The Fora: A Higher Education Community

I'm not sure where this opening post should go, since there is no 'non-tenure track' board like the old forum had. But I'll try it here.

Have any of you part time adjunct faculty experienced this? I had one assistant chair at college 'A' tell me, a couple years after I was hired:
"I'm trying to figure out what's happened with you. Your schedule just hasn't filled up the way I expected. I can't figure out why the students are not more eager to study with you. The only thing I can figure is they just don't know much about you, and...you work somewhere else so you just don't seem to be connected to this department in the same way as others are.' School 'A' pays more than School "B" and knows it.
Meanwhile, at college "B" the chair sends me an email asking me to meet with him. Then he intones, with a furrowed brow, 'so...how many hours a week do you currently work at this other school...?" Then I give him the answer and he replies "Oh. OK. Just wondering." That's the whole meeting, outside of a couple throwaway questions.
I think, even though you're only working for them part time, they resent that you might be appearing as an attraction for the other school. What else could it be? What kind of loyalty are they entitled to?
I asked my friends, should I let the one that pays less go and just be a promoter for the other one? They couldn't tell me. I didn't, because I figured as an adjunct, you're taken for granted anyway. They've invested nothing in you.

What are the enrollment trends at the colleges and in the departments in which you teach? 

I've watched situations where good planning indicates the department should offer N sections total, but the chair kept putting N+N/2 sections on the schedule and insisting that faculty just need to advertise their courses better.  The surprise every time about how many fabulous classes were only half full just made me sigh because it was entirely foreseeable that 25*N students didn't fill 25*N*1.5 seats.  No matter how good some of the faculty were and how fabulous their courses would be a declining enrollment overall and a sharply declining enrollment in the major meant we can't offer as many sections as the chair remember from the heyday from 30 years ago.

Unrealistic expectations from the chair doesn't mean you have to do anything different, but it may be time to look at additional options when people have very unrealistic expectations and start punishing workers who don't meet the unrealistic expectations.

Is the headache worth the money?

I've definitely become serious about looking for other jobs when the money was no longer worth the headache.  For example, I was treated well as an adjunct at a community college that had standards, but there's no way I would ever again agree to teach a new prep to seriously undermotivated and underprepared students for only $1800 if money was the reason for wanting to teach.

Can you replace the money doing something else?

One reason I wouldn't again teach a new prep for only $1800 is I could make more money for fewer hours as the person working the night shift at the gas station making minimum wage where I could read my book between customers.  I happen to know that some minimum wage jobs have a lot of down time in which I could read, which is more appealing than many aspects of teaching people who don't want to learn.

I also have available to me options that pay better than most adjunct positions and would be more enjoyable.  If adjuncting is one of your income streams, then can you change how you allocate your time/effort to make a different income stream replace the adjunct money?

That's obnoxious. One of the things you lose if you employ adjuncts is the ability to control what else they're doing. As long as you're teaching the class in an acceptable way, they don't have any right to question where else you're teaching.

Quote from: polly_mer on September 04, 2019, 06:22:05 AM
What are the enrollment trends at the colleges and in the departments in which you teach? 

I've watched situations where good planning indicates the department should offer N sections total, but the chair kept putting N+N/2 sections on the schedule and insisting that faculty just need to advertise their courses better.  The surprise every time about how many fabulous classes were only half full just made me sigh because it was entirely foreseeable that 25*N students didn't fill 25*N*1.5 seats.  No matter how good some of the faculty were and how fabulous their courses would be a declining enrollment overall and a sharply declining enrollment in the major meant we can't offer as many sections as the chair remember from the heyday from 30 years ago.

The colleges within driving distance (less than 1/2 a day) of each other are absolutely competing with each other for enrollment, and they use adjunct faculty who are trying to fill their classes and thus keep their weekly hours and income to promote themselves and their classes so they will fill up enough to run.

Quote from: Caracal on September 04, 2019, 06:36:42 AM
That's obnoxious. One of the things you lose if you employ adjuncts is the ability to control what else they're doing. As long as you're teaching the class in an acceptable way, they don't have any right to question where else you're teaching.

In fact, the faculty handbook requires us to treat all colleagues 'with collegiality.' By rights, it seems to me, being interrogated by the chair over your other teaching activities should count as uncollegial treatment, a basis for a union grievance. Of course, they will probably already have some idea if they take the time to google you on the internet or look at your CV on file. Not only that, but the backstage conversations, in which the chair can decide which faculty and courses to promote to the students, and which ones to not promote, are something you can only guess about, unless you have students doing private investigations for you, which I've never done, and only thought of just now.
I have heard unsolicited comments from students on occasion that are pertinent, however.

I would never, as a chair, comment on outside teaching by our adjuncts, anymore than I would comment on the work responsibilities of adjuncts who had full-time employment in addition to picking up a course for us. The only issue is if their other activities (whatever they are) was interfering with getting to class on time, and that's an operational question, not a "loyalty" question.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 07:42:52 AM
I would never, as a chair, comment on outside teaching by our adjuncts, anymore than I would comment on the work responsibilities of adjuncts who had full-time employment in addition to picking up a course for us. The only issue is if their other activities (whatever they are) was interfering with getting to class on time, and that's an operational question, not a "loyalty" question.

How about your adjunct employment contracts and accompanying documents for them to read? Nothing about these positions are intended for instructors who have full time employment outside of the college, concurrently with this contract? I've lost count of how many I've seen.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 07:48:19 AM

How about your adjunct employment contracts and accompanying documents for them to read? Nothing about these positions are intended for instructors who have full time employment outside of the college, concurrently with this contract? I've lost count of how many I've seen.

I'm not sure what you mean about our adjunct employment contracts and accompanying- can you clarify?

Majority of our adjuncts were full-time employees in professional jobs, who taught courses for us based on their expertise. For example, I had an adjunct teach a section of genetics who was a researcher at a local institute, or a medical doctor who would teach a section of medical ethics etc. The documents were the same for them as other adjuncts.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 03, 2019, 05:35:14 PM
I'm not sure where this opening post should go, since there is no 'non-tenure track' board like the old forum had.

NTT faculty are not marginalized on The Fora;-)

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 07:42:52 AM
I would never, as a chair, comment on outside teaching by our adjuncts, anymore than I would comment on the work responsibilities of adjuncts who had full-time employment in addition to picking up a course for us. The only issue is if their other activities (whatever they are) was interfering with getting to class on time, and that's an operational question, not a "loyalty" question.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 09:38:34 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 07:48:19 AM

How about your adjunct employment contracts and accompanying documents for them to read? Nothing about these positions are intended for instructors who have full time employment outside of the college, concurrently with this contract? I've lost count of how many I've seen.

I'm not sure what you mean about our adjunct employment contracts and accompanying- can you clarify?

Majority of our adjuncts were full-time employees in professional jobs, who taught courses for us based on their expertise. For example, I had an adjunct teach a section of genetics who was a researcher at a local institute, or a medical doctor who would teach a section of medical ethics etc. The documents were the same for them as other adjuncts.

I guess that's a 'no' then.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 01:24:49 PM

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 07:42:52 AM
I would never, as a chair, comment on outside teaching by our adjuncts, anymore than I would comment on the work responsibilities of adjuncts who had full-time employment in addition to picking up a course for us. The only issue is if their other activities (whatever they are) was interfering with getting to class on time, and that's an operational question, not a "loyalty" question.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 09:38:34 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 07:48:19 AM

How about your adjunct employment contracts and accompanying documents for them to read? Nothing about these positions are intended for instructors who have full time employment outside of the college, concurrently with this contract? I've lost count of how many I've seen.

I'm not sure what you mean about our adjunct employment contracts and accompanying- can you clarify?

Majority of our adjuncts were full-time employees in professional jobs, who taught courses for us based on their expertise. For example, I had an adjunct teach a section of genetics who was a researcher at a local institute, or a medical doctor who would teach a section of medical ethics etc. The documents were the same for them as other adjuncts.

I guess that's a 'no' then.

I don't even know what question you're asking (as my post said), so no, "no" isn't the answer.

But if you're not willing to clarify, ok, then.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 05:35:41 PM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 01:24:49 PM

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 07:42:52 AM
I would never, as a chair, comment on outside teaching by our adjuncts, anymore than I would comment on the work responsibilities of adjuncts who had full-time employment in addition to picking up a course for us. The only issue is if their other activities (whatever they are) was interfering with getting to class on time, and that's an operational question, not a "loyalty" question.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 09:38:34 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 04, 2019, 07:48:19 AM

How about your adjunct employment contracts and accompanying documents for them to read? Nothing about these positions are intended for instructors who have full time employment outside of the college, concurrently with this contract? I've lost count of how many I've seen.

I'm not sure what you mean about our adjunct employment contracts and accompanying- can you clarify?

Majority of our adjuncts were full-time employees in professional jobs, who taught courses for us based on their expertise. For example, I had an adjunct teach a section of genetics who was a researcher at a local institute, or a medical doctor who would teach a section of medical ethics etc. The documents were the same for them as other adjuncts.

I guess that's a 'no' then.

I don't even know what question you're asking (as my post said), so no, "no" isn't the answer.

But if you're not willing to clarify, ok, then.

Sure, here's clarification: some adjunct contracts say, either in the contract or in some type of attached addendum, language of this sort; 'these jobs are intended for persons who have full time employment in addition to this employment.' So if that were true in  your school, then you would have been in fact been commenting on outside employment, or party to the implementation of that type of meddling. But I gather such is not the case. And I agree with you that interrogating people about other teaching activities is not appropriate. And I think Caracal got it right too.

Quote from: Caracal on September 04, 2019, 06:36:42 AM
That's obnoxious. One of the things you lose if you employ adjuncts is the ability to control what else they're doing. As long as you're teaching the class in an acceptable way, they don't have any right to question where else you're teaching.

I see. I've never seen such language in an adjunct contract. We don't distinguish is any operational way between adjuncts that are full time employed elsewhere and those who are not.

Quote from: Scout on September 04, 2019, 07:37:56 PM
I see. I've never seen such language in an adjunct contract. We don't distinguish is any operational way between adjuncts that are full time employed elsewhere and those who are not.

However, in my long experience, these kinds of statements are not taken seriously, and shouldn't be. No one's going to hope you have a full time job outside of the college teaching. That would just mean that they'd have to be flexible in order to get their course offering(s) to fit in with your existing schedule. Lots of extra work for them. Also included sometimes is or has been language suggesting you are not an employee of the state, but a private contractor, which is even more absurd. Everyone knows it's W-2 wages, not 1099 miscellaneous income. And a recent ruling in our new and President Trump - improved National Labor Relations Board establishes that employers have the right to mislead workers about their employment status and rights. that is, if you believe what they say is on the level, and not likely to be a bunch of malarkey calculated to discourage you from exercising your labor rights (I don't recall that I ever did.)

Mahagonny, have you ever done the scheduling or the hiring?  These things aren't nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 06:36:49 AM
No one's going to hope you have a full time job outside of the college teaching.

For professional fellows, we look specifically for people who have a full-time job in their field so they can provide better examples to our students.  The ongoing relationship for the required classes often depends on continuing to be employed in a full-time job in their fields.  I have seen contracts to that effect for nurses and other fields where licensing is important.

In the case of warm bodies covering random gen ed courses, no one cares what else you're doing with your life.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 06:36:49 AM
That would just mean that they'd have to be flexible in order to get their course offering(s) to fit in with your existing schedule. Lots of extra work for them.

For a professional fellow teaching an assigned required course as a recurring part of the curriculum, the extra work involved is minimal and well worth the effort to ensure we're getting that highly qualified person.

For the warm body covering an extra gen ed section at the last minute, usually the scheduling is for when the students can take the course and then we find an instructor willing to take that time.  Interchangeable cogs have to fit into the schedule that has already been decided.

Yes, a last minute fill in to teach one of our labs has our blessing to drive an Uber or run for congress. We don't care.

However, if the person is contracted full time, we care, and we have statements as to the limits of hours of outside work. Of course, these limits are often violated, and we only start to care if someone starts missing their classes, or is never available for students or committee service (if tenure track).

Quote from: polly_mer on September 05, 2019, 06:53:16 AM
Mahagonny, have you ever done the scheduling or the hiring?  These things aren't nearly as difficult as you're making them out to be.

Yes. I have been told, 'we need another adjunct, who do you know? OK, is he qualified? Yes? OK, is he available? Will you ask him? OK thanks. If he's interested, find out when we can get him down here to meet him.'

Quote from: Ruralguy on September 05, 2019, 07:41:01 AM
Yes, a last minute fill in to teach one of our labs has our blessing to drive an Uber or run for congress. We don't care.

Gee thanks. I knew you were a regular guy.

Quote from: polly_mer on September 05, 2019, 06:53:16 AM

For professional fellows, we look specifically for people who have a full-time job in their field so they can provide better examples to our students.  The ongoing relationship for the required classes often depends on continuing to be employed in a full-time job in their fields.  I have seen contracts to that effect for nurses and other fields where licensing is important.

...and so the one-size-fits-all contract with language about you being expected to hold a full time job, concurrently, in a department like mine, where  a good number of professional people need to be on campus for hours at a time, during 9-5 hours, is a strange thing to read, and gets some deserved ridicule from people like us. There was even one fun fellow, a mid-level administrator, on the old forum who claimed that most part time adjunct teaching was done at night. And nobody said anything.

Quote from: polly_mer on September 05, 2019, 06:53:16 AM


In the case of warm bodies covering random gen ed courses, no one cares what else you're doing with your life.

Insulting terminology, and reflects poorly on you.

Some of them actually do care, (winding back to my original post), if they think you are attracting students to a competing school.

We schedule our part-time faculty classes based on a variety of data points, including:
— what we need taught
— when we can get classrooms
— the rest of the course offerings
— the teaching schedules at the other college in town where many of our PT faculty also teach
— when our part-time faculty are available to teach based on:
—— their preferences
—— their other jobs & schedules
—— their life needs (daycare pick ups, etc.)

So if the three people who can teach the 3 200-level basket weaving theory course are only available at 8 am before they go to their 10-6 job or at 7 pm after the day job is done, then that's when we schedule those classes.

It's really not complicated if you bother to talk to your colleagues.

Quote from: glowdart on September 07, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
We schedule our part-time faculty classes based on a variety of data points, including:
— what we need taught
— when we can get classrooms
— the rest of the course offerings
— the teaching schedules at the other college in town where many of our PT faculty also teach
— when our part-time faculty are available to teach based on:
—— their preferences
—— their other jobs & schedules
—— their life needs (daycare pick ups, etc.)

So if the three people who can teach the 3 200-level basket weaving theory course are only available at 8 am before they go to their 10-6 job or at 7 pm after the day job is done, then that's when we schedule those classes.

It's really not complicated if you bother to talk to your colleagues.

So what happens when a section doesn't populate and gets canceled? Does the instructor receive a cancellation payment? Does the adjunct professor know the total amount that his contract will pay before committing to being available?

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 08:50:22 AM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 05, 2019, 06:53:16 AM

In the case of warm bodies covering random gen ed courses, no one cares what else you're doing with your life.

Insulting terminology, and reflects poorly on you.

Some of them actually do care, (winding back to my original post), if they think you are attracting students to a competing school.

The terminology is crude on purpose.  People really need to know the full spectrum of part-time academic faculty employees from "interchangeable warm bodies" through "qualified temporary workers" to "fully integrated, part-time faculty who are truly valued professionals".  My bet is that you, Mahagonny, fall more into the gap between qualified temporary workers and fully integrated part-time faculty than interchangeable warm body.  Nobody cares enough about the interchangeable warm bodies to bother having a talk like "where else are you working?"

In addition, interchangeable warm bodies are not attracting anyone anywhere.  They can't be because those are the slots marked "staff" on the course listings because we don't know which human will end up with that section, if the section runs.  Interchangeable warm bodies are not generally listed on departmental websites with enough details to draw a following of any sort.  The advertising is simply not there and almost no one selects a college to attend based on the low-level, mostly indistinguishable gen ed offerings anyway.

Qualified professionals who are listed on the course listings by name might be attracting students from other sections in the same institution (e.g., Let's take that fabulous Mahagonny again for 302 since 201 was great!), but it's not likely to be from school to school unless students were already shopping around for those specific classes. 

If someone truly wanted to study with big name artists/writers/musicians, then that student is much more likely to be picking an institution that advertises heavily its big name folks, especially if a given department has a pretty good pool of fully integrated, truly valued part-time professionals so being enrolled means one is working with some big names, even if not exactly the big name every term.  I suppose it's possible to have something like a director take one play for the fall and draw students that way to one college for that one class, but that still seems more likely only if the students were already shopping around. 

I have seen some instances of students who decided they'd rather spend a term at the local CC to take essentially the same classes that could have involved some of the same faculty at a third of the price, but those were all gen ed classes to get knocked out of the way at low cost, not a big draw for individual professors. 

I've dealt with cases of droves of students going to another institution to avoid the one person who teaches a specific required course. 

I've seen students change institutions when they discover the same major for essentially the same price has much better offerings, more involved professors, and is in many ways overall better.

However, I've not seen droves of students enroll at another institution for one class being taught by one really special qualified professional, even when that person has a recurring contract to teach the same set of courses.

Quote from: polly_mer on September 08, 2019, 07:00:02 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 08:50:22 AM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 05, 2019, 06:53:16 AM

In the case of warm bodies covering random gen ed courses, no one cares what else you're doing with your life.

Insulting terminology, and reflects poorly on you.

Some of them actually do care, (winding back to my original post), if they think you are attracting students to a competing school.

The terminology is crude on purpose.  People really need to know the full spectrum of part-time academic faculty employees from "interchangeable warm bodies" through "qualified temporary workers" to "fully integrated, part-time faculty who are truly valued professionals".  My bet is that you, Mahagonny, fall more into the gap between qualified temporary workers and fully integrated part-time faculty than interchangeable warm body.  Nobody cares enough about the interchangeable warm bodies to bother having a talk like "where else are you working?"

It's gratuitously crude and strongly suggests that the speaker relishes showing disrespect. People can easily be interchangeable because each one of them is competent. 'Warm body' suggests a low standard or the desire to create that perception.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2019, 12:52:06 PM
It's gratuitously crude and strongly suggests that the speaker relishes showing disrespect. People can easily be interchangeable because each one of them is competent. 'Warm body' suggests a low standard or the desire to create that perception.

If we're in agreement that workers should know their status with the employer, then the correct status for some adjuncts is "warm body".  You can be mad that I tell the truth, but it doesn't change what the truth is.

If you can really write:

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 08:50:22 AM
Yes. I have been told, 'we need another adjunct, who do you know? OK, is he qualified? Yes? OK, is he available? Will you ask him? OK thanks. If he's interested, find out when we can get him down here to meet him.'

and then claim the hiring bar for that position is substantially above "warm body", then we live in different realities.  The hoops to hire qualified professionals for even a full year with a full slate of classes, let alone for a long-term position, are a far cry from "hey, do you have a friend who might be interested?"  While I can't find the post now, years ago someone in English admitted to calling up the local bookstores, asking the person who answered if they had an MA in English, and then entering into negotiations to try to fill sections for a term that started in less than a week.

I can't even amend the "interchangeable warm body" category to "interchangeable warm body with a graduate degree" because about 5% of part-time faculty teach with a bachelor's or lower (http://www.academicworkforce.org/CAW_portrait_2012.pdf, table 9).  I watched a heated discussion at an HLC conference when the community college representatives pointed out that universities with graduate programs allow first-year graduate students to teach classes under often pretty lax supervision, but under proposed regulation, the CCs couldn't do the equivalent, even if they hired the first-year grad students from those same institutions.  That was a huge problem for the more isolated CCs where adjuncts for certain classes (math is commonly in this category) are very hard to find if the minimum bar is a master's in the field (e.g., mathematics) from an accredited institution.  I taught mathematics one term at a CC with zero graduate credits in math, but the assertion was my PhD in engineering was sufficient to demonstrate knowledge of the material.

I reiterate that, based on the information we have, you, Mahagonny, are not personally in the "interchangeable warm body" category.  However, to pretend that category doesn't exist neglects the reality of people who are the strongest in need of union protection.  Those are the people who could most benefit from a regional adjunct union to set qualifications that prevent hiring anyone in a category less than "qualified temporary workers" and ensuring the minimum pay rate is at the qualified professional level. 

I use the crude term to make the point to readers that a toe in the door for faculty as an adjunct functions nothing like a toe in the door for practically any other job for most other employers.  An "interchangeable warm body" is not building good will towards a more permanent position in that department.  An "interchangeable warm body" is not building valuable experience that will pay off in a tenure-track position elsewhere.  An "interchangeable warm body" is just getting a paycheck for this term.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2019, 06:08:11 AM

Quote from: glowdart on September 07, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
We schedule our part-time faculty classes based on a variety of data points, including:
— what we need taught
— when we can get classrooms
— the rest of the course offerings
— the teaching schedules at the other college in town where many of our PT faculty also teach
— when our part-time faculty are available to teach based on:
—— their preferences
—— their other jobs & schedules
—— their life needs (daycare pick ups, etc.)

So if the three people who can teach the 3 200-level basket weaving theory course are only available at 8 am before they go to their 10-6 job or at 7 pm after the day job is done, then that's when we schedule those classes.

It's really not complicated if you bother to talk to your colleagues.

So what happens when a section doesn't populate and gets canceled? Does the instructor receive a cancellation payment? Does the adjunct professor know the total amount that his contract will pay before committing to being available?

I'm going to assume the answer is 'no' then. So when you say 'it's not complicated' you mean it is not complicated for you. But it is complicated for the person with whom you have been discussing being hired.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2019, 06:08:11 AM

Quote from: glowdart on September 07, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
We schedule our part-time faculty classes based on a variety of data points, including:
— what we need taught
— when we can get classrooms
— the rest of the course offerings
— the teaching schedules at the other college in town where many of our PT faculty also teach
— when our part-time faculty are available to teach based on:
—— their preferences
—— their other jobs & schedules
—— their life needs (daycare pick ups, etc.)

So if the three people who can teach the 3 200-level basket weaving theory course are only available at 8 am before they go to their 10-6 job or at 7 pm after the day job is done, then that's when we schedule those classes.

It's really not complicated if you bother to talk to your colleagues.

So what happens when a section doesn't populate and gets canceled? Does the instructor receive a cancellation payment? Does the adjunct professor know the total amount that his contract will pay before committing to being available?

Three institutions- no cancellation pay, which I tell those we hire, but I also tell them they're free to break the agreement if they get a better offer.

Of course I tell them what they'll be getting. Either I reference the contract, if it's a union shop, or show them the calculus.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2019, 06:08:11 AM

Quote from: glowdart on September 07, 2019, 06:37:48 PM
We schedule our part-time faculty classes based on a variety of data points, including:
— what we need taught
— when we can get classrooms
— the rest of the course offerings
— the teaching schedules at the other college in town where many of our PT faculty also teach
— when our part-time faculty are available to teach based on:
—— their preferences
—— their other jobs & schedules
—— their life needs (daycare pick ups, etc.)

So if the three people who can teach the 3 200-level basket weaving theory course are only available at 8 am before they go to their 10-6 job or at 7 pm after the day job is done, then that's when we schedule those classes.

It's really not complicated if you bother to talk to your colleagues.

So what happens when a section doesn't populate and gets canceled? Does the instructor receive a cancellation payment? Does the adjunct professor know the total amount that his contract will pay before committing to being available?

There's a published pay scale, so as long as the professor can read a chart with two columns and discern whether they are teaching undergraduate or graduate classes and how many credit hours the course is, then yes, they know what they're making.

We don't staff classes before enrollments make.

On the rare occasion something has gone wrong and we've needed to cancel a course, we've added another section that will fill for the instructor or put them in a still unassigned section.  This happens long before the start of the semester.

I don't know why you're assuming the answer is no — maybe let people answer before jumping to conclusions?

Quote from: polly_mer on September 08, 2019, 05:32:11 PM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2019, 12:52:06 PM
It's gratuitously crude and strongly suggests that the speaker relishes showing disrespect. People can easily be interchangeable because each one of them is competent. 'Warm body' suggests a low standard or the desire to create that perception.

If we're in agreement that workers should know their status with the employer, then the correct status for some adjuncts is "warm body".  You can be mad that I tell the truth, but it doesn't change what the truth is.

If you can really write:

Quote from: mahagonny on September 05, 2019, 08:50:22 AM
Yes. I have been told, 'we need another adjunct, who do you know? OK, is he qualified? Yes? OK, is he available? Will you ask him? OK thanks. If he's interested, find out when we can get him down here to meet him.'

and then claim the hiring bar for that position is substantially above "warm body", then we live in different realities.  The hoops to hire qualified professionals for even a full year with a full slate of classes, let alone for a long-term position, are a far cry from "hey, do you have a friend who might be interested?"  While I can't find the post now, years ago someone in English admitted to calling up the local bookstores, asking the person who answered if they had an MA in English, and then entering into negotiations to try to fill sections for a term that started in less than a week.

It brings me relief and satisfaction to explain that you and I do not live in the same reality. First of all, you misquoted me. My friendship with the prospective new adjunct is not a criterion. Second, they know I have high standards, so if I recommend someone, he/she is better than a hell of a lot of people in our area, which is well endowed with talent in my field. What's known as 'word of mouth.'

Quote
I reiterate that, based on the information we have, you, Mahagonny, are not personally in the "interchangeable warm body" category.  However, to pretend that category doesn't exist neglects the reality of people who are the strongest in need of union protection.  Those are the people who could most benefit from a regional adjunct union to set qualifications that prevent hiring anyone in a category less than "qualified temporary workers" and ensuring the minimum pay rate is at the qualified professional level. 

Why would I care about that? You're saying 'we advertise positions, then interview and staff them, and then make fun of the people who who've accepted the assignment merely for doing their job. But don't worry, it's not you we're talking about.' I don't like this. It's unhealthy and, once again, reflects poorly on you.
Polly_Mer, notice, no one else is making up derisive nicknames for a category of faculty. Glowdart is not. Scout is not. You are doing something weird.


And you maintain that it should be the union's job to insure quality people are hired? Why? Don't people like you, who are already on salary, care enough to do it?

Scout and Glowdart, thanks for the info.

Quote from: Ruralguy on September 05, 2019, 07:41:01 AM
Yes, a last minute fill in to teach one of our labs has our blessing to drive an Uber or run for congress. We don't care.

However, if the person is contracted full time, we care, and we have statements as to the limits of hours of outside work. Of course, these limits are often violated, and we only start to care if someone starts missing their classes, or is never available for students or committee service (if tenure track).

Yes to both of these.

Specific to adjuncts, the only issues that arise are when academic calendars get out of phase. I have a colleague who has not proctored an exam in at least a decade, because our exam schedule conflicts with his other teaching obligations. We cover for him. We do the same in the years when we do some fancy jiggery-pokery with date swaps because of holidays. Since we're the ones making every second Tuesday a Monday, or the like, we don't insist that adjuncts come in. Full-time faculty don't get a pass, since the expectation is that we are available working hours every day.

The only time my Chair would ask about somebody's other teaching would be to try to ensure that people have health insurance.

You have some lousy bosses.

dc

The reality of adjuncting at the warm body level:

1) Qualifications are usually determined by a group of qualified people and are written in a job ad.  No job ad and the likelihood of warm body category goes up enormously.  A generic job ad listing a whole stack of fields (e.g., physics, English, psychology, and sociology) is also a pretty good indicator of warm body category.  Qualified is seldom one yes/no question, but requires a rubric to score the various qualifications for several yes/no/kinda questions.

2) People who are being hired as qualified professionals tend to have a formal interview that includes discussing the written list of qualifications after submission of a cover letter, transcripts, CV, and very likely a teaching statement that address those qualifications.  People being considered for a part-time, continuing relationship will likely have most of a day of interviews with various faculty, the chair, the dean, and possibly the provost.  Unless one is a true star (e.g., Stephen King covering a creative writing class), a ten-minute phone call/meeting that is mostly logistics of what paperwork needs to be filed and where the class meets is a strong indicator of a warm body category.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 04:52:29 AM
Why would I care about that? You're saying 'we advertise positions, then interview and staff them, and then make fun of the people who who've accepted the assignment merely for doing their job. But don't worry, it's not you we're talking about.' I don't like this.

I am not making fun of people.  I am pointing out the brutal reality along the spectrum of part-time academic jobs.  There are people who get hired with no job ad and possibly an interview that consists of 10 minutes of "the pay is $1800.  Can you be ready by Tuesday at 6 PM?"  People in that category need to be told in stark terms that that's a very bad situation in which they are not paying dues or otherwise climbing any sort of academic ladder.  They are being exploited and need to get out. 

I again state that's not all part-time faculty; some people are in positions that could be a little more stable and pay a little more, but are good enough for now.  Some people are actually in great positions that mesh well with their lives.

Yes, you don't like the starkness of "warm body on the academic death march" as a description.  I don't like reading all the first-person narratives where it's clear too many people are in that category who claim no one ever told them how bad it would be.  I am that person telling people at great volume in the starkest terms how bad it can be in the hopes that fewer people end up in that category.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 04:52:29 AM

Polly_Mer, notice, no one else is making up derisive nicknames for a category of faculty. Glowdart is not. Scout is not. You are doing something weird.

Several people have also used the term "freeway flier", which may be another term which you see as derisive. To me, it just reflects the situation frequently described where people are teaching at several different places, often with (by their own admission) long commutes which is the basis for the term. I recall one time where someone actually said that the pay wouldn't cover the gas costs, but wondered whether it was worth it for the possibility of future employment.

If that doesn't suggest an impractical, if not extremely naive, view, then I don't know what does.

For people who have such unrealistic ideas, blunt language may help them realize that they are not merely hoping for something which is not a "sure thing", but rather for something which is "wildly unlikely".

Quote from: polly_mer on September 09, 2019, 05:37:31 AM

Yes, you don't like the starkness of "warm body on the academic death march" as a description.  I don't like reading all the first-person narratives where it's clear too many people are in that category who claim no one ever told them how bad it would be.  I am that person telling people at great volume in the starkest terms how bad it can be in the hopes that fewer people end up in that category.

I don't believe you. You and your kool aid stand are here talking about part time faculty among your former peers, tenured and administration, in a way that makes you feel swell about yourself while keeping the second tier 'down where they belong'. You are not going to be seen as a friend or advisor to the adjunct. Few things could be more implausible, given your hostility to unions, the put-downs, the assaulting of adjunct faculty boards with relentless walls of text, etc.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 11:13:30 AM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 09, 2019, 05:37:31 AM

Yes, you don't like the starkness of "warm body on the academic death march" as a description.  I don't like reading all the first-person narratives where it's clear too many people are in that category who claim no one ever told them how bad it would be. I am that person telling people at great volume in the starkest terms how bad it can be in the hopes that fewer people end up in that category.

I don't believe you. You and your kool aid stand are here talking about part time faculty among your former peers, tenured and administration, in a way that makes you feel swell about yourself while keeping the second tier 'down where they belong'. You are not going to be seen as a friend or advisor to the adjunct. Few things could be more implausible, given your hostility to unions, the put-downs, the assaulting of adjunct faculty boards with relentless walls of text, etc.

How does encouraging people to get out of a situation serve to keep them  'down where they belong'???

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 11:28:32 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 11:13:30 AM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 09, 2019, 05:37:31 AM

Yes, you don't like the starkness of "warm body on the academic death march" as a description.  I don't like reading all the first-person narratives where it's clear too many people are in that category who claim no one ever told them how bad it would be. I am that person telling people at great volume in the starkest terms how bad it can be in the hopes that fewer people end up in that category.

I don't believe you. You and your kool aid stand are here talking about part time faculty among your former peers, tenured and administration, in a way that makes you feel swell about yourself while keeping the second tier 'down where they belong'. You are not going to be seen as a friend or advisor to the adjunct. Few things could be more implausible, given your hostility to unions, the put-downs, the assaulting of adjunct faculty boards with relentless walls of text, etc.

How does encouraging people to get out of a situation serve to keep them  'down where they belong'???

It does when you are the one that creates the job and then hires someone to fill it. They're encouraging someone to get out of the situation? They are the situation.

We don't have to agree, but I am quite certain people like Polly_Mer are not going to be, have never been seen as the friend by adjunct faculty. That's one reason why we have unions. You and me.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 12:43:07 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 11:28:32 AM

How does encouraging people to get out of a situation serve to keep them  'down where they belong'???

It does when you are the one that creates the job and then hires someone to fill it.

Except that the people "creating jobs" and "hiring" are rarely the people establishing the budget in the first place. Allocating funds is done much higher up the food chain, so those doing the hiring aren't in control of what to pay in many (most?) cases.

Quote

We don't have to agree, but I am quite certain people like Polly_Mer are not going to be seen as the friend of the adjunct, and don't expect to be. That's one reason why we have unions. You and me.

My impression is that you see very few "friends" of the adjunct. Administrators are bad. Tenured faculty are bad. Part-time faculty who don't like unions are bad. Not a lot of potential friends left.

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 12:56:40 PM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 12:43:07 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 11:28:32 AM

How does encouraging people to get out of a situation serve to keep them  'down where they belong'???

It does when you are the one that creates the job and then hires someone to fill it.

Except that the people "creating jobs" and "hiring" are rarely the people establishing the budget in the first place. Allocating funds is done much higher up the food chain, so those doing the hiring aren't in control of what to pay in many (most?) cases.

Quote

We don't have to agree, but I am quite certain people like Polly_Mer are not going to be seen as the friend of the adjunct, and don't expect to be. That's one reason why we have unions. You and me.

My impression is that you see very few "friends" of the adjunct. Administrators are bad. Tenured faculty are bad. Part-time faculty who don't like unions are bad. Not a lot of potential friends left.

Oh, it's always open season on administrators. Tenured faculty do the most complaining about presidents, provosts, extra provosts, extra deans, et al. And unlike us, they can fuck them up too. 'No confidence' votes and such.
As I've said before, votes for adjunct unionizing are usually 'yes' and frequently by a landslide. Yes, plenty of friends around.

More about this:

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 12:56:40 PM

My impression is that you see very few "friends" of the adjunct. Administrators are bad. Tenured faculty are bad. Part-time faculty who don't like unions are bad. Not a lot of potential friends left.

Tenured people being bad people, when encountered one-on-one is not usually my impression, though if they are inclined to be vindictive toward an adjunct, as happens occasionally, there's very little restraining them. Tenured people as a group being no friend to the adjunct as a group is an undeniable fact of my years of experience, and there is no way anyone with my experience could have concluded otherwise. First, shut out of their union, then important misstatements of fact about us that appear in their union agreements, then their flat refusal to lend even a modicum of spoken support for us when we finally did organize, then the icing on the cake: not just not being a friend, but being a proactive enemy with active attempts to cripple our leadership through discontinuing of contracts. I'm sorry if I have to keep doing SPADFY on this forum to readers with tenure who report having helped adjunct faculty get gains, but everything I've reported has happened and I've been here muddling through it, with many colleagues understanding the lay of the land as I do.
Furthermore, I have no reason to believe this experience is unusual through any information presented here. Anyone who wants to talk about union organizing and progress achieved thereby will be met with a prolonged chilly reception. It's especially comical given recent conversations about the forum wanting more participants.

Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2019, 07:02:32 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2019, 04:52:29 AM

Polly_Mer, notice, no one else is making up derisive nicknames for a category of faculty. Glowdart is not. Scout is not. You are doing something weird.

Several people have also used the term "freeway flier", which may be another term which you see as derisive. To me, it just reflects the situation frequently described where people are teaching at several different places, often with (by their own admission) long commutes which is the basis for the term.

The new forum says 'we need more contributors' but on the old forum, one long term poster wrote 'we do not need more freeway fliers contributing to the forum.' I'm not going to tell you who. Maybe you can figure it out.

Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

I suspect not. I certainly haven't seen a place. I'm not sure why there is no such place, but I entertain a few hypotheses.

It would be great if there were such a place.

Quote from: downer on September 09, 2019, 04:28:24 PM
Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

I suspect not. I certainly haven't seen a place. I'm not sure why there is no such place, but I entertain a few hypotheses.

It would be great if there were such a place.

The only thing secret on the 'net is, just maybe, who you really are. In real life, discussions among adjuncts are productive, and obviously, only a real horse's ass would try to crash the party. Unfortunately, there are 9.2 million horses in the USA alone.

Quote from: downer on September 09, 2019, 04:28:24 PM
Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

I suspect not. I certainly haven't seen a place. I'm not sure why there is no such place, but I entertain a few hypotheses.

It would be great if there were such a place.

I have started a thread: https://thefora.org/index.php?topic=543.0 for such a discussion.  I agree to not post anything further to that thread so that the thread can function as a support group.

Out in other parts of the internet:

Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Adjuncts/

Adjunct Nation: https://www.adjunctnation.com

New Faculty Majority: http://www.newfacultymajority.info

The CHE ChronicleVitae/Adjunct Life: https://chroniclevitae.com/groups/adjunct-life?cid=VTXGROUP_GROUP_BY_TOPIC was a place, but it seems dormant now

Twitter brings up many entries for #adjunct #adjunctlife #adjunctprofessor

The American Association of Adjunct Education: http://adjuncteducation.weebly.com has newsletters that might help make more contact.

The title of this thread is Punished or Cut Back on Hours for Working at Multiple Colleges. 

Let's do a different take by looking at two adjuncts: Alex and Dana.  Both have MFAs in creative writing from comparable programs. 

Alex publishes about a novel per year for a solid income stream, but far from enough to give up all other income streams.

Dana publishes online and has placed some articles with good magazines for a steady income stream, but is also far from being able to give up all other income streams.

Several years ago, Administrator P ran an ad for creative writing adjuncts to build local authors into the creative writing program.  Alex was hired as one of the several authors in the cluster due to Alex's ongoing productivity in publishing a novel a year.  Dana applied, but wasn't in the top several applicants, but Dana's materials remain on file because Dana is a publishing author who has an MFA from a good program.

The contract with Alex is year-to-year for 2 sections each term with the agreement that Alex's name and likeness can be used to promote the program. Alex gets paid $4000 per section (full parity for teaching duties) and has an agreed upon cap of 20 students so that Alex can provide good feedback to the students and yet has plenty of time and energy left to continue writing novels.  About once every two years, Dana gets a call about a week before classes start with "could you pick up a section for us for the upcoming term?  We've got about 30 students already enrolled and we'll bump the rate to $2500 over the standard $1800 for being last-minute at a full cap." 

One fine day, Administrator P is doing some local market research on comparable programs and sees that Alex is also teaching 1-2 sections at two other institutions for a total load of about 5 sections every term.  That's a full-time load by assembling together three part-time jobs.  Because Alex is listed by name on all the courses and has a picture on all the websites, every institution is trading on Alex's name and likeness.  In contrast, Dana might be teaching at all those same places, but Dana's name never goes on the class schedule and Dana has no presence on any institution's webpage.

Administrator P is then concerned because, while students haven't complained about Alex's teaching, people's time and energy is limited and scaling back on feedback to students is one common way that professors make room for their own writing.  In addition, the 20-student cap on Alex's sections haven't been reached for several terms while some of the "staff" sections have filled at 30.  Administrator P had been chalking up that discrepancy to time slot, but perhaps Alex isn't nearly as good a draw now that Alex is teaching several places with Administrator P's institution being the most expensive to students.

Administrator P calls a meeting with Alex to gather information.  Alex seems taken aback by the questions of what Alex is doing with all of Alex's work time because Alex doesn't consider Administrator P's institution as a primary employer, but is instead one income stream among many.  Administrator P is not happy because Administrator P hired an author who would do a little excellent teaching special for just Administrator P's students.  That's why Alex got a much better, ongoing deal at more than double the standard rate for a lower cap. 

Administrator P then give serious consideration to giving Alex one 20-person section at the $4000 rate per year so that Alex's name and likeness stay on the website, but Administrator P is paying in better accord with what the program is getting from the relationship.  If more sections fill, then Dana or the next name on the warm body list can be called and offered less money for equally good quality of teaching based on student feedback and observations.

Quote from: polly_mer on September 10, 2019, 04:51:35 AM

Quote from: downer on September 09, 2019, 04:28:24 PM
Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

I suspect not. I certainly haven't seen a place. I'm not sure why there is no such place, but I entertain a few hypotheses.

It would be great if there were such a place.

I have started a thread: https://thefora.org/index.php?topic=543.0 for such a discussion.  I agree to not post anything further to that thread so that the thread can function as a support group.

Out in other parts of the internet:

Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Adjuncts/

Adjunct Nation: https://www.adjunctnation.com

New Faculty Majority: http://www.newfacultymajority.info

The CHE ChronicleVitae/Adjunct Life: https://chroniclevitae.com/groups/adjunct-life?cid=VTXGROUP_GROUP_BY_TOPIC was a place, but it seems dormant now

Twitter brings up many entries for #adjunct #adjunctlife #adjunctprofessor

The American Association of Adjunct Education: http://adjuncteducation.weebly.com has newsletters that might help make more contact.

Thanks. Not all of those have spaces for discussion.

Reddit has discussion, and seems like the main place there would be among adjuncts. I've gone this far in life without ever posting to Reddit. I may have looked at their Adjunct group before. It's not a very active forum there, surprisingly. I don't see much sense of community there. Lots of angst of course. 600+ members of the group. It's not a lot really.

Quote from: downer on September 09, 2019, 04:28:24 PM
Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

When you say "actually talk with each other", does that mean actual conversations about actual topics, or is it just a steady stream of complaints about how tenure track faculty are the enemy, how administrators are the enemy, and how students live better than them?

I feel bad for anyone trying to live off the salary of a low-paid adjunct...but the constant complaining inserted into every discussion gets tiring in a hurry. Maybe it's hard to find a place to talk because nobody finds it interesting.

Quote from: tuxthepenguin on September 10, 2019, 09:12:54 AM

Quote from: downer on September 09, 2019, 04:28:24 PM
Is there some secret location on the internet where adjunct faculty do actually talk with each other?

When you say "actually talk with each other", does that mean actual conversations about actual topics, or is it just a steady stream of complaints about how tenure track faculty are the enemy, how administrators are the enemy, and how students live better than them?

I feel bad for anyone trying to live off the salary of a low-paid adjunct...but the constant complaining inserted into every discussion gets tiring in a hurry. Maybe it's hard to find a place to talk because nobody finds it interesting.

"I wish to register a complaint!" Again and again.

You might like this blog post: https://www.adjunctnation.com/2011/09/12/if-youre-complaining-maybe-its-time-for-a-new-job-2/

Personally, I'm looking for an adjunct pride discussion. Sort of an analogy with Mad Pride (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_Pride).

Quote from: polly_mer on September 10, 2019, 05:32:59 AM

The contract with Alex is year-to-year for 2 sections each term with the agreement that Alex's name and likeness can be used to promote the program. Alex gets paid $4000 per section (full parity for teaching duties) and has an agreed upon cap of 20 students so that Alex can provide good feedback to the students and yet has plenty of time and energy left to continue writing novels.   [corrected to] Alex gets paid more and has a smaller cap because that's what Administrator P calculates he will need to offer to get Alex's interest. [end correction] About once every two years, Dana gets a call about a week before classes start with "could you pick up a section for us for the upcoming term?  We've got about 30 students already enrolled and we'll bump the rate to $2500 over the standard $1800 for being last-minute at a full cap." 

You guys are always making it sound like you're thinking of someone else's needs.

QuoteAdministrator P is then concerned because, while students haven't complained about Alex's teaching, people's time and energy is limited and scaling back on feedback to students is one common way that professors make room for their own writing.

...which Administrator P expected would happen all along, but the students would put up with it because, who would they be complaining about it to, anyway? Administrator P, who doesn't care all that much.

Quote from: downer on September 10, 2019, 09:27:08 AM

Personally, I'm looking for an adjunct pride discussion. Sort of an analogy with Mad Pride (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_Pride).

There is plenty of adjunct pride around. What there isn't much of is admiration and gratitude to the tenure track and administration, which they try to use against you and make the discussion about you, alleging depression, false consciousness, propensity to complain in general, etc.

So, here's an answer to the original thread question.

In my state, there was an attempt to treat working at multiple state institutions (at all levels - CC through Flagship) as if they were all one employer, as the pay ultimately came from the State coffers.  That would have meant that an adjunct could teach at an essentially unlimited number of private institutions, but teaching at more that one public institution would be prohibited b/c the adjunct would very quickly hit the teaching cap.

That was ultimately DOA b/c of the work of our (FT and Adjunct) union.  Why?  Primarily b/c it would hurt adjuncts.

Quote from: FishProf on September 10, 2019, 11:42:58 AM
So, here's an answer to the original thread question.

In my state, there was an attempt to treat working at multiple state institutions (at all levels - CC through Flagship) as if they were all one employer, as the pay ultimately came from the State coffers.  That would have meant that an adjunct could teach at an essentially unlimited number of private institutions, but teaching at more that one public institution would be prohibited b/c the adjunct would very quickly hit the teaching cap.

That was ultimately DOA b/c of the work of our (FT and Adjunct) union.  Why?  Primarily b/c it would hurt adjuncts.

So who proposed the policy in the first place? And who endorsed it?

Quote from: downer on September 10, 2019, 11:54:12 AM

Quote from: FishProf on September 10, 2019, 11:42:58 AM
So, here's an answer to the original thread question.

In my state, there was an attempt to treat working at multiple state institutions (at all levels - CC through Flagship) as if they were all one employer, as the pay ultimately came from the State coffers.  That would have meant that an adjunct could teach at an essentially unlimited number of private institutions, but teaching at more that one public institution would be prohibited b/c the adjunct would very quickly hit the teaching cap.

That was ultimately DOA b/c of the work of our (FT and Adjunct) union.  Why?  Primarily b/c it would hurt adjuncts.

So who proposed the policy in the first place? And who endorsed it?

State Level bean-counters.  It was a sidestep of ACA eligibility calculations (or so we were told).

In my adjunct years, I typically worked at two to three institutions a semester.  No one cared as long as I was taking care of business for each institution, which I was.

I do find the use of the expression "warm bodies" to refer to adjuncts to be condescending and misleading (at best); far more expertise is required of adjuncts than the expression suggests.

Quote from: FishProf on September 10, 2019, 11:42:58 AM
So, here's an answer to the original thread question.

In my state, there was an attempt to treat working at multiple state institutions (at all levels - CC through Flagship) as if they were all one employer, as the pay ultimately came from the State coffers.  That would have meant that an adjunct could teach at an essentially unlimited number of private institutions, but teaching at more that one public institution would be prohibited b/c the adjunct would very quickly hit the teaching cap.

That was ultimately DOA b/c of the work of our (FT and Adjunct) union.  Why?  Primarily b/c it would hurt adjuncts.

Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM

Quote from: FishProf on September 10, 2019, 11:42:58 AM
So, here's an answer to the original thread question.

In my state, there was an attempt to treat working at multiple state institutions (at all levels - CC through Flagship) as if they were all one employer, as the pay ultimately came from the State coffers.  That would have meant that an adjunct could teach at an essentially unlimited number of private institutions, but teaching at more that one public institution would be prohibited b/c the adjunct would very quickly hit the teaching cap.

That was ultimately DOA b/c of the work of our (FT and Adjunct) union.  Why?  Primarily b/c it would hurt adjuncts.

Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

Oddly, that was never one of the options considered....

The likely outcome was a swelling of the number of adjuncts needed to cover the same number of courses.  Each one making less than had been the case prior.

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

This would require specific regulation by the regional accrediting body. I have been eagerly expecting them to step up for many years now.

Instead, all that I can extract from my regional accreditor is the same wimpy washy statement that an institution try and have at least half of its courses taught by TT and other salaried full time professors. Over half? Yeah, that's it. This means colleges can "operate" (I use this term loosely) with over 40% courses taught by contingent workers and that's totally okay. My college takes this literally, hiring so few salaried professors that we're a minority. My own department operates with a 1:4 ratio of salaried:adjunct faculty.

This still doesn't explain how the large for-profits (e.g. Keiser) possess regional accreditation and yet operate with almost exclusively contingent professors.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 10, 2019, 10:28:10 AM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 10, 2019, 05:32:59 AM

The contract with Alex is year-to-year for 2 sections each term with the agreement that Alex's name and likeness can be used to promote the program. Alex gets paid $4000 per section (full parity for teaching duties) and has an agreed upon cap of 20 students so that Alex can provide good feedback to the students and yet has plenty of time and energy left to continue writing novels.   [corrected to] Alex gets paid more and has a smaller cap because that's what Administrator P calculates he will need to offer to get Alex's interest. [end correction] About once every two years, Dana gets a call about a week before classes start with "could you pick up a section for us for the upcoming term?  We've got about 30 students already enrolled and we'll bump the rate to $2500 over the standard $1800 for being last-minute at a full cap." 

You guys are always making it sound like you're thinking of someone else's needs.

QuoteAdministrator P is then concerned because, while students haven't complained about Alex's teaching, people's time and energy is limited and scaling back on feedback to students is one common way that professors make room for their own writing.

...which Administrator P expected would happen all along, but the students would put up with it because, who would they be complaining about it to, anyway? Administrator P, who doesn't care all that much.

Let's continue the story for more perspective.  As mentioned previously, Alex was hired as part of a cluster of local authors to improve the creating writing program.  Sam has the same contract as Alex, but Sam also tends to eat lunch in the common room and chat with students who are also there.  It's only an extra hour three times per week between the 11 and 13 sections.  Sam's 20-person classes tend to have a waiting list of 2-4. 

Administrator P gets a pretty steady stream of positive comments regarding student interactions with Sam outside of class.  Alex has good ratings and students greet Alex in the hall, but Sam has a following.  Prospective students who tour on the right days are taken by the common room during lunch so they can chat with Sam because enrolled students cite the routine interactions with published authors who take the students seriously as authors even outside the classroom as a draw to the program.

Lee was also hired as part of the cluster for the same contract.  Lee is on campus only in the evenings because Lee's prime writing hours are 2200 to 0200.  Thus, back-to-back sections starting at 1800 followed by brief chats with students who want to stick around work well for Lee's workflow.  Lee's second course tends not to fill because few people enroll for a class that gets out so late.  Thus, Lee often has only 30ish students total in the two sections.  Students really love the detailed, personalized, specific feedback they get from Lee.  Again, Lee's students tend to provide a continuous stream of positive comments to Administrator P so the direct comparison with Alex's "no complaints" put Alex as a less desirable professor when cheaper options are available.

Administrator P doesn't care about faculty jobs; Administrator P cares about having a thriving program with enough students recruited and retained that the doors stay open.  A faculty member who is fine, but not directly contributing to the goals of recruiting and retaining students is not going to be treated as well as those who have strong qualitative evidence supporting their value to the program.

Students will vote with their feet to cheaper institutions in a time when seats are plentiful and students are the limiting factor.   Once the bar is "fine", the question of why Alex is retained at a higher pay when Dana is right in the wings comes up.  After all, Dana has fine student evaluations with no complaints as well and clearly is willing to work for lower pay.  If Alex isn't really a big draw any more for Administrator P's program and other people with Alex's qualifications exist, then the reasonable thing to do is reduce Alex's load for a year while doing a targeted search for more local authors who will draw students to the program.  Dana can get an email with notification of the opening, but it's better to do a wide search and have one of the qualifications be appeal to students.

Quote from: aside on September 10, 2019, 04:53:56 PM
I do find the use of the expression "warm bodies" to refer to adjuncts to be condescending and misleading (at best); far more expertise is required of adjuncts than the expression suggests.

Then you haven't been far enough down the food chain where people are teaching well outside their expertise because they were the ones willing to say yes for the money offered.  Mahagonny accuses me of not caring; I have never hired someone who is straight-up unqualified, although I have definitely continued to shop around in certain fields until I found someone willing to work for peanuts or as a straight-up volunteer.  The organic chemist is getting whatever is required to get that section covered.  We're going to shop until we find someone willing to take freshman comp at $1800 and we might get back to the local retired lawyer who is eager to teach developmental English with his undergrad credits in education and a BA in English.

While looking for discussions per Downer's request, I came across:

Quote
Imagine a History Ph.D. being told to teach Music Apprec and you get the idea. Obviously there's some overlap, but at the end of the day I don't know that much about music. (To be clear, the courses are not History or Music Apprec, this is just an example.) (At the time I was hired, in July, I honestly thought I could teach in this field.)

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Adjuncts/comments/cwpit7/want_to_quit_my_adjunct_position/

The narratives in STEM at the CC level and isolated teaching-only institutions abound of putting slightly better than warm bodies in classrooms and hoping for the best.  I personally know physicists teaching geology, chemists teaching astronomy, and anyone who has any math skills teaching math classes with zero MATH graduate credits.  Even science for teachers had me teaching geology and astronomy units -- fields in which I have zero even undergraduate formal education. 

Why isn't there an adjunct pride site?  There's not really a need for that, except as a precursor to organizing for better conditions and better recognition.  People whose lives are going well tend to share the interesting parts of their activities that aren't unique to being adjuncts.  For example, I follow many people on Twitter who share lesson planning, questions about reaching underprepared students with complicated lives, and other pedagogy concerns.  Some fraction of those folks are adjuncts, but the overall impression is dedicated teachers who wish to tweak their teaching.  Much more energy goes into worrying about race/class/gender discrepancies for students and faculty than concerns about being underemployed and/or underpaid as an adjunct.

Quote from: Aster on September 11, 2019, 05:38:07 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

This would require specific regulation by the regional accrediting body. I have been eagerly expecting them to step up for many years now.

Instead, all that I can extract from my regional accreditor is the same wimpy washy statement that an institution try and have at least half of its courses taught by TT and other salaried full time professors. Over half? Yeah, that's it. This means colleges can "operate" (I use this term loosely) with over 40% courses taught by contingent workers and that's totally okay. My college takes this literally, hiring so few salaried professors that we're a minority. My own department operates with a 1:4 ratio of salaried:adjunct faculty.

This still doesn't explain how the large for-profits (e.g. Keiser) possess regional accreditation and yet operate with almost exclusively contingent professors.

While accrediting agencies do manage to identify some of the most egregious problems, and one might hope that they would stand up for the quality of education, I've never seen them do much more than encourage colleges to hire more administrators, and of course, perpetuate their own existence and employment for their staff. So I wouldn't look to them as a source of progress.

Quote from: Aster on September 11, 2019, 05:38:07 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

This would require specific regulation by the regional accrediting body. I have been eagerly expecting them to step up for many years now.

Instead, all that I can extract from my regional accreditor is the same wimpy washy statement that an institution try and have at least half of its courses taught by TT and other salaried full time professors. Over half? Yeah, that's it. This means colleges can "operate" (I use this term loosely) with over 40% courses taught by contingent workers and that's totally okay. My college takes this literally, hiring so few salaried professors that we're a minority. My own department operates with a 1:4 ratio of salaried:adjunct faculty.

This still doesn't explain how the large for-profits (e.g. Keiser) possess regional accreditation and yet operate with almost exclusively contingent professors.

Contingent is not the same as part-time nor is it the same as "easily replaceable with another warm body".  When last I was active with the HLC, there was no firm number on what percentage of courses or students needed to be taught by T/TT.  Instead, the criterion is:

Quote
3.C. The institution has the faculty and staff needed for effective, high-quality programs and student services.

1. The institution has sufficient numbers and continuity of faculty members to carry out both the classroom and the non-classroom roles of faculty, including oversight of the curriculum and expectations for student performance; establishment of academic credentials for instructional staff; involvement in assessment of student learning.

2. All instructors are appropriately qualified, including those in dual credit, contractual, and consortial programs.

3. Instructors are evaluated regularly in accordance with established institutional policies and procedures.

4. The institution has processes and resources for assuring that instructors are current in their disciplines and adept in their teaching roles; it supports their professional development.

5. Instructors are accessible for student inquiry.

6. Staff members providing student support services, such as tutoring, financial aid advising, academic advising, and co-curricular activities, are appropriately qualified, trained, and supported in their professional development.

Source: https://www.hlcommission.org/Policies/criteria-and-core-components.html

High continuity in part-time folks is very different on the ground than a revolving door of interchangeable folks, each with 18 graduate credits in an appropriate field.  Contingent means "year to year contract" and can be full-time folks who only have a one-year contract at a time, but no limit on renewals.

I'll say it again: inappropriate adjunct armies of warm bodies tend to be concentrated in the general education programs and service courses.  When one is reviewing the written documents for programs, even departments that might have poorly paid, high turnover armies of adjuncts for service courses don't tend to have written documents that show that situation.  After all, the majors are being served by full-time folks augmented by integrated professional fellows; the adjunct army is mostly for service.  A program review might have a list of requirements with a couple entries marked "faculty search in progress", but there won't be a ton of entries with "staff" for core requirements for the program.

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

Quote
The likely outcome was a swelling of the number of adjuncts needed to cover the same number of courses.  Each one making less than had been the case prior.

Assuming there is a fixed supply of MA and PhD's in English to qualified to teach First-Year Composition. Right now A works 50% at College North and 50% at College South to cobble together a full-time living to stay under the 50% adjunct limit. Meanwhile, B works 50% at College South and 50% at College North... ditto.

Theoretically there are two full-time jobs there.

Let A work 100% at North and B work 100% at South.

Quote from: downer on September 11, 2019, 05:53:16 AM

Quote from: Aster on September 11, 2019, 05:38:07 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

This would require specific regulation by the regional accrediting body. I have been eagerly expecting them to step up for many years now.

Instead, all that I can extract from my regional accreditor is the same wimpy washy statement that an institution try and have at least half of its courses taught by TT and other salaried full time professors. Over half? Yeah, that's it. This means colleges can "operate" (I use this term loosely) with over 40% courses taught by contingent workers and that's totally okay. My college takes this literally, hiring so few salaried professors that we're a minority. My own department operates with a 1:4 ratio of salaried:adjunct faculty.

This still doesn't explain how the large for-profits (e.g. Keiser) possess regional accreditation and yet operate with almost exclusively contingent professors.

While accrediting agencies do manage to identify some of the most egregious problems, and one might hope that they would stand up for the quality of education, I've never seen them do much more than encourage colleges to hire more administrators, and of course, perpetuate their own existence and employment for their staff. So I wouldn't look to them as a source of progress.

So you wouldn't call the maintaining of a subclass of cheap, disenfranchised unwelcome and stigmatized faculty progress? Take it away and a lot of important people are gonna be unhappy.

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 11, 2019, 07:14:01 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on September 10, 2019, 09:15:29 PM
Seems it would help adjuncts by forcing institutions to create full-time jobs so they could cover their classes instead of relying on adjuncts artificially splitting their time across campuses.

Quote
The likely outcome was a swelling of the number of adjuncts needed to cover the same number of courses.  Each one making less than had been the case prior.

Assuming there is a fixed supply of MA and PhD's in English to qualified to teach First-Year Composition. Right now A works 50% at College North and 50% at College South to cobble together a full-time living to stay under the 50% adjunct limit. Meanwhile, B works 50% at College South and 50% at College North... ditto.

Theoretically there are two full-time jobs there.

Let A work 100% at North and B work 100% at South.

Two half time positions costs significantly less than one full-time position.   That's usually the primary reason for such a situation.

Additionally, making a full-time TT position out of two half-times will (usually) mean a nationwide search, with the likely outcome that neither A nor b gets the FT job. 

Quote from: polly_mer on September 11, 2019, 05:41:05 AM
Why isn't there an adjunct pride site?  There's not really a need for that, except as a precursor to organizing for better conditions and better recognition.  People whose lives are going well tend to share the interesting parts of their activities that aren't unique to being adjuncts.  For example, I follow many people on Twitter who share lesson planning, questions about reaching underprepared students with complicated lives, and other pedagogy concerns.  Some fraction of those folks are adjuncts, but the overall impression is dedicated teachers who wish to tweak their teaching.  Much more energy goes into worrying about race/class/gender discrepancies for students and faculty than concerns about being underemployed and/or underpaid as an adjunct.

I knew there was a reason college administrators register as democrats.
If you don't care about people, you don't care about 'black people.'

But you can't call people 'warm body' to their face. It's rude. It's your backstage talk, reflecting your bitterness over your situation and taking it out on someone else. You may see yourself as grateful to them for accepting the work, but you don't come across that way. Or not to me anyway.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 20, 2019, 04:23:12 PM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 11, 2019, 05:41:05 AM
Why isn't there an adjunct pride site?  There's not really a need for that, except as a precursor to organizing for better conditions and better recognition.  People whose lives are going well tend to share the interesting parts of their activities that aren't unique to being adjuncts.  For example, I follow many people on Twitter who share lesson planning, questions about reaching underprepared students with complicated lives, and other pedagogy concerns.  Some fraction of those folks are adjuncts, but the overall impression is dedicated teachers who wish to tweak their teaching.  Much more energy goes into worrying about race/class/gender discrepancies for students and faculty than concerns about being underemployed and/or underpaid as an adjunct.

These are the acceptable discussions.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 20, 2019, 04:23:12 PM

Quote from: polly_mer on September 11, 2019, 05:41:05 AM
Why isn't there an adjunct pride site?  There's not really a need for that, except as a precursor to organizing for better conditions and better recognition.  People whose lives are going well tend to share the interesting parts of their activities that aren't unique to being adjuncts.  For example, I follow many people on Twitter who share lesson planning, questions about reaching underprepared students with complicated lives, and other pedagogy concerns.  Some fraction of those folks are adjuncts, but the overall impression is dedicated teachers who wish to tweak their teaching.  Much more energy goes into worrying about race/class/gender discrepancies for students and faculty than concerns about being underemployed and/or underpaid as an adjunct.

I knew there was a reason college administrators register as democrats.

I'm not a registered Democrat.  However, I am an engineer by education and spend a lot of time in the CS and physics worlds.  The concern for including everyone who wants to learn is very much a topic for discussion in the K-infinity teaching areas of those fields.  One doesn't have to play any identity politics games to realize we have a shortage of people in the country with specific knowledge and skills and one way to address that shortage is to figure out how to widen the pool and support people who might be willing to try.  If we continue to only have the very motivated and already talented in just the classrooms, then we will continue to have a shortage of educated people.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 20, 2019, 04:23:12 PM
But you can't call people 'warm body' to their face. It's rude.

I have told people flat out to their faces while applying and then after they were hired that they would get a better deal doing something else.  I continue beating the drum here in my free time because I feel so strongly that people in some situations need to know they are not paying dues or climbing the academic ladder by being in the 'warm body' pool.  Again, not all part-time faculty are adjuncts and even some adjuncts are not warm bodies.  However, the people who are in the 'warm body' death-marching situation need to be told flat out how dire their situation is and what's required to get out.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 20, 2019, 04:23:12 PM
It's your backstage talk, reflecting your bitterness over your situation and taking it out on someone else.

I left academia for a job that pays twice as much and I spend my work day doing research in an area related to my PhD along with the activities required to support that research.  I publish and present.  I am strongly encouraged to have postdocs and students to mentor the next generation in my area.  The limitation on professional travel is time away from my research, not money.  I don't write grant or other proposals and I have to turn down more work than I can accept because my research area is in such demand.

I became an administrator because I realized how much more I loved doing the big-picture, bureaucratic work over the futile work of trying to teach underprepared students who didn't want to learn what they were required to take that I was tasked with teaching.  I much more like the human aspects in mentoring individuals on their specific situation over formal classroom teaching where the group ability and interest is so large that I can't teach to a middle and the top is only one or two individuals.  I loved doing institutional research with the attendant report writing and helping faculty progress in their careers.

Quote from: mahagonny on September 20, 2019, 04:23:12 PM
You may see yourself as grateful to them for accepting the work, but you don't come across that way. Or not to me anyway.

I was grateful to the essentially volunteers doing a fabulous job under resource constraints.  I was grateful to professional fellows willing to step up to teach a class or two a year while truly being part-time faculty including the service part.  Paying them the money for being fully fractional was always worth it.

In contrast, I was quite perturbed every time someone skimped on doing the job because we weren't paying enough and yet they took the job anyway more than once, even after realizing they were not being paid enough to do a good job.  We fired more than one true adjunct partway through a term for ripping off our students like that and we even put full-time academics on improvement plans for ripping off our students by doing far too little in the classroom.

I remain quite annoyed with the warm bodies who refuse to believe that the best thing they could do for themselves, their students, and their colleagues is to stop accepting jobs they can't do with the resources provided and go do something else for a few terms.  The power a union has usually relies on the threat of a strike severely hampering operations.  If no one in charge believes the strike will occur or that the strike will significantly hamper operations, then there's no power.