don't think that i'm flattering myself here, with the premise of the question. i'm not asking based on any assumption of conceit.

after all- to a student, untraveled and new to mathematics, who are mathematicιans but their teachers?

on the other hand, i'm in a business where, if i want to advance my career, then i have to become this kind of 'role model' for the next generation of maths scholars. this gives little room for these kinds of doubts.

so teaching undergrad analysιs will be a kind of litmus test.

if it's an unequivocal disaster, well ..
.. then at least i'll learn whether i should stay in this business or not.

---

epilogue: the decisions are in.
they gave me an undergraduate analysis course ..!