I had to laugh at this article in the New York Times, suggesting part-time college teaching as an option for un- or underemployed people. Really? Honestly, for the amount of time one puts in, you’d be better off waiting tables. But I understand, you’ve got your Ph.D., why waste it as a waitress. I do like my part-time gig, but if I were looking to make an actual income, I don’t think part-time teaching is what I’d be pursuing. I agree with the article that there are a lot of intangible benefits to teaching part time. But it also glosses over the generally poor treatment of adjuncts and all the complex reasons for the fact that there’s such a demand for adjuncts in the first place.
Related posts:
- Recession: Personal Effects
- Tenure, or Tilting at Windmills
- Teaching and Learning and Education
- Harvard decides to focus on teaching
- Tear down the Ivory Tower
Phew! Your first lines make it clear that you’re just being sarcastic in the title, ’cause when I saw it I went “What?!” and had to check what it was that you were saying
.
Yes. I scoffed outloud when I read that column. Very uninformed or superficial.
Wasn’t that insane?! I actually waitressed while adjuncting for awhile, and I definitely made more money waitressing!
Not to mention that it’ll further perpetuate the belief among college administration that adjuncts are a cheap, easy and plentiful source of labor, which isn’t good for anyone. (Which is probably what you’re implying in your last sentence.)
Yes, exactly, ianqui. And I don’t like the NYT for creating more supply. As long as colleges think there are plenty of people out there willing to work part-time for the cheap wages they offer, they won’t create full-time positions or even viable part-time ones.
ecomonic recessions could really mess up great economies..’