Resources on Contingent Faculty

[Miller, Laura]

Dear Colleagues,
Following up on Nate and Judy's notes, there will be a Roundtable session sponsored by the Committee on Gender Equity in Anthropology at the American Anthropological Association in December. Below is the abstract for the session.  We are especially interested in the range of experiences within anthropology that the audience and the participants will share. 
best,
Laura


"The Feminization of Contingency: Sex, Race, and Class in the Academy"

While  a concern of the AAUP for many decades, adjunct-ification and its effects on higher education have recently taken center stage as a hot issue in academia, the media, and even the US Senate. The AAUP (2005) estimates that 2/3 of academic employment now occurs off the tenure track. Adjunct-ification encompasses a variety of contingent positions including adjuncts, lecturers, renewable professors, visiting assistant professors, and a host of new terminologies to signal new labor configurations. Even though some positions off the tenure track may incorporate better pay and conditions, contingency as the new norm signals important problems for stability, student-outcomes, academic freedom, and mobility. Adjunct-ification also poses troubling concerns for tenure-track faculty and the university as a whole. 

Recent research links the rise in contingency with sharpening trends that further exclude women, LBGTQ individuals, ethnic/racial minorities, and those from working class backgrounds from the tenure track. Women earn more than 50% of PhDs, but are 10-15% more likely than men to occupy contingent positions (AAUP 2005; Finley 2009). Finley (2009) calls this a “glass wall” versus a glass ceiling since many women never gain the opportunity to even step on the academic ladder. Additionally, Mary Ann Mason (2011) argues that women with children are disproportionately represented in contingent roles, whereas men with children are highly concentrated in the upper echelons of academia (even more than their single and childless counterparts). To achieve a holistic understanding of gender equity, Mason (2011) urges scholars to examine now only the career gap, but also the gap in desired family formation between men and women. Finley (2009) argues that the “feminization of contingency” over time further devalues women’s work and confines them to low pay, low-status work, insecurity, and immobility. Moreover, the proportion of African-Americans in non-tenure track positions is 50% higher than whites (McMillan Cottom 2014). Commentators highlight how adjunct-ification generates a two-tier system that exposes vast class differences between high status tenure track faculty and their “second-tier” counterparts. This has been particularly striking in the media storms that erupted over the death of Margaret Mary Vojtko and over revelations of adjuncts on food stamps. Yet there has been less attention to the fact that individuals from working  class backgrounds have long been excluded from the tenure track and how rising adjunct-ification further entrenches this exclusion. However, there has been little discussion, research, and analysis of how these trends are unfolding in anthropology, a discipline historically committed to combatting sexism, racism, and class inequality. This roundtable brings together contingent faculty from different backgrounds and experiences (including non-US) cross-disciplinary tenured advocates, and union advocates to engage these issues within anthropology, across the university context, and in the public sphere. 


________________________________________
From: Linguistic Anthropology Discussion Group [LINGANTH at listserv.linguistlist.org] on behalf of Nathaniel Dumas [nadumas at UCSC.EDU]
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 11:15 AM
To: LINGANTH at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Resources on Contingent Faculty

Dear Colleagues,



I hope all is well. In light of my last email and some of the responses I
have received offline, I want to emphasize the complexity of the issue of
contingent faculty, particularly in the realm of the heterogeneity of this
category (i.e., non-academic professionals who teach on occasion, retiring
professionals, those aspiring for tenure-track positions, freelancers,
involuntary versus voluntary contingent faculty, full-time versus
part-time). Many times the debates on this issue tend to focus solely on
contracts and benefits, when, in fact, this is not an issue for all
contingent faculty in this category, or at least not to the same extent. At
the same time, the exclusive focus on contracts and benefits for those
aspiring towards tenure-track positions also erases the other important
aspects that shape the non-tenure track (NTT) experience. These often
non-discussed aspects (i.e., full access to professional development
resources, participation in governance when appropriate,
systemically-implemented mentorship) are often pointed out in the
literature and can also be implemented with low to no costs.



Yet researchers on NTT issues point out that these other aspects are often
not pursued because of the stereotypes that many, whether explicitly or
implicitly and not informed by empirical research, reproduce about NTT
faculty in daily practices and experiences within the three-tiered faculty
system. These stereotypes are also not trivial in the long-run, for they
play a huge role in hiring decisions for tenure-track positions, as pointed
out in an earlier study from 1998 on contingent academic labor and
‘accumulated deficit.’ (Also, it is difficult to get quality empirical
research on NTT faculty for a variety of reasons, including (a) the fact
that because NTT faculty lack job security and the same kind of academic
freedom, many will be hesitant to speak fully about their experiences with
those in power to renew or cancel their contracts without due process and
(b) many universities make it difficult, if not impossible, to collect
public information for researchers on how many NTT faculty are present on a
campus at any given time, in part to avoid damaging PR.) Another common
issue pointed out is that much NTT reform will not be pursued or challenged
repeatedly for quite some time because most operate under the idea that NTT
issues are really not that central in the workings of university life.
There exists is no incentive to take NTT issues seriously or, after a
policy fix, to monitor them on an ongoing basis as conditions within and
beyond the university change. Many times we implement a policy and then,
over time or when an economic crisis happens, remove it or slowly reduce
its efficacy because it never really became part of the institutional and
department cultures, but something to be tolerated temporarily.



I’m glad we are having this discussion on the LINGANTH listserv, as this
will become a major issue of mentoring for many rising linguistic
anthropologists seeking to continue their work in this new academic market
in varying capacities. I also hope this will become a central part of the
SLA’s initiatives for mentoring scholars within the three-tier faculty
system.



Have a great holiday weekend!



Best,

Nate


On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Nathaniel Dumas <nadumas at ucsc.edu> wrote:

> I hear you Judy. Are you familiar with the other policies, practices, and
> values that other universities are taking towards NTT faculty? Also, have
> you read up on the recent research on NTT faculty conducted also by NTT
> faculty alongside TT faculty? (For instance, this is a feature of the Kezar
> volume). The new things coming up in the research is that, when it comes to
> NTT faculty, while contracts and benefits are important, there are other
> issues to consider in the process (e.g., fairness and equity in the hiring
> process, participation in department governance, full professional
> development and access to development for all NTT hires). However, these
> other issues often get erased or downplayed but play equally important
> roles in the achieving of the mission statement of universities and
> departments, and many times NTT faculty are afraid to speak up on these
> issues because they often still lack job security and cannot exercise
> academic freedom in the same way.
>
> Hope you're having a great weekend!
>
> Best,
> Nate
>
>
> On Sunday, May 25, 2014, Judy Pine <Judy.Pine at wwu.edu> wrote:
>
>> My university seems to be fighting a rear guard action, holding firm to a
>> minimal number of NTT and a majority of T/TT positions while also covering
>> our NTT in our union contract and providing benefits, etc in a very
>> generous fashion relative to other institutions.  I hate the defeatist tone
>> of moving to the new normal, and would love to see more universities
>> joining western Washington university in pushing back against the
>> dismantling of the professoriate.
>>
>> Can we please include something like that in our own response?
>>
>> Judy Pine
>>
>> Sent using OWA for iPad
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Linguistic Anthropology Discussion Group <
>> LINGANTH at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of Nathaniel Dumas <
>> nadumas at UCSC.EDU>
>> Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 6:08:24 PM
>> To: LINGANTH at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>> Subject: Resources on Contingent Faculty
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>>
>>
>> I hope all is well. In the spirit of the recent AAA resolution on
>> contingent faculty issues, I wanted to pass on two relatively new
>> resources
>> to those of you seeking to expand your knowledge on the contingent faculty
>> issue in higher education…
>>
>>
>>
>> Kezar, Adrianna (ed.) 2012. Embracing Non-Tenure Track Faculty: Changing
>> Campuses for the New Faculty Majority. New York: Routledge.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hoeller, Keith (ed.) 2014. Equality for Contingent Faculty: Overcoming the
>> Two-Tier System. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
>>
>>
>>
>> I will also be conducting another workshop this year on contingent faculty
>> issues at the Conference of Ford Fellows in September and would be happy
>> to
>> share my materials upon request. It really is quite a complicated issue
>> and
>> is often quite difficult to discern amidst blogs, anecdotes, brief
>> recurring articles in the Chronicle, and the newly-released congressional
>> reports. In this vein, I offer these resources to you all in the spirit of
>> generosity, especially since this is the market characterized by growing
>> numbers of contingent positions at a rate more rapid than tenure-track
>> positions without the widespread complementary changes in policy that
>> reflect this new trend.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Nate
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nathaniel Dumas
>> Research Associate, Department of Anthropology
>> University of Santa Cruz
>> nadumas at ucsc.edu
>>
>
>
> --
> Nathaniel Dumas
> Research Associate, Department of Anthropology
> University of Santa Cruz
> nadumas at ucsc.edu
>
>


--
Nathaniel Dumas
Research Associate, Department of Anthropology
University of Santa Cruz
nadumas at ucsc.edu