Wednesday
December 3, 2008
Advertisement
News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Feb. 16, 2007 Purely Academic
Call Me
Recently I heard of an adjunct who insists that her students address her as “Professor.” Also, it seems she wants the word, “Professor,” before her name on any official written communication. It’s not clear to me if she’s been apprized of an apparent university policy whereby only full-time faculty merit the appellation of “professor.” But what are adjuncts to be called instead? Can even adjuncts who have earned doctorates be addressed as “Doctor?”
Related stories
- Two-Year in Hell, June 30
- Waiting 20 Years for the Tenure Track, June 17
- ‘The Last Professors’, June 11
- Composition and Cookies, Jan. 22, 2008
- Rethinking Work, Dec. 31, 2007
These are intricate questions. Has any institution in the country worked out completely satisfactory answers to them? Outside of military institutes, are there any that mandate that both teachers and students must never under any circumstances address each other on a first-name basis? Probably as many as mandate that they must only address each other on such a basis. And the rest of us? Nominatively, we flounder.
I’ve had more than one student during the past couple years correct me after I called her name on the roll, and ask me to use her nickname. But the great majority seem comfortable if I call them by their first name. Students usually address me as “Sir,” often as “Professor,” and occasionally as “Doctor.” I haven’t heard, “Mr.,” although friends report a regular appearance of the odd student insufficiently removed from high school who will use “Mr.” or “Ms."— always to their annoyance.
What to do? In such contrast to the above adjunct, I know another who dislikes being called, “professor.” “I haven’t earned it,” he insists. This seems to me too severe, slighting the fact that the name functions as a generic term, or even as an honorific, rather than exclusively as a designation of official employment status. But of course students aren’t normally aware of these distinctions [is that person leading the class an adjunct or a tenured faculty member?] much less the professional culture that enforces them or American social conventions in which hierarchy or status boundaries are often casually enforced at the linguistic level.
Not so in other countries. When I began teaching I had a colleague whose background was German. He loved to tell jokes about Germans. One of his favorites was of the student who knocks on the office door of his professor. Then he asks “Herr Professor” for permission to enter. The man gets up from his desk and hits the student with a cane for insulting his dignity. “It’s Herr DOKTOR Professor,” he cries. Tears would well in Max’s eyes (a full professor, he insisted right away that I call him, “Max") each time he uttered the punchline.
I thought of this joke often when I taught in Japan, where I had to address my own colleagues as formally as I used to address my professors when I was a graduate student in the U.S.. (In each case, a first name was inconceivable.) My Japanese students, on the other hand, simply addressed me as sensei. The word might translate into English as “teacher,” but “teacher” doesn’t begin to express either the fixed, revered cultural status or the deep, sage-like character of a sensei, which literally means, “one who comes before.”
Another national practice. In a Brazil even less formal than the U.S., I was customarily either “Teacher,” or “Mr. Terry,” and with graduate students, “Terry.” Happily, in Portuguese the word, “professor” (or “professora“) means both “teacher” as well as “professor,” and Brazilians are pleased to wave away any worries about when to use one and not the other. In this respect alone, a contrast with how the sensei is addressed in Japan (or even how the professor is addressed in Germany, although I have no direct experience myself) could not be more difficult to imagine.
In the U.S. it might appear at least with our terms of address we ought to be more like Brazil. We’re not. Furthermore, as in all things, the great number of adjuncts now among us only exacerbates the problem, most especially when they act to claim hitherto unstated aspects of our identities as professors. After all, we are professors not only because of our contracts or our research. We are professors because we have students who call us professors as well as because we have offices, nameplates, and memos whereupon or wherein we are also so called.
Of course the problem predates the rise of adjuncts. When I began teaching 30 years ago, I didn’t have a Ph.D. This mattered to those who did. Consequently, I felt about being called “doctor” the same as my adjunct friend feels about being called “professor” now. Worse, by the time I had earned a doctorate (nine years later), and therefore merited the title, it had ceased to matter much to me. The importance of distinction itself, on the other hand, has never gone away,
Can we say that an institution is an institution, in part, on the basis of how its “culture” (ranging from official administrative policies to casual social codes) negotiates this particular distinction? I believe we can — and of course whether or not an individual is well and truly termed a “professor” (according to the institution) follows from it. Perhaps only the most elite schools can afford to flaunt the difference — everybody instead called either “Mr.” or “Ms.” — on the basis of the fact that of course everybody has a doctorate.
Down below, though, everybody, alas, doesn’t. Down below, all manner of crudities now obtain. I used to think, for example, that only people outside academic life — authors of self-help books, say — give, “Ph.D.,” after their names. Vulgar ostentation! Now I’ve seen it after the names of more than one college president, on official communications, as well as course syllabi of individual instructors. Are there at least departments whose chairs direct these instructors to remove mention of the degree? But what about cases in which the chair — horrors! — doesn’t have a Ph.D.?
No wonder an American, me, likes to watch old films, such as The Browning Version, about British public schools. The black-robed masters exist in a sublime nominative firmament, from which they bestow the title of “Mr.” upon even the lowliest sixth-form boy. No subjectivity ruffles the public surface. Everybody knows his or her place because everybody knows the proper term for each one. Appellatory bliss! I don’t want to hear that it’s changed in the actual world off-screen or, worse, that it was never so.
Back home, compare the new hire who identities herself beginning with “Doctor,” when she has occasion to call her chair on the phone. Why would anybody do such a thing? In a way, the answer is all too simple: because she has an insecure relation to the discipline and so tries to ground it in a more stable relation to the institution (in the person of her chair). This logic is even more painfully operative in the case of adjuncts, which, come to think of it, this particular new hire is.
Adjuncts (even if they are Ph.D.’s) virtually have no relation to the discipline; that’s why they’re adjuncts. Yet they do have a relation to the institution — and of course they do have some measure of pride. Hence, their moves to try to recuperate an absent professional relation through a willed institutional presence, often by means of naming or being named. Into the old nominative problem brought about by having a doctorate or not is introduced a more comprehensive one: having a name or not.
Adjuncts aren’t normally listed in course catalogues. They don’t have name plates on their office doors. They don’t have offices. So, much as we might want to bemoan their attempts to secure a public identity beyond the classroom, we can easily look more kindly upon these attempts, especially if we see in them expressions of our own insecurities about enjoying a socially resonant professional identity. Just because you’re a tenure-track, or even tenured, college professor doesn’t mean that you get the respect you feel you deserve, which begins with how others address you.
This may especially be the case in countries, such as our own, where nouns rather than verbs carry the burden of designating authority. A friend tells the story of taking a graduate course in Spanish, before she was a competent speaker of that language. How to define competence? In her case, being able to use correctly the two forms of the second person, the familiar tu and the more formal usted. One day she noticed her professor visibly wince after she spoke tu to him. A colleague took her aside and explain that you never use tu to a professor.
And yet in Spanish-speaking countries, despite the dispensation of their very language to admit a category of formality unknown in English, it may be no easier to sort out when to use “Professor” rather than “Doctor,” or how to call somebody who appears to be somehow different than either one. What to conclude? It’s probably too easy — too secure — to declare that the whole appellatory affair is ultimately a comic one. This ignores the pain of abiding under a nominative regime which begs to be too ruthless with its limited vocabulary.
Yet as long as we’re trying to understand the regime in impossibly global terms, comedy does seem to me the happiest solution. An Australian friend tells me that assistant professors are known in New Zealand as “aspros.” This is the brand name of a headache remedy. The friend himself taught for many years in Singapore, where he was a Senior Lecturer, and so not entitled, it seems, to be addressed as “Professor.” But not to worry; students call professors, “Profs.” It probably sounds more delightful in a rigid system.
Ours might aspire to be. But it isn’t, and we may as well celebrate the fact. The other day I chanced to hear of a woman who encourages students to call her, “Doctor Judy.” The person who told me this rolled her eyes. I just smiled and thought of the court TV show, “Judge Judy.” In each case, what the first word demands in formality the second word withdraws with familiarity. So it goes among we Americans. We keep mixing things up and we just might be the better a little bit more than we are the worse for it.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Comments
Professor or Doctor
Could it be many adjuncts put in long years of study and far too much money to earn that title of Dr., and wish to hear the title, Professor (or Doctor) they worked so hard to earn? Could it be that the bottom line of too many institutions rests on adjunct labor, and once caught in the Land of Adjuncts, even the best historian, British Literature, or Spanish professor has little hope of that full-time position ever coming along? Could it be revenge on the snobs of academe who reserve titles for themselves and their closely guarded tenure track positions? Ah, one or more of these reasons could be the answer! Hope the author has been in Land of Ajuncts, tis a most interesting one.
doc, at 8:06 am EST on February 16, 2007
Titles of teaching personnel in Colleges and Universitites
Ah for the days of liberal arts colleges when all instructors were Mr., Mrs. or Miss!Relic from the 70’s
LM, at 8:35 am EST on February 16, 2007
ugh!
This article takes an incredibly offensive tone toward adjuncts. I think the author may want to expand his understanding of why certain professionals serve in an adjunct capacity. There are, of course, experts who work full-time in their fields and teach on the side, or who teach part-time in retirement, or who serve on administration and teach at adjunct status. Not all adjuncts are social and academic outcasts as the author suggests!
Dr. Professor Adjunct, at 8:35 am EST on February 16, 2007
“Can even adjuncts who have earned doctorates be addressed as “Doctor?”These are intricate questions.”
Why? Of course they can. “Doctor” means the person in question has a doctorate. Why would use of the title “Doctor” to refer to someone with a doctorate be questionable or “intricate?”
JBM, at 9:18 am EST on February 16, 2007
Of course adjuncts with Ph.D.s have a relation to the discipline. I give papers at conferences and continue to enrich my understanding of the field—I even do some committee work even though my teaching load hovers around six and seven. From where I stand, it looks as if about half of the tenurati suffer from the same illusion some rich people display when they can’t admit that the difference between them and the poor hinges partly (or greatly) upon luck.
That said, I tried to get my students to stop calling me professor until a tenured colleague (yes, colleague—in his view, at any rate) advised me to just let them. Act like one, and that’s what they’ll see you as.
Jim Pangborn, at 9:18 am EST on February 16, 2007
Teachers by any other name...
I have never in my life been exposed to an industry so full of themselves and so concerned with titles!! An adjunct professor IS a professor! If they have their doctorate degree and wish to be addressed as Dr. then so be it. Who is anyone to say how they should or shouldn’t be addressed? Really — you are all teachers (aghast!), get over it!! Titles mean nothing — Integrity, Character, Honesty — those are the things of which true leaders are made.
Not a Teacher, at 9:18 am EST on February 16, 2007
A calm outlook
At first glance all this seems so foolish. However, there may be a middle ground.When I began as an adjunct, I felt odd when students called me professor, even more so Dr. But after a while I found that professor ( lower case) was ok and unstoppable- but I always stopped the Dr. Now that I am ABD, I look forward to not worrying about anything. In spite of attempts to get students to call me by first name, they keep to the professor most of the time orally, and sometimes first name on emails. Did anyone think that students use ‘professor’ because they forget our name or because they want the assurance that we in some manner are expert enough to be teaching them? I guess it all comes back to our own belief in ourselves which would preclude even a concern with all this- :)Mary- a 15 yr adjunct and 8 year administrator
mary, at 9:18 am EST on February 16, 2007
Titles
Methinks the author doth protest too much.
As someone who was first an adjunct (state university) and then “regular” faculty (Ivy League university), I wonder when I gained that “relation to the discipline” that the author assumes that I lacked. I was an adjunct because I was making better money in my field as a non-academic practitioner—something that also gave me more of a relationship to it than many of my full-time academic colleagues. (At least the author concedes that I might have had “some measure of pride.")
The tradition at the undergraduate school I attended, Oberlin College, is to call all faculty members Mr. or Ms. I was told years ago that it was a way of showing equal respect to those members of the Conservatory of Music faculty who were world-class musicians, but might not have doctorates. A few other faculty are ABD or have non-doctoral terminal degrees. That’s a rational approach for all involved.
By the time I was a senior in college, I was on a first name basis with every faculty member in my major department. It was a way for them to demonstrate their respect for me as a budding colleague, which I much appreciated. However, I addressed them informally only outside of class.
For the past 20 years, my students (in my case, graduate students and post-docs) have addressed me by my first name both inside and outside the classroom. I’ve found that it builds our relationship and does nothing to undermine either my authority or self-image.
bothsides, Harvard, at 9:35 am EST on February 16, 2007
Call Me ...
There is far too much simplistic rhetoric denigrating those who are not tenured or on a tenure-track. The term “adjunct” is used so carelessly (here and elsewhere) that it does great injustice to a category of college/ university faculty who form part of the core of the institution: language teachers. Many have PhDs; many others have terminal degrees from other countries that go unrecognized by ignorant American academics. Most of them are highly expert and experienced, full-time, fully committed to their students and their institutions. They aren’t on a tenure track because their publications are in second language acquisition, an academically respectable field that is almost totally unfamiliar to the senior faculty in their departments who publish on literature and critical theory, so even if (in the face of teaching loads far heavier teaching and administrative loads than those of their literature colleagues) they publish in their own scholarly area their work is never even considered for tenure. These language- teaching faculty manage one of the fundamental distribution requirements, increasingly recognized as essential to any meaningful “internationalization". To lump these people in with “adjuncts” who are hired by the semester or the year, who may have little training and no supervision, who seldom have any commitment to the institution (and given how badly they are usually treated there’s no reason why they should) is not only outrageous but is also counter- productive in any serious discussion of academic titles — or of academic courtesy. All those who teach at a college or university should have the same title in their capacity as teachers. If the culture of the place dictates calling teachers Professor, then it doesn’t matter whether the teacher is a graduate-student TA or a full professor or an adjunct (in any sense) — they should all be addressed as Professor.
Nina Garrett, Director of Language Study at Yale, at 9:35 am EST on February 16, 2007
There’s a reason they call it the “real world”
“Adjuncts (even if they are Ph.D.’s) virtually have no relation to the discipline; that’s why they’re adjuncts.”
That was a silly thing to say. Adjuncts often have more relation to the discipline, not less, especially in Business.
Steve Foerster, Director of Instructional Technology at Free Curricula Center, at 9:36 am EST on February 16, 2007
Missing the point
Hello,
Where have you been? We need to take a step back. The title controversy is real and nasty and based on falsehoods to make everyone feel better about widespread exploitation of part-time faculty labor. Many so called adjuncts have advanced degrees including PhDs. Many do research and perform service to their institutions. Does the simple acceptance of a lower wage make us less worthy somehow? I am wondering in a way if this is actually tongue in cheek and meant to provoke this type of response. Having been on a committee that investigated titles of part-time faculty on my own campus, I can tell you that anyone granted the official title professor automatically had more status but that was it. No more access to benefits necessarily even. Still someone on my sub-committee made it far too obvious her effusive respect for those honored with this title. Personally, students should call us Professor and then our last names because to be frank that is what they are most comfortable with. So I say stop looking at adjuncts as a disease and more like colleagues since working together we can save academia in general, keeping us separate and at each other only makes administrations happy, and eliminates the progress e can make. Think about it.And while I’m at it please don’t call us the adjuncts, call us fellow faculty members and by our names.
Thank you.
JJ, Professional Writing Instructor at Syracsue Univiersity, at 10:01 am EST on February 16, 2007
Anyone who teaches in higher education is generically a professor, and can use the title in conversation. We often use “professor” for masters prepared people who do not yet have their doctorate, whether or not they’re adjuncts. For example, an ABD job candidate speaking on a campus may have the title “professor” used on the announcement for their talk.
The *rank* of professor is somewhat different— usually that accrues to tenured and tenure track people.
Many adjuncts are well prepared and actively participate in their discipline. They are tenure track “professors” in waiting (in the second sense.)
TBD, at 10:35 am EST on February 16, 2007
All I ask is not to be called “Mrs.” or “Miss,” but usually to no avail.
B, at 10:51 am EST on February 16, 2007
Did the website editor make a mistake? The term “blowhard” was used regarding the “Teachable Moments” cartoon; it seems to apply much more aptly to this lengthy essay, the subject matter of which could have easily been stated in a brief paragraph.
Mr. Dr. Will, PhD, at 11:16 am EST on February 16, 2007
This is a silly column. It reminds me of that slapdash column Terry posted a while ago about how to treat janitorial staff. Sure, we all deal with students calling us different things, but I think he’s using this minor aspect of academic life as yet another excuse to reinforce his self-image.
Even if the editors remove this comment, I would ask them to consider dropping Terry as a columnist. A simple review of his columns should reveal the same message being sent over and over- one of self importance, glorification of the tenured, and disgust for the masses (adjuncts, staff, graduate students, undergraduate students).
QuakerProf, at 11:46 am EST on February 16, 2007
>>Adjuncts (even if they are Ph.D.’s) virtually have no relation to the discipline; that’s why they’re adjuncts.
I agree with many of the other commenters that this viewpoint is, at best, overbroad and simply incorrect in many contexts.
In law school, at least in my experience, the opposite seemed to be the case more often than not, as adjunct professors were experienced practioners who were experts in the subject matter and who were teaching for the “prestige” factor and/or simply because it was something that they enjoyed doing.
In any event, this column would appear to support the quote attributed to Henry Kissinger that “university politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small.”
Mr. Dr. “Professor” Al, MA, JD, at 12:01 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Ummmmmmmmm
I am one. This all seems like such a waste of energy, but here I am as a participant. The bigger issue seems to be about “adjuncts” in general. I took the Adjunct magazine and was very surprised at the hostility. And there are too many “hostile” remarks in all of this “blog.” I hope you have a nice day, whoever you are or whatever you call yourself.Regards,
Just plain Bill
Bill, at 12:55 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Call me Doctor
In teaching hospitals, medical students are called Dr. even by MDs. It has to do with how they function, in this case as physicians (albeit in training and under the supervision of an MD). The entire medical staff recognizes it’s important for nurses and patients to view them that way. If university physicians with MDs can subordinate ego to function, why can’t university professors with PhDs do the same with adjuncts, instructors, and teachers without doctorates? If you teach in a college or university, you should be called either Prof. or Dr. An alternative would be the sometime Ivy League practice of calling everyone Mr. or Mrs. Not to do one or the other is to devalue the teaching function of those who have not yet fully “arrived.”
Damon D. Hickey, at 12:55 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Terry Caesar: Professor Thug
What an offensive column! I would expect Inside Higher Ed to have better sense and discretion than to publish this sort of trashy bigotry—yes, bigotry. Try substituting “African-American,” or “Latino,” or “female” for “adjunct” and see how that looks. Terry Caesar—excuse me!— “Professor Terry Caesar” is a crude, snobbish jackass. And Inside Higher Ed ought to find more interesting and important subjects for columns than this sort of insulting trash, given the important issues in politics, culture, and teaching that ALL instructors and their students face every day.
Pico, at 12:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
If you have earned it, use it
I have been an adjunct for 7 years, not because I lack the correct degrees, but because there are far too few openings for full-time positions. When a position does surface, adjuncts are often overlooked. As an adjunct I believe I bring to the classroom a “real world” perspective as I am in the world practicing my disipline. I hold a PhD, well earned, and use the title Dr. with students and other professionals. I have earned that title, and I have the student loans to prove it!
Melinda Spohn, Dr., at 12:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Continuing My Crusade
Okay Mr. Dr. “Professor” Al, MA, JD, four things ...
First, for at least the past twenty years – up until about two years ago – I used that wonderful bit of biting sarcasm, “Academic politics is so vicious because the stakes are so low” with some frequency.
Second, I don’t know who the author of the statement is, but it’s often attributed to Henry Kissinger (1923- ) ... and, true or false, Henry is not the sort of fellow who denies a clever retort thrust upon him by the masses. I’m guessing he’s not even close to the being the author. Indeed, at various times, the quote has been attributed to Mark Twain (1835-1910), George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950), C.P. Snow (1905-1980), Laurence J. Peter (1919-1990), and Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1927-2003).
To the best of my knowledge, Kissinger’s first reference to something approximating the quote was in 1997 at the Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs
(see http://www.ashbrook.org/events/memdin/kissinger/home_speech.html)
when he said “... I’m going to say one thing about academic politics to which Mr. Schramm referred. I formulated the rule that the intensity of academic politics and the bitterness of it is in inverse proportion to the importance of the subject their (sic) discussing. And I promise you at Harvard, they are passionately intense and the subjects are extremely unimportant.”
I’m also fairly certain Laurence J. Peter (“The Peter Principle”) is not the author, else it would be fairly easy to track down.
I can’t say for sure, but I’m putting my money on Wallace Sayre (1924-1973), former Professor of Government and Public Administration at Columbia University. Sayre’s Third Law of Politics is “Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low” ... which is probably where Herr Doktor Kissinger picked it up and embellished it.
By the way, Sayre’s Second Law of Politics is pretty damned clever too; to wit, “Business and public administration are alike only in all unimportant respects.”
Third, despite the fact that the wonderfully sarcastic tone of the quotation fits my personality to a tee, I no longer repeat it. That’s because (1) it’s so outrageously false and (2) it sends a very misleading message to the uninitiated. Of course I agree that academe seems to have waaaay more than its fair share of petty, self-centered individuals. Of course I agree that nothing is so trivial that it would not, under ordinary circumstances, command the attention of a committee of academics for the better part of a day. One might fairly say “Academic politics is so vicious because there are so very many small, petty, self-centered, and intolerant academics pretending to be politicians.” But – and I can’t emphasize this too strongly – the stakes of education at every level here in the United States are probably more important (higher) than the stakes of any other significant endeavor. I repeat, in the main the stakes of education are so critically important to so many different dimensions of our lives, it is simply absurd to suggest otherwise.
So now when I hear some clever wit repeating that quote, I roll my eyes, scowl, look over my glasses and quickly (1) point out how outrageous it is and (2) look for an opportunity to give credit to Wallace Sayre instead of Henry Kissinger.
Fourth, check out this artistic rendering of the quotation, but don’t ask me to explain it:
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exhibitions/hoffman/h001.html
RWH, at 12:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Wow — that was offensive....
I’d like to take a poll of adjuncts to find out just how many of us CHOSE to be adjuncts so that we could take the easy way out of our academic discipline. I certainly didn’t. I do it because I can’t find a full-time position in my field (yet). That doesn’t make me any less connected to my field.
Moreover, the insinuation that it would be presumptious for me to ask my students to call me Doctor (if I have a PhD) or professor is even more offensive. Doctor goes with the degree, not the job. Professor is, to the students, not a rank but a fancied up word for teacher. Unless you think we should force Associate Professors to get their students to call them Associate Professor your arguement merely displays a bias against adjuncts.
Yes, I’m an adjunct, at 12:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
As an adjunct with a mere M.A., I don’t like being called “doctor” but often don’t want to bother correcting the student. It seems beyond the point, as if I’m calling attention to myself when what I should be doing is answering the question on the material.
The labeling of names always has to do with power. Students see their professors as authority figures, and sometimes fear insulting them with a lower designation (I think that’s why I’ve been called “doctor” when “mister” would be more accurate). And when a prof tells students to call him/her by the first name, isn’t he/she attempting to remove (or downplay) that power dynamic, to level the relationship? And the meaning of these labels to the discipline and/or institution usually note this power dynamic.
Pacifist Viking, at 1:01 pm EST on February 16, 2007
RWH,
I’m pleased that my comment gave you the opportunity to pontificate on the source and history of that particular quote. Attributions for quotes are a tricky business, and I (sincerely) enjoyed learning more about the origins of this one.
That being said, you might want to review my comment more closely. First, I pointed out that the quote was “attributed” to Kissinger precisely because I suspected that he might not be the original source. Second, although I should have stated it more clearly, by pointing out that this column would “appear” to support that quote, my point was to critique the column and its assumptions, not to express agreement with the quote itself.
Al, at 1:25 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Herr Doktor
“Adjuncts (even if they are Ph.D.’s) virtually have no relation to the discipline; that’s why they’re adjuncts.”
What this tells me is that we have a lot of education to do among our esteemed colleagues about the realities of higher education.
PHH
Paivi Hoikkala, at 2:51 pm EST on February 16, 2007
I’m a TEACHER, dammit!
If we’re concerned about grade inflation, shouldn’t we be concerned about appellation inflation as well?
At my community college (where most of us do not have PhD’s), years ago the Academic Senate (and, come to think of it, how’s that for an example of over-the-top pomposity and bloviation?) decided that full-time teachers with tenure should be called “professor,” full-time teachers who were not yet tenured would be called “assistant professor,” and mere adjuncts would be “associate professors.” The reasoning was that the letters of recommendation that we write for our students would “look better.” I thought that since we were just making up names for ourselves, “Duke” or maybe “Grand Poobah” would be even more impressive.
Not long ago, we suffered through five years of a particularly monomaniacal college President (this guy, honest to goodness, had his name followed by PhD—which was from a place where the only book he needed was his checkbook—embossed on his Christmas cards!)and the practice of addressing each other as “professor” became irritatingly common. Some folks have “PhD” after their names on their office doors, and more than a few with an automatic signature line on their email are mighty proud of the fact that they are “Joe Blow, BA, MA.”
“Mutton dressed as lamb” is what my great-aunt would have said.
Philip, at 3:01 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Changing the Subject ... But Just A Little Bit.
I will be 70 on my next birthday (this spring), but I am not even close to wanting to pack it in.
I have a Ph.D. in statistics, but before completing that degree I (1) completed all of the course work for a Ph.D. in mathematics, passed the preliminary exams, and even started my research for a dissertation and (2) completed all of the course work for a Ph.D. in education research and evaluation, passed the preliminary exams, and couldn’t find an advisor who was interested in anything that interested me. My point is that it’s pretty damned easy to get a Ph.D., especially if you’re not encumbered – what a terrible choice of words – with the responsibilities – another terrible choice of words – of family life.
Anyway, I have been thinking lately about taking a job as an adjunct (math, statistics, operations management, quality sciences ... that kind of stuff). Although I’ve had a few offers, I have heard “Oh my, you are waaaaay too qualified for our position” so many times it would make your head spin. I have done the mathematics, however, and have concluded that many adjuncts are making in the neighborhood of $4,000 per course ... times (let’s say) three courses per semester ... minus some expenses ... plus (you guessed it) no benefits at all ... equals less than $25,000 per academic year. That’s about one-fifth what I was making at my last position and – and this is really interesting — just the slightest bit more than I could get as a TA in a Ph.D. program (where my tuition and fees would be paid). As a full-time graduate student I’d get student benefits (probably the use of the university hospital or clinic ... and certainly the athletic facilities ... and God knows what else). And since academics are so remarkably proficient at looking the other way in the presence of those around them being exploited, I could probably pick up an extra buck here and there doing odd jobs around the Department.
In other words, my friends, I will make almost as much as a Ph.D. student as does your typical adjunct professor (or whatever you mindless dorks decide to call them after this silly discussion in over). And the sense that I’m getting from this discussion is that, as a Ph.D. student, I’ll get a Hell of a lot more respect around the Department than the adjunct professors get ... many of whom, by the way, differ from their tenured “colleagues” only by the grace of God.
And like I say, Ph.D. programs are easy (and often downright fun), and what do I care if I get mine in a discipline that is over-producing Ph.D.s as it is. When I get one, I won’t be looking for a job anyway ... I’ll be looking around for my next Ph.D. program.
Will this work? You bet. Some years ago someone did a little research regarding the Political Science Department at the University of Michigan where the Ph.D. students took more than eleven years beyond their bachelors’ degrees, on the average, to finish up. The Department couldn’t beat them away with a club. And why? ... well a great many had cushy jobs at the Institute for Social Research, the Population Studies Center, and the like ... and they really liked living in Ann Arbor. Finishing up was pretty far down on their list of priorities.
So, if you don’t mind, “Show me da application!”
Frizbane Manley, at 3:01 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Name Calling
I am a 32 year university teaching veteran with tenure and no PHD (currently matriculated.) I used to coach, and that name still sticks depending on what I am teaching. I am also an administrator and instructor for a mostly adjunct-taught graduate program which, by the way, pays a lot of the bills for many other departments on campus.If you have a PHD, you are doctor, if you teach at a university, you are professor, unless you specify otherwise; if you are old like me, many students just can’t call you by your first name, and then it is back to professor, or Ms.—- I always correct those who address me as doctor, and welcome the familiarity of “coach” even though it has been a few years and many of my colleagues have not known me in that position. If you think academics have ego issues(and many do, adjunct or full-time) check out the health sciences clinical education programs. Many instructors have titles that extend the length of the letterhead and encompass most of the alphabet. And now with the addition of clinical doctorates, there are endless discussions in their professions concerning the proper way to list the letters in their title! We all just need to get over ourselves and understand that our so-called social capital has no exchange value if we can’t do the teaching and scholarship!
TT, Associate Professor, at 3:06 pm EST on February 16, 2007
““Adjuncts (even if they are Ph.D.’s) virtually have no relation to the discipline; that’s why they’re adjuncts.”
Really? Would this include practising attorneys who teach in their field? They have vastly more legal expertise than any mere classroom faculty.
JBM, at 4:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
While I do sympathize with the adjunct situation (I swear, I never realized the extent of the downside before subscribing to inside higher ed. It always seemed like a pretty cool gig to me), I would like to bring a bit of attention back to an earlier comment on simply wishing students would not call one Mrs/Miss. This same fact occurs all to often to me as well (I am a woman, have a PhD, am on tenure track and have longevity within my academic program), while students at my institution are more than willing to call ANY male instructor in front of them Doctor or Professor. This drives me a bit crazy as I see it as a lasting remnant of their expectations regarding men of automatic higher rank or education while women are still lesser abled or qualified somehow. Perhaps this is me being overly sensitive (such a female flaw!), but I do try to take it upon myself to point out to these students my education and experience warrant equal respect denoted in the appropriate title of Doctor or Professor (at this point, I don’t care which!). I see it as an education in the advances women have made and the lasting prejudices still percolating below the surface. I also invite them to call me by my first name in order to avoid the whole situation, but they continue to call me Mrs or Miss. It is ironic that those students wishing to be more respectful are the very ones falling into constraints of traditional stereotypes that my fellow female colleagues and I must still fight against. So I agree with some earlier comments that quite often titles are a symbol of respect and status and that we ALL deserve an equal amount of both as the brave people taking it upon ourselves to educate the young people of today.
Hey You, at 4:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
I was taught to reserve “Doctor” for medical professionals such as Medical Doctors, Dentists, and Veterinarians. Academics with Ph.D.s are scholars who should be proud of that distinction and, particularly in the classroom, should be honored to be addressed as “Professor” since their primarily role was to instill knowledge. At least that was the rationale at my northeastern liberal arts college. By the time I was a senior, I addressed most of the faculty in my department by their first names. The added benefit of the “Professor” title was that on the rare occasion a faculty member did not have their Ph.D., they could still be addressed as “Professor.”
Michelle, at 4:56 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Call Me
Aside from all the other offenses eloquently addressed by previous commentators, the anecdote about German academics is inaccurate.
In German it’s NEVER “Herr Doktor Professor,” but always Herr Professor Doktor. With two doctorates, say an MD and a PhD, it’s Herr Professor Doktor Doktor, abbreviated Herr Prof. Dr. Dr.
Today, German academics are simply addressed as Professor XYZ, though some prefer a first name. The same should hold true for American faculty, whether they be adjunct or tenure track.
Most adjuncts are just as connected to their students and their profession as us tenured folks. It’s all those adjuncts teaching large classes in English composition, foreign languages, math, music, art and everything else that allow us tenured folks to enjoy our arcane research, social hobnobbery, sabbaticals, etc.
PDGB, Distinguished Service Professor of German at SUNY New Paltz, at 6:06 pm EST on February 16, 2007
Question for RWH
What is Sayre’s first law of politics? Does he have a fourth, fifth, ... ?
math prof, at 6:06 pm EST on February 16, 2007
To fall in line with previous comments, “Adjuncts have no relationship to the discipline"....wow, such pomposity. You must be kidding right? What a bizarre column....
The Urbanist, Adjunct/Curmudgeon, at 10:45 pm EST on February 16, 2007
It’s Hard To Tell
Ordinarily, I would think the question “what are Sayre’s [other] laws of politics?” was just an annoying challenge, but I think I know math prof better than that.
Truth is, without going to a real library – because there’s not that much about Wallace Sayre on-line – I simply can’t answer that question. But what I do know is that his “claim” as author of “Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low” is indisputable ... and it predated Henry Kissinger’s obvious plagiarism by a long shot.
Knowing that much, however, is enough for me. I’m not going to do the research required to identify his other laws of politics. You will probably be interested in another of Sayre’s Laws, this one having great relevance for Rudy Guiliani and his aspirations to be president; to wit, “Mayors of New York come from nowhere and go nowhere.” Ouch!
http://www.timbomb.net/blog/2005/12/22/wallace-sayre/
RWH, at 10:45 pm EST on February 16, 2007
RWH—You’re right. It wasn’t meant as an annoying challenge. Rather, I found the two Sayre’s laws you cited to be rather witty, and genuinely wondered what the others were.
math prof, at 5:45 am EST on February 17, 2007
For the record
The author’s friend Max (the guy who likes to tell jokes about Germans) obviously doesn’t know the first thing about German academic culture. To call somebody “Doktor Professor” would indeed be ridiculous, and testimony to the speaker’s ignorance. The standard appellation in this admittedly very status conscious culture would be “Herr Professor Doktor” followed by the last name. However, addressing anybody by the title without also mentioning their last name would be considered rude, whereas calling somebody “Herr ” would not be deferential, though still polite. And no student in their right mind would dare calling somebody “Professor” if they didn’t also know that the person in question also holds one of the (compared to the U.S.) relatively rare professorial chairs. And this is where we get back to the use of “Professor” in the American context, where the functional relationship between student and instructor seems to matter much more rather than status for status’s sake. Though being a professor myself, I have seen students who are unable to remember (let alone spell) my name even at the end of the semester. Students might call me “hey” (no kidding!) or might use my first name. I wouldn’t have that much of problem with the latter were it not for the fact that some students seem to think that this kind of first-name relationship should make it impossible for me to give them (from their perspective) low grades. So I rather think it is a good idea to be called “professor” because it puts a healthy distance between student and instructor. Why should I withhold this tool for successful in-classroom relations from my non-tenure track colleagues? Undermining their teaching in order to enhance my own status seems particularly absurd if you consider that there are many (non-"university") institutions that do not require a doctoral degree for an instructor to be called “professor.”
Markus Kemmelmeier, University of Nevada, Reno, at 5:51 am EST on February 17, 2007
Miss Sally or Dr. Sally
I have had students combine the title with the first name. It evokes discomfort in me because it is associated with racial caste in the Southern US and imperialist customs worldwide. Miss Sally is what children were instructed to call a white teacher, an elderly aunt, or the white mistress of a household. I cringe when I hear it in my classroom, often from an international student. I don’t like being reminded of the inequalities of caste and customs of address that supported them. Calling me Dr. ______ is appropriate because I have earned that title through my hard work and scholarship, not as an honorific related to race, age, or social class. I don’t find it “Judge Judy” cute. I find it offensive, though I do not tell the students so — their usage is innocent.
Sally, at 12:55 pm EST on February 17, 2007
Labels and power
“... And when a prof tells students to call him/her by the first name, isn’t he/she attempting to remove (or downplay) that power dynamic, to level the relationship? “
Is this a bad thing? I’m a graduate (MS) student at a state university, and faculty in my department all strongly encourage all their students to address them by their first names. This helps create a relaxed atmosphere where students feel more comfortable asking questions and generally being curious about the subject.
Having spent two decades doing engineering in Silicon Valley, I have yet to meet a corporate executive who isn’t addressed by his/her first name. This in no way confuses understanding of the power structure in the company.
Karen, at 6:55 am EST on February 18, 2007
gender/minority component
This column is a bit shocking, for many reasons that others have articulated. I would like to add another, which was only hinted at: women and minorities have a different experience with titles and this piece seems to be blissfully unaware of these different (from the white male “neutral” position) experiences. Titles stick to men easily, whether or not they have PhDs, but they certainly don’t stick as well to women and minorities. (Ironically, the author does sort of recognize this when he says that he doesn’t have the problem but others have reported being addressed as “Miss” or “Ms.” —-Hmmmmm. . .!?)Finally, as we all know, the adjunct population, at least in my disciplinary area(s), is HUGELY female, so in that sense this essay is saying: “hey, adjunct chicks who don’t have anything important to say in Big Shot Disciplinary Knowledge Way, who do you think you are asking us to call you by an authoritative title that you don’t deserve?”
WTF?! (I know you will cut the WTF, Scott, and that’s okay. But this essay pisses me off)
Violet, Private Midwestern U, at 10:25 am EST on February 18, 2007
A Little Poetry May Help
The overwhelming profundity of this event has inspired me to write a limerick ...
I’m certain you’ve heard this “Knock, knock”
“Who’s there?” you ask ... “It’s me, Doc.”
To which I reply
“It’s not ‘me;’ it is ‘I.’”
No wonder we think you’re a crock.
and a haiku ...
She stands at her desk
PowerPoints arranged neatly
“Please ... call me Buffy”
Frizbane Manley, at 2:55 pm EST on February 18, 2007
Mr. or Prof. Manley’s idea is very clever by half! Would he be accepted to a PhD program and be funded as a 70 year old student? Aging adjuncts want to know.
forever adjunct, at 2:55 pm EST on February 18, 2007
C’mon Forever Adjunct
I’m sure you know better than that. Question: Why do they want warm bodies – er, students – in their Ph.D. programs to begin with? Answer: (1) so they have slave labor to teach the shit courses the vast majority of their department’s students are taking and (2) to give these “geniuses” the free time that is necessary to produce the remarkably important – if intellectually vacuous – research papers to which they must devote their time and attention.
So, Forever Adjunct, forgive me for suggesting that if they thought the job could be done by a Rhesus monkey as well as it could be done by an eager, intellectually-alive 70-year-old, they’d opt for a 1968 history major from Yale every time.
Cut me some slack, if those guys thought they could exploit a 70-year-old intellectual, the lump in their pants would mean, “Oh my, I hope you’ll enroll in all of my courses.”
Frizbane Manley, at 5:30 pm EST on February 18, 2007
Golden Rules for Name Calling
I’ve been adjunct forever.
Call me by the name I use to introduce myself or my institutional title—it makes no difference, so long as you do it respectfully. And I will make every effort to do the same for you.
kgotthardt, at 2:00 pm EST on February 19, 2007
Adjunctified
As a long-time adjunct faculty member at a large state university in a department in which over 75% of our students are taught by adjuncts, I’ve always wanted to reply to students who address me as “Professor” by paraphrasing the old military enlisted man’s admonition: “Don’t call me ‘Professor,’ I work for a living!”
Tyler, at 2:26 pm EST on February 19, 2007
Karen: no, it’s not a bad thing; I tell my students they’re free to call me by my first name (and most of them do). I was just observing the reason.
Pacifist Viking, at 4:30 pm EST on February 19, 2007
As I get older, my students begin to get younger. Since about 75% of my student population could be children of my own, I feel that it is justified in expecting them to use a formal way of addressing me. After all, we expect children much younger to call their teachers in grades K-12 by the proper surnames. Why not carry that tradition into higher ed and maintain much deserve titles; even if one is an adjunct. Adjuncts who are just as qualified (sometimes more in some cases as the fulltime staff) have earned the recognition of being called “professor". One would assume that the reason for them being hired is that they are competent and are experts in their field; they just lack the nameplate on the door they so decidedly deserve.
Instead of condeming them for seeking a title for validation for work well done, you should be thanking them for upholding the quality of our many institutions
CJ Moore, at 10:31 am EST on February 20, 2007
comment on call me
All of you need to get a life. I have a Ph.D. and my name is Judy Doktor. Do you expect me to make all my students stutter as they say Dr. Dr??? I prefer them to call me by my first name. My institution frowns on this “informality” so some students prefer to call me Dr. Judy. Big deal..who cares. All I care about is that the students I teach feel that I am worthy of being in the classroom. By the way, my ex is DR. Doktor and so is his new spouse. We have heard Dr. Dr. jokes for over 30 years. Stop worrying about titles and just teach your students.
judy doktor, at 4:15 am EDT on May 16, 2007
Advertisement
Jobs Related to Call Me
or search for jobs directly.
Psychology (Adjunct) Instructor
Hillsborough Community College
Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job
3D Modeler and Programmer
Appalachian State University
Appalachian State University seeks a 3D Modeler and Programmer in the Department of Leadership and Educational Studies. see job
Director, Office of Institutional Research
Mississippi State University
Mississippi State University is a Land-Grant, Research University. see job
Full Professor and Chair
University of Denver
Job Summary: The Department of Computer Science (CS) at the University of Denver (DU) is seeking a ... see job
Assistant/Associate Professor, School Counseling
Loyola College in Maryland
Loyola College in Maryland is seeking exceptionally qualified applicants for a tenure track faculty position (open rank) in ... see job
Associate Director of Career Services
George Fox University
George Fox University seeks an Associate Director of Career Services to develop and oversee employment and field experience ... see job
Assistant Adjunct Professor, Pediatrics
University of California, Irvine
School of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Child Development Center Division Position: Assistant Adjunct Professor This ... see job
Assistant Professor or Instructor of Music Education
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Fiscal Technician II — Insurance Follow Up Technician
University of South Carolina
A leader in academe, the University of South Carolina holds the Carnegie Foundation’s highest research designation and is ... see job
Associate Director of Development, George Eastman Circle
University of Rochester
Associate Director of Development, George Eastman Circle at the University of Rochester. see job
Home
| Sign up | Log in
| About us
| Work for Us
| Press Releases
| Rights and permissions
| Contact us
| Advertise
| Partners
| RSS 
| Podcasts
| Links
| Privacy
| My Account
© Copyright 2008 Inside Higher Ed
Call me
I’m a full-time congregational rabbi and have been an adjunct professor (or: Guest lecturer) at a local university for eleven years. On the first day of class, I introduce myself to students as “Mike Stevens,” and use this name when writing to or calling students. I’ve never asked that students use any particular name or title whe addressing me. Some call me Rabbi, some us Mr., and some call me Professor, and one or two have called me Mike. What’s most important to me is that each student feels comfortable in speaking with me, and that each student feels the excitement and challenge of being my student for a semester.
Michael N. Stevens, Rabbi at Temple Beth-El, Munster, IN, at 4:35 pm EDT on July 24, 2007