Even teaching about Beyoncé can’t save your job if you’re an adjunct professor The pe

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/05/even-teaching-a-popular-beyonce-class-didnt-give-me-job-security/?hpid=hp_hp-cards_hp-card-posteverything%3Ahomepage%2Fcard

In 2010, I began teaching a course at Rutgers called “Politicizing Beyoncé.” My students read a survey of black feminist activists across American history, alongside critical analysis of Beyoncé’s music.

The class quickly became one of the university’s most popular, filling to capacity each of the 11 times I’ve offered it since. I’ve been invited to teach mini-sessions on the subject everywhere from Claremont McKenna College to Harvard University. I’m currently adapting the curriculum into a book.

Then, the class was cancelled.

I wasn’t warned in advance — I found out only when I received my 2016 schedule. The University’s Women’s and Gender Studies department has refused to communicate with me about their decision.

 

You should have read the comments thread following the article. It was extremely negative towards her and a hotbed for ignorance. Essentially, they were complaining that Beyonce wasn't a serious subject for a college course. But what they didn't know was the course content. How do we know what was done with the subject? Using her as a course-long case study might be interesting in a number of ways, like music, communications, sociology, and (I'm sure) others.

But what bothered me was the arbitrary nature of the administration. The article makes that plain.

 

Alternative theory; the course became known in the undergrad circles as "easy credits", resulting in the skyrocketing enrollment, then the administration caught on, so they pulled the plug.

 

Alternative alternate theory: one of the tenured professors wants to teach the class herself.

 

Undergraduate Courses

 

A distinguishing factor in getting an undergraduate education in the U.S. is the general education component. This is both a weakness and a feature. It's a weakness because it leaves less time to study the major subject of the degree. But it is a feature because it exposes the student to a wide array of concepts and ways of making meaning in the world. This course isn't about Beyonce; it's about studying feminism through the lens of a famous woman's life and works.

I'm not sure why this is any more or less useful than any other general education elective.

 

You could probably peel the onion down one more layer and say it's really about learning the skills of critical thinking, text analysis and expository writing.

 

I guess that's my point; that there's a lot to be learned using different methodologies. The real issue isn't "Bey." The real issue is the dregs of teaching as an adjunct.

 

Are you saying the adjunct is the "dregs of teaching" or that the issue is the "dregs of teaching"?

 

Adjunct. Many people enjoy teaching as adjuncts, but it is touch-and-go drudgery for a lot of others. This is a hot topic in higher ed today.

 

My comment wasn't to impugn the legitimacy of the subject matter. It's just an observation, based on my own undergraduate experience, that elective courses which quickly become insanely popular usually have a reputation of being easy. I tried a few times to take an elective called "Rock n Roll Radio", but it always filled up in about 5 minutes.

 

I didn't think you were impugning anything, and your point about the popularity of "gut" courses--of which this one may or may not be--is well taken.