Captains?

A sad reality is that many colleges are increasing the number of adjuncts as a way to reduce costs. In some places, the number of adjuncts is greater than the number of full-timers. The tenured/tenure track folks typically are not crazy about having a lot of adjuncts, not because they pose a threat of any type, but due to the perception that adjuncts dilute the quality of the program. In professional schools many think that it is good that students get some exposure to the so-called real world, and adjuncts are great at bringing their full-time job experiences into their part-time adjunct work. Students usually like the "war stories." However, as we typically don't view professional schools, or at least business schools, as vocational schools, a little bit of the purely practical goes a long way, as it is applied theory, or the understanding of the why and not just the what, that is the great shortcoming of adjuncts. Ironically, though, adjuncts often get higher student ratings than full-timers, not just because of typically easier grading, but because college students of today all-too-often overemphasize entertainment as the standard for quality instruction.

In my mind adjuncts are really treated atrociously, though I suppose there may be some debate as to whether the qualifications and performances of adjuncts merit better pay and benefits. We have seen adjuncts organizing at many colleges. What is most disturbing to me, however, is the disappointing lack of respect too often shown to adjuncts. Rarely do they have offices, and if they have anything it may be a "bullpen" or shared offices. They pick up the scraps on scheduling and resources, and full-time faculty rarely interact with them. Students usually don't think of them as "real" professors. And yet we have tons of people trying to be "college professors." It reminds me of the punchline to an old Myron Cohen (Vaudeville and Catskills/Borscht Circuit comedian): "To me, you're a captain [college professor]. But to a captain, you're no captain!"

Foot in the Door

Many of these posts are for undergrads, and some for no one in particular (though perhaps all narcissistic, like most blogs, I guess). With the academic hiring season close to its conclusion, maybe it's time for a blog for the adjuncts (part-timers).

There are lots of reasons why people will teach part-time at a college. For example, some adjuncts are sincere in teaching to "give something back," some do it for the ego stroke, and some do it to make ends meet (like those who list their occupation as "consultant"). Those in this last category who teach many classes at several schools (often for around $3000 per class) as a way to make a living are sometimes called "gypsies." That's a mighty tough way to make a living.

What I'd really like adjuncts to know is that part-time work in academia virtually never evolves into full-time tenure-track work. Most colleges have minimum hiring requirements (ours includes a doctorate in field, for example), and someone who does not meet those minimum requirements has no shot of getting hired for a continuing tenure-track position. I really think that department chairs, or whoever does the hiring, have a moral obligation to inform part-timers that not only is there not an implied guarantee that future classes will be available, but that a tenure-track position for anyone without all the credentials will in all probability never be available to them. There is usually no foot in the door for adjuncts.

Batter Up

Baseball season at last. Old guys like baseball. Yes, it's a little like fishing, but it's not really just because of the slow, idyllic pace, or the allowance for other activities and thoughts during the game. No, baseball is about the universe of possibilities, and the strategies and probabilities that turn with every pitch, and are reflected in every statistic. It's like a slot machine, attractive not only because of the intermittent reinforcement, but the time between the turning of the reels where all the possibilities are considered, then reconsidered as each reel sets, until the hope is realized or not. And in baseball, when you think you've seen every possibility, there's something new within the old and familiar. And there's always the next pitch, the next play, the next batter, the next inning, the next game, and the next year. There's the past and future, and there's always baseball.

Popsicle Toes

Erik's sandal comment brings to light the whole ugly business of open toes. If we can dismiss the foot-fetishists (and while all fetishes are pretty weird, sucking on toes and whatever else these disturbed individuals do is disgusting -though who really cares as long as they're someone else's toes, I guess), who wants to see toes? They range from unattractive to revolting, so why would women wear rings, paint toenails, and otherwise draw attention to those odd metatarsals? I can pretty much guarantee that men aren't looking at her toes, and if they are, well, let's just say that this isn't a good sign.

And the sandals. Nice feet aren't all that nice, and there aren't many nice feet around. Too many are dirty, and are misproportioned, have bumps, with crooked, misshapen toes and nails that are too long, cracked, and lord knows what. And that little toe that's barely a toe, that's never a showpiece. So of course it's good to give the dogs some air on those hot days, but there must be a better way to hide those toes. Socks with sandals? Looks odd, especially against those toneless calves, but give the sandalsockers credit for not displaying those knarly toes. Unless of course it is socks with flip-flops (which I've seen). Flip-flops shouldn't really be in any public place other than the beach or pool anyway (and Birkenstocks should be eliminated entirely, or maybe just the pretentious snobs who wear them).

They say children are better seen and not heard, but toes should not be seen at all.