The Future of Higher Education: Trash Bears and Pandas

One of my Harvard graduate school pals, long ago, wasn’t happy about the job market for new PhDs. In particular, he was disgusted by the prospect of taking an adjunct teaching job. "I'd rather eat out of a garbage can," he said.

Oh well, I've been eating out of garbage cans for about twenty years, and at about as many different schools, all of them run by presidents who, if you hang around them for more than five minutes, will give you a speech about how education is opening the doors of opportunity for all.

So, for the coming semester, I'll be eating out of garbage cans provided by Fordham University, Westchester Community (SUNY), and LaGuardia Community College (CUNY). The fare is of variable quality, but never more than what $3800 per course, with no benefits, can buy. I'm better off than many of my brothers and sisters in the "majority faculty," by the way, who make on average $2700 per course. I suppose there's a sort of cost-of-living bonus for foragers in the NYC metro area.

I've come to think of myself as a Trash Bear, one of those degraded bruins who rummage through the town dump, or through suburban trash cans. They seem to survive pretty well, and there are more of them now than ever. Though they were clearly not "naturally selected" to do so, they successfully adapted to new and unnatural conditions, and are now able to survive by foraging, often ranging over great distances, for meager resources.

 Now, can they organize?

 I hope so, because my strengthening conviction is that it’s going to be trash bears, not pandas, who save higher education. Pandas, of course, are full-time tenure track—but particularly tenured—faculty, exquisitely adapted to a specific environment in which they depend on huge quantities of rare bamboo and the occasional boiled egg and maybe a little glass of sherry. They are highly specialized mammals, and seriously cute.

 Their habitat is being destroyed at an unprecedented rate, their bamboo groves replaced by huge stainless steel buildings which house 1) The Student Counseling and Loan Center, 2) the Office for Loan Compliance, 3) the Dean's Office for Deanly Affairs, and 4) the Provost's Command Post.

 How can these pandas be saved? They do not wander far from the sweetness of their bamboo, and perhaps do not see the devastation that rolls toward them. But we, the wide-ranging trash bears, we know the lay of the land, and can plan accordingly. If Service Employees International Union (SEIU)  or similiar strategies in higher education organizing are successful, bringing solidarity to this highly dispersed foraging population, it will certainly change the terms of the "education reform" debate, focusing on the link between decent higher ed outcomes and decent faculty working conditions. That should be good for all the animals.

 Here is the key: part-time faculty can organize anywhere--under whatever state law pertains, and in public and private universities—but, among the pandas, only those in the public institutions can do so: a result of the Supreme Court's 1980 Yeshiva University decision, in which full-time faculty at private institutions were designated "management."

 Pandas, already declining in number, have been divided into two distinct and even smaller populations by Yeshiva, and this raises the specter of "minimal viability": at some point they won't be able to reproduce. But trash bears? No minimal viability there: they've been growing in number for forty years. And ask yourself, by the way, is any court likely to declare that part-timers are part of "management"?

In the past, it's true, trash bears have often foraged alone but, as their numbers have grown, and their travels have become more frequent and wide ranging--through private and public and even for-profit higher ed garbage cans--they are becoming more capable, and increasingly more willing, to share information and resources, and to plan ahead, with others of their kind.

 That's my view, and I think it's in sync with SEIU organizing campaigns for part-time adjunct faculty. In a recent NYT article, Adrianna Kezar, director of the University of Southern California’s Delphi Project on the Changing Faculty and Student Success, was quoted as saying that “The S.E.I.U. strategy has the momentum right now.” She also said “And we know that unionizing leads to pay increases and at least the beginnings of benefits.”

More on that SEIU "momentum": That would be Adjunct Action, a national contingent organizing campaign with a great track record beginning in the Washington D.C. metro area, with SEIU’s Local 500, which now represents part-time adjuncts at  George Washington University—where I got my first degree—American University,  Georgetown University, and Montgomery College. More recently, Tufts University and Lesley College (Boston metro region) are active, as are University of LaVerne and Loyola Marymount, and Whittier College (Los Angeles metro). And now, we’re seeing Adjunct Action at work in New York State: stay tuned. 

Most higher ed faculty aren't pandas, and to pretend otherwise is a disservice to all faculty, and to students, and to the future of higher education itself. Unless we are able to understand our own condition, and to accept the truth of it, we'll hardly be able to fight for better things.

Now, what's with all my trash talking here?

So, two weeks ago, at the American Philological Association's annual meeting in Chicago, I participated in an excellent panel entitled “Contingent Labor in Classics: The New Faculty Majority?” My contribution was a version of the trash bear/panda theme I’m playing with here—I also tossed in some language about “monstrous hybrids” that I thought would be appealing to classicists, and which reflects some of the work that gets done in my own field, cultural anthropology. Mutant unnatural hybrid adjunct/contingent swarm organizes. You get the idea. 

While it was all received, as intended, amiably, there was some unease as well. Some people clearly found it divisive and, in fact, not just the "trash bear" idea, but the idea of a "new faculty majority" itself: don't these ideas divide us?

 I don’t think so. The labels, the metaphors, do not divide us. Divisions have been made. They are real. They have created real obstacles to communication and movement. We’ve been divided. But the divisions have created a few opportunities, I think, of which the most significant is the potential of part-time adjunct faculty labor to build solidarity across institutions and throughout "metro" and regional higher ed territory. Pandas can't do that yet, but, who knows? When the day comes, I hope all the bears will have a big picnic.

Fordham Students and Transparency in Catholic Higher Ed

Ok, kids, this is maybe one sort of transparency, but not what I had in mind. 

End of October it was, and I was saying look in coming weeks for an article in the Fordham student newspaper, The Ram, for a good student-written article on adjunct faculty.

Well, that wasn't The Ram, it seems, but The Paper, which is the other student newspaper at Fordham, and I did manage to figure that out, and to grab a few copies before they all disappeared.

You know, it was a very good article, by Matt Winters, and I hope the editors will post it up on their website, and soon, because, in truth, it was buried--and big time--in the middle of an issue which did not, to put it mildly, feature any outward sign at all that anything serious was contained within its exuberantly adolescent pages.

By which I mean to say: These darn kids! They're all beer bong and grasshopper now, and that's natural, sure, and there's nobody likes a sock hop more than me, you'd be surprised, but these young people, you know, it breaks your heart, they'll find themselves sadly in need of fiber and formic acid when the hard freeze comes, and I'm just trying to provide some guidance. You can see more here. 

So straighten up and fly right! 

I expect a corrected copy of that whole edition, in my box, by Monday morning, with Matt Winters' excellent article on adjuncts featured prominently on the front page, and NO images of attractive nearly naked young ladies suggestively brandishing machine guns. Just cut that stuff out right now and it won't be too soon. 

_______________________________________

Now, in another sector of Catholic academe, please see An Open Letter on Transparency: Fears, Problems and Solutions, by John H. Sceski, Managing Editor of the Catholic Higher Education Advocate (CHEA).

I think perhaps you need to register to comment, something you really should do, especially if you work at a Catholic school. Here, though, are the last several paragraphs of John Sceski's letter and I join him in asking you to "please get involved."

_________________________________

To test the waters, over a year ago CHEA contacted the heads of faculty senates and congresses at what we believed were eight Catholic universities where faculty appeared to have more clout and success in working with their administrations. We asked these Catholic schools to provide the following information (This request still exists on the Stats & Legislation page of the CHEA site):
The average percent faculty salaries have increased over the past three years (if any).The percent of the school’s budget devoted to faculty compensation compared to capital expenditures.The current ratio of full-time faculty to contingent faculty (i.e. adjuncts, visiting assistant professors, graduate students, non-fulltime faculty of any type) and the percent of increase or decrease in the use of contingent faculty over the previous three years.The number of departments/programs added or deleted over the past three years.The average years of service required to achieve tenure.The average percent of increase or decrease of healthcare cost at your institution over the past three years.

Most schools did respond, but not with the requested information.  In fact, several individuals requested complete anonymity concerning any communication between themselves and CHEA. To be connected to providing the requested information and make it available for public consumption is just too professionally risky.  CHEA now realizes it was wrong to request that information from publicly recognized leaders.
But without transparency about the true state of things how can we effect change at our schools that will benefit our careers and Catholic higher education in general?  Two solutions seem to be available: 1) If every Catholic school provides the above information (and perhaps more directly damaging information about practices at its school), then the rules of the game change since administrations will now know that such practices are commonplace and the likelihood of being punished for participating in an industry wide practice will diminish, 2) create a safe haven where anonymous dumping of information cannot be traced back to its source, but the information is accessible for all to see.  CHEA will now make option number two a reality.  Personnel from any school will be able to post information on the CHEA “Information Dump” in a way that it cannot be traced to its source.  We cannot claim credit for this idea. In February 201 3, CHEA linked to a story about Gustavus Adolphus College (see here) where an information dump was created that empowered their faculty to effect real change at the college.
No doubt downsides remain. Schools that choose to provide information when other schools do not provide such information run the risks of having such information negatively affect: hiring, funding opportunities for research, potential donors, accrediting agencies and the like.  As well, non-sourced and untraceable information invites reporting abuses.  Indeed, scholarly activity eschews not citing one’s sources, so this solution seems at odds with established academic practice.  However, our quest for a better workplace is not solely an academic matter. It seems reasonable to trust in the intentions of those individuals who dump information and the critical thinking skills of the people who choose to access this information. 
Finally, CHEA is requesting a dialogue with Catholic academe about the value of such an information dump before it is launched.  Criticisms of what is written above and new ideas are welcomed.  Please get involved.
Sincerely,
John H. Sceski, Ph.D.
Managing Editor

Cringing Again-OSHA Inaugurates New Faculty Protections

I'd just like to take this opportunity to welcome myself back to this space, and to note that I've been doing some very dangerous work lately 1) trying to recall my username and password, and 2) researching the increasingly bizarre claims of our higher education leaders. But there is hope: check out the OSHAhttps://www.osha.gov info on "temporary workers."

The OSHA site features info on the Protection of Temporary Workers: God Bless Big Government!
Who knew they were trying  to protect adjunct and contingent faculty from noxious fumes (from DOE?)? 

I expect to shortly have a decent source of oxygen, and will be posting again regularly, just as soon as all the hoses and other gear are properly installed.

Only Contingent Faculty to be Affected

I've done a study. It shows that most higher ed faculty jobs are stressful because 1) most of them are adjunct or contingent and therefore low-paid, low benefit, and insecure, and 2) because most of what is ever written about adcons is stupid or, if not stupid, just sort of “too bad and tough luck.”

I got this cool picture of Roy here: http://www.7digital.com/artist/roy-orbison/release/only-the-lonely-sun-rca-monument-singles-1956-1960. I think if we all started wearing shades like that, all the time, like even at night, when we're teaching at off-campus sites, they'd really notice us, don't you? 

So, that's stressful.

And now, I've done the study for you and you may now put my study up against what Huffington Post calls "A controversial new survey from CareerCast.com" that "insists college professors have the least stressful job in America."

You know, perhaps it's because of more pressing problems—that pesky time-in-seat aspect of the credit hour, for example—but, whatever the cause, it's clear that some of our pals in "journalism," or whatever it's called, are having problems with higher education reality.

You are familiar, I imagine, with the brouhaha around a very silly article in Forbes, which is the thing that inspired the Huffpo bit just referenced?

This was a "report" on a "study" showing that "professors" live stress-free work lives, blah, blah, blah, and before the  Huffpo thing, the Forbes piece had triggered a strong reaction from full-time tenure stream faculty, and from adcons, and a bit of not-very-convincing back-tracking by Susan Adams, who wrote it, and then, also, some amused commentary by Scott Jaschik at Inside Higher Ed, and some nice though brief correctives at Washington Monthly and elsewhere. 

Oh well, maybe our big break is just around the corner. Look, here's an MSNBC story about a serous topic, "Colleges roll back faculty hours in response to Obamacare,” by Ned Resnikoff.

Exciting, no?

An article about majority faculty in higher education facing new exclusions, heaped on top of those already condemning them to a grim, low wage, no-benefit future of thankless toil?

While, at one and the same time they bravely struggle to raise up the nation's aspiring masses, through the miracle of higher education, so that they—the students, I mean—can at least imagine, sort of, in an informed and critical kind of way, enjoying the fruits of the secure middle class lifestyle that is guaranteed by, you know, higher education?

Yes, I hear you answer, with pluck and enthusiasm, that’s what we want!

Ok, then, read on:  "Only contingent faculty—as opposed to full-time, tenure-track faculty—would be affected by the change in policy."

Well, I mean, sure, but, only?  What can this mean?

The article refers to four colleges, and here, from the ever trusty Modern Language Association academic work site, they are, with "only" indicated as a percent of total faculty:

Palm Beach State College is only 81% part-time non-tenure. 

Community College of Allegheny County is only 83% part-time non-tenure. 

Youngstown State University is only 52% part-time non-tenure. 

Kean University is only 73% part-time non-tenure.

I gather, by the way, that at least one of the voices speaking our for faculty, in this piece, did point out that adcon faculty are the majority faculty nationwide: this info didn't make the final cut.

So, now the public knows: it's "only" some faculty who may be facing future problems with job caps, healthcare, etc. Only some.  "Staff," probably. 

Ain't Misreportin' Again?

In the course of his recent interview with himself, FAQs on Recent Data Misreporting by Colleges, Robert Morse, director of data research for U.S. News & World Report, hears himself saying that misreporting, by Tulane University, George Washington University, Emory University, and Claremont McKenna College, is no biggie because:

"We have no reason to believe that other schools have misreported data—and we therefore have no reason to believe that the misreporting is widespread."

Mr. Moore, who has worked at U.S. News and World Report since 1976, blogs at the Morse Code: Inside the College Rankings, which forum is intended to provide "deeper insights into the methodologies" of the rankings game.

Found this image of legitimate mischief-making here: http://www.musicstack.com/album/fats+waller/ain't+misbehavin'

Ok, so how's this for a deep insight: if your only method of checking for accuracy is a voluntary admission of guilt from the institution that misreported data in the first place, you'll never have any other reason to believe that misreporting is widespread.

And, in the four cases at issue, Tulane, George Washington, Emory, and Claremont-McKenna, it seems plain that U.S. News and World Report would have remained forever clueless about the misreporting had not the institutions themselves, after their own internal investigations, reported the mistakes voluntarily. 

I believe there are other ways of practicing journalism.

Whatever: one reason I’m so touchy about this stuff is that, at one of the places I work, Westchester Community College, of the State University of New York system, misreporting on at least one measure has been something of a tradition. 

Westchester’s website, for instance, under "faculty," reports 164 full-time faculty, as of October 2011, and no part-time faculty at all. (In “Westchester Community College at a Glance, Current Year) Various folks, and I myself, have wondered about this for several years, knowing, as part-time adjuncts, that there are divisions at WCC in which 85% of sections are taught by us. 

So, where is us, we cry? Well, we did find us, in the (not on line) Westchester Community College Handbook for Adjunct Faculty, for 2010-2011, in a couple of pie charts stuck in the middle—these charts weren't in the full-timers' handbook, by the way—and in those pies we were the super-plentiful little raisins: 1245.

Where’d they come from? On the inside back cover of that same handbook you can read a figure of just 175 faculty, total, all full-time, as of October 2009. 

How’s that work? Again, where is us?

Now, just lately, I have it on the authority of my local’s union treasurer—an adjunct, and the first adjunct to hold that position—that as of November 2012, there are 768 adjunct faculty on the college payroll.

How does he know? Well, he has to look at the agency fees and union dues, every two weeks, that are collected by WCC and deposited in the Westchester Community College Federation of Teacher’s (WCCFT) union account, in order to calculate how much of that needs to be sent to our state organization, NYSUT.  

Mystery solved. So when will that figure be properly reported?

I don’t think, really—though I don’t know for sure—that the Westchester Community Colleges of the world matter too much to U.S. News and World Report, in its business of marketing annual Big-and-Best Reviews, or Believe-or-Not-in-Higher Education editions, or whatever they do, but it’s worth noticing—isn’t it?—that reporting practices and journalistic standards across various higher education neighborhoods are not all they ought to be. 

In my own neck of the woods, by the way, I have brought up my objections with Judith A. Myers, who is a County Legislator, 7th District, on the Westchester County Board of Legislators. She seemed both surprised, by the numbers and the working conditions of the majority adjunct faculty at Westchester Community College, and sympathetic, when I first spoke to her last year about these problems. But I haven't heard much lately, and the local press doesn't seem too interested. 

So, let’s hang on, I suppose, is the best advice, in regard to not only my local WCC problems, but in regard to the various scandals of higher ed misreporting nationally, on which I have barely touched here.

Hang on, sure, but that’s not enough: keep after them. I’ll be trying to take my own advice in coming months.

Sector is Just Broken: From Guardian's Friday the 13th

“Have you been following what happened at the University of Virginia?” That was a question appearing in a live chat sponsored a couple weeks ago by the Guardian’s higher education blog.

Also referenced, early on, was an old favorite from AAUP on the bleakness of things, in 2010, which had a subheading “the Collapsing Faculty Infrastructure.” 

Which, really, was the main subject of the Guardian's Friday the 13^th conversation, entitled, “Freelance, part-time or fixed-term: is this the future of academic careers?”

This produced comments so rich, and varied, that I have taken the liberty of excerpting a number of them, with enough editing to yield “one-liners.” I think I have not altered  anyone’s fundamental views.

Now, although they were obviously aware of grim parallels in the United States, the respondents seem to be mostly British, no surprise, an Australian or American here and there, and mostly lecturers—limited term and part/or part-time, “fractionals”—and graduate students. There were also some “staff” folk, and at least one senior tenured professor, and a gaggle of panelists who are listed here. 

The chat was kicked off by the news that a job advertisement, from the University of Birmingham,* had elicited applications for a "voluntary postdoctoral position.” Well, even in Britain they’re not going for an entirely voluntary higher education faculty yet, and so the comments more often involved “fractional” and other sorts of arrangements that are very familiar to American adjunct and contingent faculty.

Of course, anyone can see the original comments whenever they wish, but I read them all, in one bleak and unbroken binge, and I am trying to convey here what I heard as a sort of opera, with voices of despair, grief, cynicism, solidarity, resignation, sadness, amusement (not much), anger, and resolve.

Um, before we go on, have you seen New Faculty Majority's new website? That will help you get through this or, after you've read the whole thing, get over this. 

Ok, it was a downer, altogether. I didn’t, for instance, read anything that sounded like good fun. You know, a bunch of teenagers preparing to toss a burning motorcycle through a bank window, that sort of stuff. 

And I guess I was a bit surprised by the lack of revolutionary zeal.

Also, not much about fattening administrative salaries or pharaonic building projects.

And not much class-based chat either. Some, not much: Brits, we really do rely on you for this. What gives?

Well. Here it is-almost everything is in order of appearance, with a few switches, and a few parenthetical indications, for the sake of intelligibility. I didn’t sample every single comment, but most of them. Also, I’ve linked here and there to some sites that explain some special topics.  

__________________________________________

Sad to hear that this is happening.

Sector is just broken.

Fractional contracts insufficient to live on.

Interactions lead to inequalities....nobody has managed to eliminate them.

Unless/until full time staff begin to value part timers and support them.

Existence of contingent faculty downgrades the value of every professor. 

In America, the pundits are continually asking why isn't college cheaper? 

Declare a fiscal emergency and tenure goes out the window.

Short-term, part-time contract was perfect. (Then) 

[But] Opportunities for permanence are not so forthcoming. (now).

Their career is something they're passionate about.

Supporting the status quo....actually part of the problem

Underpay and overwork new entrants to the profession.

Blight of casualisation.

UCU Day of Action on Casualisation great opportunity.

Universities know they are losing out to entrepreneurs.

Universities tend to be appalling employers.

Mundane factors...eating and sleeping and having basic job security.

Support...that you hope to get from senior colleagues...patchy.

Closed off to workers on casualised contracts...getting a mortgage.

PGWA resists... increasing exploitation of PhD students.

Someone who completed her PhD...working as a “honorary” research fellow!

Concordat says "value and afford equal treatment...regardless of contract.

Boggles the mind what they think they can and.. actually get away with.

Has the concordat actually made any difference?

Tend to avoid these kind of discussions because they fill me with panic.

Very long way from being paid fairly for the work they do.

Wait until you have to compete against every Ph.D. all around the globe.

Women academics are also twice as likely to work part-time.

I have been advocating the 'branded academic' and portfolio professional.

The level of responsibility that senior academics do or don’t’ feel.

The HE equivalent of selling off the family assets in order to survive today.

It’s about intergenerational responsibility, innit?

Can't get a job in academia, need to look outside it(?) Seems a tad harsh. 

There's clearly something rotten in the industry that needs to be sorted.

I'm more keen on tackling these problems than just throwing my hands up.

How about having limits on the numbers of PhD students trained?

Wish I could be as optimistic about the future as you.

Administrators primarily have cutting labor costs in mind. 

Have you been following what happened at the University of Virginia? 

Replace professors with machines...few people left to fight for ...education.

In terms of solutions, unfortunately, there are no easy fixes

Personally happy to (at least have accepted that I'll) work part-time.

What disheartens me is that this is expected.

Burden this puts on people not as lucky as I am in having partner who earns.

In US and Australia university teaching is casualised to a staggering rate.

Fraction of the cost of meaningful salaries.

Absolutely no business incentive whatsoever to higher education institutions.

We all hate to think that this is what's happening.

Try to find constructive answers.

The problem now goes...beyond individual academic career disappointment.

Someone looks at the evidence and decides it is time to do something else?

Many were working below the UK minimum wage.

Knock on impacts are huge... impacts upon support staff.

Casualization....going hand in had with relentless drive of marketisation. 

Increasingly seeing privatization of higher education.  

There is a LOT rotten in the industry!

When I [Senior faculty] catch cold, contingent faculty catch pneumonia.

All facing the same epidemic...should work together in order to stamp it out.

Without support from senior academics

Grassroots' groups ....little power to make any significant changes.

Real need for criticism of the system by those...already tenured.

"Lecturer" is part research part teaching, I don't see it w/only one part.

Flexible workforce... balance of financial incentive and professional esteem.

Reward flexible workforce: trust in you as employer will reap rewards. 

They'll keep you innovative, lean, on the cutting edge.

The very knowledge creators that your business depends on.

I doubt I'll get an academic job or post doc funding.

Get a job, almost any job...see if I can do a bit of research on the side. 

I'm 30—I want a pension and to start a family.

Think they'll get....jobs...supervisors don't seem to let them know the odds. 

Support staff...far more job security than people doing teaching or research.

Hell, some panelists (for live chat) have these kinds of staff positions.

Have hopes...but you should not have expectations.

* Now have look at this, for, not University of Birmingham, but University of Alabama at Birmingham where, strangely, they offer not one, but two "volunteer postdoctoral positions." Of course, we are a much bigger country. And, sure, it's for orthodontics students, and those guys stand to make a little money down the road, but still, there it is. 

And, again, just pointing it out: New Faculty Majority's new website? That will help you deal with all of this.