next »

[wryter]

It seems to me that the most recent comments come from folks who, though quite well-intentioned, may have forgotten the OP's actual dilemma:  Hu isn't leaving academia voluntarily; hu's contract is up, and there are no new jobs to replace it.  So the question shouldn't be whether or not it is a good idea to leave academia for a year or two, but rather what to do in the event that you MUST leave it for a year or two (or longer, depending upon how long it takes for the market to kick up again) and wish, ultimately, to return.

As for adjuncting, something I've always wondered:  Does doing so actually LOWER your stock with some prospective TT employers, since it sends the signal that they can have you on that basis instead of having to commit to offering you a real position with a real salary, benefits, etc.?  Why buy the cow when you can exploit it into giving you milk for a ridiculously low price and then send it on to the slaughterhouse when dairy tastes change or it gets mouthy?  (I'm sure that last sentence will make some bristle, and for that I apologize; but in my defense, it was a lot of fun to write.)

[glowdart]

Search committees will not know that the OP did not leave voluntarily, however.  Spin it into a choice, and then how will they know?

The adjuncting issue has been hotly debated over the years on this thread; my overwhelming impression from the last go-round that we had was "Yeah, what wryter mentions can be a factor at some schools, but you can't control or predict what the SC is thinking, and with the economy the way it is, we might all need to recalibrate our feelings on the perpetual adjunct."  Plus, it isn't like the OP is adjuncting and working at Kinkos.  Adjuncting with a real job in your discipline is a different thing entirely.

A reaction to porcupine:  we're at a SLAC that gets a lot of applicants who fit the description that porcupine mentions -- people who work, then teach, then work, then teach, then work, then hold a visiting fancy-pants lectureships, then work, etc. 

Frankly, if you are a recognized name in your discipline outside of the academic realm, and you apply at our school, we are alternately frothing to get you in for an interview and terrified that you're just going to teach at our campus until Harvard or Hollywood comes a-calling because why on earth else would you, Dan Brown, be applying for a job with a heavy teaching load?   

The combination of fame and bouncing in and out of academia make us question the applicant, because of the nature of our school.  Now, if we were NYU, then I doubt we'd care if you only stayed on our faculty for 3 years before you then left because you had to run to LA to advise on the filming of your novels for a few years.  For us, replacing anyone after three years is a chore, yet every search we run includes at least of couple of applicants where we all think "NO WAY!  REALLY?  How COOL would THAT be!" (There are some very specific reasons why we get these applicants, and those would totally out me, so mum's the word on why we always have them in a pool.)

Now, applicants like the OP, who taught, worked, got another degree, and worked some more before applying to teach again?  We'd snatch you up in an instant for some programs, especially if you were adjuncting on the side while working -- as long as you could convince us that you really did want to shift your balance to full-time academia and part-time external work in the discipline.  Be prepared to explain that in the phone interview, as well as your application materials.

[larryc]

As for adjuncting, something I've always wondered:  Does doing so actually LOWER your stock with some prospective TT employers...

Yes! Some adjuncting to build up a teachig portfolio is great, but after that it makes you look at best unimaginative and at worst unemployable. I would much rather see a vita with a soldi degree, some pubs, and enough teaching to show me that the person can teach, and a career outside the academy than I would someone with the first three things but then years of piecing together a living a course at a time.

Look, in the humanities at least we all understand the market and I think nearly all of us are willing to take it into account as we cull the applications. The way to show us that you an active scholar is to do some scholarship, not to adjunct yet another 101 course at the local CC.

[wryter]

Thank you for confirming what I already suspected, larryc.

I'm still curious to hear if the rules are somehow different for those in the arts -- writers (like me), visual artists, musicians, etc.  Will a year or two out of academia, doing what we did before (writing, painting, performing, etc.), hurt us, or help us, or make no difference when the academic job market picks up again?

[alleyoxenfree]

As one who's been on search committees for a post in this area, this kind of non-teaching experience seems a plus, as would any kind of arts administration, because it is portable back to the classroom and back to the department. 

As for the notion that too much adjuncting is a no-no, I suspect that is going to undergo a change as the economy worsens and only the most well-established (read: privileged) of professors and institutions will escape unscathed.  The reality is that good professors must leave good positions for family reasons.  Good lecturers will be cut for budgetary reasons.  People will adjunct in order to bridge the gap from one good job to their next one.  It's really long past time for academics - especially those who spend large amounts of time talking about building an inclusive, diverse professions, to get realistic about how the work lives of real academics play out.  The days are long gone - except among the children of privilege - that a young Ph.D. might come out minty fresh, to be placed at Excellent U by their Attentive Mentor, and go on to Career Brilliance via Select Yet CuttingEdge Publications, with a dash of salt and teaching.

The reality - which it might be time for us to admit as a profession - that any career can be subjected to the vagaries of economics, health (or lack of health insurance) crises, gender biases, campus crises, a sudden family issue.  Isn't it time that, as search committee members, we looked for people who are whole people, living whole lives, and remaining committed to the profession?  Isn't that what the buzz terms in so many ads, "commitment to teaching," might mean?  For any committee that I'm on, that will remain part of the criteria.

[watermarkup]

Well, that's a nice thought, Allyoxenfree, but here's my guess: nope.

I've never been on a SC, but the contributions in the Chronicle by SC members regularly highlight the oversupply of candidates and the necessity of making a first cut somewhere. So next year, instead of 200 applications with 30 stellar applicants, there might be 300 applications with 15 stellar applicants who are untainted by the stench of adjunct teaching or non-academic labor. That's enough to fill the short list. Some SC members will still be smugly self-confident about their ability to differentiate between rising stars and those from lesser programs who just didn't have what it took to land a TT job at a respectable school in 2009, and they will be eager to share their wisdom with would-be applicants in the pages of the CHE.

[nipper]

In my experience, when it comes to an arts/creative field, "the stench" tends to attach itself to those who ONLY have academic experience, as opposed to real-world experience and achievements.  Of course, that's only true at upper-tier schools or programs, which may go a long way toward explaining how they made it into an upper tier to begin with.

And FWIW, lots of these upper-tier programs -- especially those located in urban areas (Columbia, NYU, UC Irvine, Houston, etc.) -- hire lots of creative adjuncts.  I cannot imagine having something like that on your CV would add anything but a lovely fresh scent.

[alleyoxenfree]

As Nipper says.  Further, even institutions who still pride themselves on being able to attract "rising stars" do, after having been burned a few times as those "stars" move on, choose someone who has the ability and interest in building a whole career and helping to build a whole institution - rather than just their own lovely light.  We did the last time we hired.

[maggs]

Hi all,

I agree with nipper, in arts/creative fields, I believe real world experience/ competing in a tough market are assets  rather than detractors as long as you can prove an ongoing interest in education as well (ie adjucnting)

I believe SCs may wish to upgrade the professionalism of certain departments by specifically hiring a non-academic.

I can only speak to my experience, but returning after a long hiatus, is possible.  It is also really rewarding.  If you want it enough, you can make it happen.  Publish, exhibit, perform ( and teach a class or two, preferably engaging at risk or non-traditional students). 

Best Luck - Maggs

[sumiko]

Thank you for confirming what I already suspected, larryc.

I'm still curious to hear if the rules are somehow different for those in the arts -- writers (like me), visual artists, musicians, etc.  Will a year or two out of academia, doing what we did before (writing, painting, performing, etc.), hurt us, or help us, or make no difference when the academic job market picks up again?

I think this would be a GREAT time to be working on your publishing/gallery pedigree - if you can't get an academic job, you might as well be working on buffing your national and international show/publishing record. The prof. who is now head of the dept. I graduated from didn't teach for 8 years, made her national reputation, had two kids, and got her job based on her professional record and portfolio. For the visual arts, at least, producing and showing work is hugely important.

[frenchgirl]

Can someone please tell me what "real world experience" is in relation to a humanities position, particularly English or History? I just have no idea how to utilize my PhD in the next year or so in a way that will help me eventually get back on the TT.

I realize this thread is a bit stale now, but I believe it is still relevant to many of us here. Plus, I for one am very curious what VAPs without contracts for next year or, like me, postdocs whose funding will run out this summer, can do to stay in the academic game while still eating and paying bills, etc. Ideally, I'd like to hang on as long as possible before giving up completely and moving into non-academic work, but in the meantime I really need a plan B that doesn't involve adjunct teaching. (Because it doesn't pay enough.)

I've had several postdocs since graduating a couple years ago, and turned down a VAP to take one, but now the gravy drain has come to an end and I don't have a TT to show for it, though I do have a number of forthcoming, well-placed pubs and potential book contract with a great univ. press. Alas, I have no idea what to do with myself. Low level academic admin. seems like a possibility but what do I know?

Does anyone out there have any specific advice?

[msparticularity]

Frenchgirl, my advice would be to find regular employment of some kind (I did bookkeeping) that is not a creative drain for you.  While you're totally right not to try to adjunct for a living, you might check into the possibility of teaching a single course, just to keep a university affiliation and library access. Then just keep doing what you're doing--writing and publishing, and hopefully going to conferences from time to time to keep in touch.

[larryc]

Can someone please tell me what "real world experience" is in relation to a humanities position, particularly English or History? I just have no idea how to utilize my PhD in the next year or so in a way that will help me eventually get back on the TT.

Any white collar job can be spun to be relevant to academia. Even if you sit all day and write memos--we do a lot of that too! And you can argue that your job involves some aspects of research (any topic), or expository writing (any topic), or managing a budget, or supervising anyone at all, or just getting your ass out of bed on a regular schedule.

[seniorscholar]

Can someone please tell me what "real world experience" is in relation to a humanities position, particularly English or History? I just have no idea how to utilize my PhD in the next year or so in a way that will help me eventually get back on the TT.

My years before grad school as a secretary and administrative assistant, both in business and in the office of my representative to the state legislature, let me apply for a lot of jobs where "Business Writing" was one of the things in the ad, and in my first TT job (which I didn't land until I had a book under contract), I found that teaching a section of the course every semester before tenure (when I had children at home) gave me a lot more research time than teaching the exciting stuff in my specialty. (Typical business writing papers are short and easy to mark, and typical business students at my university are ambitious immigrants or their children, eager to do everything you tell them to do.)