Post on adjuncts in the Chronicle

I thought this was interesting.

Not So 'Adjunct' Anymore - On Hiring - The Chronicle of Higher Education

So do you think universities abuse their power with adjuncts? Seems a lot of people here want to do adjunct teaching. This makes me think it's a lot of work for next to no money.

 

+1 to Steve's post. It's likely dead on.

From my own perspective there are two reasons why I want to adjunct.

1. There's no better way to reinforce what you've learned than to constantly have to explain it to others. It's a great way to keep abreast of theory.
2. It looks great on a consultancy CV and can help establish an expert's image.

If I wanted to be a tenured faculty member (and it'd be nice if I could get there though I'm already ten steps behind) I'd not be working full time in the corporate world. I'd be writing my ass off instead.

 

::Caution : Rant::

Apparently some people may not realize how hard it is for those people who adjunct. I also don't think it is a vocal minority - I have adjuncted a lot of places, and it is the same depressing crowd. There are some really good teachers out there that will never get a full time job in the field they have spent half their life studying because there are not enough jobs for them. Before anyone says " you should have picked a different career" think about what Americans are told from a very early age - you can be anything, you can do anything. These people are very dedicated to their career and had no real guidance to what the job market really looks like. Advisers throw students into graduate school, most are quite out of touch with what the job market looks like because they have been employed for at least 7 years in most cases. Most people think it is just the social sciences and humanities that are losing full time positions, no, the whole roof is being blown off at most schools. Actually, most of us online adjuncts are the ones really killing the market, because we accept such low wages. However, it is not the adjunct's fault the situation is bad. There is no bargaining power for someone who is as expendable as a college professor. That is right, there will always be another person to take your job, why should the universities budge? Anyone who is lucky enough to do this as a part time gig on the side from their real job really has it made. However, most adjuncts teach to make a meager living with no health insurance nor guarantee that they will have employment next month. This article gets one thing right, the majority of classes are being taught by part time workers. This is a big problem when most of those workers don't have the skill set or experience to do anything but teach. Most are in debt up to their eyes, and can't afford retraining. The quality of the teaching does decline when relying so much on adjuncts, because you find that many of these adjuncts are stretched way too thin to provide quality classroom experiences.

Also, since many of these adjuncts are no longer researching in their field, it decreases the quality of interaction a student is getting. I would not have agreed with this five years ago when I started teaching with just a masters, but I have found over the years after sitting in on various classes as a TA or observing that it is very true that an active scholar is a much better teacher in most cases. Why? Because they know their content inside and out past the survey levels. That is not to say that an Masters can't get the job done, but they often do not have the training to answer deeper questions students have. I am talking strictly in a brick and mortar situation here. We all know as online professors we can just take our time and look things up, but I know I personally am better even online with most of my PhD training under my belt. I will give one caveat, those who teach computer sciences (and other hands-on disciplines) are probably much better at teaching if they were professionals in the real world rather than theoretical academics. For the majority of traditional disciplines, I think the seasoned academic is the much more valuable faculty member. Institutions relying heavily on adjuncts takes away from those teachers the ability to grow professionally. Hire less adjuncts the quality of teaching goes up and so does prestige of the university. There is a reason that an education at a state school that relies on a tenured workforce is much better than an education at a community college or the University of Phoenix. If you don't believe me hire five graduates from each, work them for a year, and tell me which group had more proficient workers total.

The state of education is broken, we are part of an education machine. It no longer provides something of intrinsic value, but rather something that "qualifies" people to work in this country. Adjuncts make this all possible. If you are not going to give them full time jobs, at least pay them enough that they are above the poverty line if they teach a full load over three different universities.

 

You know I think I have to agree with you.. while I have thought about going into education full time, I know I do not have the research skills to really provide the in's and out's as you say. This does not mean I do not have the work ethic to become better, but I am not a trained research as one with a quality PhD would be.

Having said that, my 2 masters has prepared well for courses in information technology along side my 13+ years in the workforce. For other education departments real world application may not play that large of role in lieu or knowing the core content and advanced concepts, which leads to another statement I agree with from your post, that one of the few disciplines that can getaway with getting the job done well without a PhD technology courses.

So is it cheap labor yes, while I thoroughly enjoy my part-time adjunct position, the pay could be better but I am not complain because I did become adjunct for big bucks, I knew what wages would be, but my goal was to teach the subject i care about, to better inform others going forward.

 

The cycle works like this:

*****

1. Universities produce large numbers of master's and doctoral graduates. However, they reduce the number of tenure-track positions, which have high wages, good benefits, and job security.

2. Many of these graduates love teaching. But they discover that the supply of prospective teachers greatly exceeds the number of available tenure-track positions.

3. So the graduates can only fulfill their dreams of teaching if they accept adjunct positions, which have low wages, no benefits, and minimal job security. Since they love teaching, they accept those conditions.

4. Universities discover that there is an ample supply of graduates willing to work as adjuncts. Since adjuncts are much cheaper, the universities decrease the number of tenure-track positions.

5. Go back to step 1. Repeat indefinitely.

*****

At present, there is no reason to believe that the cycle is approaching an end.

 

People here seem to forget that tenure track professors do research, teaching is secondary to most of them. Ask any tenure track professor and most view teaching, especially intro courses, as more of a nuisance. If you're not interested in performing high quality research you're never going to get a tenure track job.

 

Bingo.

Next up, you can still lose tenure for many of the same reasons you can lose a regular job. So I'd argue that it's a herring for the most part.

 

And at smaller schools they chair dissertations, serve on committees, write grants, serve as program directors, etc. Most of the tenured professors I know are moving more into those areas above and away from teaching. I also get the feeling that many people think tenured-track = no one will mess with you while you teach your classes the way to want without any other distractions.

For those who complain about being an adjunct, here is an idea: Don't do it anymore. There are plenty of people out there who will.
Or, improve your credentials and work for a better school.

 

That is pretty much it, in a nutshell. Folks need to make an honest assessment of their competitiveness for a tenure track position. If they come to the conclusion that they are not competitive (and are unwilling or unable to improve their credentials to become competitive), then they need to decide whether they should continue living life as an adjunct or just change careers.

Many, I suspect, will choose to stay adjuncts. As bad as adjunct life sounds, it may look preferable for some career adjuncts to changing industries and getting a "real job' (the term an adjunct friend of mine used).

 

I am also surprised at how many people are under the assumption that if a person is an adjunct, his/her ultimate goal is to become tenured faculty and the perspon is just adjuncting until that full-time job comes along. Many people perfer the freedom that is associated with part- time teaching and have no desire to enter the TT race. Honestly, I could never make as much as a tenured faculty member as I do now with my regular job and my teaching activities.

 

You fit the description of a traditional adjunct professor. You have the academic credentials, but you are working outside of academia for your living. You bring valuable experience to the classroom.

The problem is that as TT positions become more scarce, those intending to pursue the TT path end up lost in adjunct land.

 

Agreed. I think one of the underlying issues is that many of those who see TT positions as the "end-all" do not really have a realistic view of what that means in the long run. This perspective makes "adjunct land" all the more depressing for this group.

 

I think the TT is the objective of most people that finish traditional PhDs but not the case for people that finish online or part time PhDs that have already jobs and careers and do the PhD for supplementary income or as a resume booster.

However, there are people that make careers out of being an adjunct. If you teach the same subject at multiple places that cuts down your preparation time and can increase profits. If you work for places with unions that can tackle the issue of job security and benefits.

I was a professional adjunct for many years and was able to make a decent salary but needed to be selective on the schools you tech for. A 80-100K salary is feasible for an adjunct and not that far for some of TT jobs.

A professional adjunct is not so bad and comparable to other professions that share lack of job security.

 

That is not really true at all. Aside from the 50 biggest universities, most of those tenured are primarily teachers in most fields. They published their one book to get tenure and are just teaching / advising / attending to committees. If a professor wants to get away from teaching, they try to move up... those second and third tier schools all have large departments and many people "going nowhere" (in the eyes of the elite in the field).

I think more people look for TT because they want job stability, not huge incomes or publishing. In the traditional PhD program I am in, perhaps 3 out of 40 actually want to do something more than teach after they publish that first book. There is an unrealistic expectation by advisors to push their graduate students towards this care-little-about-teaching attitude. In the end, most people end up teaching professors not research professors. In my discipline, a Harvard or Princeton PhD is not enough to get you hired at a teaching school anymore, whereas at a research university that still matters. Guess what, there are more teaching schools than research universities. Off topic a bit, but the point is, many of those struggling adjuncts are the PhDs that desire teaching, not those people who think certain jobs are too low for them; mainly one that requires teaching more than a 1/1.

 

I agree with you. Many that do traditional PhDs is because they are already professional adjuncts and need the job stability and they think the PhD is the ticket to this.
Professional adjuncts have hectic schedules, little job security, teach at several institutions, etc. The sad part is that many put themselves into debt to follow PhD programs at Walden, Capella, etc with the hopes to land a tenure track but very few from these programs materialize their objectives.
As some mentioned here, TTs are becoming harder to get even with traditional PhDs.