next »

[offthemarket]

It's really quite simple. You're a tenure-track faculty member coordinating a course.  So you pick the text.  Of course you want to do this using good management style, and respecting the perspectives of people with more experience.  If the objections of adjunct faculty were based on pedagogy, then maybe opening up a discussion/forming a committee/whatever might make sense. 

But their objection was based on prep time, not the quality of education for students.  Of course they'll complain about it, it means more work for them.
 
As politics vary, it'd be worth running this by your chair/mentor in case there would be some kind of flak from tenured/tenure-track faculty that you can't easily anticipate.

cheers
terry

[pikachu]

At the very least be polite and respectful in communicating any decisions. These instructors are being abused by the system, teaching at a rate of 1.5-3k per course.

[mdwlark]

I'm an adjunct and I'm with larryc on this.  We can debate how an ideal manager in an ideal system would do it, but you made a decision and I think as a new director or manager you need to meet challenges to your authority or you lose your authority and will have a hard time getting it back.  They are saying, no, we want to follow our former leader.  offthemarket is right, run it by your chair.  The problem isn't over backing up your textbook selection, it is over backing you up as an appointed leader, regardless of your leadership style. 
 
I had a week to prepare.  I would be thrilled with 2-1/2 months.   My class would be going a lot better too.  That would have given me time to have all my own materials ready to go.  I could have actually read the textbook in advance. 

[rattusdomesticus]

Big mistake.

If you are new and in a position of authority over other instructors, I would say it's tremendously unwise to make a decision like this on your own. You would have garnered HUGE points had you asked the adjuncts to form a committee and simply oversaw their decision making. (I did say oversaw, not override). Committee work, though dull as dishwater, will keep you from frying your chances to command real authority where it matters.

Now you've got an us v. them situation that will NEVER (ever) resolve while you are on t/t track there.

Sorry to be so ugly about it, but this would be the truth at any cc or u I've ever worked. Not good. Not good.

[kaysixteen]

Meden has a really good argument.  These adjuncts are the long-term teachers, and this kid comes in and starts to unilaterally impose changes?  They will doubtless be thinking who the bleep does she think she is, etc.?   And consider this-- what would happen if they all decided en masse that the new text was unacceptable, so they were not going to teach the class, going to do without their princely adjunct course wage next semester and the attendant royal status the job confers...

[daniel_von_flanagan]

what would happen if they all decided en masse that the new text was unacceptable, so they were not going to teach the class, going to do without their princely adjunct course wage next semester and the attendant royal status the job confers...

If an adjunct or group of adjuncts tried to extort my department into adapting its curriculum to suit their wishes, I would happily communicate this behavior to all the other departments in my field in the area.
Temporary faculty should certainly stand up for themselves on general workplace issues - heck, I'd support them in an effort to unionize - but not on the content of our courses. - DvF

[gearjones]

Just to clarify, _I'm certainly not suggesting that ultimate authority be turned over to the adjuncts_.  Determining the curriculum is ultimately the role of tenured (and frankly, to a lesser degree, tenure track) faculty.  Nor am I suggesting it's an especially good idea to come across now as wishy-washy once you have already communicated a decision (even if the process was ill-advised).  You will presumably be working with these people in the future, however, and the question is one of process and promoting good work dynamics, good performance, and good outcomes.  Exercise all the authority one is entitled to and do it as unilaterally as one is entitled to, and that person's workplace can easily become the kind of toxic environment so many people (including tt faculty!) write in to this forum about.

I seriously doubt that a group of adjuncts would stage a mass walkout over something like this, even if you ultimately just decided to blow them off and say "like it or lump it - I don't need or want to consider your opinion"  (words I can't imagine you would use - merely posing a hypothetical here!)  It's also clear, though, from the procedural justice literature that people respond more strongly to the _way_ decisions are made than to the choice itself.  They often actively undermine decisions they rightly or wrongly feel were reached by an unfair or disrespectful process.  The more likely scenario is that the adjuncts would pacify you and keep their jobs by assigning your book and then ignoring it to the greatest extent possible, teaching as they prefer to teach (including in many cases old materials keyed to the old text).

It's pretty naive to think that a good book assigned by an instructor unwilling to embrace it will yield instructional outcomes superior to a slightly less preferred (but presumably competent) book assigned and taught with full support and enthusiasm.  Just fire them, some posters might say, but I suspect they're neither foolish enough nor unprofessional enough to obviously sabotage their courses.  They'll simply disregard the book (and the person who crammed it down their throat) to the maximum extent possible.  And that's a shame, because if it's really a good book, the same decision with greater consultation and buy-in could improve the class for everyone involved.

As for whether adjuncts merit any consultation because they are not "real" faculty, one can choose to highlight any subordinate role.  Tenure track faculty are not "real" faculty to tenured faculty, and temporary faculty are not "real" faculty to tenure track faculty (who are often more temporary than they realize!).  Even new adjuncts are not "real" faculty to long term adjuncts in a program or department.  It's not a question of power or authority, as that pecking order is clear.  It's about getting good work from people, good experiences for students, and good working relations in a department.  If a school places them in the classroom to teach autonomous classes, even with departmentally selected texts and standards, they are still "faculty" and professionals.  Presumably if one cares enough to change a text to improve course outcomes, one also cares enough about the human dynamics of the workplace and the classroom to accord these professionals some visible degree of respect and procedural recognition, even if the final decision "doesn't go their way."  If those dynamics are ignored and the adjunct faculty are treated as glorified (and sometimes even more poorly paid) TA's, which text is being used may end up being the least of one's worries. 

[daniel_von_flanagan]

Tenure track faculty are not "real" faculty to tenured faculty

Sure they are.  - DvF

[irishdmbf]

I think I have got it figured out  I talked to my wise chair who said to stick with the new book for one main reason. That being that the original/old text is coming out with a new edition which is actually substantially different from the old edition so certain things would have to be changed anyway.  Also if we stuck with the old text and then changed next fall, those that bought the new edition (would have to be bought new!!!!) of the old text wouldn't be able to sell it back to the bookstore because we would have changed the text.  Its better to make the switch now rather than in one semester!!!!! 

[gearjones]

Tenure track faculty are not "real" faculty to tenured faculty

Sure they are.  - DvF

Perhaps best to move this to a new thread, but "real" was in quotes precisely to reflect the subjective elements of these judgments of autonomy and authority at various ranks and statuses.  Tenure track but not yet tenured faculty are probationary.  Their contracts can simply not be renewed.  In many schools, they cannot serve on certain committees like tenure and promotion committees.  The may be expected by tenured faculty to adopt departmentally selected texts, even if the (relatively) new hire might prefer a different one.  In some schools, untenured tt faculty do not write letters of evaluation for promotion and tenure; in others, they do write letters, but those letters are often accorded less weight and deference.

The above is not intended as an endorsement; it's just a description of how untenured tt faculty are often treated and viewed (the forum is full of such observations and complaints!).  Adjunct faculty are even lower on the totem pole of rights, privileges, and authority.  The management question is in how those relative authorities and privileges are exercised.

[mdwlark]

Big mistake.

If you are new and in a position of authority over other instructors, I would say it's tremendously unwise to make a decision like this on your own.

I have to disagree with our lovable rodent on this one.   No, when you are in a position of authority, you get to make decisions on your own.  Or you can turn the decisions over to others.  Or you can form a committee.  You decide how much consultation you want to do with others before you make a decision.   You are in charge.   Even if you turn a decision over to someone else, or a committee, you are in charge because you gave them permission to make the decision.  But, if you do turn a decision over to someone else, you have to be willing to live with their decision, because stepping in and reversing their decision creates many more problems than if you kept the decision making for yourself in the first place. 

What ever direction you take on a textbook, its all good, as long as you stay in charge.   You get to decide. 

You would have garnered HUGE points had you asked the adjuncts to form a committee and simply oversaw their decision making. (I did say oversaw, not override). Committee work, though dull as dishwater, will keep you from frying your chances to command real authority where it matters.

OK.  Would the adjuncts be paid for this committee work?  All of them?   Is committee work in the adjunct budget?   We are not paid for prep time, which is a little more crucial.   Are you going to increase the adjunct pay, to justify having them do committee work?   Or would the adjuncts be willing to donate their time to study a pile of text books?  (I was on a media selection committee and it took many hours a week over a couple of months.)   Do they just want to give you an opinion without putting any time in on it?

Maybe the textbook decision is one of those real, command decisions that matters.

Now you've got an us v. them situation that will NEVER (ever) resolve while you are on t/t track there.

Sorry to be so ugly about it, but this would be the truth at any cc or u I've ever worked. Not good. Not good.

If the adjuncts are foolish enough to perpetuate an us vs. them dynamic, you have to win and put the whole thing to rest quickly.   Get some new adjuncts if you have to.  I'm an adjunct.  I would not fight this battle.   I would pop in to your office and ask you some procedural question or advice on the course, just to send a message that I'm on your team.   I think most adjuncts will just get to work preparing for the new text.

In my day job, the new department head decided to implement a new computer system.  There were lots of loud, angry protests, but the manager just calmly said, "You will start using this and get trained on it by such and such a date."  That ended the discussion.

There are many private sector industry leaders who would tell you that even if you loved the old text, it would be a smart move to step into your new job and change the textbook just to establish your authority.   That is why new industry leaders rearrange work teams or move people's offices as their first act of command.  They are sending a message that a new person is in charge, and the new person will be making new decisions.    It is done all the time--deliberately as a power message.   A good leader has to decide what is good about the old system that needs preserving, so he/she is not reinventing the wheel or throwing out years of collective knowledge with each leadership change, but in private industry a new leader always chooses something highly visible to change.   Sometimes they wait six months to get the lay of the land, sometimes they do it right away.   It may be a major reorganization or it may just be new vending machines in the lunch room, or potted plants in the foyer, but they do something that shows.   

They also don't care if they have to replace a few employees who don't accept the new leadership and want to fight it.  Better to replace them now than after a battle.  The leader stays in charge.

Changing a text is a good strategy because it is a substantive change, it is visible, but it doesn't reorganize the whole program when you don't want to or are not ready to do that.   No one's job changes. 

My ex was a private industry manager.  (He was an excellent manager, just a lousy husband.)  I learned a lot from him.   I also learned a lot working in and observing a toxic department that fell apart.   I escaped with more than a few psychic scars and a lot of lessons.

You are on the right track.   Be understanding but don't be apologetic--that is what was good about larryc's suggested email.   

[daniel_von_flanagan]

Tenure track faculty are not "real" faculty to tenured faculty

Sure they are.  - DvF

Perhaps best to move this to a new thread, but "real" was in quotes precisely to reflect the subjective elements of these judgments of autonomy and authority at various ranks and statuses.  Tenure track but not yet tenured faculty are probationary.  Their contracts can simply not be renewed.  In many schools, they cannot serve on certain committees like tenure and promotion committees.

Of course there is a status difference between untenured and tenured tt faculty, but it is not structural the way the difference is between tt and temporary faculty.  At all institutions where I have been, tt faculty occupy an official faculty slot, usually a position allocated by the admin or (as in my current school) a position number allocated by the board of regents.  To be a "probationary member of the faculty" is inter alia to be a "member of the faculty".

It is quite reasonable for probationary faculty to not be involved in tenure decisions and related personnel matters, but I think it would be very unusual for them to not have a full voice on curriculum matters. (Split infinitive intentional, as is the one below.)

The presumption for any faculty member - probationary or otherwise - is that they have a structural commitment to the department in a way that transient hires do not.

The may be expected by tenured faculty to adopt departmentally selected texts, even if the (relatively) new hire might prefer a different one. 

Most often this is either because the text had to be selected (and ordered at the bookstore) before the new hire arrived, or because it is a text for a course commonly taught in multiple sections by multiple instructors.  It is a sign of a dysfunctional department for an untenured tt faculty member to not have an equal voice with the tenured faculty on the choice of a textbook, common or otherwise, while with an adjunct I think it would be unusual the other way. - DvF