Beware of Geeks Bearing Gifts

Last week, Dan Berrett published an article in The Chronicle of Higher Ed entitled "Adjuncts Are Better Teachers Than Tenured Professors, Study Finds."  All the rest of the week on social media, this article was trotted out as an example of what is wrong with higher education in America today:  1.  There is an ever-larger segment of the workforce that exists in the space without benefits, protection, and stability, and 2. Tenure is an evil system which keeps lazy professors who no longer care about their craft in the top jobs sucking up all the money.  I can see, at first glance, why the title was so very appealing to many in the Education Mercenary Army, but on closer inspection this article contains some worrisome ideas.

Firstly, the study that Berrett reports on was conducted mainly at Northwestern, which has a selective admissions process and its treatment of adjuncts is above the norm for most:

     But an untenured faculty member at Northwestern may not look much like the stereotype of a part-   

     time instructor cobbling together teaching gigs on multiple campuses.  Northwestern's were 

     generally well compensated and enjoyed longstanding relationships with the university, said Mr. 

     Figlio [conductor of the original study].

     He added that 99.4 percent of the untenured faculty members in the study had taught at 

     Northwestern for at least six quarters.

     "This is not someone we're hiring once to fill a gap and then getting rid of," he said.

An arrangement such as this is one that I experienced at the school where I have taught the longest, up until this year.  I did feel a certain amount of loyalty and had plenty of time to truly work at the craft of teaching.  Whether or not I was made to feel welcome at department functions (this varied on what they might be and who might be in charge of those) mattered little.  I was welcomed by many colleagues and groups on campus.  I had a good salary, benefits, and a great office space for students to drop in when needing help.  I knew all the years that I was there this was an anomaly in the adjunct world, but it worked for me and my family. Until now.  Now I'm learning how the other more-than-half lives.

I do still have my office space at that school, but my hours are fewer and my loyalty is gone.  At my second school, I share a communal office space where I can rarely use one of the two computers during my off times.  Any student dropping in for a writing conversation could not be guaranteed confidentiality due to the other adjuncts from various fields sharing the space.  I carry all sorts of supplies in two large bags that makes my commute and elevator use interesting, to say the least.  All that aside, it's a very good school and I'm fortunate to have gotten a position there.  I've been treated enthusiastically by department heads and other workers.  I don't feel the "adjunct stigma" as much there as at the place I'd called home for so long.  I'm welcome at teaching groups, workshops, and events, though my commuting distance makes some of those impossible.  But I digress.

Secondly, what about these super adjunct teachers? 

Figlio's study shows that students who took economics to an untenured faculty were "7.3 percentage points" more likely to take another economics class as opposed to the students who took political science to a tenured or tenure-track faculty member.  I'm sorry if I don't find this earth-shattering--maybe it's my lack of math skills--but the study doesn't seem inclusive of many fields and it is at only one school that has a non-standard practice of treating adjuncts well.  However, I must admit that when I saw the headline pop up that first day, I thought, "Well DUH! Of course we teach better!"  I've seen the hard work adjuncts and teaching associates pour into their classes. Generally, if I want to know the latest tech use in class that works, I'll ask another adjunct.  We're willing to try it and also able to admit when something is junk.  We dig through publications, each other's brains, and draw on our own pasts as students to make the best classes that we can.  At least, most of the people that I know do, and we have some very good reasons to work so hard.

Often our jobs are dependent on the numbers generated by student assessments and/or peer evaluations of our courses.  We stand to lose a great deal by being lazy or having uninteresting classes.  Additionally, many of us are still on the job market, hoping to land a position that raises us out of the mire of adjunct-land.  To do so requires proof of teaching ability, whether it be copies of those evals or fat teaching packets of syllabi, assignments, objectives, and lesson plans.  I work diligently on my classes planning, tweaking, researching, amending, and championing whatever I've been assigned to teach.  Above all, I try to remember that even if this is my 124th Composition I class, it is likely the student's first and only one, and I owe it to that person to make it worth their time and useful.  To be honest, I cannot imagine myself ever becoming so complacent that I stop learning and trying new things.  So while I'd like to get all self-congratulatory over this article, it functions more like a Sword of Damocles despite the imbedded positivity conferred by the statistics.

Any administration that wants to continue justifying cuts to adjuncts' salary, hours, and benefits could point to it as evidence contingent labour does not harm students as unions and education organizations claim.  It could be used to abolish tenure as a useless relic, allowing for a large-scale house cleaning of highly paid professors who will be replaced by an all-adjunct team.  Surely, the tenured may say, no educators will stand for this!  In solidarity we'll all stop work.

Don't be too sure about that.  Look at the bad deals many adjuncts have already accepted to keep bellies full and lights on.  When the tenure track forgot to include us in their vision of social justice, when universities turned to the Wal-Mart template for exploiting workers, few took a vocal stand for adjuncts.  Expecting us to stand up now for tenure may be unrealistic.  It's starting to feel like perhaps we adjuncts are the ones inside the horse and it's being slowly rolled up to the ivory tower.  The question is if anyone is willing to take the working conditions and the educational mission of higher education seriously anymore, or if folks are still concerned with only themselves and hanging on to what is already theirs?  

And my once-homey office space?  It now feels rented and I'm just the current tenant.  

Journal: What Day IS This?

It's early in the semester but things are settling in:  they are already "my" classes, "my" students.  For better or worse, at this point, I commit myself to getting as many to the end as possible if they will be lead, or cajoled, or badgered into it.  This is week three for my regular classes and the fourth meeting coming up for my Saturday-only seven week class.  However, today I had that moment of "Okay everyone, here's what you need to have for....." I was going to say the day of the week, but I had no idea which day that particular class met next or worse, which day it was right then!  Two of the bi-weekly classes meet Monday/Wednesday and the other three meet Tuesday/Thursday.  I just couldn't sort that all out on command.  This is how adjuncts slowly go insane.  I mean, I know which classes I'm teaching while I'm in them, especially since they meet in radically different locations.  Still, I hate that bewildered, lost feeling.  It makes me think of student teaching when some high school student would ask me a ridiculous grammar question that no one who hadn't been teaching grammar for 400 years would know.  (Admittedly, thanks to the revision, that's how I feel about MLA now.  "Let me get back to you on that....")

I've almost gotten the names memorized for the students in the smaller classes.  The larger ones are going to take some time, and I met them last so that adds to my confusion.  I've not lost too many either, so no breaks there because most classes are still at cap or one under.  I HATE not being able to call them all by name already, although I must remind myself that even last semester with a regular four-class load I had a little trouble remembering the names of those who either were not speaking up or impressing me with their writing in some way.  I thought about using the big name cards that I've seen a few other professors employ, but that seems like giving up on my memory entirely and I'm not ready to throw in that towel.  I will remember, eventually.

Going to make this a short post tonight:  lunches are packed, lessons are ready, and even though I'm sure there's something I forgot,  I'm tired and the big commute awaits me in a few hours.  I'll use that vehicular waste of my time to ponder an article that keeps popping up regarding adjuncts, tenure track faculty, and teaching ability.  I've read it once but it needs a second look.  That, in addition to news of more retrenchment at some universities not too far away may make for an interesting thought-exercise.  At the very least, thinking about that article may keep my road rage to a manageable level.  This is how adjuncts slowly go insane.

Some thoughts on Adjuncts and Retention of Majors

It's just after midnight and I suppose I should be sleeping, but I've gotten into the nasty habit of staying up late to get things done.  This particular Unarmed Education Mercenary enjoyed having two days in a row off, thanks to Labor Day.  This means I only have to make the horrendous drive twice this week and one of those days is the weekend class, which isn't as difficult due to lower traffic volume.  

All six of my classes are up and running now, and I am enjoying the work.  However, I'm trying to find some sense of balance among the two schools, late hours, family life, and generally getting everything done.  One benefit of the commute is that I have a considerable time to think and an article I read a few weeks ago has been gnawing at me for a couple of reasons.  Scott Jaschik's "Majoring in a Professor," published on InsideHigherEd.com on August 12, 2013 just won't get out of my head.  (Read the whole article here: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/12/study-finds-choice-major-most-influenced-quality-intro-professor#ixzz2dzHPIJcX). 

While this article may not appear to relate to adjunct faculty at first glance, it is indeed closely tied to the work that we do for colleges and universities.  In summary, Jaschik reports on a sociological study which finds that:  "Undergraduates are significantly more likely to major in a field if they have an inspiring and caring faculty member in their introduction to the field. And they are equally likely to write off a field based on a single negative experience with a professor."  More plainly, the first impression a student gets of a field can significantly affect whether they stay in that major or perhaps change to that major from another, less favorable one.  Now, consider the courses most often assigned to adjunct faculty.  From personal experience at the four different higher education venues where I have been employed, adjunct faculty are generally forbidden from teaching any course over the 200, or second-year level.  Occasionally, from dire need or emergency, an adjunct may fill in during an absence or be given a higher-level course, but often as a one-time arrangement.  Therefore, most students encountering subjects for the first time are likely to do so via adjunct teaching. Furthermore, "From 1987 to 1999, the percentage of courses taught by adjuncts at public research universities increased by 50 percent, and adjunct usage increased by 80 percent in public doctoral universities" (National Center for Education Statistics qtd. in Bettinger and Long's "Help or Hinder? Adjunct Professors and Student Outcomes"; See full article here:  http://www.ragingchickenpress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Bettinger-Help-or-Hinder.pdf)  The likelihood is great that a college student's first encounter with their chosen major is through an adjunct instructor.  

Although Bettinger and Long criticize the shallow teaching of some adjuncts in their study, many adjuncts are doing the very best that they can and employing learning/student-centered methods in their courses.  However, as their study shows, some people do not teach in this manner or cannot based on their specific situations.  Yet the cry goes out from department chairs and deans:  "Retain! Recruit!"  Obviously, in a time of strict education budgeting, stronger programs will receive more funding.  It is in every department's best interest to not only keep majors that come in declared and excited about their choice, but to snap up as many undecided and wavering students as possible.  An important task, no? Important as upper level courses that are often fought over and even given strict rotations to ensure some sort of fairness among the tenure track faculty?  Glance at many on-line scheduling tools to find Professor Staff or TBA is racking up the introductory credit hours.  The names listed as professor of record for higher courses may have one, if any, sections of these vital first classes.

I agree with Jaschik, and even Bettinger and Long mention in their conclusion, that retaining and gathering more majors is extremely important.  Yet, these introductory courses are the ones that are given to adjuncts.  Adjuncts are often hired last minute, given little to no orientation and/or resources, and sometimes little collegiality.  What incentive, other than the personal satisfaction of a job well done, does the adjunct have to contribute significantly to a department that has made their disposable status very clear?  Why worry about the well-being of a department or school that may or may not ever offer work again?  These are very real questions that savvy department heads need to be asking themselves.  If adjunct faculty is the answer for current teaching needs and budget trends, should they be treated as the gravity of this position deserves, or should they continue to be viewed at many places like the rabble outside the gates of the ivory tower, only fit to teach the "lowliest" classes?  

Let The Wild Rumpus Begin!

This post comes to you after midnight during the first week of classes.  I have been insanely busy getting all six of my courses ready to go, including attending some very fine sessions offered by the new school.  They had a nice focus on technology and were not only informative and useful, but also fun.  Plus, adjuncts were invited and I know that this invitation is not extended to all those out there in temporary faculty land.  Perhaps later I can share some of these things and let everyone know how they worked in my class, but that will have to wait until I have more time.  However, after these sessions put me in a better mood, I had to make a quick trip into my office at my older position, and this was harder than I expected.  Yes, I have an office space and computer of my own there (I don't at the new school), but it did not feel like "Mine" anymore, and I suppose it never was.  I was only a squatter.

Somewhere this week I acquired a rebellious streak--possibly motivated by the letter telling me that my health insurance would take half of each paycheck, should I choose to continue it--and I made a nice sign for my door.  I went on to Dictionary.com and borrowed their definition of "adjunct" but I cleaned it up a bit and made sure the examples all fit the academic sense of the word.  Then I put it on my door. I haven't been back there since, so I don't know if anyone censored it.  I kind of doubt that, since my office is not located in a main hallway and not too many people pass that way on a regular basis.

I've got another post I want to work up in regards to an article making the rounds, since it directly relates to the kind of coursework most adjuncts do, but I need to catch at least some sleep because I have three classes in a row to teach tomorrow.  At least I can walk to these and not drive an hour and a half.  #AdjunctProblems