Educational Futures

Almost half of recent college graduates did not get jobs in their field of choice. The majority of these underemployed appear to work in the retail or restaurant industries. Among those working in the retail industry, 78 percent had desired to enter a different industry prior to graduating. Similarly, 81 percent of those graduates working in the restaurant industry had wanted to enter a different industry. This study once again showed that many of our recent graduates are currently underutilized.

McKinsey on Young College Graduates,” Will Kimball

When I worked at a public university I was always surprised to find so many professors in favor of raising tuition. Not all of them would admit it, but the consensus seemed to be that the more expensive an education becomes, the better the students. Many professors would rather send off the difficult students to the community colleges– or to a poorly paid job– than have to deal with trying to teach them.

Some students, it was commonly said, are simply not college material. The real issue isn’t about who can or cannot learn; it’s about money and time. The less well-prepared students are more expensive in every way. They need more personal attention, which means smaller class sizes, and it can be a challenge to convince them that learning is worth the time and effort. Too many people think it’s just not worth it.

This CEPR report worries me because some people will use it to argue that too many people are going to college; that college is too expensive given that we don’t need as many graduates as we already have, and so on. It’s the classic reactionary push against social progress. Maybe (now that the debt crisis is over) we ought to be expanding those fields– research, science, education itself– that require a college degree.

Lies and Damn Lies

It seems obvious that any reform of academic culture– and any hope of restoring professional status to the adjunct majority–has to include a complete transformation of administrative culture. Here’s a piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education (“4 Public-College Presidents Pass $1-Million Mark in Pay“) that illustrates not simply that universities pay their presidents too much but also that these presidents can be well compensated and practised liars.

The piece tells the story of one Jo Ann M. Gora, president of Ball State University, who apparently made a public show last year of turning down a salary increase. Meanwhile, in the backrooms, someone was having a bit of a laugh at the gullibility of the public:

Unmentioned, however, was a deferred-compensation payout of the same amount, which she received three weeks later. That payout, which had accumulated over five years, combined with other benefits to bring her 2011-12 total compensation to $984,647. Just four other public-college presidents in the nation made more than that.

I am not sure what is more amazing: that a university president could be paid a million dollars a year after years of rising tuition and shrinking numbers of full-time academic jobs or that President Gora is still president after being caught being so profoundly dishonest. That’s just a start. Graham B. Spanier, the highest paid president, “was fired in 2011 in connection with a child-sex-abuse scandal involving a former assistant football coach.” Bob’s your Uncle!

Future Tense

About 15 years ago those of us interested in using computers to teach– we were teaching composition or literature classes– saw ourselves as fighting against academic Luddites who refused to understand that these new communication technologies were both beneficial and inevitable. This is the future, we would say, and we should welcome it and use it to our advantage. That wasn’t the only development in our field, however.

Alongside this technology we also saw the rise of a higher education system in which the ordinary standards of professional life– established over decades– had been eroded. The tenure track academic was being replaced with the poorly paid itinerant adjunct without health care, a pension, or any job security. I’ve long believed that our technological optimism was used as a kind of trojan horse to help destroy the profession.

Times have changed. I don’t mean to suggest that there we have lost our technological optimism. We have not. I think, though, that the technological emperor has begun to seem more and more naked. Multitasking is dead. There’s been a conference on “The Dark Side of the Digital” and more and more faculty– not surprisingly, in California (see here and here)– are resisting the online dystopias. We’ve come full circle.

As I’ve said, we were overly optimistic and this new-found realism is a helpful sign; I am hoping it does not presage a new form of academic Luddite. Resisting ineffective or immature online technologies, however, is only one-half of the picture. We also need a political movement dedicated to re-professionalizing academia. If that is ever going to happen it’ll have to include a savvy understanding of online technologies.

Mayday Manifesto

The Mayday Manifesto, published by the Student/Labor Collation at SUNY, begins with a long list of historical grievances about the use of adjunct and contingent labor in U.S. Higher Education. It’ll be familiar fare to anyone who reads this blog. It concludes with a list of demands that is worth reproducing as wildly as possible:

The conditions under which contingent teachers are forced to work undermine the quality of higher education. Their miserable working conditions adversely affect student learning conditions, thus short-changing our students and threatening the future of our nation. This is no way to prepare the next generation for an increasingly competitive global economy! Funding education on the cheap has resulted in most American students no longer being competitive with those in dozens of other countries.

To reverse this disastrous trend, the undersigned urge that the following steps be adopted on a priority basis:

1. Increase the starting salary for a three-credit semester course to a minimum of $5,000 for all instructors in higher education.
2. Ensure academic freedom by providing progressively longer contracts for all contingent instructors who have proven themselves during an initial probationary period.
3. Provide health insurance for all instructors, either through their college’s health insurance system or through the Affordable Care Act.
4. Support the quality education of our students by providing their instructors with necessary office space, individual development support, telephones, email accounts and mail boxes.
5. Guarantee fair and equitable access to unemployment benefits when college instructors are not working.
6. Guarantee eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program to all college instructors who have taught for ten years, during which they were repaying their student loans.
7. With or without a time-in service requirement, allow all college teachers to vote and hold office in institutional governance, including faculty senates and academic departments.

It’s not complete– I think class sizes ought to be capped as well– and in many ways it sets a very low bar. An adjunct teaching 8 classes a year, for example (assuming a workload of only 2 courses in the summary) would, after taxes, be working just above the poverty level for a family of 4. I think the rate ought to be high enough to make loads higher than 8 courses per year unnecessary. This is one way to improve education in every sort of institution. If we were to take into account the amount of experience and skill needed to teach at the college level, $10,000 per course would probably be a reasonable baseline. Still, the list is a great start. If you have a Gmail account you can sign the manifesto here.