106:365 | Utility Player

A Facebook post by Dr. Thomas Reeves today about a new book called “The Adjunct Underclass” from the University of Chicago Press prompted some good commentary. I noted:

I look forward to reading this book. I could probably be a case study for this book. I love being a “utility player” with my PhD. I teach at the University of Virginia as an adjunct. I started a nonprofit. I publish research on my nonprofit’s work. I present at both practitioner and academic conferences. I do the one-off consulting project. But, this isn’t a “career path” that was laid out for me … or to the title of this book that is valued or encouraged by the academy. I never wanted or pursued a tenure track position – mainly because I completed my PhD in my mid-40s, but it would be nice if “we” (as a field) could foster a separate and equal path for all those who want to further their education but take (or create) a non traditional path. *steps off soapbox*

With estimates of 70% of college faculty coming from the adjunct ranks, this is a big deal issue. I LOVE teaching, but as I note within my comment, I do it as a “utility player” who also started a nonprofit and a participates in the field in a variety of ways (research projects, presentations, publications, etc.) Unfortunately, I don’t see how it would be financially possible for anyone to make a living wage as ONLY an adjunct. But, this is a reflection for another day.

Instead, I want to address those who say we’re pumping out too many PhDs. It’s not hard to see where this perception comes from when “the US is graduating 50,000 new Ph.D.s a year into a system that can sustain 10,000”.

However, I want to think about how we’re defining this “system”. If you mean a system that equals “only tenure-track faculty in higher education”, then it is ridiculous. But, I’m asking us (as a field; as a society) to broaden our lens when contemplating the opportunities.

Having too many qualified workers hardly seems like it should be dubbed “a problem”, am I right? How is it a problem to have thousands of smart, educated, and motivated people who want to work? Instead, I suggest we need to widen our lens and think about the potential career paths and jobs that need really smart, educated, and motivated people. Again, how is this a problem? It seems more like opportunities not being pursued. That said, we also need to ensure that we’re NEVER implying to PhD prospects that universities will have sufficient full-time tenured positions waiting for them.

However, maybe these students are already a step ahead. As one commenter noted, they have a hard time convincing students to pursue positions in academia. Given the anecdotal stories I hear of 50+ applications for every open tenure-track position, I don’t know how widespread this problem of keeping people in academia is outside of some isolated cases. Either way, the core issue is helping people find/make a path.