next »

[Brian]

Okay, individuals, I  would like some advice from you, if you can help me. I currently teach as an adjunct at two community colleges. I have searched extensively for a job and finally have an offer. However, it is for a full-time temporary position half the nation away. My question is: Is a full-time temporary position worth more to a future employer than working as an adjunct? My fear is that I will work one year and return home unemployed and be in a worse situation. I would like your input on this matter. Thanks

[Townie2]

I have been in your situation two years in a row now: I was offered a one-year position last year and again this year. I took neither. Although I do not like my current job (outside of academe), I cannot rationalize taking a one-year position, no matter how much I'd like to teach. I can't see how taking a one-year position would benefit you, if what you have now is on-going. You gain teaching experience either way.

[Anon]

Here is the beauty of this column. I totally disagree!  

Not only did I take a short-term visiting job right out of grad school, but it was only a one-semester job in a weird place (but at a good school). I was married aready for several years, but I left my husband (who fully supported my strategy) and dogs (who were inconsolable) for what I thought was to be four months, but in fact, I worked there for 1.5 years as a visiting professor and then got a tenure-track offer there.

My husband joined me after a couple of months when we realized I would be there longer than expected. I didn't take the tenure-track offer, since due to this very visiting experience, I had another, better offer, but the one-semester job turned out to be a great idea.  

Why did I do it? Well, I figured that very few qualified people would apply for it, and the applicants would be mostly have local high-school teachers or people who'd been out of academe for 40 years in totally unrelated fields (you have to have been on a search committee to see and believe who applies for such jobs!!!). I figured the search committee might be surprised and happy to get an application from someone from a good program and with a good vita. I was right -- the chairman later told me that this is exactly what happened. Out of 50 applications only 2-3 were from what they considered to be suitable candidates, and they had not even been expecting that many.

When I was first in grad school, my professors told me and my fellow students that unless we were among the top five new Ph.D.'s in our field in the nation, we'd better be ready to move to weird places for short periods of time, as most of them had in their time. Even moreso in big urban areas like New York City, where I did part of my graduate work. Everyone wants to live in a great place -- so the competition for otherwise mediocre jobs in desirable urban or idyllic rural settings is fierce.

Forget New York or Los Angeles -- Pittsburgh and Cinncinnati are almost as desirable when you've been at a religous college in rural Iowa or some such place for a few years. Much more experienced people will be vying against you for the great or even decent jobs.
 
Well, my point is that I had a tenure-track job in 1.5 years, while my friends who thought they were too good for such a strategy, or thought it was too inconvenient for their just-so, just-right way of life, were still looking for their first job.

It is six years later now, and I am now moving into a new position at a top research school with all the goodies that go with it, while some of my friends are just getting their first tenure-track offers. I can demand a spousal hire for my professor husband, while they are feeling guilty about moving their spouses now -- at a much more difficult time than when they were fairly footloose new grads. They finally gave in and took the temporary or part time job, which led to better jobs, but only after waiting in vain for better initial offers. A couple of my friends are now out of the professor business altogether because after years of searching for that perfect job, they were left with little or nothing academic on their vitaes, and in our competitive field, that spells death.

They love to say that they didn't want to be professors anyway, that business is far superior, that it was the best thing that ever happened to them -- all of which may be true -- but the reason they didn't leave academe by choice.

I'm pretty good at my job, with all the right stuff on my vita, but I am not an unusually bright or stellar light in my discipline's sky. I really feel that my strategy for job hunting and climbing from one rung to the next is what got me to a very good place today.

I'm sure that both strategies -- waiting for the perfect job or plunging into an imperfect job -- can work for different people, under different circumstances. But sometimes it's well worth it to take whatever job you can get. I certainly don't it's beneath you or an insult to your talents to take whatever job(s) you need in order to build your vita and your career.

[Ramen noodles]

Here's the deal; I have absolutely no qualms about working my way up the ladder (I'm sure many others feel the same way). Rolling up one's sleeves and going from the bottom to the top is a concept I can readily grasp. Heck, I wish that the ladder system did exist in our field! I think that such a system would be a lot more fair than this "hit and miss" give-a-few-folks-something-great-and-the-rest-get-scraps sort of endeavor called job hunting in higher education.  

I'm sure that those with fantastic jobs would not like the idea of ground floor and upward employment (it seems so, well, too much like something other people do), but there's the rest of us to consider. We work hard,  and many of us are willing to relocate, but there are just too many people for too few jobs, period. One's chances of getting a job in this field are starting to resemble one's chances of breaking into the entertainment industry in Hollywood, except we don't have agents! But there are plenty of car washes and tables to wait -- whoopuhdeedo!
 
As for the "perks" that come with a job in higher education, they're not that great. My husband works in industry. They paid for his entire move (and that includes packing, storage, shipping), they covered all the expenses involved in selling our old house, as well as the expenses involved in buying our new house. They also gave him a signing bonus. But I guess that "pales" in comparison to being able to "demand" a position for one's spouse (oh the power! ). I'm being sarcastic, of course.

Having been in academe for a while (both as a full-timer and a part-timer), I realize that one should always keep one eye open, because in this tight market, the situation can change at any moment. I've seen wonderful, capable adjuncts who have moved 15 times, and each time they have been let down yet again. Fantastic professors have been laid off. Yes, laid off. This isn't just a problem in industry. I guess I'm cynical enough to realize that you can never rest easy.

[lola-lola]

Good question. Actually, I have seen a lot of people used up in a temporary  job and then just kicked out. Obviously, it would be a much easier decision, if the place was close by. Is the job in a nice area with good access to things? Also, find out, what's meant by full-time -- do they want  to dump everything on you, i.e., committee work, etc.? Is this a temporary offer at a university?

Here is the thing. Regardless of what's being said, if you come from a hole in the ground (hypothetically), then, most likely, it will be really hard to get hired at a decent place. Do you have any connections at these two community colleges? If there are no prospects for your getting hired there or to have your contract extended, maybe you should move.
 
I've noticed that a lot of people don't suffer as much through job search if they have relatives or friends in academe. I guess that's not the case with you, and I sympathize -- it is not the case with me either, and, at times, all universities and community colleges seem to operate like the mafia.

The bottom line is this: if the place is a decent one -- e.g., a public university with a good record -- then, maybe, it will be better for you to go there. Is there a way you could find out if they'd be willing to extend that position?

[Brian]

Here's the deal. I have been an adjunct instructor at two community colleges for five years now and a voluntary assistant sports coach/paid coach for nine years. I have been offered a full-time temporary position, but it is only for teaching, not coaching. That's fine with me. However, I would have to reapply for the position again to get tenure status. I am really thinking of taking this position for the in order to get full-time experience on my résumé and broaden my network and horizons.

I approached my current employers, and they said they could not open any positions for at least six years. I'm not waiting around that long. Although I have many jobs on the side, friends, relatives, etc. around the area, I have no full-time job, no medical coverage, no retirement plan, etc. I'm really thinking about rolling the dice and seeing what happens. I just thought I would pass this along and see what others have to say. Thanks.

[C.R.]

I took a full-time temporary job that was originally supposed to last a year. Then it got renewed for a second year because the department didn't get approval from the administration to do a tenure-track search.

I was actively hunting for jobs during both years, and the fact that I had full-time written on my CV made a big difference. During my first year I had one on-campus tenure-track interview, and during my second year I had three on-campus tenure-track interviews that resulted in two offers (I took one of them).

Of course, you will have to weigh things like the following: Is this temp job in a truly God-forsaken place with horrible colleagues and moronic students?