I’m delighted to share that Putting the Humanities PhD to Work is in production at Duke University Press, and should be out in the world in time for Fall 2020! It has a fresh new subtitle (Thriving in and Beyond the Classroom), and a structure that has been much improved thanks to thoughtful comments and questions by generous peer reviewers.
In addition, our team at the Futures Initiative is using ideas in the book as a starting point for what I think will be an exciting nationwide conference in Spring 2020. This conference, Graduate Education at Work in the World, aims to collectively imagine and redesign graduate education to support students, scholarship, and the public good. If you’re interested in these topics, please consider submitting a session proposal (by Oct 21, 2019) or joining us in NYC on April 30-May 1, 2020. Graduate Fellow Cihan Tekay (Anthropology) will be leading much of the conference development, and I’m so excited to be a part of the conversations that emerge.
What has become incredibly clear to me, both through writing the book and now through the process of developing the conference, is how important it is to embed any discussion about career pathways in a broader context of the values and structures of higher education. Even when a university has deeply-held values about its purpose and mission (such as supporting the public good), those values can easily be undermined by inequitable structures. I think a crucial starting point for reform is finding where the tensions are between values and structures, as those points of friction often illuminate tacit values that work against the university’s goals.
These are the kinds of difficult questions that are woven throughout the book. It will be released by late summer 2020, and I hope it will be useful to graduate students, faculty, and administrators alike. Read on for an updated table of contents and abstracts:
My friend Erin recently asked on Twitter what I thought about Matt Bruenig’s post on adjuncts. I realized I had more to say than just a tweet or two, so here are a few quick reflections on the post:
Data use: The data Bruenig is responding to is from 2004—nearly a decade ago. I would be extremely hesitant to draw conclusions about today’s landscape from this data, when both higher education and the overall economy have undergone major changes in the intervening years. The Coalition on the Academic Workforce’s data (pdf) would be a better place to start. (The sample is smaller, but the data’s more recent, having been collected in 2010.)
Desirability of part-time work status: One of the things that complicates advocacy for contingent labor conditions are the range of career goals of the people in part-time faculty positions. Pushing to convert all contingent positions to full-time, non-tenure roles would be an undesirable outcome for many. The reasons a full-time position might not be desirable are varied—some people have other careers, as Bruenig highlights, while others have family or personal considerations that make full-time work difficult or impossible. Still, in the CAW data, more than 70% of respondents indicate that they would probably or definitely accept a full-time, tenure-track position at their institution if that were a possibility.
Adjuncting as secondary employment: Bruenig highlights cases in which adjuncts teach courses in addition to what they consider to be their primary employment. This may be normal in some disciplines (Bruenig cites business and education), but it is far from typical in the humanities, where many cobble together adjunct positions as their sole means of employment. A lack of benefits (like health care coverage) isn’t a major issue for people who hold a primary career outside of academe, but it is a huge concern for those who don’t have another means of support. Further, the CAW data paints a different portrait, with a majority of respondents reporting an annual personal income below $35,000.
High average family income: To me, this suggests the importance of an alternate source of income, benefits, and stability for adjuncts. Teaching university courses as one’s primary employment should not require the privilege of a well-compensated spouse.
Admittedly, the complexities surrounding adjunct employment make it difficult to generalize, and measures that improve working conditions for some may be undesirable for others. Still, as the academic labor equation continues to shift toward increasing reliance on contingent faculty, it’s essential to work toward supporting working conditions that promote student learning and effective research outcomes—which means stable employment, reasonable compensation and benefits, and a voice in governance.
I’m delighted to announce that our proposed roundtable on the Praxis Network has been accepted for the 2014 MLA Convention. Here are the details:
How can humanities programs better equip students for a wider range of careers, without sacrificing the core values or approaches of the disciplines? While not new, the question becomes more urgent as public funding for the humanities shrinks and the proportion of contingent faculty grows. Rather than see these pressures as threats, however, many programs see in them an opportunity to develop vibrant programs that take a broader view of possible methodological approaches, research products, and desirable career outcomes.
The participants in this proposed roundtable are all members of the Praxis Network, a new international partnership of graduate and undergraduate programs that are making effective interventions in the traditional models of humanities pedagogy and research. They represent programs that are embarking upon collaborative, interdisciplinary, project-based approaches to humanities education.