The Academic Job Market

PAGE 3 OF 3

 
I agree that it's of vital importance for departments to prepare their
graduate students for professional life. In the Spanish and Portuguese
dept. at the university of massachusetts at Amherst, we have for years
had virtually 100% success at job placement (academic jobs). This
despite the fact that we are a language-and-literature dept., not in
the sciences. So it's true that, as Ruth G. commented, students don't
usually "collaborate" with professors on research here. What we do do
is encourage them to start giving conference papers and submitting
papers to journals. This puts quite a different slant on the work they
do "for courses." We also have meetings with them to discuss (in
groups, I mean) how to prepare a C.V., how to prepare for an
interview, and our own forums for them to present their work tdo a
group before they present it at a conference, etc., etc.
 The result is they have a thorough professional
preparation by the time they start looking for jobs, and C.V.s to back
up their hopes.  BUT of course if all departments did this, they'd all
be competing against one another for jobs. Absolute scarcity cannot be
remedied by being "excellent." So the ultimate solution must be sought
elsewhere.
--

Daphne.Patai  @  spanport.umass.edu

 
Ah another 2 cents on jobs and adjuncts...  I too have a PhD (english
lit.) and have had no success in the job market--the stories of few MLA
interviews posted so far have brought back memories!  Right now I'm
teaching adjunct at Indiana State U, where my wife works full-time.  We
will both be teaching 3 courses this fall; she directs and is getting
into school committees and such (the old tenure route!), and I have been
putting together web servers, working on school-wide projects and such.
 
Thus in essence we have similar work hours and responsibilities; the
kicker:  she makes about 3 times as much as me (plus benefits)!  Not
that I'm particularly complaining since it's nice to be able to work in
academia and not worry about starving right now, but certainly this will
have to stop sometime:  we have a child, and it's simply too costly to
have both of us working full-time (ha ha) without two full-time
salaries.  So likely unless I get a full-time teaching job in the next
year or two, I'll have to move on, along with hundreds of other people
in similar situations.
 
What does this mean?  Aside from personal anger at a system which has
lost all semblance of friendliness, I think that educational
institutions are in the process of losing an entire generation of
scholars and teachers, and that this will return back to haunt them in
the years to come.
 
Just some thoughts....
 
John Kundert-Gibbs

 
Coming from a student's perspective, the saturation of degree-holding
applicants for jobs in academia has much to do with the cost of education.
 This link may not seem obvious, but I think so many students go onto grad
school, law school, etc. to put off paying their loans because as was
pointed out, the job opportunities available to those holding simply a
bachelor's are not as prestigious as they were only a few years ago; and
consequently, the salaries are not as high.  Personally, I would love to
take what I've learned in academia and get involved with grassroots
organizations that are compelling to my social consciousness and epitomize
my ideal career goals - even if that means starting out with a low salary.
 The reality is, however, I literally CAN'T take that low-paying job  or be
"creative" in my post-BA pursuits because I have debts to pay and so I will
continue in the narrow path of academia with the (evidently false) hopes
that I will emerge, albeit with more debts, with more degress and hence more
qualification for opportunities in the job market.  I don't think I am alone
in this rationale.  This is problematic, however, in that there is no where
to go, so we do what we can - publish, teach, and so forth.  What is the
solution to all of this?  Raise admissions standards for undergrad and grad
schools?  Perhaps so, but the COST of education still plays (I think) a
major role in the surplus of qualified applicants for teaching positions
because even "Ivy League" schools (such as my own) continue to admit
students who may not be academically qualified, but who are needed to fill
the quota for full-paying students.  I don't know what the solution to any
of this is, and I know all that I have said is not very "academic" and
motivated mostly by personal frustration, but I am sharing my response
nonetheless.
Trinity Treat <ttreat  @  post.slc.edu>

 
Cameron:
 
Thanks for bringing this aspect of the exploitation of "replacement"
faculty to
light.  As editor of NWSAction, I have tried to get adjunct and TA's to
write articles addressing this issue -- to no avail.  I believe we had
one article a couple years ago, and I called for letters of response and
did not receive a single one.
 
I believe it's because a poorly paid job is better than no job at all and
people are afraid to express their anger and fear in public.  We all know
what happens to whistle blowers.  As for senior faculty, they are
notoriously silent when it comes to the exploitation of adjuncts,
lecturers, and TAs.  Indeed, I have heard of institutions where "real"
faculty didn't even converse with the part-time "outsiders."
 
What was it Audre Lorde said about the master's house?  From the number
and content of these letters it looks like the house has major cracks in
the foundation.  Now lets ask ourselves:  who has the tools to fix the
cracks and the strength, power, and courage to use them?
Miriam Harris, editor
NWSAction
mharris  @  utdallas.edu

 
In Canada the job situation and relationship of W/S grad students is a
little different. As some of us may remember, one aspect of the US/Canada
free trade agreement was the idea that Canadians recieved an unfair
educational and health care subsidy which made "free" competition for
professional jobs (eg. academic) inequitable across the border. As soon
as the free trade deal was signed the Mulroney government (conservative)
in Canada passed bill C69 which would erode all health and educational
subsidy by the year 2004. We have felt those cuts in Canada since,
although they are usually hidden under an ideological smokescreen (eg.
national deficit, economic recession, the need for educational
restructuring). The truth of the matter is that the free trade deal is
rolling along very smoothly and cuts to educational subsidy in Canada
accounted for the fact that my graduate tuition more than doubled in only
2 years. We have not yet felt the full swing of the ax, however. Program
cuts have been offset by program "transfers" (eg. from 1 university to a
sister program in another university), program "restructuring" (eg. what
corporations call down-sizing), and program re-focussing (eg. a
corporation takes over the program and funds it). In other words, in
Canada education is quickly being privatized and the place of W/S in this
process is very unclear. In fact, the place of the humanities as a whole
is unclear. Then what does this mean for Canadian W/S students such as
myself? Well, I have just transfered from a ph.D program and W/S teaching
position in Concordia University, Montreal, to a similar program at
Syracuse University. I am watching my colleagues in Canada struggle for
even the most meagre funding and these people are excellent scholars with
publications, teaching or TA experience and plenty of conferencing behind
them. What will happen next in Canada? Will W/S scholars all try to
transfer to the US? And, if so, will the response be animosity to
Canadian W/S scholars instead of an analysis of the relationship between
the US and Canada around the issue of education and professional jobs?
 
Linda Wayne
bones  @  bosshog.arts.uwo.ca

 
One thing we can all do: protest the current exponential growth of
resources directed toward administration and the corresponding cut in
faculty resources.
   The AAUP has published a number of excellent pieces in _Academe_ in
the last year on this issue.  The AAUP's findings show that administrative
salary raises have steadily outpaced faculty raises and, worse, that many
colleges have hugely expanded their administrative staffs even as they
have frozen faculty hiring and institutionalized the exploitation of
adjunct faculty.
  Some of this administrative expansion is of course required by federal
law, and has been beneficial for women and minorities in the academy.
Some has directly benefitted Women's Studies programs or individual
teacher/administrators in Women's Studies.  But something is wrong with the
system when the administrators who control funding decisions can choose to
reward themselves and expand their power bases at the cost of present
and would-be faculty members.
  What practical actions can we take?  Use our local AAUP chapters and
faculty senates to investigate the allotment of resources.  How do
administration and faculty compare on such issues as salary increments,
hiring opportunities, the creation of new units, etc.?  The academy's
current problems won't be solved simply by reallocating money to the
faculty . . . but every administrative position created involves enough
money to pay for one (or more) full-time faculty members.  At the very
least we may be able to shame administrations into reflecting on the
injustice of expanding in one sphere at the same time as they deny
health benefits to our part-time colleagues.
 
Marie E. McAllister
mcalliste  @  ucis.vill.edu

 
For those of you out there job hunting: I just reviewed dozens of applications
for a temporary position.  It was very clear to me that both male and female ap
plicants are, in general, greatly in need of instruction on how to prepare prec
ise, to-the-point cover letters, well-organized vita, and other materials.  Eve
n though some were qualified, reading their dossiers was such a trial, that the
y left the reader with a bad impression.  The best applications shown through b
rightly.  Make sure to get advice from recently hired faculty in your field and
 you will at least get a careful reading and consideration.  Good luck!
 
Marjanne E. Gooze'
Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Langs.
University of Georgia
Athens, GA 30602
Telephone: Office: (706) 542-2450; Home: (706) 549-2831
E-Mail: MGOOZE  @  UGA.CC.UGA.EDU

 
On Tue, 2 May 1995, Cameron MacDonald wrote:
 
> think I'm surprised to miss in these discussions is the exploitation
> of adjunct and "replacement" faculty and its corresponding affects
> on the dearth on junior-level tenure track positions.
>
> What, if anything, are senior faculty doing to combat this growing
> problem?
 
The exploitation continues, and grows worse.  I do not hear even senior
faculty here discussing this issue, so I am not surprised the issue is not
discussed on the list fully.  What is horrifying is the downsizing push
everywhere that university administrators use as an excuse to continue to
exploit adjunct faculty--which I currently am.  I do not receive a
contract for even one year, though adjunct faculty in other disciplines
do.  I teach twice the load of tenure track professors (when I teach
full-time--and that is not guaranteed) and I receive approx. $15,000. a
year LESS than junior faculty, who often have less training and
experience.  The bitterness among the instructional staff in English
depts. is growing as our numbers swell. Surely I did not work hard and
sacrifice for ten years to live below the poverty level, but that seems to
be the current grim reality.  I continue to seek tenurable positions.  My
credentials are good: I have a book that will be coming out probably in
1996 and am co-authoring two other texts; a text book I am working on will
be available in the Fall, and my letters of recommendation are strong.
Still, this past year no one interviewed me at MLA or after, though I
applied to over 40 positions.  So, I don't know what hiring committees
want exactly.
 
 What's very frustrating is the very deep love I have for
teaching and for research which is being buried alive teaching huge
classrooms for almost no pay. This may be the case for most of those on
the market, since no one should go into such a brutal field (scholarship
takes long hard hours of work) without loving it.  I did know the job
market was bad when I started, but no one told me the field itself would
abuse me and that the university feels English instructors are "disposable."

 
          the recent post that suggests that academic jobs are being cut while
          administrative jobs are increased (and the suggestion that
          administrative jobs are overpaid) prompts this reply:
 
            at many institutions there has been a conscious effort to "protect"
          jr. faculty (who are trying to meet increasing tenure demands) by not
          requiring as much "service" work from them.  committee work,
          administrative work, and the like is no longer as great a part of many
          asst. profs. lives.  meanwhile, because many senior scholars are also
          for various reasons unavailable for lot of service, there is a greater
          squeeze at the associate level.  and yet departmental, college, and
          other unit needs for work to be done has not decreased.  so there has
          been an increase in administrative hiring, but i don't quite see it as
          being at the expense of academic positions as much as it is a part of
          a changing academic culture.
 
                now, i speak from an administrative position--one for which the
          minimum requirement was a ph.d. in a liberal arts discipline.  more
          than 100 other phds applied for the position--all of whom may have
          really wanted/trained for a teaching-research position.  the pay at
          this level at least is less than jr. faculty receive, and the
          prospects for it rising are pretty minimal.  the position uses the
          skills i acquired and i don't feel like part of the problem.  i do
          believe that all of our faculty are able to do their teaching,
          research, curriculum development, student contact, (etc.) activities
          better because the college's offices are sufficiently staffed.
 
          joann castagna
          joann-castagna  @  uiowa.edu

 
Since I am junior faculty in a department with a quickly greying senior faculty
I think I can address some of the sentiments about adjuncts and lecturers.
*My experience* with the members of my department is that they are extremely
concerned about the trend in academia towards hiring part-timers and lecturers
rather than tenure-track faculty, AND they have been fighting with the adminis-
tration to replace retiring members with    tenure-track faculty.
 
I think that the problems that everyone is coping with individually in every
college in the country are systemic and are largely a result of the changing
economy and the lack of understanding, interest and sympathy in state legis-
latures when it comes to higher education. Furthermore, Prop. 13-style
referenda which reduce the tax-base available for funding education, libraries,
etc., are destroying the avenues for upward mobility.
 
Our economy is turning into a service economy and the multinationals are
finding that it pays to take jobs abroad, even just over the border, where
the minimum wage, OSHA, and environmental protections don't apply. Furthermore,
the computerization of libraries, industry and education is causing a shift in
the number of skilled jobs. For example, when I was a lawyer, legal secretaries
and the women in the steno pool did most of the paper work in a law office. Now
-adays, many lawyers have their own PC's and the secretaries have a more spe-
cialized function, and, I venture to say, there are probably fewer of them.
 
The state universities that once, ideally, were meant to create an entrance
to the middle class, now have tuition costs that cannot be met by many aspiring
students at the same time that secondary education is beset with all kinds
of problems, including financial and social conflict issues.
 
With universities being pushed into a "TQM" model, and the "bottom line"
becoming the pervasive value even in academe, the power of the faculty, even
of senior faculty, is being drastically reduced.
 
My point is that there is a lot of finger-pointing going on in which the
administrations of universities and even senior faculty are the guilty parties,
 whereas the real problems go much deeper and may be insolvable.
 
If the problem was just with a university, for example, UCLA, or a group
of state universities, for example, The University of California, then perhaps
we could look for a cause endemic to that particular organism.  But the prob-
lems are everywhere, in the junior colleges, in the big schools,in the small
schools.
 
Here in Rhode Island, we hear that the state government itself is in trouble,
particularly if the changes in the Contract with America are enacted.
 
I think that we in academia must start taking a look at the broader picture
to see what we can do about the problems on a mass scale. For, as the old
French proverb says, "They that don't do shall be done to."
 
.......................................................................
Rosa Maria Pegueros             e-mail: pegueros  @  uriacc.uri.edu
Department of History           telephone: (401) 792-4092
217C Washburn Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881-0817         "Women hold up half the sky."

 
I have only followed this discussion sporadically but find it
extremely interesting.  As someone who will be on the job market
in a couple of years, I've noticed the increasing use of non-tenure
track faculty positions.  But what I have yet to see addressed, and
I really don't know how big a problem it is-- is the issue of tenured
faculty taking LONG TERM leaves of absence from one institution while
taking a PERMANENT tenured position at another.  The first institution
won't drop the faculty, the reason I've been given is that they're
afraid they will lose the FTE for that position to another department.
So what do they do?  They hire NON-TENURE track adjuncts to pick up
the teaching load.  They save money on the tenured position, and get
two or more adjuncts for the price of one.
 
I've been meaning to write to the Chronicle of Higher Education to
ask them to do a story on this phenomenon, to assess its broader impact
and so forth, but maybe someone on this list can speak to its prevalence
at other universities.  I know in my own department there are more than
one of these types.  I just think it's so unfair to basically tie up
TWO tenure track positions by one person.
 
 
Christine Morton
UCLA Sociology Department
 
morton  @  math.ucla.edu

 
I am in my 4th year of post-doc at the National Institutes of Health.  Last
year President Clinton ordered Health & Human Services (of which we are a
branch) to cut its administrative staff by 15%.  Of course the decision
regarding who would be cut was (you guessed it) up to the administration!
 They immediately passed a resolution declaring all post-doctoral scientists
administrators!!  I have no objection to researchers shouldering our share
of the burden and trimming down.  However, we are outnumbered 10 to 1 by
administrators here.  If the administration accepted 90% of the burden of
cuts and asked us to shoulder 10%, there would be little objection.
 However, by declaring scientists administrators those in power can cut us
in disproportionate amounts while simultaneously preserving their own
departments.
 
On another issue that was brought up, it is true that there are more
postdoctoral & industry opportunities in the sciences.  However, most of
these are not tenured and are contract work.  Furthermore, along with the
"better" network has come a lot more exploitation.  Tenured professors
enhance their careers on the backs of post-docs and grad students in the
sciences.  It opens up egregious abuses of power.  Unlike the humanities,
where your work is largely considered your own, in the sciences everything
that you do is the intellectual "property" of a mentor.  It is they who
derive the greatest benefit from your work.  In reality, many times they
have contributed little to the actual work done.  Thus, although the
sciences may have more money, nothing comes without a price.  There are huge
trade-offs.  For example, I have spent the last 10 years of my life actively
involved in research for which I receive little or no recognition.  It is my
three mentors who have derived the greatest benefit and who are "known" for
the work.  Moreover, there is no end in sight to this pseudo-apprenticeship.
 
iana
pattatua  @  dc37a.nci.nih.gov

 
Those of you interested in discussions of hiring practices and the problems
with a degeneration in higher education from tenure-eligible to temporary and
part-time positions might consul ACADEME the journal of the American
Assocation of University Professors.  The same issue is currently being
discussed on the AAUP list.  Note the standards of AAUP state that no more
than 15% of any faculty should be in temporary or part-time positions clearly
that is a standard being violated by many colleges and universities across the
country.
--
**********************************************************
Jacqueline Wilkie             +  Women's Studies Coordinator
Luther College                +  Associate Professor of History
Decorah, IA                   +  wilkieja  @  martin.luther.edu

 
As a senior faculty member I have been following this conversation with great
interest and growing pessimism.  Like many institutions we have a near freeze
in new positions in virtually every discipline.  This has a major impact on
students who do not have access to new viewpoints, on senior faculty who have
heard each other's points of view many times, as well as on you new Ph.D.'s
who certainly deserve more than you are getting.  You may, however, be assuming
that senior faculty have more power to increase the number of positions than
we do.  We do have some power to improve the departmental climate for adjunct
faculty even if we can do little about their exploitative salaries.  A few
suggestions include taking adjuncts to lunch (and paying for them), making sure
that they have offices and access to computer facilities, and engaging them in
curricular decisions when these do not infringe on their ill-paid time.  These
may appear to be very small matters compared to the financial issues, but I
hear a lot of bitterness in the non-financial aspects of adjuncting too.  I
would welcome other suggestions and will pass them on to faculty in my own
(psychology) and other departments.
Rhoda Unger
unger  @  apollo.montclair.edu
 

 
Is it heresy to suggest that part of the problem right now in the academy is
the tenure system itself?  Certainly I'm all for lifetime employment for myself
and my colleagues, but is it a realistic or even desireable goal any more?
What would happen if tenure-track positions were converted to three year
renewable contracts?  With built-in provisions for sabbatical leaves (say,
after two renewals, depending on the institution), protections of academic
freedom (we seem to live in a litigious enough society to manage that), and
a sharing of courseloads between senior and junior faculty, we might actually
do better than currently.  Why?  Well, for one thing, the pressure to publish co
   uld be more evenly
spread out, instead of the big push being pre-tenure, when one needs to be
working on teaching and learing how to be an academic colleague.  There would
be no glut of unproductive tenured professors at the top collecting top-end
salaries and not teaching much, for another thing.  Now, I know this last
sentence will raise hackles; it does not actually describe the reality of many
places I know, but there are some where much of the teachng burden is
shouldered by adjuncts while tenured professors teach one graduate seminar a
year--and don't even publish!  I do recognize the need for leave time to
complete research; and the need for course reductions to do administrative
work; but I'm not sure we cna't get all that without tenure.  Unfortunately, i
do think that tenure creates an academic class system that we can all do
without.  As others have pointed out, the increasing reliance on part-timers
and adjuncts hurts all of us; until tenured and tenure-track faculty make it
clear that they are willing to forego the benefits that accrue to them as a
result of such employment practices, I'm afraid little will change.
 
 
X-News: urvax bit.listserv.wmst-l:3883
 
>From: Rosa Maria Pegueros <PEGUEROS  @  URIACC.URI.EDU>

>Date: Thu, 04 May 1995 15:09:27 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-ID:<WMST-L%95050415385785  @  UMDD.UMD.EDU>
 
>Since I am junior faculty in a department with a quickly greying senior faculty
>I think I can address some of the sentiments about adjuncts and lecturers.
>*My experience* with the members of my department is that they are extremely
>concerned about the trend in academia towards hiring part-timers and lecturers
>rather than tenure-track faculty, AND they have been fighting with the adminis-
>tration to replace retiring members with    tenure-track faculty.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O>
>I think that the problems that everyone is coping with individually in every
>college in the country are systemic and are largely a result of the changing
>economy and the lack of understanding, interest and sympathy in state legis-
>latures when it comes to higher education. Furthermore, Prop. 13-style
>referenda which reduce the tax-base available for funding education, libraries>
   etc., are destroying the avenues for upward mobility.
>
>Our economy is turning into a service economy and the multinationals are
>finding that it pays to take jobs abroad, even just over the border, where
>the minimum wage, OSHA, and environmental protections don't apply. Furthermore,
>the computerization of libraries, industry and education is causing a shift in
>the number of skilled jobs. For example, when I was a lawyer, legal secretaries
>and the women in the steno pool did most of the paper work in a law office. Now
>-adays, many lawyers have their own PC's and the secretaries have a more spe-
>cialized function, and, I venture to say, there are probably fewer of them.
>
>The state universities that once, ideally, were meant to create an entrance
>to the middle class, now have tuition costs that cannot be met by many aspiring
>students at the same time that secondary education is beset with all kinds
>of problems, including financial and social conflict issues.
>
>With universities being pushed into a "TQM" model, and the "bottom line"
>becoming the pervasive value even in academe, the power of the faculty, even
>of senior faculty, is being drastically reduced.
>
>My point is that there is a lot of finger-pointing going on in which the
>administrations of universities and even senior faculty are the guilty parties,
> whereas the real problems go much deeper and may be insolvable.
>
>If the problem was just with a university, for example, UCLA, or a group
>of state universities, for example, The University of California, then perhaps
>we could look for a cause endemic to that particular organism.  But the prob-
>lems are everywhere, in the junior colleges, in the big schools,in the small
>schools.
>
>Here in Rhode Island, we hear that the state government itself is in trouble,
>particularly if the changes in the Con
 
Elisabeth Gruner
English & Women's Studies, U of Richmond
gruner  @  urvax.urich.edu

 
    Previous posts have pointed out the growing use of adjuncts as
contributing to the difficulty finding tenure track academic jobs and
have wondered what senior faculty are doing. It's hard to think of myself
as "senior faculty", but I have been here 20 years.
    Anyway my institution has been relying more and more on
"honorarium" instructors who are paid only $1800-2200 a course (depending
on level of the class). In my pol. sci. dept. the full-time faculty have
tried to some small things to make the situation of honorarium faculty
less tacky (e.g.refusing to take over their classes if ours don't make,
making dept. funds available for them for professional development when
we have the funds) and we keep demanding that the administration transfer
funds to new tenure track lines.
    I'd like to hear of what other depts. are doing on this issue--to
get some more ideas. The issue of honorarium instructors hits women in
particular, but there are both men and women in this subordinate academic
class.
jana everett
university of colorado at denver
jeverett  @  carbon.cudenver.edu

 
In response to Anne, a note from another frustrated, discouraged job-hunter,
tired of those "we have been overwhelmed with the number of qualified
applicants (message: "more qualified than you, because you didn't get the
job)" letters.  I would be very happy to teach at a 2 year community college,
what I want to do is TEACH.  (Oh yes, and to have a job.)  But how does one
find out about community college positions?  They aren't, for the most part,
advertized in the Chronicles.
Ellie Amico
Heartwell  @  aol.com

 
On Thu, 4 May 1995, Jackie Wilkie wrote:
 
> discussed on the AAUP list.  Note the standards of AAUP state that no more
> than 15% of any faculty should be in temporary or part-time positions clearly
> that is a standard being violated by many colleges and universities across the
> country.
 
It is certainly being violated here.  Recent polls showed our department
relies on approx. 30% temps and part-times--including our assistant
director of composition!  All of our adjunct faculty and instructors are
listed as temporary no matter how many years we're here.  On the side of
fairness, the "temps" are 50% male and female!
 
*********************************
*Theresa Thompson               *    Out flew the web, and floated wide,
*Washington State University    *    The mirror crack'd from side to side,
*Pullman, Washington  99164     *    "The curse has come upon me!" cried
*email: ttheresa  @  wsunix.wsu.edu *    The Lady of Shalott.
*********************************

 
I am not sure that it is possible to protect academic freedom without the
tenure system--which I agree creates a class system in the academy as does
rank.  But I have noted a reluctance to speak out on the part of non-tenured
faculty because they fear retaliation for politically unpopular views--a fear
I have never shared but one I understand.  With three-year renewable contracts
the possibility of being eliminated because you have offended a collegue or a
student would come up at every renewal.  Perhaps we shouldn't be protecting
moral cowards who won't speak without a guarantee of protection but what are
the alternatives--rule of the mob.
--
**********************************************************
Jacqueline Wilkie             +  Women's Studies Coordinator
Luther College                +  Associate Professor of History
Decorah, IA                   +  wilkieja  @  martin.luther.edu

 
Libby Gruner raises the question of abolishing tenure to ease the job
situation.  Aside from the complex issues of academic freedom such a
question raises, "term limits" for faculty would also have the effect
of decreasing our already weak power to effect change at our institutions.
(women's studies programs like ours which don't have "regular" faculty
already face this problem within even the faculty governance system).
I believe the problem with job scarcity right now is systemic, but it
cannot be fixed simply by abolishing tenure.
Jo Ellen Green Kaiser jgkais00  @  ukcc.uky.edu

 
I have been watching the discussion on academic jobs with some dismay.  I was
wondering about alternative advice for WST graduates; what other jobs can you
go into.  This falls into the category of student advising, I guess.  Is there
any central resource center for women-centered jobs to which we can send
students (from BA to PhD)?  Or are we to assume that all WST focussed PhDs are
to continue as teachers?
 
Debby Morgan
MORGDEB  @  OREGON.UOREGON.EDU

 
Debbie Green's sense of desperation is understandable--last I heard only
about one-third of lines that come up (because of retirement, death,
departure) are being refilled with tenured or tenure-track appointments;
another third by adjuncts.  And a third aren't being filled at all.  And
that was before the Contract on America, George Pataki, and the rest.
    I've been a bit surprised, however, that most of the posts on
this subject seem to view the situation as a kind of given--not exactly
the weather, but in that category: more or less predictable and pretty
much out of control.  But the crises in higher education are the products
of human choices--see, for example, Ernie Benjamin's excellent article in
Higher Education Under Fire (Routledge).  (See also Bob Herbert's column
in the NY TIMES, May 6.)
    I think we have to be louder in demanding an excellent educational
system for the young people of this country, and not a system designed
mostly to sort and divide the workforce.  Has any faculty gotten out there
to defeat a candidate because he or she voted to cut educational funding?
I continue to think such positive issues do cut real political ice.  But
then I still think the Sixties were pretty good, too.
    Paul Lauter

 
The academic job market has been crisis for my entire career.  I finished
my Ph.D. in history in 1972 and am the ONLY member of either my M.A. or
Ph.D. entering "classes" to ever hold a tenure track position or to still
be in academia.  Now I am a senior faculty member at a new university in the
badly-hurt California
State University system (the middle tier - NOT the research UC system)
after 14 years tenured at a small college and several years as an adjunct.
In the last 6 years I have been on the search committee for more than 20
academic positions in administration and at least six disciplines.  There
are many qualified candidates for every job.  There are also a number of
people applying deperately for EVERYTHING and thus wasting everyone's
time.  I had almost fifty applicants who had not finished their
dissertations apply for a SENIOR position, for example. The financial
crisis in the CSU has left most departments in the position of replacing
only one out of every three or four retirements.  Adjuncts or full-time
faculty take up the slack (some campuses have no adjunct money).  My dean
considers it "good" policy to have almost 1/2 of our courses taught by
adjuncts, and while putting some on "full-time"  temporary positions,
refuses to consider those faculty full-time.  He refers to them as
"full-time part-timers."  They receive no travel funds, and program budget
allocations for supplies, etc. do not count those positions.  Faculty with
women's studies background are being hired through various disciplines and
then develop courses that also serve women's studies.  The faculty we hire
all have their disserations done, most have publications and teaching
experience.  What is amazing is the number of candidates who think that
they can come to a mid-tier school on a job interview and READ a highly
academic paper to a room filled with faculty from 5 or 6 disciplines,
students, and staff when we tell then we are looking to see how they would
interact in the classroom.  Graduate professors are not giving these
students appropriate advice.
 On the tenure issue consider this:  Without tenure, those faculty who
upset the administration (perhaps by their sexual orientation, support of
a salary equity review, advocacy of strong faculty governance or women's
issues, or the content of their classes) are all vulnerable.  When there
are more applicants clammoring for a job, the administration has nothing
to fear by dismissing a "troublemaker" (a label that comes easily to those
of us in fields challenging the status quo patriarchy).  As a tenured
faculty member I became a conduit and voice for many faculty who felt
silenced and brought up issues ranging from ethics to job discrimination.
What were the non-tenured faculty afraid of?  Returning to that
overcrowded job market. Tenured faculty are often the ones willing to
fight for new positions on a campus.  We would like to have more
colleagues.  Getting faculty and potential faculty to fight each other for
jobs is a sure way to exhaust us all and silence us, thus preventing
meaningful change in academia.  With three year reviews of all faculty,
faculty energy and time is taken up in an endless cycle of preparing
dossiers and reviewing each other.  Because I am at a new university, I
have had to serve on no fewer than five peer review committees every year
for the last five years.  This takes an immense amount of time.  It is a
good way to keep the faculty too busy to take part in meaningful
decision-making on a campus.  I think that's why many administrators like
the idea.
 
Sorry this went on so long, but women's studies faculty cannot afford to
turn on each other in a feeding frenzy for the few jobs that exist.  Power
hierarchies have been practicing this tactic for millenia.  Joan Gundersen
jrgunder  @  csusm.edu

 
I'm hearing a querulous note in the voices of those who have been on search
committees and have had to wade through mountains of "inappropriate" job
applications, and I feel I must come to the defense of my fellow job seekers.
We are being advised by faculty to (1) apply for all jobs for which we're even
vaguely suited because (I'm paraphrasing here) "departments often don't know
what they want until they see it"; and (2) apply even when we're early ABD
for the experience of the search.
 
Others on the list have spoken to the first issue.  I don't know that there's
any successful resolution to it except for a department that KNOWS what they
want to be as specific as possible.  But if you're advertising for a
specialist in American lit with an emphasis in women's studies or queer theory
or colonial lit, expect to get every Am. lit. person on the market to apply
since we'll figure you're not sure what you want.
 
The second issue is perhaps a function of a changing marketplace.  My
department has an excellent record for placements, the majority of whom have
been hired ABD and have finished their dissertations either in the summer
before starting a new job or the summer after.  However, I think that's pretty
much a thing of the past since the market is so glutted.  I got a number of
responses to my applications this year which said, "Thanks but we've have so
many responses that we're automatically weeding out all who don't have the
degree in hand."  I suspect that a lot of other schools did the same without
actually saying so.
 
All of which is to say that a job search is a hellish process on both sides
and maybe, just maybe, we're all doing the best we can with a vastly imperfect
system.  Perhaps we could discuss how to change the system, rather than
venting at each other???
 
Jane Gassner
jg0a  @  lehigh.edu

 
          some recent messages have indicated one of the ironic?paradoxical?
          aspects of the current situation--some committees don't want to look
          at abds, but others (i'm pretty sure) are wary of the "stale" phd,
          especially with new phds arriving every year.  so, the hiring window
          becomes very narrow.  i know of some people who delayed the phd
          defense after not getting a job, so that they could arrive at the
          next year's market looking not as if they'd been passed over....
 
          have i missed any discussion of the jobs that don't get filled
          because departments don't continue to look after they've been turned
          down?  the urging to job seekers not to apply for everything needs to
          be balanced with a plea to those with positions to think about what
          they will do if the candidate to which they offer a job turns them
          down.  every year some candidates are offered many more convention
          intervies, on-campus visits, jobs, than the one the take.  and what
          happens to the jobs they turn down?  an adjunct is hired and next
          year the department starts all over again, often by-passing the
          adjunct for the next "star"--who will also turn down more jobs than
          she/he takes.
 
          jane gassner suggests talking about the process:  it is interesting
          that although it looks like academic departments have a long time to
          fill positions (i.e. they start looking a year before the job
          begins), the process is compressed in strange ways.  many job seekers
          have probably received form letters talking about "we had to winnow
          400 applications in 10 days" because the deadline for application was
          that close to the time when convention interviews had to be
          scheduled.  (and can that kind of time-compressed winnowing mean
          anything except looking at where and with whom the seeker's grad work
          was done? and maybe a look for publications?)
 
          discussion of this thread on the list has amply demonstrated the
          general unhappiness about the process, but is there any way to
          transform it???
 
          joann castagna        joann-castagna  @  uiowa.edu

 
While I have no specific ideas re: the process of the job search, I do
have a suggestion for where the humanities might find models for the
remodelling, so to speak.  In the hard sciences, they do not do things at
all the way we do in English.  I'm not certain how different the process
is, but my partner is in biology and thought our whole system
inefficient, costly, and destined to let the "shit float to the top."
So, maybe we should really look around at other hiring practices and see
what happens?  No one, based on the recent discussion, seems happy with
the current model....not even the administration!
 
 
*********************************
*Theresa Thompson               *    Out flew the web, and floated wide,
*Washington State University    *    The mirror crack'd from side to side,
*Pullman, Washington  99164     *    "The curse has come upon me!" cried
*email: ttheresa  @  wsunix.wsu.edu *    The Lady of Shalott.
*********************************

 
I know this thread has finally died down, but I wanted to add this.  Hope
it's ok.  As a job hunter in academe, I am getting a lot of those form
rejection letters.  Most of them include wording to the effect of:
 
We had a large group of well-qualified applicants, and it made our choice
very difficult.  You were not among...blah blah blah....  We wish you every
success in your future endeavors.
 
This becomes very tired and old very fast, especially that last sentence,
which sounds like something that would be written in a high school yearbook.
Especially when I am struggling with the fear that, far from EVERY success, I
will never know any success nor have any real future in which for endeavors
to occur.
 
But what can you do?  With 100-200 applications for every position, I also
feel for the hiring committees, who have the awful job of letting, say, 199
people know they didn't get the job.
 
Today I got a turndown that was so different, and made me feel so much
better, that I had to post it to this list. It validates that this is
painful, not only for the school which had such an abundance of choices to
sort through, but for me.  Instead of glibly saying : best of luck in your
future endeavors, which is meaningless and unhelpful to me right now, it
tells the truth.
 
With credit where credit is due, this letter came from Morningside College in
Sioux City, IA, and I am grateful for their words.  Here is the relevant
section:
 
"We recognize that the number of available teaching positions in Religious
Studies is limited, and that announcements like this bring disappointment to
many.  You have our sincere best wishes in this difficult time."
 
What a helpful way to bring painful news.
 
Ellie Amico
Heartwell  @  aol.com