Foundations

In the UC system, lecturers represented by UC-AFT (University Council of the American Federation of Teachers) have a clear pathway to job security with relatively high pay and full benefits (including pensions). These teachers also at times have a strong role in departmental governance and curricular development and have their academic freedom protected. Although, there is still plenty of room for improvement, at one of the largest public university system in the country, activism and organization have led to a model that should and can be replicated throughout the United States.

An Existing Just Model for Non-Tenure-Track Faculty” Bob Samuels

Every once in a while, I like to remind myself that the it is possible to clean up the mess that’s been made of my profession. I think the old system– full-time employment and benefits– made a lot of sense and was by far the most effective model for learning and research. Keep it simple. I think the best solution is to go back to that system; if nothing else, no system worth pursuing is going to be any less expensive. That may be a lost dream.

In a sense, then, we are fighting against a perceived symbolic enemy, the tenured professor, who many (administrators, right-wing economists) believe is by definition complacent if not ineffective and who’s employment security makes it nearly impossible for schools to adjust to changing conditions. In effect, Samuels wants to make an end-run around the boogie-man through a new kind of job, with equivalent but different forms of pay and security.

We accept the final defeat of tenure, in other words, in exchange for getting back much of what we lost: relative employment security, fairly good pay, a pension, protections for academic freedom of speech. It’s an attractive idea, not only as a way forward, but also as a foundation on which to build an entirely new, non-exploitative system. It’s a model that works, after all, only if adjuncts have a union to fight for their interests.

Sound as Earthquakes and the Solar System

Here’s some good news, in the form of a definitive statement on climate change from the American Meteorological Association. It is good news and not old news, of course, because the disinformation campaign has been so extensive. Still, after weeks of horrible, violent weather, it’s good to be reminded of the ongoing dangers we face. There’s no chance of responding effectively to climate change without this sort of scientific push-back and students need to be educated early and often. The AMA’s review of the climate change science is here.

The Next-Generation Science Standards (NGSS) developed in collaboration with 26 states and several scientific organizations is a transformative set of guidelines for teaching science in the United States. For the first time, climate change is recommended as a core concept for U.S. science curricula, including an emphasis on anthropogenic or “human-caused” effects. As an association of scientists and science-based professionals, the American Meteorological Society (AMS) affirms the inclusion of climate change in the NGSS. Climate change science is firmly rooted in peer-reviewed scientific literature; as science, it is as sound as other NGSS subjects such as earthquakes and the solar system.

Climate Science is Core to Science Education” adopted by the AMS Executive Committee, 23 May 2013

The New Faculty Minority

We don’t deserve to all be adjunctifed—if only because universities without academic freedom translates to a less free society—but I worry that we are more likely to be if we let the few sadistic professors and knife-twisting administrators distract us from the much more difficult, because more intimate and more ethically complex, politics of painstakingly changing what is in many places now our status quo.

When Tenure-Track Faculty Take on the Problem of Adjunctification,” Jennifer Ruth

Here’s another piece that links the current state of our profession to the privileges and stubbornness of tenure track faculty, e.g. the status quo. I have had some experience with these things myself, and I sympathize with Ruth’s plight. I admit, too, that when I first went into academia I naïvely supposed a certain kind of progressive thinking was a natural part of my profession. As it turns out, academics are a deeply conservative lot, less concerned with justice and equity and more with protecting (what’s left of) their status.

I am hoping that these skirmishes are a sign that the bottom has been reached, although I tend to agree more with P.D. Lesko, who thinks that adjuncts need to think beyond what their tenure track colleagues believe is best. I am also less sanguine that Ruth about the good will of administrations. I think it is administrative culture– with its distorted business model– that lie at the heart of our problems. As Lesko notes, we work in a trillion-dollar sector. There’s no reason, beyond misguided administration, why we can’t have pay equity.