Oct. 2, 2007

Ph.D.'s at CC's

By Dean Dad

An alert reader noticed my passing comment in a post last week and wrote to ask why I would support a preference for Ph.D.’s when hiring faculty at a cc. After all, he noted, cc faculty are primarily teachers, and Ph.D.’s are really research degrees; there’s no reason to believe that someone with a doctorate is necessarily a better teacher than someone with a Master’s.

It’s a fair question.

I’ll start by defining ‘preference.’ It’s not a hard requirement. In fact, fewer than half of the faculty I’ve personally had a role in hiring (nobody makes unilateral hires here) brought doctorates, although a few of them are ABD. A plurality topped out at a Master’s. We’ve had multiple cases of candidates with Master’s defeating candidates with doctorates, so it’s certainly not a trump card. It’s more than a tiebreaker, but less than a trump card. It helps.

Certainly, the single clearest criterion we look at is teaching ability, especially in the areas we need taught. I’ve seen Ph.D.’s fall flat here, and the degree won’t save them. I’ll grant that good-faith observers can differ on the relative performance of one teacher as against another – that’s one of the reasons that we have search committees. But a demonstration that fails to show, say, mastery of the subject matter, or the ability to speak clearly enough to be understood, is the kiss of death.

All of that granted, though, the preference for doctorates isn’t just arbitrary.

Although our degrees top out at the two-year level, our students don’t. A gratifying number of them go on to four-year degrees and beyond, up to and including medical school, law school, and grad school. I believe that part of the job of a cc is to prepare those students to succeed at the next level(s). To the extent that we can give the students exposure to the same faculty they’d get at the next level, I think we do them a service. (Honestly, in many cases, I think we do better than some of our four-year competitors at teaching intro courses. The four-year schools sometimes treat intro courses as afterthoughts or grudging obligations; they’re our bread-and-butter. Our intro classes are small, and taught mostly by full-time faculty. That certainly isn’t the case at, say, Flagship State.)

There’s also the matter of students’ parents. Community colleges still carry a stigma, especially with adults who themselves have advanced degrees. I’ve spoken with parents at Open House events, and watched their expressions relax when they see how many doctorates we have on our faculty. When I can assure them, truthfully, that not only will the classes be small and the credits transferable, but the faculty will be as highly credentialed as at the four-year school down the street, it makes an impression. A well-qualified faculty is a no-apologies selling point. I’d rather sell that than, say, a football team or a rock-climbing wall or fraternities.

And while we don’t have a requirement to publish, there is an expectation that faculty will remain current with the literature and developments in their fields. A doctorate is no guarantee of that, but it does suggest, at minimum, a deep exposure to the research in one field, and the ability to translate that literature into something presentable. I’ve also noticed that some of the doctoral faculty bring with them denser academic networks, which bring significant benefits over time. (They’re incredibly handy when recruiting external consultants for site visits, for example.)
Finally, on a pragmatic level, someone who already has a doctorate won’t spend the next several years working on it.

Wise and worldly readers, what do you think? Are there legitimate reasons to prefer Ph.D.’s for cc faculty positions?

Comments

I’ve never questioned the CC’s preference for the Ph.D. It makes perfect sense. What does not make sense is the pay. Ph.D.’s at a Community College and in many other colleges often cannot afford to work there if they have, for example, student loans.

kgotthardt, at 8:50 am EDT on October 3, 2007

PHDs at CCs

I am an ABD working at a large community college in Florida. My coworkers are a mixed bag of MAs and Phds. I think many of them are excellent teachers but I know that I know a great deal more about my field now than I did as a freshly minted MA and that translates into a better experience for my students. If I was in a position to hire professors I would put the PHDs at the top of the pile

Wesley Moody, at 11:05 am EDT on October 3, 2007

PhDs at CCs

The knowledge base of a PhD also translates to program development: the greater awareness of the field allows a PhD to oversee a curriculum revision for a department. About half of our newly-hired full-time faculty hold a doctorate (mostly PhD but also EdD) and so all of our intro courses are taught by people with a master’s or a doctorate, which makes the credentials of faculty *better* than at Flagship U, where intro courses are taught by grad students (often their first or second course ever). That’s a selling point.

Jeffrey Klausman, Whatcom Community College, at 2:40 pm EDT on October 3, 2007

PhD faculty at CCs

PhDs with solid first-hand research experience, superior teaching talent, and solid interpersonal skills are rare birds indeed. They effectively close gaps between community college students and milestones for their future. They nurture attitudes in students to become lifetime learners to productively fill jobs aspired to; they give words of encouragement from one who’s “been there and beyond"; they give teachable moments from real-world examples, they spark a self-sustaining fire of discovery, fostering a purpose greater than self.

Even rarer are top cc administrators who recognize this. Why would a PhD researcher type come to teach at a CC? Does research expertise connect with teaching at a CC?” It certainly does. When depth and breadth of research experience comes with first-hand stories to illustrate the material, teachable moments, infectious insight and interest happen in students. Such richness is generally lacking from instructors who do not have research-level knowledge.

There is a poison that fixes CC culture in a stilted way, and limits the quality of faculty who would use their teaching gifts at CCs. This poisonous policy does not recognize and renumerate the few who have superstar value. Instead, CC chancellors, boards, and top administrators choose not to reward this asset, even though it is touted in promotional literature to attract students.

David W. Jensen, M.S., Ph.D., Professor of Biology at Tomball College, at 4:20 pm EDT on October 3, 2007

I agree with the whole line of reasoning. The trouble, as I see it, for the hiring committees is to make sure of the dedication of the potential faculty member. They need to decide whether the candidate is truly ready to give up (mostly) their research, teach predominantly intro level courses, and accept the lower pay that CCs generally have to offer. I do not think that a transient PhD that is just biding their time until they can get a 4-year college gig (whether or not they can manage that transition) does much good for the students.I certainly would prefer a PhD over a fair number of former High School teachers with the MEd that can bring a negative High School atmosphere with them. Even in developmental classes, I think that atmosphere runs counter to all of the points that the author mentioned. Disclaimer — I am obviously not implying that all former High School teachers, or all MEd’s are negative, but more than a few struggle with the transition in intent.

Skip Allis, at 12:00 pm EDT on October 4, 2007