next »

[mickeymantle]

I'm prompted to send this post because of a conversation I had with one of our long-time adjuncts a few days ago.  I don't want to provide too many details, but the end result is that Long-Time Adjunct feels overwhelmed: too many students who can't do the work, too little reimbursement for hours expended in teaching, and so on.  I think this adjunct is just clinging on because LTA can't retire, yet.

I just wanted adjuncts to know (having been a long-time adjunct myself at one time) that full-time faculty may be obtuse (to put it mildly) to your concerns, but we are facing some new stresses ourselves: administrators who increasingly demand more and more of our time in the classroom (as witnessed by the recent CHE article) and state legislatures who seem more concerned about satisfying short-term needs than long-term goals.

Finally, I wish more of our colleagues would be willing to work with adjuncts to fight the abuses of the system, but I don't think that will happen anytime soon.

[spinnaker]

Thank you. The question I guess is "what would it take for full time faculty to see any reason to align with adjuncts?" And I believe (or maybe just wish!) there may be more good reasons than they suspect.

[mleok]

The most reliable mechanism to get full-time faculty on your side is the concept of enlightened self-interest. So, the question is, is it truly in the best interests of tenured faculty to advocate for better employment conditions for adjuncts?

[helpful]

The most reliable mechanism to get full-time faculty on your side is the concept of enlightened self-interest. So, the question is, is it truly in the best interests of tenured faculty to advocate for better employment conditions for adjuncts?

Yes, of course. Those students adjuncts teach will be my students in other classes. It is in all our interests to do the best for all students and deal with the problems that have arisen.

[seniorscholar]

The most reliable mechanism to get full-time faculty on your side is the concept of enlightened self-interest. So, the question is, is it truly in the best interests of tenured faculty to advocate for better employment conditions for adjuncts?

Our faculty union thinks "yes" -- because if adjuncts and non-TT continuing lines cost enough, the money guys will see the sense of turning some of them into TT positions. This, of course, will not help the adjuncts with only a master's degree, but it will help those with doctorates from other universities [not from our own university, since, like most research universities, we won't hire our own]. It will also help tenured faculty, because there will be more people to do the committee work, the advising, the three-year stints in various departmental administrative roles, cover our sabbaticals with someone who can teach graduate courses, and so forth. [We have managed to diminish the number of adjuncts in some departments with a heavy load of "service" courses by creating non-TT PhD required positions with a decent salary, full benefits, and the possibility of long-time reappointment.]

[spinnaker]

The most reliable mechanism to get full-time faculty on your side is the concept of enlightened self-interest. So, the question is, is it truly in the best interests of tenured faculty to advocate for better employment conditions for adjuncts?

Our faculty union thinks "yes" -- because if adjuncts and non-TT continuing lines cost enough, the money guys will see the sense of turning some of them into TT positions. This, of course, will not help the adjuncts with only a master's degree, but it will help those with doctorates from other universities [not from our own university, since, like most research universities, we won't hire our own]. It will also help tenured faculty, because there will be more people to do the committee work, the advising, the three-year stints in various departmental administrative roles, cover our sabbaticals with someone who can teach graduate courses, and so forth. [We have managed to diminish the number of adjuncts in some departments with a heavy load of "service" courses by creating non-TT PhD required positions with a decent salary, full benefits, and the possibility of long-time reappointment.]

I think some would refer to this as "pulling up the ladder after you have successfully climbed it" or some such.

[janewales]

Spinnaker, wouldn't positions like seniorscholar describes (decent salary, full benefits, and the possibility of long-term reappointment) be considered an improvement over the current state of most adjunct positions?

[spinnaker]

Yes, also one answer to "what's in it for TT's." The LTA Mickey Mantle describes would probably be a casualty of this method of "fighting abuse." Unions are not principle-driven, are they?

[lyndonparker]

The most reliable mechanism to get full-time faculty on your side is the concept of enlightened self-interest. So, the question is, is it truly in the best interests of tenured faculty to advocate for better employment conditions for adjuncts?

Our faculty union thinks "yes" -- because if adjuncts and non-TT continuing lines cost enough, the money guys will see the sense of turning some of them into TT positions. This, of course, will not help the adjuncts with only a master's degree, but it will help those with doctorates from other universities [not from our own university, since, like most research universities, we won't hire our own]. It will also help tenured faculty, because there will be more people to do the committee work, the advising, the three-year stints in various departmental administrative roles, cover our sabbaticals with someone who can teach graduate courses, and so forth. [We have managed to diminish the number of adjuncts in some departments with a heavy load of "service" courses by creating non-TT PhD required positions with a decent salary, full benefits, and the possibility of long-time reappointment.]

I think some would refer to this as "pulling up the ladder after you have successfully climbed it" or some such.

And what would you suggest? Folks without PhDs really don't belong in higher ed, and can't expect the system to change to accommodate them.

[helpful]

Yes, also one answer to "what's in it for TT's." The LTA Mickey Mantle describes would probably be a casualty of this method of "fighting abuse." Unions are not principle-driven, are they?

There is nothing preventing adjuncts from forming their own union to fight for the principles for their members.

[spinnaker]

And what would you suggest? Folks without PhDs really don't belong in higher ed, and can't expect the system to change to accommodate them.

Sure they do. Our department chair, for instance.

[_touchedbyanoodle_]

Folks without PhDs really don't belong in higher ed, and can't expect the system to change to accommodate them.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's adorable.

[lyndonparker]

Decent places haven't hired folks without terminal degrees in at least 40 years. I have little sympathy for those who only have an MA kvetching about not being offered t-t positions. It's really problematic for students that they are being denied a quality education, and one of the reasons they act so bewildered when we don't accept their transfer credits.

[spinnaker]

Yes, also one answer to "what's in it for TT's." The LTA Mickey Mantle describes would probably be a casualty of this method of "fighting abuse." Unions are not principle-driven, are they?

There is nothing preventing adjuncts from forming their own union to fight for the principles for their members.

Of course, this is what is needed. And those unions won't be principle-driven either, and that's fine. But why assume, when your pay isn't even close to keeping pace with inflation, that some improvement in your pay and some access to employee benefits is going to eliminate your job?

Decent places haven't hired folks without terminal degrees in at least 40 years. I have little sympathy for those who only have an MA kvetching about not being offered t-t positions. It's really problematic for students that they are being denied a quality education, and one of the reasons they act so bewildered when we don't accept their transfer credits.

You've provided no evidence that undereducated educators is a problem.

[dweeb]

The unfixable economy raised the stakes, stakes that had already gotten dear. There's a great deal of lip service in the US about how much we revere education, but when it comes down to voting to spend the money needed--it's SOL.

With less money, institutions make cuts, which raises the stakes even higher for professors. Less funding for tenure positions; more reliance on contingent faculty. With the stakes raised due to job insecurity for all, it is no wonder that the institutions can willy nilly break laws regarding legal full to part time faculty ratios. 

And with the stakes raised, a new form of Us v Them mentality has arisen, except it's not Us against the Man, it's Us against ourselves as FT & PT fight for ever thinning slices of pie. This battle has worsened the prejudice against adjunct faculty in California. From a big picture perspective, gaining a tenure position loses meaning when artificial outside forces are to blame. And, having far more applicants than needed to choose from due to a dearth of openings does not guarantee that the most qualified person is hired.

We are all qualified, otherwise, we would not be able to teach. I say this knowing that some reading this believe themselves to be more qualified. Worse than this, though, is the thought sneaking through many minds: "But, I'm not prejudiced against adjuncts!" Hell, we adjuncts are prejudiced against ourselves from all the internalized oppression. Look around these forums, with adjunct panties in a twist over ridiculous office politics, making ends meet, and health issues when we should be able to spend this time focusing on our students.

Fellow union members: before we can meet the call to arms to fight for proper funding, we must rid ourselves of the prejudice that keeps us at each others' throats.

But oh well, we all know who will lose in the long run: the students.  Meanwhile,  keeping us busy infighting is an advantage when the ultimate goal is non-union hourly wages with no benefits for all.