|
fedscholar
|
 |
« on: December 19, 2009, 10:10:01 PM » |
|
I have been thinking about the merits of hiring at the AP vs. ASP vs. FP levels. Some feel that in tight times universities feel compelled to "bargain shop." I have not seen that, but it seems reasonable for the next year or so. However, I have read somewhere that many state and government agencies will be affected by boomer retirements over the next ten years or so. I think I have also read this somewhere for academia, but I cannot recall where. It would seem that in all these institutions there would be a need for people at various levels of experience to fill the void. Still, it seems that the vast majority of the academic hiring is at the AP level.
So, anyone want to gaze into a crystal ball and say what the academic job market might look like post-recession? Will the retirements be filled largely by rookie APs or will there be a demand for more senior hires, either tenured or with somewhat shorter tenure periods?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
t_r_b
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 19, 2009, 10:22:53 PM » |
|
So, anyone want to gaze into a crystal ball and say what the academic job market might look like post-recession? Will the retirements be filled largely by rookie APs or will there be a demand for more senior hires, either tenured or with somewhat shorter tenure periods?
You seem to assume that the replacement positions will be either tenure-track or tenured. Based on the hiring trends of the last twenty years or so, I doubt that assumption is warranted. Look for the proportion of limited-term faculty to continue to rise, with particularly sharp spikes during economic downturns such as the present one. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you want to be zen, then stay in the freaking moment.
A lot of the people posting on this thread need to go out and get kohlrabi.
|
|
|
|
mad_doctor
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2009, 10:42:39 PM » |
|
I don't think it will take a crystal ball, fedscholar. The trends for the last forty years or so have been less-and-less tenured and tenure-track faculty, and more and more non-tt and adjuncts. In the last thirty years, acc. to the AAUP, tenured and tt faculty have diminished from 57% to 31% of university faculty, while non-tt and adjunct faculty have increased from 43% to 69% of university faculty. I posted on another thread that if these trends continue, in thirty more years the number of tenured and tt faculty will either be trivial or non-existent. University administrators have almost no incentive to tenure faculty, and if they had their way they would just do away with tenure once and for all. It limits their discretion, and they don't like it. The trends are incremental - if you reduce tenured faculty by only 1/2 of one percent a year, in ten years you have 5% less, in twenty years, 10%, and so on. I have been worried that a crisis could allow them to justify sharp cuts in tenured and tt faculty by declaring an emergency, and the end of tenure could come very quickly at many universities. I think this economy will either wipe out tenure at many of the mid- and lower-tier universities, or trivialize it to the point of being gone for all practical purposes. I fear that by the time this depression/ recession is over, that universities across the board will have eliminated a bunch of tenure and tenure-track positions and replaced them with instructors, lecturers, and adjuncts, and it will stay that way forever. It's really hard to get those positions back once they're gone.
At my last job they didn't even bother to cut the non-tt faculty when the economy crashed. They went straight for the highest-paid tt faculty. Why keep tt faculty when you can have twice as many non-tt faculty for the same price, since in their estimation it's not like tt faculty add any more value to the university than non-tt faculty? In fact it's probably the opposite, since in their mind we cost more to hire, teach less, and often exercise our academic freedoms in conflict with their own interests, we add less value than our non-tt and adjunct colleagues.
Future scholars should expect to be either adjunct faculty, or full-time contract workers on one- two- and three-year renewable contracts, or something along those lines. Tenure and tenure-track positions will be rare, and reserved for special candidates.
On edit: what t_r_b said, but with a little more detail.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 19, 2009, 10:43:57 PM by mad_doctor »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
der_gadfly
SSOB-hatin', snarklet-writin'
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 1,844
oy vey
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2009, 10:51:33 PM » |
|
My crystal ball has indicated that the elder tenured faculty will hang on long past what is considered normal retirement age, sucking universities for all they can, placing extreme burdens on pension systems, and stopping others from getting jobs that can allow them to feed their families.
Another revelation is that any tenure track jobs will be limited to those who are of the highest caste (have a lot of completely immaterial qualifications (relevant to current social issues) such as a lot of academic publications from when they were in High School (at ONLY the most top private high schools) and are the 'superstars')
Lastly, the abuses practiced by tenured faculty in the past will further hurt any possibility for expanding tenure lines: "I am tenured, so anything you ask me for that I do not like, I will not do"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
(and I bow before der_gadfly) Don't forget, that cat hair can come in handy as a good luck charm! |
|
|
|
t_r_b
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 19, 2009, 10:58:12 PM » |
|
My crystal ball has indicated that the elder tenured faculty will hang on long past what is considered normal retirement age, sucking universities for all they can, placing extreme burdens on pension systems, and stopping others from getting jobs that can allow them to feed their families.
You assume that if they retired, their jobs would then be available to others. As I said above, I see no reason to think that would be the case. Many of those jobs just won't come back. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you want to be zen, then stay in the freaking moment.
A lot of the people posting on this thread need to go out and get kohlrabi.
|
|
|
voxprincipalis
Foxaliciously Cinnamon-Scented (and Most Poetic)
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 17,442
Has potentially infinite removable wallets
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2009, 11:02:10 PM » |
|
It would seem that in all these institutions there would be a need for people at various levels of experience to fill the void. Still, it seems that the vast majority of the academic hiring is at the AP level.
So, anyone want to gaze into a crystal ball and say what the academic job market might look like post-recession? Will the retirements be filled largely by rookie APs or will there be a demand for more senior hires, either tenured or with somewhat shorter tenure periods?
Leaving aside the issue of TT vs. non-TT faculty, I think you misunderstand the hiring and tenure process rather significantly. VP |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you need me, I'll be hiding under a rock until mid-August. Try not to need me, unless you come bearing Chinese food.
|
|
|
|
fedscholar
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2009, 11:33:24 PM » |
|
It would seem that in all these institutions there would be a need for people at various levels of experience to fill the void. Still, it seems that the vast majority of the academic hiring is at the AP level.
So, anyone want to gaze into a crystal ball and say what the academic job market might look like post-recession? Will the retirements be filled largely by rookie APs or will there be a demand for more senior hires, either tenured or with somewhat shorter tenure periods?
Leaving aside the issue of TT vs. non-TT faculty, I think you misunderstand the hiring and tenure process rather significantly. VP How have I misunderstood? I would not be the least bit surprised if I had, but I cannot see what leads you to that conclusion. Please elaborate. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
