Are Adjunct Faculty Exploited: Some Grounds for Skepticism

Brennan, Jason; Magness, Phillip W.

doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3322-4

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their range of $15 billion to $49 billion has been widely reported; unfortunately, it is inaccurate. As they note in a subsequent paper (Brennan and Magness, 2016b:fn 24), adjunct faculty members teach 1,578,336 classes per semester, not per year. Consequently, B&M's cost estimates that utilize this figure are understated by a factor of two.…”

Section: Bandm's Cost Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Costs and Benefits of Adjunct Justice: A Critique of Brennan and Magness

Shulman

2017

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In their controversial 2016 paper in this journal, Brennan and Magness argue that fair pay for part-time, adjunct faculty would be unaffordable for most colleges and universities and would harm students as well as many adjunct faculty members. In this critique, I show that their cost estimates fail to take account of the potential benefits of fair pay for adjunct faculty and are based on implausible assumptions. I propose that pay per course for new adjunct faculty members should be tied to pay per course for new full-time non-tenure track instructors or to pay per course for new assistant professors. That framework for adjunct faculty justice yields an aggregate cost range of $18.5 billion to $27.9 billion, one-third to one-half lower than the range computed by Brennan and Magness. Its opportunity cost would not be borne by students since students and faculty are complements, not substitutes, in the educational process. Instead it could be financed by reducing spending on non-educational purposes. Current adjunct faculty members would be protected from job displacement in this justice framework. The real obstacle to achieving justice for adjunct faculty is the priorities of university administrators, not budget constraints or opportunity costs.

show abstract

Section: Bandm's Cost Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Costs and Benefits of Adjunct Justice: A Critique of Brennan and Magness

Shulman

2017

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a whole, scholarship on financial considerations in part-time NTTF work has acknowledged the lacking material benefits of part-time work and agitated for reform, not only for parttime faculty more acutely affected by financial duress but for all. Yet this work is often complicated by the fact of part-timer heterogeneity (many of these faculty, after all, do not rely on government assistance and sincerely enjoy their part-time roles) and, in particular, the skepticism of some scholars and practitioners that as many part-time faculty are "exploited" as scholarship and advocacy seems to avow (e.g., Brennan & Magness, 2018).…”

Section: Financial Considerations In Part-time Nttf Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2−3). Like Mary Margaret Vojtko, the infamous veteran French adjunct who died after losing her contingent faculty position and health insurance (see, for example, Goldstene, 2015), these part-time faculty may be often characterized as exploited, though not without controversy (e.g., Brennan & Magness, 2018;Shulman, 2019).…”

Section: Survivorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thriving, Surviving, or Striving? A Part-Time Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Typology for the New Era of Faculty Work

Pryor

2020

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context As instructional part-time, non-tenure-track faculty (NTTF) come to constitute an increasing proportion of all teaching faculty in the United States, significant research has investigated the experiences and perspectives of these essential higher education workers. In past decades, a subset of this work has sought to typologize this heterogenous group by various characteristics including their professional attributes and motivations for teaching part-time. Yet these typologies evidence limited usefulness to the robust and current scholarly debate surrounding NTTF in higher education. Purpose This article presents a novel typology of part-time NTTF for the new era of faculty work—an era marked by financial inequality. Thus, the proposed typology sorts these faculty, within the context of structural inequality, by their motivation to teach part-time and their financial dependence on this work. Research Design This analytic essay synthesizes literature on the attributes, work experiences, perspectives, and motivations of part-time NTTF in order to critique existing part-time faculty typologies and present a novel classification system. Conclusions The proposed typology advances three types of part-time NTTF: “thrivers”— those who work as teachers predominantly by preference; “survivors” —those who work as teachers predominantly out of financial need; and “strivers” —those who work as teachers because of a combination of preference and financial need. As proposed, the new typology enables a more complex understanding of part-time faculty's work experiences and better differentiates lines of future inquiry and practice for these essential professionals, many of whom are indispensable to, yet face inequitable working conditions within, the field of higher education.

show abstract

“…The problem is that, although adjunct faculty bring on-the-job experience and reality to the classroom, there are problems associated with their use to include lack of departmental academic support, a minimal voice in academic decision making, and few or no professional development opportunities or incentives (Vincente, 2018). Many adjunct faculty members seek to teach only as a way to supplement their income (Brennan & Magness, 2018). Others are teaching in several colleges or universities and may have little or no time outside the classroom student-faculty interaction.…”

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Field Study: The Business Of Engaging Higher Education Adjunct Faculty

Henkel¹,

Haley²

2020

JABR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competition among higher educational institutions has increased especially among public and private institutions; this is exacerbated by demographic changes whereby the number of high school graduates continues to decrease. Additionally, colleges and universities face daunting competition challenges retaining students; therefore, they are reexamining their long-established business models. As a result, to offset costs, higher education institutions continue to increase the hiring of adjunct faculty. Currently, adjunct instructors account for more than half of all faculty appointments and that number is expected to increase. To amplify the situation, college and university accreditation organizations are requiring student retention and faculty work engagement as part of the effectiveness and accreditation process. Customarily, compared to full-time faculty, adjunct faculty are less engaged with their work as effective coaches and mentors for students outside the classroom. Thus, a quantitative study using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale questionnaire sought adjunct faculty feedback in terms of engagement with their work for academic and student success and how the results could be used to increase this engagement.

show abstract

Are Adjunct Faculty Exploited: Some Grounds for Skepticism

Cited by 10 publications

References 9 publications

The Costs and Benefits of Adjunct Justice: A Critique of Brennan and Magness

The Costs and Benefits of Adjunct Justice: A Critique of Brennan and Magness

Thriving, Surviving, or Striving? A Part-Time Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Typology for the New Era of Faculty Work

A Field Study: The Business Of Engaging Higher Education Adjunct Faculty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About