Covid adjunct nonrenewal: women & minorities

[Wahoo Redux]

Adjunct life bumped off the radar for some time new, particularly with COVID on everybody's brain.

"The coronavirus is threatening diversity in academia" on NBC

[dr_codex]

Not bumped off my radar.

I predict a swell in adjunct ranks, a swell of early retirement offers, and a short-term culling of academic support staff.

Consulting gigs, especially if you can promise expertise in "black swan events", should see robust growth.

[Parasaurolophus]

I think it's telling (and right) that when we're assessing a department's research strengths/profile, we don't usually count its adjuncts, VAPs, or postdocs; just its permanent employees.

It seems really wrong to me to think of one's adjuncts as counting towards diversity; it really just seems to promote hiring adjuncts as a way of fixing diversity issues in a department, field, university, etc. That kind of double exploitation seems especially gross to me.

[mahagonny]

Adjunct life bumped off the radar for some time new, particularly with COVID on everybody's brain.

"The coronavirus is threatening diversity in academia" on NBC

...And what a shame it is. Now it's affecting the people who matter.

[polly_mer]

I think it's telling (and right) that when we're assessing a department's research strengths/profile, we don't usually count its adjuncts, VAPs, or postdocs; just its permanent employees.

It seems really wrong to me to think of one's adjuncts as counting towards diversity; it really just seems to promote hiring adjuncts as a way of fixing diversity issues in a department, field, university, etc. That kind of double exploitation seems especially gross to me.

This.  Temps don't count and should only be a tiny part of the department anyway.

Relying on the temps means doing it wrong all around.

[Aster]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

[mahagonny]

I think it's telling (and right) that when we're assessing a department's research strengths/profile, we don't usually count its adjuncts, VAPs, or postdocs; just its permanent employees.

It seems really wrong to me to think of one's adjuncts as counting towards diversity; it really just seems to promote hiring adjuncts as a way of fixing diversity issues in a department, field, university, etc. That kind of double exploitation seems especially gross to me.

What it is is implausible. To attempt to say you are doing something for people who have traditionally not risen through the ranks as readily by hiring them for a job that (a) you used to have but couldn't wait to get rid of, and (2) are advising them to quit alludes to that higher ed employment is looking for suckers. You might as well say you should get a pat on the back for educating these workers and sending them away from a toxic situation. Except it wasn't the system that did it. It was the pandemic.

This.  Temps don't count and should only be a tiny part of the department anyway.

Relying on the temps means doing it wrong all around.

What you do speaks so loudly I can't hear your words.

[marshwiggle]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

[mahagonny]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

It would also make sense, in this instance, and countless others like it, to call these employees 'faculty' and to refer to the remaining 45% as 'adjunct faculty' (dictionary: something added to the main thing but not part of of it.) But academia does not run on logic, truth telling or accuracy. It runs on culture and hierarchy.

[marshwiggle]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

It would also make sense, in this instance, and countless others like it, to call these employees 'faculty' and to refer to the remaining 45% as 'adjunct faculty' (dictionary: something added to the main thing but not part of of it.)

That might actually make sense if part-time faculty taught more than 50% of the courses; but since they typically teach fewer courses apiece, they would have to have to make up a much higher proportion of faculty for that to be the case.

[mahagonny]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

It would also make sense, in this instance, and countless others like it, to call these employees 'faculty' and to refer to the remaining 45% as 'adjunct faculty' (dictionary: something added to the main thing but not part of of it.)

That might actually make sense if part-time faculty taught more than 50% of the courses; but since they typically teach fewer courses apiece, they would have to have to make up a much higher proportion of faculty for that to be the case.

Not where I work. The adjunct faculty are the majority of the bodies and the majority of student contact hours are with adjunct faculty.

This thread reminds me of that Andy Rooney piece about republicans and democrats. "Democrats love television. They watch a lot of it. Republicans hate television. They watch a lot of it too.'
Conservatives think hiring lots of women for academic low-paid temporary jobs is just fine. They do a lot of it. Liberals think it's terrible. They do a lot of it too.

[apl68]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

Well, I suppose.  But schools trying to appear diverse would find it hard to brag about how many of their insecure, frequently low-paid auxiliary faculty are "diverse," however defined.  That doesn't exactly look like progress, any more than highlighting how many African American or Hispanic custodial staff a school has.

[marshwiggle]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

Well, I suppose.  But schools trying to appear diverse would find it hard to brag about how many of their insecure, frequently low-paid auxiliary faculty are "diverse," however defined.  That doesn't exactly look like progress, any more than highlighting how many African American or Hispanic custodial staff a school has.

That's exactly the point. To lump everyone together gives a really misleading impression; breaking it down is the way to be transparent about the real situation, if the institution is actually trying to be honest. Simply not counting certain groups is going to be noticed. (Just a note: If they pay higer than minimum wage and provide decent benefits to their custodial staff, then even the kind of makeup you've described could be in their favour.)

[mahagonny]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

Well, I suppose.  But schools trying to appear diverse would find it hard to brag about how many of their insecure, frequently low-paid auxiliary faculty are "diverse," however defined.  That doesn't exactly look like progress, any more than highlighting how many African American or Hispanic custodial staff a school has.

What the academy wants to call progress is any shift (no matter how small) in favor of more permanent jobs. these jobs are then less likely to be populated by the 'underrepresented group.'
What I call progress is honest appraisal of the situation. The system runs on a sub class of workers, claims it doesn't, finally admits it does, blames each other and has no intention of changing.

[Wahoo Redux]

Big Urban College operates with over 55% of its faculty as adjuncts. None of those people are counted in our employee diversity metrics.

If diversity is broken out by employee group, such as academic staff, administrative staff, custodial staff, etc., then it makes sense to break adjuncts out as a separate employee group, in the same that that full-time faculty would be broken out as a group.

Well, I suppose.  But schools trying to appear diverse would find it hard to brag about how many of their insecure, frequently low-paid auxiliary faculty are "diverse," however defined.  That doesn't exactly look like progress, any more than highlighting how many African American or Hispanic custodial staff a school has.

What the academy wants to call progress is any shift (no matter how small) in favor of more permanent jobs. these jobs are then less likely to be populated by the 'underrepresented group.'
What I call progress is honest appraisal of the situation. The system runs on a sub class of workers, claims it doesn't, finally admits it does, blames each other and has no intention of changing.

Be fair.  Before the damn pandemic hiring trends were reversing.  I've heard with my own ears the concern with PT hiring.  And if you've ever seen the inside of a search committee, diversity is a BIG issue on all levels.

This may be a flame-producing comment, but diversity can take a good candidate and elevate hu to a great candidate, rightly and/or wrongly.