• November 1, 2014
November 01, 2014, 5:50:51 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with your Chronicle username and password
News: Talk about how to cope with chronic illness, disability, and other health issues in the academic workplace.
 
Poll
Question: If you are currently tenured or TT, did you adjunct as a primary job between completing your education and getting your job?
No, not at all - 46 (49.5%)
Yes, for 1 year or less - 12 (12.9%)
Yes, for 1-2 years - 11 (11.8%)
Yes, for 2-3 years - 5 (5.4%)
Yes, for 3-4 years - 6 (6.5%)
Yes, for 4-5 years - 6 (6.5%)
Yes, for more than 5 years - 7 (7.5%)
Total Voters: 93

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
  Print  
Author Topic: Tenured/TT faculty: Did you adjunct? How long?  (Read 49657 times)
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #75 on: May 06, 2012, 6:31:16 PM »

The thread about whether adjuncts are exploited or not makes me curious: how many of us who've got the "holy grail"--a tenured or tenure-track job--adjuncted first? Because to me, the best argument that adjuncts are exploited is that they are "strung along" into believing that eventually their work will turn into a TT job.

I think a stronger case is merely that you are doing work that benefits the academy which initially is a positive thing to have in your resume, eventually turns into a negative for you, while it remains beneficial to the employer, after you've done it too long.
Any discussion of exploitation would have to start with a definition.

And, as for giving the right advice, what would that be? A few, like oldfullprof landed as TT job after many years as an adjunct.

When will you get it that they are many of us that teach on a non-TT line that don't want a TT line?
I have been doing this for twenty years (is that included in your vague "you've done it too long"?) and consider that my teaching is still a major positive for me. How dare you assume that it has turned into a negative?
My work benefits both the academy and myself. My mental cost/benefit calculation includes far more than mere salary.

I don't mean a negative in your life. I mean a negative as a credential if you're applying for other positions. If you take two candidates with identical training and publishing  credentials, one who has adjuncted two years and one who has adjuncted ten, the one who has adjuncted ten years is not a stronger contender even though it would be counter-intuitive not to suppose that his added experience as a teacher has brought improvement.

Again--it depends on the job.  I would argue that there are hiring situations in which someone with 10 years of teaching experience would have a definite advantage over the one with only two years' experience, especially if the job I was hiring for had an emphasis on teaching.


So perhaps Quietly's advice about the three year cutoff is not the best.
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
miadjunct
New member
*
Posts: 20


« Reply #76 on: May 06, 2012, 6:47:26 PM »

I don't mean a negative in your life. I mean a negative as a credential if you're applying for other positions. If you take two candidates with identical training and publishing  credentials, one who has adjuncted two years and one who has adjuncted ten, the one who has adjuncted ten years is not a stronger contender even though it would be counter-intuitive not to suppose that his added experience as a teacher has brought improvement.

I don't mean to be too snarky (well, I guess part of me does), but have you actually been trained as an academic? Your stubborn resistance to recognizing realities other than your own and your constant use of broad, poorly defined generalizations makes me think not.
Having taught for many years at an R1 institution is a very positive credential for me when applying (read responding to RFP's) for a position as a consultant. The fact that it was as an adjunct and not on a TT line makes very little difference (if any).
You have heard many times that some of us on the board DO NOT WANT A TT LINE. While that may be considered blasphemous by some, it is a reality.
Logged
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #77 on: May 06, 2012, 8:03:15 PM »

I don't mean a negative in your life. I mean a negative as a credential if you're applying for other positions. If you take two candidates with identical training and publishing  credentials, one who has adjuncted two years and one who has adjuncted ten, the one who has adjuncted ten years is not a stronger contender even though it would be counter-intuitive not to suppose that his added experience as a teacher has brought improvement.

Having taught for many years at an R1 institution is a very positive credential for me when applying (read responding to RFP's) for a position as a consultant. The fact that it was as an adjunct and not on a TT line makes very little difference (if any).
You have heard many times that some of us on the board DO NOT WANT A TT LINE. While that may be considered blasphemous by some, it is a reality.

No, I understand that. Good for you; you should keep doing what you're doing. I would say though, the poorest paying adjunct jobs are poor indeed, and I suppose that's why some folks persist in mentioning exploitation.
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
rustymuscle
Junior member
**
Posts: 78


« Reply #78 on: May 07, 2012, 4:23:43 PM »

I've already noted that I do not take adjunct positions that pay less than $2500 per class. But I'm curious, why are the poorest paying adjunct jobs poor indeed? I know adjuncts who take the low paying positions and have never heard any of them talk about the job being "poor."


Logged
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #79 on: May 07, 2012, 7:19:02 PM »

I've already noted that I do not take adjunct positions that pay less than $2500 per class. But I'm curious, why are the poorest paying adjunct jobs poor indeed? I know adjuncts who take the low paying positions and have never heard any of them talk about the job being "poor."




Maybe they think you're a snob.
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
polly_mer
practice makes perfect
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 37,443

Have you worked on that project today?


« Reply #80 on: May 08, 2012, 7:51:55 AM »

I've already noted that I do not take adjunct positions that pay less than $2500 per class. But I'm curious, why are the poorest paying adjunct jobs poor indeed? I know adjuncts who take the low paying positions and have never heard any of them talk about the job being "poor."




Maybe they think you're a snob.

I suspect it's because those people either aren't adjuncting for the money or are comparing having a minimum wage crap job at 20 hours a week to a guaranteed couple thousand dollars for multiple classes for something in climate controlled conditions with no heavy lifting.

Or, the people could just be too stupid to know the low-paying jobs for years upon years are a sucker bet.  I've definitely seen that as well.
Logged

I've joined a bizarre cult called JordanCanonicalForm's Witnesses.  I have to go from door to door asking people things like, "Good evening, sir!  Do you have a moment to chat about Linear Transformations?"
adjunk
Member
***
Posts: 179


« Reply #81 on: May 09, 2012, 5:42:28 PM »

Got my PhD in 93, but didn't land a TT position until 2005.  The ONLY way I was able to survive adjuncting is that my Mom let me live rent free in my grandmother's house after she passed away.  I adjuncted primarily at two different colleges, and I was definitely strung along by both of them.  At the one, I was told repeatedly by my chair that he was trying to move me into a TT position, but the moment one finally became available, my colleague moved heaven and earth to give it to one of her cronies fresh out of grad school.  At the other, my chair lamented repeatedly that there were no openings, but the year after I left, the entire department started retiring one by one, leading to multiple openings. 
Logged
aneumey
Member
***
Posts: 163


« Reply #82 on: May 10, 2012, 3:46:24 PM »

After I graduated with my first Masters in December 2002, I was fed up with academia and taught high school for a few years while working on a second Masters (both humanities), which I finished in 2006.  I began to miss the college world, so I started as an adjunct on the side in Fall of 2004, then had a series of semester and summer temporary full time contracts that lasted from January 2005 to Fall 2006, when I landed a permanent non-TT full time job at another institution.  My original institution didn't like the fact that I had left and lured me back with a TT job that I started in the fall of 2007.  They also counted my year at the other institution toward my tenure and made me department chair.   Assuming I clear the final hurdle at the state level, I will be tenured and promoted in the fall.   
The fact that I left to teach at a private high school for a time made a huge difference, as bringing dual enrollment high school students in to take some freshman classes has become a big thing, and I had high school experience.    That and the fact that as of Fall 2004, when I cleared 18 hours on my second masters, allowed me to beat out several adjuncts with PhDs who had been around longer.
Logged
aneumey
Member
***
Posts: 163


« Reply #83 on: May 10, 2012, 4:28:38 PM »

If everyone left the adjuncting profession after three years, there would still be plenty of people to fill those positions. What would happen in my estimate is the quality of adjunct teaching would decrease, as the experienced people leave.

Spinnaker, looking though your posts in this forum, it seems that all you do is whine about exploitation, union actions, and see everything through your very narrow lens.   Do you work in academia?  I'm having great difficulty believing it, given that you never provide evidence for your opinions or actually engage the critiques of your posts that others leave, instead regurgitating bits of Marxist theory.   
Logged
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #84 on: May 10, 2012, 7:30:03 PM »

If everyone left the adjuncting profession after three years, there would still be plenty of people to fill those positions. What would happen in my estimate is the quality of adjunct teaching would decrease, as the experienced people leave.

Spinnaker, looking though your posts in this forum, it seems that all you do is whine about exploitation, union actions, and see everything through your very narrow lens.   Do you work in academia?  I'm having great difficulty believing it, given that you never provide evidence for your opinions or actually engage the critiques of your posts that others leave, instead regurgitating bits of Marxist theory.   

I currently teach at two colleges.

After I graduated with my first Masters in December 2002, I was fed up with academia and taught high school for a few years while working on a second Masters (both humanities), which I finished in 2006.  I began to miss the college world, so I started as an adjunct on the side in Fall of 2004, then had a series of semester and summer temporary full time contracts that lasted from January 2005 to Fall 2006, when I landed a permanent non-TT full time job at another institution.  My original institution didn't like the fact that I had left and lured me back with a TT job that I started in the fall of 2007.  They also counted my year at the other institution toward my tenure and made me department chair.   Assuming I clear the final hurdle at the state level, I will be tenured and promoted in the fall.   
The fact that I left to teach at a private high school for a time made a huge difference, as bringing dual enrollment high school students in to take some freshman classes has become a big thing, and I had high school experience.    That and the fact that as of Fall 2004, when I cleared 18 hours on my second masters, allowed me to beat out several adjuncts with PhDs who had been around longer.


This is extraordinary!
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
aneumey
Member
***
Posts: 163


« Reply #85 on: May 10, 2012, 8:46:14 PM »

I think the point that many are trying to make is that adjuncthood is not the same from field to field.  Generally speaking, and there are exceptions, the death march analogy works well for the humanities and social sciences - the purpose is indeed to save money.  In fields such as engineering or medical stuff, having someone who actually works in the field come in and teach a class brings in a fresh knowledge base that only using full time faculty could not bring, and generally brings in people who aren't interested in full time academic employment.  In those areas, the reasoning can be to bring in outside expertise.
Logged
infopri
I guess I'm now a VERY
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 23,568

When all else fails, let us agree to disagree.


« Reply #86 on: May 10, 2012, 9:32:59 PM »

I think the point that many are trying to make is that adjuncthood is not the same from field to field.  Generally speaking, and there are exceptions, the death march analogy works well for the humanities and social sciences - the purpose is indeed to save money.  In fields such as engineering or medical stuff, having someone who actually works in the field come in and teach a class brings in a fresh knowledge base that only using full time faculty could not bring, and generally brings in people who aren't interested in full time academic employment.  In those areas, the reasoning can be to bring in outside expertise.

I can't speak to the humanities, but I think you've put social sciences (at least, the applied ones) in the wrong category here.  My very interdisciplinary field has a large (applied) social-sciences component, and we place a big premium on hiring people who are active practitioners, both on our full-time non-TT faculty and among our adjuncts.
Logged

People who do not understand numbers should not be allowed to use them for anything. - DvF

MYOB.  Y enseņen bien a sus hijos.
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #87 on: May 10, 2012, 10:33:39 PM »

This may be surprising: "Degrees and Credentials: Most part-timers have less formal education than full-timers, with 67% of full-timers having PhD's or the equivalent against 27% of part-timers, though many part-timers are in graduate school while teaching." Reclaiming the Ivory Tower by Joe Berry 2005
I get the feeling that adjuncts are under-represented on this particular forum. Just noticing.
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
aneumey
Member
***
Posts: 163


« Reply #88 on: May 10, 2012, 10:35:11 PM »

I based what I said on what I have heard from a lot of people in the social sciences...I am thinking of people who, for example, have an MA in sociology.  I imagine it is a different world if you are talking about, for example, practicing psychologists. 
Logged
spinnaker
Distinguished Senior Member
*****
Posts: 1,902


« Reply #89 on: May 10, 2012, 10:58:00 PM »

I think the point that many are trying to make is that adjuncthood is not the same from field to field.  Generally speaking, and there are exceptions, the death march analogy works well for the humanities and social sciences - the purpose is indeed to save money. 

The death march metaphor is gratuitously morbid and graphic, IMHO. "Dead end career" is a much more popular vernacular phrase that is more palatable.
Logged

"I never agree with Spinnaker, but..."
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.9 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St., N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037
subscribe today

Get the insight you need for success in academe.