The key to securing better workplace conditions for the growing number of full- and part-time faculty members who are not on the tenure track lies in setting standards for how all faculty members should be treated, according to a document released by the Coalition on the Academic Workforce.
The coalition, whose members include disciplinary associations and other faculty groups, calls on colleges in its issue brief to give contingent faculty members better pay and more on-the-job support, to treat longtime adjuncts as members of their departments and institutions, and to ensure that a certain share of courses are taught by full-time faculty members.
"As a coalition, we've been working on documenting the issues related to contingent faculty and bringing awareness to them," says Rosemary G. Feal, executive director of the Modern Language Association, which is a member of the coalition. "Contingent faculty members in all of our associations should feel that we've all collectively taken a step in support of them."
Expanding Who Gets Benefits
The issue brief, "One Faculty Serving All Students," includes specific recommendations, such as giving contingent faculty members who teach at least half of a full teaching load access to the health and retirement benefits offered at their institutions and paying all faculty members for work done outside of the classroom. The coalition also says that non-tenure-track faculty members should be included in planning the curriculum and should be "hired, evaluated, and renewed in a professional manner."
The longtime debate over the rising use of non-tenure-track faculty members has spurred numerous documents about how to improve their plight. In fact, some members of the coalition have crafted their own policy statements. However, finding enough common ground to sign on to the coalition's recommendations was easier for some to do than others.
The American Association of University Professors is conspicuously not among the 15 groups listed as supporters at the end of the 10-page brief. The AAUP's Committee on Contingent Faculty and the Profession released a draft of a report last fall boldly urging colleges to convert contingent faculty members to the tenure track, among other things. And the association has a separate statement, adopted in 2003, about faculty members who work off the tenure track.
Marc Bousquet, a co-chair of the AAUP committee, wrote in an e-mail message that the panel "commended disciplinary associations for paying more attention to this issue" and for putting the onus on departments to monitor their academic work forces. He added: "Given the weaknesses of the CAW statement, however, AAUP leadership felt that the appropriate discussion of these issues is best found in AAUP's own statements."
Standards Could Backfire
One concern Mr. Bousquet and his colleagues have about the coalition's document is a recommendation that departments should make sure the "percentage of course sections taught by full-time faculty members does not drop below the majority of the course sections a department offers in any given semester."
Mr. Bousquet says such a base line, effectively calling for full-time faculty to teach just over 50 percent of classes, can be problematic when some institutions have surpassed that.
"Since there's no real teeth to this to raise numbers of those below, the actual lasting effect of this recommendation will likely be to legitimate the existing downward pressure on those with better numbers," Mr. Bousquet wrote.
Ms. Feal acknowledges that, for some of the coalition's members, the issue brief was "too strong or didn't go far enough."
"But the important thing," she said, "is that we're all working toward progress. Our ultimate goal is to decrease the exploitation of contingent faculty members."
Next up for the coalition is to study the salaries of part-time faculty members.
Comments
1. 11281276 - February 08, 2010 at 07:26 am
The coalition has done some superb work in this report. I am a little dismayed that the CHE coverage did not include any direct quotes from contingent faculty on their response to the CAW's recommendations. The story here isn't about the AAUP and individuals who may or may not have the real interests of non-tenure-track faculty at heart. The story is how best to address the needs of an exploited sector of our workforce.
2. charriss - February 08, 2010 at 10:08 am
Let's face it. Higher education, like business, works on the principle of supply and demand. As long as there are people out there willing to work for $2500-$3500 per course with no benefits, administrators will find ways to hire them. The obvious solution would be for all contingent faculty to organize and go on strike. If they got 100%--or even 80%--participation, they could bring most of the universities in the country to a standstill, and changes would then have to be made. But that will never happen. Unlike most grunt labor, salary isn't the only reason people want to be university instructors. Respect, prestige, and doing rewarding work are also primary factors. There is also a reluctance amongst contingent faculty to get involved, either for political reasons or for fear of losing their own little piece of the pie. I've been watching this issue for thirty years now, and people are saying the same things now that they were saying in 1980. And the contingent faculty situation, including grad student instructors, remains the same, if not worse.
3. john_d_foubert_phd - February 08, 2010 at 11:17 am
Thank you AAUP for not signing this misguided statement. Adjuncts and tenure track/tenured faculty fulfill fundamentally different roles at institutions of higher educations. Clearly there are issues that need to be addresses at different institutions regarding how some adjuncts (and tenure track/tenured faculty) are being treated. This statement and many of its recommendations demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of faculty roles in higher education. For example, setting a per-course pay level for adjuncts and assuming that faculty salaries are tied in direct proportion to the number of courses they teach is naive. Our responsibilities for advising, research, service, outreach run far deeper than the expectations we have for teaching. An adjunct is often hired to teach one class, comes to campus, teaches, and goes home. They often do great work. However the full-time responsibilities are not there. Lets hope this statement does what many of its ilk do. Sit on a shelf, gather dust, and rot.
4. boroka - February 08, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Writes a phd: " Our responsibilities for advising, research, service, outreach run far deeper than the expectations we have for teaching."
"Contingency hires" smile wearily. After 20+ years of adjuncthood at an obscenely expensive LibArts ed-corporation, doing all of the above and more, this also-phd has energy for just that and nothing more.
Actually, being proudly declared as "untenurable" is liberating, freeing me from ever teaching a required course, worrying about student evals (mine are never ever even read), or playing the PC game.
And still, the marginalization rankles: In Senate, being told in the middle of first sentence "to cut it short," not receiving pay-check for 5 months ("forgot"), or listening to students' stories of counter-advising.
Happily, there are the classes where all this goes away.
I am awaiting an organization that addresses these soul-killing practices, of which the august faculty appears to be so obtusely proud.
5. 22110249 - February 08, 2010 at 01:14 pm
"One Faculty" is a powerful reminder of the growing dependence of institutions of higher education on non-tenure-track faculty, many of whom are part time. The growing numbers of contingent and untenured faculty decreases the quality of higher eduction and increases the unequal treatment that untenured, hard-working faculty currently receive. The report and its sensible recommendations should increase the awareness of the public and legislators to the seriousness of the current situation.
I wish AAUP had signed the document. While I respect AAUP's continued insistence on converting adjuncts and their positions to tenure-track jobs, current attacks by legislators and politicians on tenure and severe cutbacks in public funding for higher education make it unlikely that AAUP's policy will be implemented nation wide. A. LaVonne Brown Ruoff, Emerita, University of Illinois, Chicago
6. wftstaff - February 08, 2010 at 02:04 pm
The "teach and go home" argument is simply false and self-serving. It is the sort of argument used in the past to justify paying women teachers less than men. Most of us teaching on term-by-term contracts are working with lower-division students teaching classes that require an enormous amount of grading and assessment. We work with students who need extra help and the work is mind numbing. If we are home, we are grading. Somehow, I publish reqularly, try to attend conferences (when I can afford to), and do professional service. The colleges resist acknowledging the full involvement of those working off the tenure track. Professional organizations, however, recognize that future generations of scholars will not have the opportunity to engage in research if this two-tier system continues much longer.
7. loweredexpectations - February 09, 2010 at 10:34 am
To add to wftstaff's comment--not only do contingent faculty face more and more difficulty finding time to research and publish, because most have to teach ungodly numbers of sections to survive, but also full-time faculty and having more difficulty finding time to research and publish. As colleges and universities cut the ranks of full-timers, those left face increased burdens of advising, committee work, and other such tasks.
Colleges should be forced to standardize their definitions of "student-faculty" ratios; they should be be based on full-time student to full-time faculty.
8. 12074406 - February 09, 2010 at 08:36 pm
I'm dissappointed there are still tenure track/tenured professors who are so narrow-minded (or is it naive?)in their assessment of what many contingent faculty do.
I have no doubt there are contigent faculty who merely teach their one class and leave. However, I would suspect there are MANY contingent faculty who go above and beyond this stereotypical performance level, no only out of passion and enjoyment of the students, but because some universities have gotten away with adding little "seemingly logical" requests to their adjunct contract/performance requirements.
I am a contingent faculty member. I have taught at the same handful of schools (both state and private) for 9 years. I have a PhD. I have exceptional student reviews. In one university's case, I have published more than some of the tenure-track faculty. I advise students. I have served on committees. I have real work experience in my field. Most students, other faculty (outside my department) and staff have no idea I am contingecy faculty. I am required to do the same number of office hours as tenure track faculty. I would hope otherwise, but I don't think I'm the exception.
Many contingent faculty have been "encouraged" to get their doctorates, finish, etc in pursuit of a full time, tenure track position. Some were told they could adjunct, start to "fit into the culture" and when the next spot opens up, they'd be most assuredly "in" - only to inevitably find that there was always an excuse to hire someone else. Full time, term contract faculty positions are often no better, with really no more rights than adjuncts - so that's no solution either.
I know there are a lot of "Roads Scholars" out there who get a bad rep: tenure track members accusingly stating "how can they possibly deliver quality instruction?" Unlike faculty who have lived at one school for years (if not decades), contingent faculty have the mixed blessing of learning from multiple institutions. We learn processes, legal issues, internal business operations, strategies, efficiencies and productivity. We HAVE to be judicious with our time. There is no other choice.
A faculty member who has experience with perhaps 2-3 universities over an entire lifetime of work, only learns a tiny perspective of how a few universities (and even worse - perhaps only ONE university or category of university) operate. Contingency faculty bring a wealth of pedagogical experience, practical industry experience, and awareness of external forces influencing our industry. However, when full time opportunities come available, the title "contingent faculty" or "adjunct" is seen as "less than" or "deficient" by some hiring committees. The longer one is an adjunct, the more unlikely it is that one will be hired on the tenure track.
To be dismissed as supplemental, or to be treated as extraneous is disrespectful for the level and volume of work so many contingent faculty do.
The sentiment "equal pay for equal work" comes to mind. If an instructor teaches 6/7ths - then get the person should have the same pay (and BENEFITS) at the faculty rate(so 6/7ths of a standard faculty contract)- based on PERFORMANCE, academic level, longevity, teaching evaluations, etc., particularly if the university enjoys the benefits of (or REQUIRES)a person's advising, committee work, or community involvement. If one teaches half time - then fine - pay the person accordingly - and pay half of whatever the university would pay salary/benefits.
The tragedy? Tenured faculty are in a unique position to give voice for their less-protected colleagues. And yet, so many do not act. Many contingent faculty, term contract faculty (and frankly non-tenured/tenure track faculty)are just too afraid to speak out in their own defense. And in this economy, who can blame them? The academy has a long history for speaking the truth, for defending ideals, for trying to make society better: and to sometimes speak the unpopular truth.
Is it not time to grow, as an academy, beyond the stereotypes? To seek equality for the least among us? To provide justice? We are not Corporate America: we serve a higher good. Should we not apply that to our own colleagues?
9. erc38 - February 12, 2010 at 01:17 am
In response to john_d_foubert_phd,
Your interpretation of the work of adjuncts is so detached from the reality of the present condition of higher learning that I question whether you are still an active faculty member. As arduous as it is to sit on committees and to advise students, the time spent performing these functions is counterbalanced by the ridiculously small course load with which tenured faculty are burdened. Furthermore, you teach the same courses year after year. Adjuncts are constantly devising new course designs for subjects that they often have little background in. Furthermore, there is absolutely no justification for compensating adjunct faculty, on average, 1/6th of the compensation extended to tenured faculty for the courses that they teach. Finally, from my experiences in teaching in liberal arts colleges, all too often the tenured fossils inhabiting the departments have not published anything in decades, and from my conversations I would go so far as to question their competency to teach anything. They have been insulated for so long that they no longer have an understanding of the current states of the disciplines in which they are purportedly experts.