ACTA's Must-Reads
« Common cause, contd. | Main | One step forward, two steps back at Columbia »
Casual academic labor
It's all well and good to debate the merits--and demerits--of the academic tenure system, and it's right and proper, too, to reform that system, as the University of Colorado is doing, to ensure that it operates as smoothly and ethically as it can.
But it's also crucial to remember that tenure track faculty members make up an increasingly small percentage of college teachers, and it's crucial, too, not to allow debates about the tenure system to mask the more fundamental problems--for teachers and for students--posed by the casualization of academic labor in this country.
The Education Department is reporting that nearly 50% of faculty teaching at colleges that award federal financial aid are part-time workers, and that the percentage of faculty who are on the tenure track is shrinking accordingly.
No discussion about tenure, academic firing and hiring, and academic freedom is complete without a recognition of this reality, which radically alters the premises upon which the ideals embodied--however imperfectly--in tenure and academic freedom exist.
Posted by acta online at March 28, 2007 08:05 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.goactablog.org/blog/mt-tb.cgi/321
Comments
I know from close observation at my own university that staff without tenure are extremely reluctant to do or say anything publicly that the administration might not like. I have in mind several controversies in which a total of close to two hundred faculty and staff took stands contrary to the administration, positions generally favored by this website. Of those who spoke out, only a tiny handful did not have tenure, and these only late in the game.
I also know that faculty without tenure are very reluctant to rock the boat on academic issues within their departments.
Faculty without tenure simply do not have academic freedom, they are well aware of this, and act accordingly.
Posted by: Mike at March 28, 2007 11:12 AM
Quite, Mike. And even after serving out one's "lackeydom" in grad school, adjunct gigs, visiting stints and one's pre-tenure indentured status, the tenured associate prof can still feel the ferule on his or her hands in the matter of committee and course assignments, grants, etc. Perhaps many vicariously rebel against this servile role by adopting absurdly radical political postures.
Posted by: Jacques Albert at March 29, 2007 12:52 PM
Jacques -- fortunately, in my field (natural science) the market dictates in various ways that people can't be dumped on too severely, or they'll walk for greener pastures. In my department, we aren't using more non-tenure track people, as far as I can see. And those we do use are fairly well paid -- again, as dictated by the market. But no $3000/course stuff (quarters). More like $10,000 x 6 for nine months.
My experience from prior jobs at other places is that science departments that go the exploitation route deliver a very uneven "product" to the students. On the whole, rather shoddy. The students may not mind, sometimes they love it. But they do notice it, at least the ones with warm brains.
I see many more adjuncts than a few years ago in my own university in fields outside the natural sciences. Some of this is good, but most of it is cost-savings and exploitation. I doubt that this is really necessary. I'm astounded that the employees involved put up with it. I always recommend, to those who ask my advice, that they get a new career before it's too late.
Posted by: Mike at March 29, 2007 01:43 PM