next »

[zharkov]

How many PT PhD programs do you know of that are accredited? 

There are actually quite a few, depending on your field.  Get a copy of Bear's Guide about the options available.

[expatinuk]

The good news where I teach now?  They'll pay for a PhD.  The bad news?  How many PT PhD programs do you know of that are accredited? 

In my field all of them ....

Business?  : ) 

Media.... many folks in media do the Ph.D. while working full time.

[anthroid]

Tolerantly, your hostility is a drag. Anthroid has explained the power she does and doesn't have. She's being honest and forthright. Take it as information, not as a target.

The Fiona

Thanks, my friend. 

For the record, we pay between $2500 and $4500, depending on experience and credentials.  I do in fact know whether adjuncts are treated decently.  We pay mileage if they live out of the county AND they get an extra bonus thrown in for the same reason.  I'm delighted that tolerantly had so very, very, very, very much power to be able to demand successfully what she was able to demand.  The world of state schools is quite different.  Those of us who actually are administrators in those schools know this and can balance some posters' comments with our real world experiences.

[larryc]

I quite liked Tolerantly's post.  Whether we as individuals set the adjunct pay or not, we are complicit in the system.  If each of us saw improving the treatment of adjuncts as part of our professional obligation, things would change.  If our national organizations decried the treatment of adjuncts, loud and long, if we if as chairs and deans pushed back against our administrations, if accrediting bodies measured both the number and treatment of adjuncts, things would change. This is not beyond our influence, if we care enough.

(And I know that many of you are doing exactly these things, and bless you for that.)

[expatinuk]

Yeah, and I want World Peace. So every time I'm shopping and someone asks 'Would you like anything else?' I answer, 'Yes, World Peace.'

No matter how often I say it, I don't think that it's going to get here any faster.

[tt33_hist]

I worked in visiting and adjunct positions for about 3 years before deciding to move for tt job in another part of the country. I do not have children but my spouse had a good job where we were and we had a high quality of life. However, I became frustrated by the high work load, little respect, and low pay. I knew that I would have to make a move before my PhD looked too "old." I am happy I made the move although our quality of life was probably better overall in the old location.

[sibyl]

We've established that it's clearly not true that it's impossible to go from adjuncting to TT.  I think there are a few competing ideas here that are getting unfairly conflated together.

I read the arguments of the article thuswise:

(1)  The requirements of tenure have a high personal cost; faculty usually choose to sacrifice elements of their personal lives in order to devote time and energy to tenure.

(2)  (1) has a higher impact on women than on men, since as a group they are more likely to sacrifice their careers for their personal lives.

(3)  There are too many adjunct jobs and not enough TT jobs.

(4)  (3) has a greater impact on women than on men, since as a group they are more likely to accept adjunct jobs.

5.  President Faust should take advantage of her bully pulpit to help change points 1 and 3.


I don't think anyone disputes (1) or (3).  It's (2) and (4) that seem to be causing the strife.  [Oddly no one has yet said anything at all about (5).]

There are several proffered explanations for (2) and (4):  societal expectations, unfair societal expectations, discrimination.  I think I would also suggest that women are more likely to have adjunct jobs because the growth in women earning Ph.D.s has coincided with the growth in adjunct jobs -- that is, there were a lot fewer female faculty back in the Good Old Days when every Ph.D. got a TT job.

I think all of these explanations are correct, and all of these things contribute to the situation.  And we need to account for all of them if we want to work toward fixing the system. 

It's counterproductive to say that men have it easy, because that argument ignores the economic and structural forces; and it's counterproductive to argue that men are just as oppressed as women, because that argument ignores the social and discriminatory forces.  And both explanations allow (1) and (3) to stand as unassailable "facts of life" rather than contingent conditions that can be addressed.

[seniorscholar]

One refinement to Sibyl's very smart analysis -- in the "good old days" when "everyone got jobs" there were nepotism rules at most universities, so if two faculty members with Ph.D.'s (even in different departments) got married, one of them was forced to give up her job (no error in pronoun there) -- and joined the hordes of other wives with M.A. or ABD or PhD status who were "teaching an extra course or two" (always in the introductory program) but were not even called "adjuncts" or "part-time faculty" -- they were "faculty wives" and everyone knew that's what faculty wives did. (Partly, I think, not giving them any formal title and no expectation of any continuing work also evaded the nepotism rules.)

[treehugger1]

from starting_search"
"But there are societal expectations that make many people think it is more appropriate to move for a man's job than for a woman's job."

This really is true. My husband and I have decided to do a joint search together, even if this means that husband will have to leave a tenured position (although he probably will be offered a position with tenure elsewhere.) Everyone in academia is perfectly accepting of this, encouraging even. Almost all of my nonacademic friends (as well as our families), however, were at least surprised, if not subtly disapproving of this choice. Their attitude seems to be "Well, you'll have a Ph.D. ... isn't that enough? They're plenty of jobs in this town. Why run all over the country, etc.

[philo]

Amen!  The truth is, IMHO, most dept chairs have a double standard:  they'll let someone teach as an adjunct (or, in some cases, even as a VAP) that they don't think is up to snuff for tenure track purposes.

Well of course they do.  My department has a number of adjuncts who are competent to teach intro. for us but who are not qualified (nor would they think themselves qualified) to teach upper-level courses or to embark on publishing careers.  Several of our adjuncts only have M.A.s, in fact.

[aardvark]

Amen!  The truth is, IMHO, most dept chairs have a double standard:  they'll let someone teach as an adjunct (or, in some cases, even as a VAP) that they don't think is up to snuff for tenure track purposes.

Well of course they do.  My department has a number of adjuncts who are competent to teach intro. for us but who are not qualified (nor would they think themselves qualified) to teach upper-level courses or to embark on publishing careers.  Several of our adjuncts only have M.A.s, in fact.

We'll go further than that, of course:  guy with PhD from U Alabama gets adjuncting or VAP gig at Emory, publishes 2 articles during the year, gets great teaching evals... but no interview for the TT position because Emory can do better than a U Alabama PhD-- it has its eye on the Ivies, Stanford, Chicago, and the like.