Adjunct Faculty Review (AFR) DTF

• Charge• Who are our adjuncts?• Information about adjunct hiring and working conditions• Analysis of TESC survey• Plans for next faculty meeting

The ChargeOn May 17, 2013, Provost Michael Zimmerman presented the charge to undertake… “a holistic review of our employment practices for adjunct colleagues.”

The provost acknowledged that a… “DTF looking into this issue will undoubtedly be faced with many conflicting pressures and I hope that members are able to negotiate a reasonable balance among all of them.”

The Charge: Three Main Questions

1) Are there structures or practices associated with our current hiring of regular faculty members that lead to unfair treatment of our adjunct colleagues?

2) Are there daily practices in the life of the College that may lead adjunct faculty members to the impression that they are not full and respected members of the Evergreen community?

3) Should the College develop a mechanism for long-term adjunct faculty members to transition to regular appointments?

Who are Our Adjuncts?

Ratio of Adjunctto Regular Faculty (13-14)

Number (FTE) and Deployment of Adjuncts in Curriculum (13-14)

42.3%

24.9%

8.9%

7.5%

7.7%

8.7%EWS (20.4)

OlyDay (12)

TAC (4.3)

MES (3.6)

MiT (3.7)

MPA (4.2)

n = 48.2

EWS-Adjuncts by Discipline and Credits (13-14)

Adjunct Faculty Degrees

EWS (13-14)

OlyDay (13-14)

30.4%

30.4% 39.1

%

Regular Faculty Degrees

90.1%

9.9%

Percent Olympia Daytime Faculty 1st Hired as Visitors at TESC

42.9%

57.1%

Regular Faculty First Hired as Vis-itor/Adjunct (OlyDay)

Regular Faculty First Hired as New Term (OlyDay)

Percent EWS Faculty 1st Hired as Visitors at TESC

55%

45%

Current EWS Regu-lar Faculty who were previsouly a TESC visitor (54%)

Current EWS Regu-lar Faculty who were NOT previ-ously a TESC visi-tor (46%)

All Regular EWS Adj TAC Adj MES Adj MiT Adj MPA Adj0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

29

24

29

21

27

24

AVG Experience Year

AVG EY

MPA $1508.62Regular $1458.68Tacoma $1367.51MIT $1345.62EWS $1264.97Oly Day $1144.49MES $1136.95

2013-14

Information About Adjunct Hiring and Working Conditions

Adjunct HiringOften with little lead time• Shorter time to prepare and plan• Can impact team-teaching• Lack of orientation & mentoring for new adjuncts

Typically by deans• Perceptions of & possible cronyism/nepotism • Concerns about quality & qualifications

Reasons Hired• Emergency needs• Student demand• Preserve regular faculty academic freedom• Ensure curricular continuity• Maintain RIF cushion

Adjunct Workload, Pay, Sick Leave Workload8 & 12 credits have many of the same elements as 16 credits and teaching multiple offerings = multiple syllabi, program delivery, evaluations

Currently adjuncts receive 90% of regular faculty pay • Adjuncts progress through experience year (pro-rated)

Sick leave • Regular. 180 days per contract year. Option to reduce hours.

Also up to six (6) weeks of paid parental leave plus one (1) week of paid bereavement leave.

• Adjunct. Two (2) weeks per quarter. Additional leave may = termination.

Adjunct Benefits•No medical benefits for adjunct faculty teaching below 8 credits

•8-credit faculty worry about losing medical benefits if HCA workload minimum increases above half-time

•Retirement benefits after Evergreen lower due to teaching frequency and workload

•Not eligible for Faculty Emeritus status even after 10-20+ years of continuous teaching.

•No formal acknowledgement of retirement even after 10-20+ years of continuous teaching

Perception/Issues of Quality

Perceived lack of quality work due to:Hiring Process (sometimes only by deans rather than faculty)Review Process (deans only instead of faculty peers)

Challenges to carry out quality teaching due to (for example): Last minute hiringTeaching despite needed sick/maternity/bereavement leaveLower pay must maintain other job or inadequate incomeJob insecurityAwareness of negative perceptions

Job (In)security and Multi-Year ContractsAdjuncts often don’t know if will be hired beyond 1 quarter or 1 year

Recent 2-3 year contracts have helped, however:• Process of selection not transparent• Basis of teaching load offered inconsistent - • Sometimes based on smallest load taught (often not

preferred level)• Still uncertain about future, even after 10-20+ years• Adjuncts committed to TESC may be forced to look/work

elsewhere or remain underemployed• Can have effects on health, family, medical benefits,

retirement benefits, comfort, confidence, and quality of teaching

Regular Hiring Topics• National Search: Widely held view at TESC Best faculty/teaching

• Charge asked DTF to collect input from regular faculty who have served on national search committees: Cannot, due to strict confidentiality of search process

Opaque hiring deliberation no accountability/transparency

• Hiring Priorities: How are they established?• Now, not only Planning Units make suggestions.

• Job Descriptions: How are they created, vetted, and accepted?• In the planning unit and then by the sub-committee.

• Do sub-committees favor or discriminate against internal candidates? The next slide is a snapshot of data from recent hires.

Regular Faculty Hiring History

•In the last 6 years, there have been 28 successful hires with 1626 applicants.

•13 of those hires had no adjunct faculty applicants.

•15 of those hires had a total of 20 adjunct faculty applicants.

•8 adjunct faculty were hired into Regular Faculty positions.

Analysis of TESC Faculty Survey

Survey Respondents N = 130

Regular (term or continuing) N = 88 Adjuncts N = 42

All Regular Faculty (N=88) 33% 34%

Daytime only (N=77) 30% 36%

EWS (N=9) 56% 22%

Grad (N=2) 50% 0%

Previously a visitor/adjunct

at TESC

Previously a visitor/adjunct

elsewhere

Regular Faculty

Methods

Read all priorities entered and identified categories (topics)

Assigned categories a color and coded each priority in the Excel sheet; Assessed intra- and inter-rater agreement

Tallied numbers for each category and represented these as a percentage of priorities given for different groups

(daytime Olympia, EWS, Grad, etc…)

Randomly selected representative statements of priorities and narratives for transparency

•Keep national searches as the mechanism for permanent hires•At no time promise an automatic route to regular status no matter what the record

•Review of adjunct faculty so we know who is doing a good job and who isn't•Possess the highest educational degree possible in their academic discipline

•That adjunct faculty who have been here more than 5 years be given a path toward a permanent position.•Possible conversion to permanent faculty

•More job security for long-term adjuncts in exchange for more predictability in curriculum•more job security, e.g. long term contracts

•Adjuncts lines should provide flexibility in the curriculum and be assignable.

Examples from a Subset of Unique Categories (N = 15)

•equitable pay vis a vis regular faculty•Receiving 7 paychecks per quarter

•collegial respect•consciousness/awareness raising among regular faculty

•Finding ways to increase flexibility within continuing faculty to decrease reliance on adjuncts/visitors

Quality of AdjunctsHiring Practices

Job SecurityTransition to F.T.Job Descriptions

Pay & BenefitsGovernance

Respect

CommunicationCurriculum & Hiring

Planning

296 Responses from all Regular Faculty (N=88)

Ensure quality adjunct hires & review processMaintain current hiring practice w Nat search; limit terms for adjunctsReduce adjunct hires or long term contractsSpousal hires

Long-term contracts & job securityTransition to regularFull time Job Descriptions allowing adjuncts to compete

Pay, Benefits & Prof DevEqual/More Governance for AdjNo/Examine Governance for AdjRespect

CommunicationCurriculum & hiring adj, offerings and resourcesPlanning & Curriculum

Quality of Adjuncts

Hiring Practices

Job Security

Transition Job Desc.

Pay & Benefits

Gov.Respect

CommunicationCurrr. & Hiring

Planning

184 responses from Regular Faculty Who Were Never a

TESC Adjunct N= 54

81 responses from Regular Faculty Who Were Previously a Adjunct at

TESC N= 23

All Regular Faculty in the Daytime Curriculum

Quality of Adjuncts

Hiring Practices

Job Security

Transition Job Desc.

Pay & Benefits

Gov.Respect

CommunicationCurrr. & Hiring

Planning

Pay, Benefits & Prof Dev (26%)

Long-term contracts/job security (23%)

Ensure quality adjunct hires (16%)

All Regular Faculty in the EWS or Graduate CurriculumTop Three Categories

142 Priority Responses from All Adjunct Faculty N=42

Quality of Adjuncts

Hiring Practices

Job SecurityTransition to F.T.Job Descriptions

Pay & BenefitsGovernance

Respect

CommunicationCurriculum & Hiring

Planning

Ensure quality adjunct hires & review processReduce adjunct hires or long term contracts

Long-term contracts & job securityTransition to regularFull time Job Descriptions allowing adjuncts to compete

Pay, Benefits & Prof DevEqual/More Governance for AdjRespect

CommunicationCurriculum & hiring adj, offerings and resourcesPlanning & CurriculumEliminate Day Oly & EWS barriers

Curriculum (flexibility in offerings, resources; 22%)

Pay, Benefits & Prof Dev (22%)

Transition to Regular (17%)

Adjuncts (Day Oly only) N= 5; 18 resp.

Adjunct Faculty Top Categories

Pay, Benefits & Prof Dev (37%)

Transition to Regular (14%)

Curriculum & Respect ( both 11%)

Adjuncts (Day Oly +Other) N= 15; 57 resp.

Curriculum (flexibility in offerings, resources; 22%)

Long-term contracts/job security (16%)

Pay, Benefits & Prof Dev (14%)

Adjuncts (EWS + Grad) N= 17; 51 resp. Adjuncts(Grad Only) N= 5; 15 resp.

Ensure quality adjunct hires (59%)

(All other categories were each 6%)

Brief Summary of Findings

Greatest number of priorities for all faculty were in categories about:

• Quality of adjuncts (terminal degrees, review processes etc. )• Curriculum (flexibility in curriculum, access to resources etc. . .) • Pay and Benefits (equal pay, timing of pay, retirement

investments, etc.) UFE bargaining issue

Brief Summary of FindingsNext greatest number of priorities for all faculty were in categories:• Job security (more long term contracts etc. )• Respect (collegial respect for adjuncts etc. . .)• Conversion to regular status (pathway for long-term adjuncts

etc.) Varied among different populations of faculty

and had opposing categories

11% of all responses (N=142) by all adjuncts (N=42)8% of all responses (N=296) by all regular faculty (N=88)

12% of all responses (N=296) by regular faculty (N=88) fell into oppositional categories of a) maintain current hiring practices and b) reduce or eliminate adjunct hires and/or long term contracts

Coming up: Spring, Week 2• The AFR DTF will have 90 minutes at the week 2 faculty

meeting, spring quarter.• Some of that time will be dedicated to discussion of the

third part of our charge: – Should the College develop a mechanism for long-

term adjunct faculty members to transition to regular appointments?

• Keep an eye out for a possible online system for reviewing documents, ideas, and issues that the DTF identifies as central to taking on this question.

• Be prepared for small group discussion at the faculty meeting.

Feel Free to Contact Us

If you have any questions or concerns then please feel free to contact the DTF members:

Co-chair Nancy Murray (Hiring Dean)Co-chair Erik ThuesenClarissa DirksMarja EloheimoSteven HendricksCheri Lucas JenningsNancy ParkesTherese SalibaSuzanne SimonsRichard Weiss