Search News


Browse Archives

News

Breadth of Adjunct Use and Abuse

December 3, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The use of adjuncts is well known among academics, but many believe that these instructors are utilized primarily in certain areas (such as the humanities) or certain types of institutions (such as community colleges). But a report being released today by the American Federation of Teachers suggests that the breadth and depth of adjunct use is greater than many realize -- such that they are teaching a majority of public college and university courses, and are a major force in a wide range of disciplines.

The report -- "Reversing Course: The Troubled State of Academic Staffing and a Path Forward" -- is designed to publicize the extent of adjunct use with a mind toward encouraging more colleges to either improve the pay they offer adjuncts or shift more of their positions to the tenure track. Along those lines, the AFT is releasing a new tool that allows colleges to calculate the costs of changing staffing policies. The goal is to show that modest changes may be possible — even in tight budget years like this one — and that over time, such changes could have a meaningful impact on the makeup of faculties and the compensation of adjuncts.

It has been too easy for administrators to ignore the issue of adjunct use as something other than widespread, and this study "debunks" that view by focusing not only on numbers of individuals, but courses taught, said Barbara Bowen, president of the Professional Staff Congress, the AFT union at the City University of New York, at a briefing on the report. Part timers are being used nationwide "in all disciplines" and in many cases at "completely non-professional salaries," Bowen said.

"Most people don't know the situation," said Lawrence N. Gold, director of higher education at the AFT. He acknowledged that there will be no immediate shift from relying on adjuncts to creating tenure-track positions. But he said that, if more of the public comes to understand what has happened to public higher education, progress can be made. The AFT and other faculty groups have argued that while many adjunct instructors are great classroom teachers, their working conditions -- such as lack of office hours, being cut off from curricular decisions, being forced to move from campus to campus -- result in a reduced quality of education, and erode the job security vital for academic freedom.

The report was prepared for the AFT by John B. Lee, whose consulting and research business JBL Associates has done previous studies for the union. Lee primarily used data from the Education Department's National Study of Postsecondary Faculty. In many cases, however, Lee grouped data in new ways.

One key change -- which Lee says is important to get a sense of the extent of teaching by non-tenure-track faculty -- was his decision to include graduate students as adjuncts if they are responsible for managing a course. So graduate students who serve as teaching assistants under the supervision of a professor are not counted, and their courses are not counted as being taught by adjuncts. But courses led entirely by graduate students are.

The focus of the report is on public institutions, including community colleges, where adjunct use is particularly high (although the use of graduate students is not). But the report shows that public four-year colleges and research universities are also making widespread use of adjuncts. Across public research institutions, for example, the report finds that full-time, tenured or tenure-track faculty members make up only 41 percent of instructional staff, while full-time non-tenure-track make up 20 percent, part-time faculty members off the tenure track make up 20 percent, and graduate employees are another 19 percent.

The AFT study comes at a time of increased attention among academic groups on the use of non-tenure-track faculty members. At the annual meeting of college human resources leaders in October, one senior member of the field stunned colleagues by denouncing the way adjuncts are treated and calling for major reforms. A few colleges -- such as Elon University -- have undertaken campaigns to increase the percentage of their courses taught by tenure-track professors. But in many other cases, long campaigns by adjuncts to improve their pay and benefits have been rejected. Next week, the Modern Language Association will release a report also documenting the accelerating trend of reliance on part-timers for teaching college courses.

In the case of the AFT report, here are some of the key data.

Percentage of Undergraduate Courses at Public Colleges and Universities Taught by Contingent Instructors

Discipline Community Colleges Four-Year Colleges Research Universities
Business 50.4% 31.3% 39.4%
Education 77.0% 42.5% 48.9%
Engineering/computer science 49.6% 38.0% 29.6%
Fine arts 56.8% 47.9% 41.6%
Health science 55.4% 32.6% 56.1%
Human services 71.6% 46.3% 54.0%
Humanities 60.2% 41.0% 44.6%
Life sciences 45.0% 26.7% 28.2%
Natural/physical sciences 57.6% 36.6% 34.9%
Social sciences 51.6% 34.7% 38.5%
Vocational education 54.5% 49.6% 53.2%
Total 57.5% 38.4% 41.8%

The report says that there are many reasons to be concerned about these numbers. A primary focus is on the limited ability of adjunct professors to fully participate in campus life and be available to students. But another reason cited is that adjuncts are not paid appropriately.

Comparisons between tenure-track and non-tenure-track instructors are difficult, the report acknowledges, because many tenured or tenure-track faculty members have specific responsibilities outside of teaching, while most adjuncts are hired to teach only. This gap in responsibilities is especially notable at research universities, the report says. However, it says that the pay gap -- if measuring salary divided by courses taught -- is unacceptably large, even when factoring in mission differences.

Across sectors, the study finds that full-time faculty members are paid on average four times what a part-time faculty member is paid per course. Even with job differences, "it is not reasonable to suggest that contingent faculty members, particularly part-time/adjunct faculty members, deserve to be paid at the disproportionately low wages they currently earn for the valuable service they provide."

Salary comparisons follow. The "other salary" category includes pay for teaching in the summer, administrative responsibilities, coaching, etc.

Average Salary Per Course, by Job Status, Public Higher Education in 2003-4

Faculty Status Basic Annual Salary Other Salary Salary Per Course
Community college      
--Full time, tenured or tenure track $58,645 $5,814 $7,722
--Full time, non-tenure track $40,117 $2,625 $6,098
--Part time $8,855 $727 $2,486
Public four-year college      
--Full time, tenured or tenure track $64,435 $4,585 $10,731
--Full time, non-tenure track $41,033 $3,010 $7,299
--Part time $9,550 $860 $2,645
Public research university      
--Full time, tenured or tenure track $78,409 $6,765 $20,253
--Full time, non-tenure track $46,974 $3,475 $9,776
--Part time $14,228 $1,159 $4,245

The goal of the AFT report is to prompt colleges to reconsider their use of and treatment of adjuncts. Specifically, along the principles of an AFT campaign called Faculty and College Excellence (or FACE), the main goals are to have 75 percent of undergraduate courses taught by full-time, tenure-track faculty members and to have part timers or adjuncts receive pro rata pay and benefits.

The tool allows colleges to put in data on their current staffing patterns and to then find the costs associated with increasing the share of courses taught by those on the tenure track or improving adjunct pay or some combination. Gold noted that the tool may help, even in tough economic times, by demonstrating that progress along these lines is possible. The costs of fully embracing FACE goals in a year might be daunting, but perhaps not some forward movement, he suggested.

"It's time for us to frame the discussion appropriately," he said. "We're taking a long term, incremental approach."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Breadth of Adjunct Use and Abuse

  • Posted by John Zeugner , Prof. of History, Emeritus at WPI on December 3, 2008 at 6:35am EST
  • Careful perusal of NCES data indicates AFT
    has UNDERSTATED the abuse.

  • Out-of-field use of adjuncts and TA's
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee , Dir., at Florida Higher Education Accountability Project on December 3, 2008 at 8:35am EST
  • There seems to be no mention in this study of widespread use of adjuncts in out-of-field classrooms. Even grad student TAs can lack a Masters degree and 18 graduate hours in the teaching discipline that is the best practice standard set by accreditors, but little monitored.

    OOF classroom assignments are another reason that "while many adjunct instructors are great classroom teachers, their working conditions — such as lack of office hours, being cut off from curricular decisions, being forced to move from campus to campus — result in a reduced quality of education" and need to be added to the list.

    There is nothing worse than being forced to teach college courses for which you have no graduate background, and for which you have no undergraduate background either. I can only speculate about why this particular aspect of the problem is being ignored by AFT. Perhaps admitting it would cast doubt on the validity of classroom QA/QC meaures, and raises the question of how many courses operate at the level of a diploma mill.

    For those interested, here are the minimum faculty qualifications for teaching in California's CC system -- the only state-level standards that I know of.
    http://www.cccco.edu/Portals/4/minimum_quals_jan2008.doc

  • "framing the discussion appropriately"
  • Posted by deandad on December 3, 2008 at 8:40am EST
  • At my cc, roughly 80 percent of our operating budget is labor. Our state appropriation has been cut three times this year, and we've been told to plan for another, bigger cut next year.

    If you can get those numbers to add up to massive pay raises for adjuncts and more full-time lines, more power to you. The arithmetic is simply prohibitive.

  • Parent and Adjunct
  • Posted by Laura on December 3, 2008 at 8:40am EST
  • I'm an adjunct and now I see the issue through a different lens, as my children are in college and have adjuncts for many of their courses. The adjuncts I work with act as professionally as possible but inevitably we have to cut corners to survive. So what exactly am I (or taxpayers) paying for and what are my kids getting educationally?

  • Posted by another adjunct on December 3, 2008 at 8:45am EST
  • When the first cutbacks came down, the first to go were the easiest to go (the adjuncts). Of course, at our pay rate, administration has to get rid of lots of us to save much. I guess that's what they decided to do.

  • Abuse cuts both ways
  • Posted by Program reviewer , Professor at CSU San Marcos on December 3, 2008 at 9:00am EST
  • I do a fair amount of external program reviewing both in my discipline and for our regional accrediting body. While it is indisputable that adjunct/contingent faculty are abused, underpaid and generally not accorded the respect, rights and priveleges of tenure track faculty members, there are other abuses that a study such as this does not take note of.

    Students are also being abused by this system, which, after all, is maintained because it is cheap. First, let me stipulate that many contingent faculty are absolutely qualified (if not over-qualified) for the roles they are asked to play on campuses. However, I have seen countless (and the numbers seem to be increasing) cases where the qualifications of the contingent faculty members are not adequate for the task they are being asked to do. Here's what I mean --- contingent faculty members whose terminal degrees are the M.A. or M.S. (and whose degrees often come from masters-only institutions) are routinely being hired to teach upper division courses in every major you can think of. I am not talking ABD folks here who are in the process of finishing PhD degrees or even experienced practioners who can bring real life expertise to specialized courses with obvious real world applications --- what I consistently witness is people with terminal masters degrees often of many years standing (and with no ongoing research agenda of any sort and often without even a masters-level thesis to testify to their skills in the field in the first place) teaching the most advanced courses in departments, including sometimes graduate courses.

    One might well argue that a PhD is unnecessary to teach to teach most subjects, but if this is so, why should colleges and universities hire anyone with these qualifications for the either the tenure track or adjunct faculty. Yes, I know it helps departments save money, as instructors without PhDs are cheaper to hire --- but there is either a point to having PhDs teaching upper division and graduate courses or there isn't. And, tenure track faculty routinely undercut their claim to special knowledge and expertise when they hire underqualifed people to deliver their curriculm. If we believe there is special expertise that comes with a PhD then we ought to care enough to insist that majors are delivered by such instructors; otherwise we are guilty of abusing students and their education.

  • breadth of adjunct use and abuse
  • Posted by rosanne soifer on December 3, 2008 at 9:35am EST
  • I an an adjunct and teach in a certificate program at a private college in NYC. I sometimes feel like a migrant worker-- waiting until the last minute to see if the program ( or truck) has enough enrollment ( or grapes) to justify a job for me. And due to some sort of gray area, even though we are classified as employees and not independent contractors, we are unable to qualify for unemployment benefits during the times between semesters and/or when our particular courses are not running. And don't get me started on how impossible it is to be available to students outside of class. How are we supposed to maintain "office hours" if we have neither the office nor the hours in which to do so?

  • California CC faculty stds higher than 4 yr ?
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee at FHEAP on December 3, 2008 at 10:20am EST
  • The comments by the anonymous regional accreditation reviewer from California need to be extended to Community College adjuncts as well.

    It may be, ironically, that the California Community College system has more rigorous and stringent minimum faculty standards than does the California University system.

    And this critique can be extended to dual enrollment programs that operate at local high schools using high school teachers to teach college level courses. There is a nation-wide push for the expansion of these programs, without any attention to faculty qualifications.

  • Posted by LJ , Up-to-date Adjuncts in Skills Courses on December 3, 2008 at 11:25am EST
  • What about adjuncts in skills classes who are more up-to-date than full-time, out-of-touch people (like me). Sure, I'm trying to keep up with changes in our field (journalism), but I learn a lot from THEM. They reinvigorate us, keeping us relevant. If I want to offer the best business journalism course I can once a year, I can't think of anyone better than the man we just let go after five years. He has a BA (the problem) and 25 yrs of experience. Everyone loves him, but even if there were better folks, I couldn't land them with our pay. Those with MAs have weak work experience and no teaching exp, sometimes even MAs in unrelated fields and/or from sub par uni's. Ph.D. adjuncts are impossible to find for us, regardless of pay.

  • Don't Mourn, Organize!
  • Posted by CaN on December 3, 2008 at 11:25am EST
  • Why do we in academia stubbornly hold to the notion that our work is outside the realm of the traditional labor market, its rules, and history? The simple but difficult solution: organize a union or otherwise fight for desirable conditions, or refuse to do this job. We are compelled to work, but not as adjuncts in academia. Anyone qualified to teach can also do other things. So, agreeing to work under unfair conditions is a voluntary endorsement of those conditions. I'm not letting universities off the hook, but if they won't treat you right, don't put up with it. Organize, leave, or shut up.

  • Posted by Christine Kelly on December 3, 2008 at 12:00pm EST
  • I have a Ph.D. I was a long term adjunct at a SLAC. I taught 6 classes per year and did advising my last 3 years there. Full time faculty taught 7 classes, the publishing expectation was minimal although they did have a heavy service to the institution commitment. But what they did wasn't worth 3 times my pay. Most of the time I was there I had no office space, so I met with students where I could. I was just as effective and committed as the full time faculty. In fact I always got above the department average in my teaching evaluations. Before I got to that school they used to have fixed term appointments. They paid more than adjuncting, but less than tenure track and were 5 year renewable term contracts. So there were benefits, some job security and you were considered part of the faculty, so more involvement and less isolation. The tenure track faculty decided to eliminate those positions since they were exploitative (they didn't like the 2 tiered pay system). So now they have more adjuncts and an even more abusive pay system, but don't seem as concerned. When I was an instructor at another institution I got higher pay, some benefits and 1 year contracts, so the university still had some freedom to adjust when necesssary. I felt less abused there. Unless the tenure track takes on the cause of adjuncts we have no recourse. They want to protect what they have. I finally had enough and got out, but my field lost a darn good teacher and mentor.

  • Better Quality Control Over Adjunct Faculty
  • Posted by Jim Riggs , Professor of Education & former President of Columbia College at California State University - Stanislaus on December 3, 2008 at 12:20pm EST
  • Unfortunately, in the community college the over-use of adjunct faculty is here to stay. The problem that most community colleges face that they can actually do something about (besides providing better compensation for their adjunct faculty), is in the area of improving quality control. They need to do a better job of monitoring who gets hired, how well their adjunct faculty are prepared to teach (a Masters degree in the subject is not a good indicator of teaching ability) and how well the institution supports the adjunct faculty. Better hiring practices, professional development and better evaluations for adjunct faculty are essential if we want to make any progress!

  • Posted by sv on December 3, 2008 at 12:30pm EST
  • deandad - it’s not just about the current fiscal crisis. Adjuncts have risen steadily as a proportion of the faculty regardless of economic growth or decline and all the while private universities have jacked-up tuition.

  • Posted by B Cushing on December 3, 2008 at 1:40pm EST
  • I think it's interesting the glaring divide that is present between full time faculty members and adjuncts. We are competitors, pure and simple. We adjuncts provide a needed service for our schools: we give them quality contingent academics which gives them the flexibility they need to compete effectively in an increasingly cluttered business environment. Of course, the full timers don't see it that way, as, of course, they wouldn't since we are a threat to their comfortable existence. We don't care. Full timers, your time is limited. Education is changing, and there is simply no room in the future for fat-cat, untouchable tenured full-timers who work 20 hours a week on campus and complain about that. Your straw-man argument that adjuncts 'don't give students enough personal attention' is blatently false, and it simply isn't being taken seriously by anyone who sets policy. So I suggest you 'get with the program,' accept that contingent academics is here to stay, and work with us to make higher education better and more fiscally viable for all stakeholders.

  • Types of adjuncts
  • Posted by Faculty Person on December 3, 2008 at 1:50pm EST
  • There are at least 3 kinds of adjuncts:

    Practitioners in a field that teach a course or two. These are particularly valuable in professional fields (Business, Education).

    Adjuncts teaching a course or two. When I was a grad student several of us would occasionally teach a course or two for the local community college or other school.

    Full time adjuncts trying to scratch out a living by stringing together multiple courses at multiple schools. I would argue these should be replaced by full time faculty, either TT or non-TT as the case may be.

  • re: President Riggs
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee at FHEAP on December 3, 2008 at 2:50pm EST
  • Taking President Riggs comments at face value, it sounds like the statutory restrictions put in place by the California legislature are not being implemented as intended. Section 87359 provides a loop-hole that allows "exceptions" to statutory minimum standards. See also Section 53430.

    "Community Colleges ... need to do a better job of monitoring who gets hired ..." But how? If college presidents cannot be held accountable for flawed hiring practices, who can be?

    The Minimum Qualifications statute assigns joint responsibility for hiring decisions to the local boards and acadmic senates. One can only speculate about the role of the chief administrative executive, and how this works (or doesn't work) in actuality.

    It saddens me that, even with laws on the books, unscrupulous administators continue to find ways around the legislative intent.

  • Posted by Former Adjunct on December 3, 2008 at 3:55pm EST
  • I was a TA/Adjunct for 10 years and completely agree that the pay rate and working conditions should be significantly improved.

    However, if (1) research, publications and external grants, (2) graduate and undergraduate student advising outside of the classrooms or individual courses, and (3) professional and university services are factored into the calculation, the "Average Salary Per Course" would be more fair and convincing.

  • Opportunity
  • Posted by Bruce Friedlander , Adjunct on December 3, 2008 at 5:30pm EST
  • While I agree that adjuncts are not paid enough--for me, being an adjunct is a golden opportunity.

    At the tender age of 47, I am in my first semester as an adjunct (I am also a public school teacher with about 8 years experience in full-time positions, plus a lion's share of subbing and student teaching). I really believe that higher ed is my calling, but until I am ready for a tenure-track position, being an adjunct is a great way to gain experience.

    I can say that where I teach as an adjunct, other department members, including the chair, show professional respect towards we pt people.

    On the other hand, how many institutions will offer tenure-track positions to people with Master degrees?

  • Posted by educator1 on December 3, 2008 at 5:45pm EST
  • The article lumps all non-tenure track individuals together improperly and debases the value and contribution of many non-tenure track faculty.
    I teach in a professional school, have an earned Phd. and over 20 years professional experience. When I came to the University, I decided that I would not subject myself to the politics and other indignities of the tenure-earning life. I teach two days a week and am on campus at least one other day. I also have my own consulting firm and am still active in my field. I have the time and inclination to actively learn about pedagogy and try to bring well researched, innovative, approaches to my classroom.
    The relationship is win-win. My consulting is enhanced by a research university connection and the university gets four classes taught by an academically AND professionally qualified individual. I go to the newly minted Phd's when I have a need to learn about new developments in my field and they come to me regarding teaching questions. I have been leading many curricular and pedagogical changes in my school.
    Too many of the tenure track individuals are in the position of "publish or perish" and do not have the time nor inclination to put forth much effort into their teaching. Too many tenured professors teach as they were taught and the cycle goes back generations.
    I realize that, in many fields, new Phd's are abused in an adjunct or Visiting Assistant Professor role as they desperately cling to the hope of a tenure earning line.
    However, there is no need to clump us all together and ignore the positive benefit of many of my colleagues in the same situation that I am in.

  • depth, too
  • Posted by SUNY Steve , Lecturer at Buffalo State on December 3, 2008 at 6:15pm EST
  • A colleague looked up salaries at SUNY-New Paltz, a matter of public record, for the campus president, starting assistant professors, and adjunct faculty in 1970 and 2005, adjusted for inflation, and found that in those 35 years the assistant professors' had dropped by 13% in real dollars, the president's had gone up by 35%, and the adjuncts' had dropped by 51%.

  • Salary per course is unreasonable measure
  • Posted by Ray on December 3, 2008 at 6:55pm EST
  • Shame on the AFT. Presenting "Salary per course" as a comparison between full-time and part-time faculty is unprofessionally misleading. As a full-time faculty member, if I use grant money to "buy out" of teaching one of my courses, guess how much grant money I give to the institution. That's right, the amount of money it costs to pay an adjunct faculty member to teach that course, because that's how much the institution pays *me* per course. If I teach an overload they pay me what they would pay an adjunct faculty member for a course.

    The rest of the money they pay me is for all the other teaching-related work I do (e.g., advising, curriculum review, assessment, interviewing potential faculty members, work with the library on collections, professional development); for the scholarly work I do, and all the community participation and service to the institution that takes up an enormous amount of time. I work 50 or 60 hours per week, only 12 of which are in a classroom at a teaching-intensive institution.

    Full-time faculty pay isn't per course. The AFT knows that, and they are presenting misleading data to make a case that could be made much better with accurate data.

    Should institutions support their adjunct faculty with professional development opportunities and pay them for doing so? I think so. Pay them to update their knowledge base? Yes. I think adjuncts should be paid for all these activities on a pro-rated basis, and support conference attendance, and give them opportunities to conduct research (with the same kind of support full-time faculty get for that) and so forth. There are substantive arguments for these ideas, and that's what I'd like to see.

    I just want honest arguments. This isn't.

  • Adjuncts
  • Posted by another faceless adjunct , adjunct faculty on December 3, 2008 at 6:55pm EST
  • Ok, so FINALLY someone is willing to seek out the truth and reveal the exploitation of part time faculty who are contingent-( easily dissmissed after one semester or quarter,paid the equal or less than Kindergarten teachers,have no health care, no job security and their usual option in response to a tyranical dept chair is the union. If the union is a string supporter,they may survive.If not,they will be one of a million adjunct casualities.If the minimum ( at least for community colleges ) is the education of a MA or MS , then why do we treat them like migrant/slave workers?They deserve respect and equal pay!

  • It varies
  • Posted by David Eggenschwiler , Prof emeitus at Univ. of Southern Calif. on December 3, 2008 at 9:45pm EST
  • I have taught at a major private research university for forty-one years and have seen the number of non-tenure-track faculty increase greatly. Now over one-half of our undergraduate courses in the English dept. are taught be part-timers, but soon to be full-time non-tenure faculty.
    My son, by contrast, is an udergraduate at a public four-year college in Washington where he is taught entirely by tenure-track faculty who spend a lot of time with students. As an out-of-stater he pays one third the tuition of a student at my university. If he were an in-stater he would pay about one eighth. Although he could have gone to USC for no tuition, he made a wise choice to go to Evergreen State where he is getting a better education than I did at Harvard. So it goes.

  • Adjunctification
  • Posted by George T. Karnezis on December 4, 2008 at 4:55am EST
  • Let us be clear about where adjuncts are used most often i.e. in what disciplines and for which students. I suspect the largest percentage is in introductory courses during the first years of college when so many students are adjusting to new demands, and it says a great deal that so many institutions, concerned about attrition, their students' future success, and about building "learning communities," are often the same ones which rely most heavily on this contingent and exploited workforce.

    People need to understand that to be a successful teacher, you need to be part of a larger educational community which is stable and from whose members you can learn as a novice teacher. Continuity of employment is not just about job security; it's about being "settled" and committed to a particular campus and student culture in a particular location, and it's about taking the time to learn about students in that location, their needs, their backgrounds and all those elements that good teachers take advantage of in their classroom.

    Only people who believe that colleges and universities are factories to be staffed by the cheapest available labor, and administrators who simply shake their heads and say "that's the best we can do" remain insufficiently outraged by this situation. One wonders why, for instance, there are no adjunct college Presidents, or Deans or other high administrative officials whose positions might be adjunctified in the name of economizing.

    What other professions than college teaching would allow so many of its aspirants to be treated this way?

  • Social Sciences and k-12 teacher education
  • Posted by Farideh Oboodiat , Adjunct Faculty on December 4, 2008 at 4:55am EST
  • Holding my Ph. D. I have been an adjunct faculty for four years. I repeatedly experienced that adjunct faculty receive tentative schedule that at the 1st day of the semester their class could be canceled, or given to a senior faculty. In such case there would be no time for searching for more teaching possibilities across the city. felt the concept of slavary and discrimination is completly implemented in the current situation of adjunct faculty by being chained in the highways and roads trying to catch up their next class from college to college. May be that is why they are silent about their low salaries because on the top of a unreliable position, they are forced to pay their Union Fee as the requirement for being highered for the next semester. Not to mentioned that in most colleges there is no room if a student want to talk about their private academic issues. It must be very embarassing for an institute of higher education when students find out about their faculty's offic situation. It is obvioused if student develop a second thought for the value of the knowledge they are receiving from a part time professor who has no value for the college to be offered an office.

  • Posted by John Morgan on December 4, 2008 at 11:15am EST
  • The article hits it on the head--the increasingly large number of adjuncts teaching courses across a broad spectrum, and often at very low stipends or institutional support. While it is important to have full-time, tenured faculty, my guess is that given the economic climate the percentages of courses taught by adjuncts will only increase. Increasing pay and working conditions is important, and also institutions which acknowledge and honor adjuncts who often feel "second class citizens" on campus. Very little in the way of continuing education, training or stipends for non-classroom work is given adjuncts, just a few measures of how little many colleges honor their roles.

  • adjunct teaching is misery
  • Posted by MM on December 5, 2008 at 5:05am EST
  • I have taught multiple classes in one semester, making at most, $2,670/class/semester. This is not a living wage. The unions need to set a living wage for adjunct faculty. They also need to set up plans to allow adjuncts to buy into health insurance plans. It's important to note that no benefits are mentioned in the salary of those with tenure track, and those might increase the tenured salary by 30%. Many full-time instructors don't get benefits either. the pay disparity may even be larger than reported once benefits, abilities to take classes for free (or given to family) and other perks are taken into account. Our local university allows faculty a free 8 credit perk for classes to be used by the employee or dependents. There is a lot more to the salary that just base pay.
    Adjuncts are working like waiters without the tips.

  • take action
  • Posted by Lascap , PhD on December 6, 2008 at 5:15am EST
  • I just requested that the US News and World report include the ratio of adjunct instructors as a parameter in the rankings. If you care about higher education, you should do the same.

  • Posted by GS on December 6, 2008 at 11:50am EST
  • The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education has recently reported that college expenses have risen almost 500% since 1982, far outpacing median income and virtually every other category of major family expense. They indicate that the 34% of young American adults enrolled in college puts us behing Hungary, Ireland, Belgium, Poland, Greece, and Korea.

    If the price for an education is going up dramatically but a greater percentage of courses are taught by lower paid adjuncts, where is the disconnect.

    The business model for higher education is broken. Institutions are devoting increasing amounts of their revenue to non value added overhead. If an activity is not directly related to the creation and distribution of knowledge, it must be eliminated.

    Businesses have learned this message. Those that haven't fail. It is time for higher education to get this message.

  • The abusive use of adjuncts
  • Posted by Kevin Kilty , Physics/engineering instructor at LCCC on December 11, 2008 at 6:05pm EST
  • Indeed, the salary and conditions under which most adjuncts work is nothing short of exploitive. On the other hand, we don't vet the adjuncts very carefully either. Some are terrific teachers with work and subject matter experience to share with students. I have one now teaching mechanics of materials. Some are terrible teachers with almost no education or experience in the subject matter at all. The administrators never investigate unless the adjunct causes trouble with students in some manner. If most community colleges are like ours, it will take more than modest changes to fix this situation. It will take a change in administrative philosophy. Administrators generally prefer powerless adjuncts to more powerful tenure-track faculty, and they prefer the sexy projects and administrative positions they fund with the savings to mundane efforts like getting faculty workloads right, even if this would improve teaching.

  • Adjuncts and the university
  • Posted by Mark Seifter on January 3, 2009 at 3:45pm EST
  • As someone who has labored mightily, tough seemingly pointlessly, over the last fifteen years in adjunctland, I would rather, for the sake of my self-respect, to go easy on adjuncts-a word I personally detest. Most of them, howver many coursers they are pressntly teaching, are doing the very best they can with awful pay, no benefits, little to no office privacy, and no hope for any secure tenure at their respective colleges/universities. I have found that most of these intructors make better teachers than do full-timers, who generally think that teaching takes them away from more important things-writing opaque works of scholarship, and worse, lecturing on these opaque works to their peers at conferences, and that most of thestuidents they teach are dummies unworthy of their valuable professorial time.

    For solutions to the adjunct question, I would have them unionized, one and all. This would remove the sporadic, intermittent, out of the blue nature of adhjunct isolation from their peers, as well as give them some kind of official recognition, as well as an institutional pressure on selfish administrators who treat them like disposable garbage at end of semester. I would see that they/we/I are paid better as a part of our univerity "contracts", and that we can qualify for additinal health and financial and personal benefits.

    Clearly the time has come for ending the situation of university/college departments that are bloated with narcissistic titled professors holding sway over passels of submissive undergrad and grad students, with a pack of collectively loathed "adjuncts" in the wings, used for teaching bottom level "dummy' classes the exalted professoriate does not wish to teach.

    Without altering this situation, university education, especially in the Humanities/Liberal Arts will become even more irrelevant, time-wasting and demoralizing for both students and teaching professionals in the field.

    Mark Seifter