In the debate over how unfairly adjuncts are being treated, a couple of assumptions are being made (at least by some posters): A) When tenure-track faculty teach the same number of courses as adjuncts yet receive more pay, violation of the "equal pay for equal work" ethic has occurred. B) Adjunct instructors and tenure-track faculty are equally qualified.
With regard to the first assumption, in my experience the work of adjunct faculty is to teach (generally undergraduate) courses and sometimes to serve on thesis committees (if they wish--not a job requirement). The tenure-track faculty have as their compensable responsibilities the requirement to teach at the undergrad and graduate levels, advise undergraduates, chair and serve on thesis committees, engage in a program of research (conference presentations and publication), serve on committees at the departmental, college, and university level, serve their profession (unpaid reviews of journal submissions, participation on committees for professional associations, etc.), and engage in service to the community (preferably unpaid). If you divide the tenure-track professor's pay by number of units taught, it looks like overpayment--but the responsibilities and expectations are quite different that those of adjunct staff. As for the second assumption, I have found that the qualifications of adjunct are usually significantly different from those of applicants for our tenure-track openings. In quality of educational training, depth and breadth of knowledge, and technical competence, the tenure-track applicants are noticeably superior to our local population of adjuncts (even though the latter group is highly motivated and generally does a fine job for us for which we are grateful). If a local person who has been teaching on a temporary basis wished to be considered for an advertised tenure-track position, I can't imagine why any member of our personnel committee would care where they lived or whether they had taught part-time. Our concern is with getting the best people we can regardless of where they have been recently--to argue against an applicant's suitability because of adjunct experience would be certain to provoke a debate from me and others. We have absolutely no reason to overlook highly qualified candidates. I suspect that there are identifiable reasons why some people get trapped into temporary work. Such reasons may include their qualifications on leaving their graduate training (the most qualified graduates tend to get the coveted tenure-track positions), a desire to remain in a particular community (home ownership, family considerations), an unwillingness to explore other means of employment (consulting firms, evaluation research opportunities, psychology-related jobs in government and business organizations). -- ___________________________________________________________________ David E. Campbell, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Department of Psychology Phone: 707-826-3721 Humboldt State University FAX: 707-826-4993 Arcata, CA 95521-8299 www.humboldt.edu/~campbell/psyc.htm --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
