
Crowded Out of Ivory Tower, Adjuncts See a Life Less Lofty - ilamont
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/20/nyregion/crowded-out-of-ivory-tower-adjuncts-see-a-life-less-lofty.html?hpw&rref=education
======
plg
It sounds crass but modern academia is becoming like most other professions,
i.e. simply getting credentialed (i.e. getting your Ph.D.) does not mean you
can count on a tenure track academic faculty position. These positions are
highly competitive.

Listen. At least it's not like many places in Europe (Italy? Germany?) where
it's basically an old boys club and someone senior has to literally die before
another position is available. At least in north america things are (mostly)
still based on merit. You compete for jobs, the cream rises to the top.

Again not to be crass but another pattern I see in modern academia is an
unwillingness to move, to take on a job. "I grew up in NYC, my family is here,
and goddamnit I want a faculty position here too, not in Ohio or Nebraska or
Arizona". I'm sorry but again, wha??

Maybe this sense of entitlement is not adequately dismantled as young graduate
students come up through the ranks, that's certainly an issue we can discuss.

Anyway I'm empathetic with the guy in the article, he loves to do X, he is
highly educated to do X, and he can't get a top-tier job to do X and so he has
to do X-light. Join the club, man. You think everyone who gets an accounting
degree expects to work at the top firms? You think everyone who gets a law
degree automatically expects to get the top jobs? Of course not. It's
competitive. It's a jungle out there.

There's the issue of how long it takes to get credentialed as a PhD, and how
it's an extra burden for a 40-something with a young family to not have job
security. Sure that's true... but am I missing something? Did someone promise
this guy 15 yrs ago when he started on this journey that he would land in a
tenure track job? Did someone tell him that it's not competitive? I don't
think so.

In fact I'm a bit on the peeved side about this guy, if he does have a young
family, what the crap is he doing, why isn't he ensuring a more stable life
for his family? For god's sake, get a stable job, do poetry on the side as a
hobby like the rest of the world.

Anyway enough ranting, I'm sick of the elite class bellyaching about how they
didn't win the lottery even though they bought a ticket.

~~~
HarryHirsch
_Did someone promise this guy 15 yrs ago when he started on this journey that
he would land in a tenure track job? Did someone tell him that it 's not
competitive? I don't think so._

I don't know about the humanities, but up to about 2009 with a PhD in the
sciences from a second-tier institution you could get a tenure-track job at
another second-tier university or four-year college. That was the typical
career track, because industry recruits only from top institutions at PhD
level.

Then the funding crisis struck, and while universities are increasing
enrollment (with the students shooting mostly for pre-med at my state school)
they are no longer hiring for tenure-track positions, it's now untenured
lecturers or part-time adjuncts.

Universities have found out that they can hire at lower salary levels because
of plentiful supply, and they do not mind that quality of instruction is
suffering. It is suffering because as a lecturer you are moving around every
three years looking for a better deal and the first year is spent getting used
to the syllabus at the new place, and if you are teaching three sections at
three different places to make ends meet as an adjunct you just can't be good.

It's strange that the students don't mind that they are getting less of an
education, but they really don't mind.

~~~
harryh
Students aren't, for the most part, paying for the instruction. They're paying
for the certification.

Unbundling these two things would solve all kinds of problems. That's a pretty
big challenge though.

~~~
wutbrodo
Forget being a challenge, is it even possible? Isn't the certification's only
value that it certifies that you've received the instruction?

~~~
harryh
Unbundling doesn't mean that you haven't gotten the instruction. It just means
that the institution that does the instructing doesn't have to be the same
institution that grants the certification.

If somehow Harvard could start certifying extra 22 year olds as "just as good
as any other Harvard grad" even if they never took a single class there then
lots of interesting things might happen.

------
fecklessyouth
I don't see why there isn't a bigger push to move all these jobless PhDs to
high school teaching positions. They'll make more money and get better
benefits than what they get as an adjunct. They won't necessarily get much
time to "research," but with their own knowledge and experience, lesson
planning should be a breeze.

More importantly, they'll be bringing something vitally important to high
school education: instructors who are passionate about their subject, and
well-equipped to improve students' skills. They'll still get exposure to their
beloved subject, but also spread that exposure to those who need it.

~~~
forkandwait
Many PhD's would probably teach high school, except for the ridiculous
credentialing programs / teacher licensing requirements. Basically you have to
get a 1.5 year education degree to "qualify" to teach a subject; yes, you can
have a PhD in math from Princeton and be unqualified to teach 9th grade math
in Trenton. Makes me want to vomit.

~~~
scarmig
In terms of math skills, sure. But a senior in high school should have enough
mastery of the material to explain things to a 9th grader, so that's a bad
argument. As anyone who's taken an undergraduate class in the hard sciences
knows, a PhD does not indicate anything about teaching ability (in my
experience, it's anti-correlated with it if anything).

I'm sure the credentialing process has its own unique failings, but it is
trying to act as a real value add.

~~~
forkandwait
It is trying to act as a value add, but it failing consistently and
pointlessly. The data, I think, are in. It is a waste of time and limits the
number of possible good teachers.

------
javert
What do you call a 42 year old, with a wife, a toddler and mounting credit
card debt who got an English PhD 18 months ago?

Either someone who completely failed to plan ahead, or someone who wanted to
knowingly gamble everything to "follow his dream."

Either is fine---just don't ask society to bail you out.

A growing gap between 0 and the top is not inherently a problem---in fact it
is necessary in a free market that is progressing. There is no problem here,
move on folks. It is an intellectually bankrupt argument. Seriously, this guy
is the best they can dig up to advance their agenda?

And the ironic thing is that in trying to promote its egalitarian agenda, the
NYT has acidentally provided additional evidence that the government-education
axis is fundamentally broken.

We need separation of government and education just as we need separation of
government and religion.

~~~
venus
Your username matches your comment - harsh, unempathetic, and blind to a
larger, kinder view of society as you pursue a simplistic, black and white
ethical code.

Your willingness to throw people to the wolves because they've pursued their
dreams without strict pragmatism about their career prospects is disturbing,
to say the least. Do you really think society will be better off without any
English professors? Artists? Dreamers? Of course not. So this guy's problem is
indirectly everyone's problem.

~~~
javert
Absolutely wrong. My viewpoint is the MOST empathetic, loving and kind. Here
is why.

What is better for a person at the bottom of the economic ladder who wants to
pursue actual values---happiness and prosperity---instead of simply
languishing?

The answer is a free market and a booming, robust economy.

What about the ones who languish? You literally can't help them anyway.
Somebody who just lives on the dole and stays there is NOT going to have a
happy life, no matter how hard you try to help them.

Therefore, as a society, we should always choose freedom and the concommitant
prosperity over egalitarianism, which just sacrifices those pursuing values to
those who are helplessly languishing.

Also I'm all for artists, dreamers and English professors--that's why I
disjuncted "willing to gamble." Which is quite reasonable if you're young and
possibly even reasonable when you're 42, poor, and have a family---which is
why I didn't pass judgement on this specific man.

------
justin66
There's an interesting discontinuity here:

\- he's got a full workload (not a universal amongst adjuncts) and so the
guy's skills are clearly in demand

\- he's taking home peanuts

\- students are paying a lot more in tuition than they ever did

In this, as in so many areas of business, the consumer (the student in this
case) might wonder where all the money is going.

~~~
stefan_kendall
Different markets.

Demand for the jobs is high, and supply is low. This keeps pay low.

Compare to tuition. Demand has been increasing over the last decade, and
supply has remained relatively fixed or grown slowly. As more students seek to
acquire trash art history degrees, price has risen to match the demand.

~~~
harryh
I understand and agree with you here, but that still leaves the question:
where does all the money go?

Most universities aren't for profit institutions churning out dividends for
shareholders, so it's gotta be going somewhere internal to the schools.

I'm honestly a bit mystified.

~~~
JDShu
I personally think it's university administration and large recurring service
contracts.

~~~
harryh
Administration makes sense. I saw something else in this thread indicating
that the administrators :: student ratio has exploded in the last 30 years.

What do you mean by "large recurring service contracts" ?

~~~
JDShu
To take two examples, Blackboard costs at least in the hundreds of thousands
(maybe a few orders of magnitude more) while an individual license of matlab
is 3000, so perhaps with a group purchase it's more like 1000 per student?
Schools also tend to spend a great deal on their course registration systems
and perhaps hire external consultants to develop and maintain them. Those are
just two examples, the list goes on for all the services the university
provides.

I also want to note that often the administrators have to ok so many contracts
(which they have no expertise in) and there are so many options, that
inevitably the university ends up paying for stuff that nobody uses. At least
in my last school, it was apparent that there were many sources of waste.

~~~
harryh
Ya, that all makes sense. My wife is in the academy and she's got some stories
too.

No competition -> bad management -> all kinds of waste. It's sad. I don't know
how to fix it though.

------
doktrin
It's an unfortunate predicament, and one for which I don't see any
particularly simple solutions.

First of all, this is hardly a problem that's exclusive to "liberal arts"
PhDs. However, it's probably exacerbated in their case due to the often
limited market demand for their skills.

What solution, other than some form of guaranteed job, is viable? Subsidizing
PhDs lifetime employment with public funds would be messy and unpopular
(although not completely without merit, IMHO).

The second option would be to limit supply. For instance, Universities only
admitting as many PhDs as they could possibly absorb (or, providing a
guaranteed-employment PhD track for a select few).

This would drastically lower the number of PhD recipients, with uncertain
effects on society as a whole. While this might negatively effect our net
research output, it might also funnel talented and hard working individuals
into potentially productive lines of work. I'm basing this on the assumption
that anyone who is capable of completing a PhD (in anything), has the
potential to contribute very meaningfully in a variety of other professions or
even fields.

~~~
smoyer
"Universities only admitting as many PhDs as they could possibly absorb"

This is an excellent idea, and I've also been a proponent of pushing liberal
arts minors in combination with other degrees that provide a much more
employability. Neither of these ideas will be embraced because each college
department _honestly believes_ their area of focus is the most important topic
on earth. Add the desire of the college administrators to build a little
kingdom of their own, and you won't even be heard.

~~~
mbreese
No it's not... there are many more job-types available for PhDs than academia,
so tying it directly to how many that particular school could support isn't a
good strategy.

Is a school only to admit a graduate student when one of their tenured faculty
is ready to retire?

Sure there are more graduate students than jobs available, especially in
academia, but it's not necessarily a good idea to tie admissions directly to
something like that.

It makes less sense in the sciences where graduate students are typically the
ones that do the experiments that the PI is interested in and keep a lab
running and funded (Post-docs usually have a little more independence in their
projects). But, one thing that naturally limits the number of graduate
students in the sciences is that those positions are usually funded. So, if a
department wants to admit a student, they had better make sure that there is
some way to pay for them. That naturally limits the number of graduate
students that a program can handle at any one time.

------
freyrs3
I'm genuinely curious how universities are allocating their money such that
these adjunct professors who are teaching more classes with more students, who
are paying ever growing tuition themselves, are still living below the poverty
line. Is there just enormous waste in the system or is there some complication
between the supply and demand of people and PhD-level academic positions?

~~~
iak8god
> Is there just enormous waste in the system

That depends on your point of view. If you are a part of the metastisizing
university bureaucracy, then you might think replacing full-time faculty with
more administrators and staff is a great use of resources.

"In the two decades from 1985 to 2005, student enrolment in the US rose by 56
per cent, faculty numbers increased by 50 per cent, degree-granting
institutions expanded by 50 per cent, degrees granted grew by 47 per cent,
administrators rocketed by 85 per cent and their attendant staff by a whopping
240 per cent." \- [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/books/the-fall-of-
the-...](http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/books/the-fall-of-the-faculty-
the-rise-of-the-all-administrative-university-and-why-it-
matters/418285.article)

------
forkandwait
Academic institutions used to have most of their teaching done by tenured
faculty, now they don't, and there is such an oversupply of PhD's (myself
included) that they don't have to have to offer shit to get someone to take a
class.

I think it is time for tenure to go -- give teachers and professors a three
year contract, good pay, and the same basic working protections as everybody
else. Fire the losers, promote the achievers, and (probably) eliminate a bunch
of the imbalance.

------
smoyer
I'd be curious to know whether he's willing to move out of the city ... and
whether his prospects of finding a job elsewhere are better.

~~~
javert
There are tons of high-paying jobs in the oil fields in Canada and the
northern-middle US.

But many people (not necessarily this guy, I don't know his whole story) would
rather bitch and leech off society than go work.

~~~
eigenvector
There are tons of high-paying jobs for qualified engineers and tradesmen with
relevant experience. Let's not pretend a guy with an English PhD can get a
well-paying job in Fort McMurray without years of costly retraining.

Even engineers without relevant experience (SAGD or at least site exp) will
have a tough time getting O&G industry jobs.

When the industry says "skill shortage" it means that engineers are starting
to ask for 1/50th of the CEO's pay, not that they'll actually hire any comers.

~~~
javert
Are you saying there are not plenty of jobs in the oil fields for people
without highly specialized training? That was not my understanding but what I
heard was just secondhand.

Anyway, it's just an example---there are still plenty of jobs out there for
people who are willing to work hard, especially intelligent people, even if
they don't have specialized training.

~~~
HarryHirsch
The population of the Dakotas is 1.5 millions. The number of unemployed people
in the US stands at 12 millions. The Bakken oil patch couldn't make a dent in
the national unemployment rate, even if it wanted to. I have no clue where
this pernicious "there's jobs in the Dakotas" meme comes from, but it needs to
die right quick.

~~~
javert
That is just one example, but the point is that there are a LOT of people in
this country that could work but simply don't want to. So the egalitarian
whining is just that, whining.

> I have no clue where this pernicious "there's jobs in the Dakotas" meme
> comes from, but it needs to die right quick.

This is an attempt to replace a rational debate with intimidation. I often see
people try to replace it with emotion, but intimidation? Really? I can only
assume it wasn't intentional.

