On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Jeffrey Fisher wrote:
>
>> hello, guys, it IS a business -- but that doesn't mean that it's just like
>> that bizarre fantasy of A Business or of The Business World that you, who
>> have never really worked there, have in your head.
>>
>
> From what I have seen, it is a step beneath the business world. When I was
> a subcontractor at Goldman-Sachs, I was invited to become a full-time
> employee on the strength of my technical expertise. In all these fucked up
> community colleges and state universities, that invitation is never
> extended. Also, from what I am reading in Marc Bousquet's "How the
> University Works", the adjuncts tend to be less male and less white than the
> tenured people so you have a caste type thing going on. Meanwhile, the
> quality of education delivered by adjuncts is compromised by a number of
> factors thus making higher education in the U.S. even more degraded than it
> would be if the faculty was full-time. Capitalism really has a way of
> undermining its own long-term prospects through these kinds of cost-cutting
> measures.
>

if only the business world were such a paradise. i have to agree, though,
that my current Really Big Old Company employer has a much more diverse
workforce, including management, than MOS. otoh, I came on as a one-year at
MOS and survived the search to get the tenure track slot. I think there are
still places where you can get bumped to full-time or tenure track in
academia. a (female, fwiw) friend of mine in the UK recently landed
full--time gig this way. maybe that's harder in the US. and the last i heard
there are bigger schools with more money who will assign funds for what they
call "targets of opportunity," which usually involve hires of traditional
minorities into senior slots (associate or full).

the flip side of this of course is that there are very very unprofessionally
run corporations. it's not surprising that a company as successful and flush
with cash as goldman-sachs would do things that way. lots more companies
don't.

none of this of course is to minimize the adjunct issue, or the issue of
glass ceilings in academia. i saw it in its full glory at MOS. i'm talking
about colleges who think "being like a business" means things like the
cost-cutting you're talking about. it means not being responsive either to
students or to faculty members and doing things like bending over backwards
to keep someone great when you've got them.

sorry this is a complicated question and i'm not really doing it justice
right now. but i hope at least it's clear where i'm coming from on this.

j
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to