Four weeks down, Four weeks until PERMANENT POST ANNOUNCEMENTS

There’s quite a buzz amongst the volunteers these days. In two weeks time, we’ll take a “mock” language proficiency interview, so that the staff may judge our language progress to date. In three weeks’ time, we’ll have one-on-one interviews regarding our permanent post preferences. Presumably we’ll be given additional detail about each post before then, but possibly not… Then – in FOUR weeks time, they’ll announce our individual post assignments. Four weeks . . .

That’s the official story, which incites buzz enough (“how will they choose?” “how good does my language need to be in 2 weeks??”) – BUT, there’s more to it. Apparently, they’ve already made unofficial placements for a few of us. What? How? A couple of us found out today that the program staff has been actively observing us on our central training days – observing what we display interest and knowledge in, our strengths and weaknesses, gauging leaders, etc. AND – the director of Programing and training has essentially been interviewing us without us knowing it: he often strikes up conversations with individuals during meals, or in the hall – and I’m absolutely certain he’s been taking mental notes, in the least. Sneaky man! I’ve had a few good talks with him about my interests and perspective – and I now realize that they’ve undoubtedly substantially effected his thoughts on where to place me. While it always feels funny to learn about such unannounced surveillance, I also admit – it’s probably a really good thing. Because through these casual conversations, Our director is getting genuine responses – bypassing any opportunity we may have to fool ourselves.

So – why would it matter which permanent post we get? They like to tell us that they’re all very similar, but – it’s clear that there’ll be some distinct variations. The first big deal difference: there will be 1 or 2 Agriculture and 1 or 2 Health posts in the central district offices. The implications of these posts: policy level work, probably in the regions most-urban center (which will be a tiny town, but also means somewhat reliable internet and market access). The next big-deal difference: there are three regions that will contain 2 volunteers, which implies (though not necessarily) a higher chance at being within 1.5 hours of another volunteer. The final big-deal difference: those regions containing 2 volunteers each are also at the highest elevation.

My conflict: do I push for the district post with the policy-level work, which very well may be the most beneficial to my Masters’ degree and future career aspirations? Or do I push for the most remote post possible, where I can truly take advantage of the opportunity to disconnect for a couple years, and work outside as much as possible with my hands in the dirt? Obviously – I want both!! I want a hybrid, if it’s possible: I would definitely like to gain experience working on at the policy level in a developing country – it’s be so insightful, and would give a lot of depth to the things I’ve been learning about in Grad school. But – y’all know I’m also a country bumpkin at heart – a backpacking, dirt-loving gal who would relish the opportunity to be away from it all for two years… There’re a couple important pieces of information to recognize as well: I am the only masters’ international student of our group, my degree is in policy, and I already have experience working in land-use policy whereas the majority of our group is fresh out of undergrad. So – the general buzz is that I’m a shoo-in for the policy post, if I want it.

And so – I turn to you, dear friends, to give me your advice. Obviously I’ll ultimately be making my own decision about what to push for, and the Peace Corps staff will be making their own decision about what they think would be best. But – I’d love to hear your opinions in the meanwhile!