McClelland, Richard T.

English

epublications@Marquette

Conversations on Jesuit Higher EducationVolume 42 After 50 Years: The Living Spirit of VaticanII Article 319-1-2012Letters: Didn't Face the IssuesRichard T. McClellandFollow this and additional works at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/conversationsRecommended CitationMcClelland, Richard T. (2012) "Letters: Didn't Face the Issues," Conversations on Jesuit Higher Education: Vol. 42, Article 31.Available at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/conversations/vol42/iss1/3158 ConversationsLettersDidn’t Face theIssuesTo the Editor:Ihave read with interest thearticle by Lynne Elkes onadjunct faculty in the recentConversations (Spring, 2012;Number 41). I was dismayed tofind that virtually none of themost serious problems faced byadjunctive faculty are treated inthis article. Most adjunctive facul-ty work under inhumane andunjust conditions. They are poor-ly paid for each course or sectionthey teach, despite having thesame responsibilities there as anyregular faculty member wouldhave. They often have access tono benefits. They have little or nojob security. To make ends meet,they often take on towering loadsof teaching, frequently in multipleinstitutional settings.  I taught as an adjunct for sixyears at Seattle University. Therewere over a dozen of us doing soin the philosophy department atthat time, several of us withPhD’s, long years of experienceand good records of publication.We were adjuncts because we hadno alternative. SU was relativelyenlightened in its treatment ofadjuncts: rates of pay, for exam-ple, increased the longer oneworked there; and benefits wereavailable on a pro-rated basis.Wherever possible, the depart-ment tried to make full teachingloads available to its most suc-cessful adjuncts, and so on.  The Jesuit university in whichI am currently employed (happilyas a tenured full professor) doesnone of this. I can tell you frompersonal experience and fromlong interactions with other peo-ple similarly placed, that the stresson adjuncts (and their families,where they have families) can bevirtually crippling. Moreover, foruniversities and colleges that pro-fess a fundamental commitment tosocial justice, as the Jesuit institu-tions all do, it is simply scan-dalous that an entire academicunder-class is allowed to workunder the usual conditions affect-ing adjuncts.  Of course, the institutionsstand to save very large sums ofmoney by employing large num-bers of adjuncts (virtually none ofwhom answer to the traditionalnotion of an adjunct, namelysomeone who has special expert-ise, and a day job, who teachesthe odd course—often in theevenings or weekends—becausethey want to do so). I estimatedthat SU, when I worked there(1993-1999) saved approximately25-30 million dollars per annumby employing large numbers ofadjuncts. Savings on that order areawfully hard for trustees andadministrators to resist, compris-ing as they might the margin with-in which the institution makes itor fails, financially. It remains thecase that most adjuncts are beingregularly and reliably treated very,very badly.  That you would run an articleon the problems of faculty devel-opment with respect to adjuncts,while leaving these other issuesunstated and unexplored, seemsto me deplorable and irresponsi-ble. I hope that you will under-take some remedy of this in afuture issue of Conversations. ■Sincerely yours,Richard T. McClelland,Richard T. McClelland, professorof philosophy, GonzagaUniversity.Gonzaga University.1McClelland: Letters: Didn't Face the IssuesPublished by e-Publications@Marquette, 2012

Letters: Didn\u27t Face the Issues

https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1795&amp;context=conversations

Letters: Didn\u27t Face the Issues

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

epublications@Marquette