The Adjunct Track

Adjuncts and Campus Politics: How Involved Should You Get?

Article tools

Printer friendly	E-mail article	Subscribe	Order reprints
	Discuss any Chronicle article in our forums
Latest Headlines First Person From Job Candidate to Stalker For a new Ph.D. searching for her first job in her field, the line between the two can be blurry. Career News Keep Up the Quality It's time for colleges and universities to improve academic, not just administrative, productivity. On Course Back to High School In a new book, an assistant professor of English finds radical new sources of inspiration for his discipline in K-12 classrooms. Career News Sensible Compromises So you don't have the perfect tenure-track position at the perfect college in the perfect town? Welcome to Earth. Resource Salaries: Faculty | Administrative Presidential pay: Private | Public Financial resources: Salary and cost-of-living calculators Career resources: Academic | Nonacademic Library: Previous articles by topic | by date | by column Career Talk, Ms. Mentor, and more... Landing your first job On the tenure track Mid-career and on Administrative careers Nonacademic careers for Ph.D.'s Talk about your career Blogs

By Jill Carroll

I heard from an adjunct recently who was bitter and jobless because he had involved himself in a curriculum debate within his department at a large urban university. He had taught as an adjunct in this particular department for several semesters, had received strong teaching evaluations consistently, and was generally well-liked by the other faculty members in the department.

He had gotten actively involved in a student campaign to develop a major degree program in his subfield. Predictably, the students didn't know much about running a university or establishing new majors or finding money for such things, so their proposals were shot down by the faculty and the administration. The students didn't relent so easily and the whole thing stirred up a controversy about university corporate interests versus student interests.

The adjunct positioned himself firmly on the students' side because he really believed in the area of study, and thought it should be offered as a major. He also thought his active involvement in a campus and department issue would demonstrate his willingness to "get involved" and be a part of the university in a way that would lead to a full-time position. He was, in effect, nominating himself to be the director or faculty sponsor of the proposed new major.

It didn't work out that way. The new major was at odds with the vision not only of the university, but of the individual department. In aligning with the students, the adjunct positioned himself right out of a job. Last I heard, he was considering a lawsuit, leaping from the proverbial frying pan into the fire.

Some of you will say that this story illustrates the need for tenure or some sort of job security for adjuncts -- that he should have been able to disagree with the major players at the university and in his department without losing his job. True enough. But given that adjuncts (and many full-time faculty members, for that matter) don't have tenure, and aren't likely to get it anytime soon, this story also demonstrates why adjuncts should steer clear of campus politics.

When I say steer clear, I mean run, don't walk. Flee it like holiday fruitcake. Why? Of the scads of reasons, I'll offer just a few in no particular order.

To effectively involve yourself in a campus political battle takes time -- time to learn the history of the issue on campus, meet the players, attend meetings, and more. You already get paid only a few dollars an hour to teach. Don't dilute your earnings even more by taking on a campus issue that will eat your time away like a cancer. The simple fact is that you're not being paid to get involved, so don't.

If you go ahead and invest your time in the controversy, whatever it may be, full-time faculty members may resent you for it. Rightly or wrongly, some will wonder at your motives. Some will think that you need to "stay in your place" as a contract teacher who is paid to teach and that's it. Some may think you're trying to muscle in on their territory, swing students to your side, or use the flap to land a position or gain influence. The last thing you need is for faculty members or administrators to be suspicious of you. Your semesters of outstanding teaching evaluations won't match up well against such suspicions.

"But it's something I really believe in," you might say. Well, that may be so, but you've got to understand that when you get involved in an internal political battle over a program, or a major, or a course, whatever, you're wading into a sea of bad blood. The full-time faculty members embroiled in the issue have most likely been at each other's throats on a host of issues in the past, and are using the current issue to land another blow against their opponents. This battle may be just a manifestation of the same silly personal squabbles that have plagued the department year after year.

When you step into the ring as an adjunct, you suddenly find yourself facing opponents you don't even know you had, ghosts of past battles. My advice? Just don't get in the ring. Teach your classes, hold your office hours, grade your papers, make a difference in your students' lives, and go home. Leave the campus fights to those who, apparently, get a kick out of them even though their time would be better spent seeing a therapist.

"But shouldn't I strategically ally myself with certain people on campus, so that I can keep my job?" Sure, you need to make friends and curry favor with important people on campus, like hiring administrators and deans. But there are other ways to do this than involving yourself in a campus political battle.

I'll use a situation from my own adjunct career as an example. Several years ago, the humanities departments at one of my universities were fighting over curriculum changes. The dean of humanities, who approved my hiring every term, took a position in the debate very much at odds with most of my faculty colleagues in the humanities. In short, they hated her, and I sat patiently at lunches and coffees listening to them gripe about how she was the devil. Well, I definitely saw their side of things, and agreed with them to a large degree, although not completely. I nodded my head, told them how much I pitied their having to deal with such things, asked them sympathetically if it interfered with their writing and research, showed concern for their personal lives, blah blah blah. I had to work with these people, right?

But I also had to find and keep consistent favor with the "terrible dean," whose side of things I saw as well. Moreover, the dean signed my contract every term. So I made it a point to say hello to the dean every time I saw her. I sent her a handwritten thank-you card every time she renewed my contract -- and I was genuinely grateful. What I didn't do was involve myself in the curriculum debate.

The dean kept signing my contracts, I landed better courses, slowly entrenched myself more in the humanities at that university, and life for me was never better. More importantly, when she finished her term as dean, I hadn't alienated anyone on the faculty, or the new dean for that matter, by taking a stand on the matter. All I had done was see their side of things -- whatever side it was.

As an adjunct, you may have to play politics. But do it in those time-honored ways: take an interest in people, see their side, let them talk, listen to them. But don't let them persuade you to undermine your future.