Notes from Maria Maisto, President of NFM for Radio presentation on October 1, 2012
75.5% of college faculty are now off the tenure track, meaning they have NO access to tenure.
This represents 1.3 million out of 1.8 million faculty members.
Of these, 700,000 or 70% are so-called part-time, AKA "adjunct."
That's almost half of the entire college faculty population.
Source: Dept of Ed 2009 Fall Staff Survey
Basic demographic info available through Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and used to collect info through National Study of PostSecondary Faculty, which is no longer funded and is gone.
51.6% female; 82% White -- BUT note that acc to AFT, "Underrepresented racial and ethnic groups are even more likely to be relegated to contingent positions; only 10.4 percent of all faculty positions are held by underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, and of these, 7.6 percent -- or 73 percent of the total minority faculty population -- are contingent positions."
Little info available about working conditions. This is being addressed by:
NFM Foundation, the 501c3 nonprofit arm of New Faculty Majority. We just completed a survey of back-to-school hiring practices and their effects on educational quality and professional integrity. We wrote a report on it for the Center for the Future of Higher Education, the think tank of the Campaign for the Future of Higher Education, a grassroots movement to ensure affordable, high quality higher education. We also work in other coalitions, like CAW. See our survey results at: http://www.nfmfoundation.org/NFMF-Back-to-School-Survey.html.
CAW (Coalition on Academic Workforce) a group of 26 higher ed associations, disciplinary associations, and faculty organizations committed to working on the issues associated with deteriorating faculty working conditions and their effect on the success of college and university students in the United States. CAW just released the results of a survey of compensation (including benefits) and some working conditions of faculty off the tenure track in Fall 2010. Enormous response: 20,000 valid responses, of which half were part-time faculty. See: http://www.academicworkforce.org/CAW_portrait_2012.pdf.
The Adjunct Project a crowdsourced data collection project founded by one of our board members, Josh Boldt, an adjunct English instructor in Georgia, inspired after he attended our January summit and realized that the Modern Language Association, the disciplinary organization for professors of language and literature, recommends
Minimum compensation for 2011–12 of $6,800 for a standard 3-credit-hour semester course or $4,530 for a standard 3-credit-hour quarter or trimester course. These recommendations are based on a full-time load of 3 courses per semester (6 per year) or 3 courses per quarter or trimester (9 per year); annual full-time equivalent thus falls in a range of $40,770 to $40,800.
(As far as we can tell from the data we have collected thus far, only 7% of departments in the modern languages are meeting or exceeding this recommendation)
MLA Faculty Workforce Academic Workforce Data Center – see http://www.mla.org/acad_work_search
Key Findings of CAW Survey:
The gap between what a part-time faculty member earns and the median earnings of full-time, year-round workers of equivalent educational attainment is staggering and becomes more dramatic as the level of credential rises.
Some would assert that while eight courses per academic year might be considered a full load for full-time tenure-track faculty members, such a teaching load without any research or service requirements does not truly represent the work of a full-time faculty member. Others would assert that, regardless of outside work, an annual course load of eight courses does not reflect full-time employment. Even if we annualize salaries using an extreme model of a teaching load of five courses in each of three terms during a year, however, we find that the annualized earnings of a part-time faculty member are still dramatically below that of professionals with similar credentials (table 20).
Median Pay per Course in Terms of Union Status
The presence of a union on campus also appears to have a positive impact on wages for faculty members employed part-time. The median pay per course at institutions where part-time faculty respondents were not represented by a union was $2,475, as compared with $3,100 at institutions with union representation (table 25). This union wage premium is also reflected across institutional types with the exception of the baccalaureate colleges, where median wages were slightly higher for courses where part-time faculty respondents were not represented by a union.8
Median Pay per Course in Terms of Discipline
Responses to the survey show median pay per course for most disciplines hovering around the median pay for all courses ($2,700), although pay in some disciplines varies considerably from the overall median (table 26). On the high end, engineering has a median pay of $4,000 per course; on the low end, a few disciplines, including mathematics and developmental education, have a median per-course pay closer to $2,000. Once the data are aggregated into broad disciplinary clusters, the median pay is consistently around $2,700 (table 27).9
Median Pay per Course in Terms of Gender and Race
Survey responses indicated only a slight variation in median pay by gender: women reported a median per-course pay of $2,700, while men reported earning slightly more, at a median per-course pay of $2,780 (table 30).
There is even less variation in pay between men and women when we account for institutional type. The median pay per course reported by female and by male respondents is basically identical in two-year institutions, master’s institutions, doctoral and research institutions, and special focus institutions. Of those respondents for whom the Carnegie institutional type could be determined, only those teaching in baccalaureate institutions reveal any disparity in per-course pay by gender—$2,700 for men, as compared with $2,800 for women (table 30).
Broken down by race or ethnicity, the data suggest that part-time faculty respondents who identified themselves as black (not of Hispanic origin) earn significantly less than other racial and ethnic groups at a median per-course pay of $2,083 (table 31). By comparison, median pay ranged from $2,500 per course for Hispanic or Latino or multiracial respondents to $2,925 for Asian or Pacific Islander respondents.
Pay rates for part-time faculty respondents who identified themselves as black (not of Hispanic origin) appear to be generally lower even when the type of institution is included in the analysis. Yet the number of respondents in this category is small. Our analysis indicates that black non-Hispanic respondents, relative to other groups of survey respondents, were somewhat overrepresented at two-year colleges and (probably more important) underrepresented at doctoral universities. They were also more likely to be employed in the southeastern United States, where pay rates are generally lower. Further analysis of the difference in pay rates by race may yield a better understanding of the situation, although, given the small number of African American respondents to the CAW survey, it would be important to collect more data, focusing specifically on this question.
Both types of benefits appear to be more prevalent at public institutions: 23.4% of part-time faculty respondents in public institutions indicated that they had access to health benefits, and 46.9% indicated they had access to retirement benefits, as compared with 16.0% and 20.6% with access to health and retirement benefits, respectively, in private not-for-profit institutions (table 34, table 35).
This difference may be due to the far greater presence of unions in the public sector, since part-time faculty respondents who identified having union representation also reported having greater access to both health and retirement benefits (table 36, table 37). Of the part-time faculty respondents who reported having no union on campus, only 13.8% indicated they had access to health benefits through their academic employer, and 27.5% reported access to retirement benefits through their academic employer. By comparison, 34.3% of the respondents covered by at least one union indicated they had access to health benefits through their academic employer, and 60.1% indicated having access to retirement benefits through their academic employer.
Available resources and support differ modestly by institutional type. Interestingly, respondents indicate that most forms of support are offered more commonly at two-year institutions than at four-year institutions (table 38). This difference may be due to the heavy reliance on part-time faculty in two-year institutions, resulting in more attention to these issues, or it could be due to the higher rate of unionization in this sector, since that variable also correlates with an increased availability of resources and support (table 39).
Respondents who reported the presence of a union on at least one of the campuses where they teach were consistently more likely to receive resources and support, particularly on matters of compensation (table 39). Respondents with a union present on at least one campus where they taught indicated the following levels of support:
◆ 17.9% indicated they are paid for class cancellations, as opposed to only 9.9% of respondents without a union present.
◆ 9.7% indicated being paid for attending departmental meetings, as opposed to only 5.4% of respondents without a union present.
◆ 14.5% indicated being paid for office hours, as opposed to only 3.8% of respondents without a union present.
◆ 33.9% indicated receiving regular salary increases, as opposed to only 12.1% of respondents without a union present.
◆ 19.4% indicated having job security, as opposed to only 3.9% of respondents without a union present.
Support for professional-development activities was also reported more frequently by respondents teaching on at least one campus where a union was present. Yet the overall low percentage of institutions providing such support represents another indicator that institutions are not investing in maintaining and improving the quality of instruction. Respondents teaching on at least one campus where a union was present reported greater access to various kinds of administrative support as well, but the difference between unionized and nonunionized settings was not as great on these items as on other forms of workplace support.
The data on professional support gathered in this survey imply an institutional assumption that part-time faculty members will for the most part appear on campus only to deliver a discrete course and not to participate with students or colleagues in any other structurally supported way.
Key findings of NFM Back-to-School Survey (note: best case scenarios because mostly unionized):
3/4 of the 500 respondents teach PT
30% in best case scenario had three weeks or fewer to prepare -- 34% no phone -- 21% no office
Almost 65% in worst case scenario had three weeks or fewer to prepare
DELTA COST PROJECT
The shift away from public funding of institutions continues, with most of the new money in higher education coming from tuition and fees, private gifts, and grants and contracts. Much of the new revenue is restricted by the donor, and is not available to pay for core educational programs. At public institutions, state appropriations per student declined from 2002 to 2005 and rebounded slightly in 2006, but did not rebound to earlier levels.
From 2002 to 2006, total spending on education and related services declined for all types of institutions except research universities. Additionally, the share of educational spending dedicated to classroom instruction declined at all types of institutions from 2002 to 2006. By contrast, spending on academic support, student services, administration, and maintenance increased as a share of total educational costs over the same period.
The share of spending going to pay for instruction has consistently declined when revenues decline, relative to growth in spending in academic and student support and administration. This erosion persists even when revenues rebound, meaning that over time there has been a gradual shift of resources away from instruction and towards general administrative and academic infrastructure.
NEEDED QUALITY ASSESSMENT INDICATORS: NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT, COLLEGIATE LEARNING ASSESSMENT.
Grad and Retention Rates are far too problematic.
Lake Area Technical Institute, South Dakota -- 73.5% Graduation Rate -- 87% FT Faculty -- No Tenure System -- 86.5% FT 13.5% PT = POSSIBLE example of a college where no union is necessary because administration and faculty are doing voluntarily what unions make mandatory
Aspen Finalist -- CHE Best College to Work For --
Lake Area Tech employees rated the institution highly enough to win honors in the following categories: Collaborative Governance; Professional/Career Development Programs; Teaching Environment; Facilities, Workspace & Security; Job Satisfaction; Work/Life Balance; Confidence in Senior Leadership; Supervisor/Department Chair Relationship; and Respect and Appreciation.
“At Lake Area Tech, we encourage employee feedback.” said Lake Area Tech President Deb Shephard. “Our ultimate goal is to provide a positive culture for employees and students alike. This honor validates those efforts to meet employee needs and to offer them a great place to work.”
AP schools <$2K: http://chroni.cl/W1Ibh8