Negotiating the Paradox: Adjuncts & Writing

  • 25 Aug 2009 /  adjuncts, publishing

    As we’ve seen in previous posts, many adjuncts write. They write well, prolifically, and usefully; they win awards for their writing. Some publish scholarship in their field; some blog or otherwise engage new media in ways that provide valuable service to their disciplines.

    Many adjuncts, though, do not write for publication. Why is that? There are a variety of possible reasons.

    1) Adjuncts are bad at what they do.

    Some commentators suggest that the conditions under which adjuncts labor drive the best of them out. The best leave, it is suggested, for greener pastures, leaving only the tired and the inept toiling as adjuncts. This is possible, but I’d obviously like to think this isn’t the case.

    2) Adjuncts are too busy and tired.

    This is one of the most obvious reasons adjuncts don’t write (at much as they like, as much as they thought they would, etc.). I think we can take it as a given that some adjuncts are exhausted—and if you’re driving from campus to campus to campus, you are usually not writing during those hours.

    3) Adjuncts care about other things.

    One of the first people I contacted about this blog falls into this category. She trained me as an online teacher, and has made a long and rich career out of being an adjunct teacher. When I contacted her about her writing, she simply said that she didn’t write—that she put her energy into other things. This includes being in a band, running a business, driving race cars, and so on. I can’t say exactly what is lost through her choice to not pursue traditional scholarship—but I can testify that her real world experience is highly useful and applicable in the classroom.

    4) Adjuncts have other demands on their time.

    Some of the exhausted adjuncts are organizing and mobilizing, making their profession a better place through direct action. They are foregoing their own writing to improve workplace conditions.

    5) Adjuncts care about teaching more than writing.

    This is actually one of the saddest truths about many adjuncts I’ve met. Many are not really a good fit for traditional scholarship. Oh, they’re smart enough, no doubt—but their focus is on their students. They live for that moment when classroom discussion catches fire and the enthusiasm spreads through the room. In my field (English), they often actually prefer the lower level courses because there they can focus on the texts and helping students understand them, rather than, say, the theoretical emphasis of graduate coursework. These faculty should be teaching—ideally at a liberal arts college, where teaching is valued—and be cherished for that focus.

    6) Adjuncts have bought into an entrepreneurial mindset.

    An interesting article in Academe makes the case for this position. There John Hess argues that some adjuncts have shifted to a kind of “what’s in it for me” approach to how they spend their time. These adjuncts are turning away from traditional scholarship because they estimate of the return on scholarly writing is too meager. Hess spends some time discussing this approach, so I’ll let you read it for yourself, but it boils down to rationalizing one’s labor: seeking the greatest return for the least effort.

    This seems at once tragic and completely logical. The classic image of a teacher is one who is devoted beyond the limits of selfish calculation to his or her student, giving more than is needed, asked, or even understood in the short term. And that is if not gone at least threatened and diminished by the adjunct labor situation. Becoming a rational laborer seems sensible in the current work world.

    Needless to say, there are paradoxes and contradictions in this list. Not only do I not deny them, I embrace them: they are the essence of adjunct teaching. People who care more about teaching than writing may be forced to short their teaching to survive.

    Tags: , , ,

  • 10 Aug 2009 /  adjuncts, blogging, teaching, writing

    It is easy for those of us who are toiling away as full-time adjuncts (if you’ll allow me that supposed oxymoron) forget how flexible and multifaceted that term is. It’s also easy for those of us working in traditional academic fields like English or history to forget the specialized demands of specialized fields. This week we’re fortunate enough to hear from James Levy, who will help us correct both of those failings. Levy was gracious enough to answer a few questions on adjuncts and writing, especially legal writing.

    AA: Why do you write?

    Levy: I write for two reasons. I enjoy the satisfaction that comes from exploring a topic in the kind of depth that can only be achieved by writing about it.   There’s an old saying that the best way to learn a subject is to teach it.  I’d modify that by saying that an even better way to learn a subject is to write about it.

    And the other reason I write, to be frank, is that I have to - it’s an expectation of my job.   I wish I could say that I love the writing process itself; I don’t.  I find it mentally grueling.  I love the last stages of the writing process when I’m polishing and the ideas that I’ve been struggling with really start to coalesce. Any remaining fog lifts and I begin to feel a certain mastery of the material.  That part of the writing process is very enjoyable and satisfying.  But getting to that point is terribly hard work.
     
    I remember reading something in William Zinnser’s book On Writing Well in which he says, in effect, that anyone who thinks writing is enjoyable probably isn’t working hard enough at it.  Like Zinnser, I also don’t understand people who say they write for “fun.”   To me, it’s about as much fun as standing in the hot sun with a sledgehammer breaking rocks.  

    AA: How does your academic writing relate to your teaching? How about writing that doesn’t qualify as traditional scholarship, such as blogging?

    Levy: I’m a legal writing teacher and because my classroom teaching is based on hypothetical problems that change from year to year, I don’t have the luxury of being able to concentrate in one field or discipline.  Instead, what I enjoy thinking about and writing about is teaching itself.  Both teaching generally and teaching legal research and writing - so that’s where I’ve done almost all of my writing.  I’m fascinated about the role the teacher plays in the learning process.  Why are some teachers successful at getting their students to learn and others are not?   My observation is that it doesn’t necessarily correlate with  traditional notions of intelligences (i.e. IQ) but instead it’s a difficult to quantify combination of traditional intelligence, an inherent understanding in how people learn, empathy, and ability to understand student personalities and how to motivate them, among many other qualities.  A lot of it has to do with the interpersonal relationship the teacher develops with the class and individual students.  It’s not a social relationship but instead a relationship that offers support and encouragement to students while also pushing them in the right ways.

    So that’s what I like to write about.  I’m fortunate in that my school, Nova Southeastern University School of Law, let’s me count “scholarship” about teaching towards my publication requirement.  Some schools don’t and that makes it especially hard for legal writing professors, or clinicians and librarian who don’t have a doctrinal specialty - to publish.  Traditional faculty publish in the areas they teach so their classroom preparation compliments their scholarship and vice versa.  But if your teaching specialty is skills and you’re not permitted to write about skills training - it’s doubly hard to find the time and energy to write about subjects that you are not also teaching.

    For the past 10 months or so, I’ve also been an associate editor at the Legal Writing Prof Blog which I’ve enjoyed very much.  It’s a much lighter kind of writing - I report topical stories that relate to legal writing and legal education generally.  That kind of writing is fun and I also derive some tangible benefits from it. I feel I’ve become much more knowledgeable about law practice and trends in the job market, the pressure lawyers are facing these days due to the terrible economy. It helps me better understand the anxiety of my students and also better prepare them for the skills they are going to need when they get into practice.

    Whether my dean will count blogging towards my publication credits remains to be seen.
    I should add that I’ve sensed a certain esprit de course among legal bloggers and have made cyber-friendships through blogging which also makes it a lot of fun.

    AA: How do you find time to write as an adjunct?

    Levy: For truth in advertising purposes - my normal day “gig” is a full-time legal writing professor at Nova Southeastern and University of Colorado School of Law before that.  This summer I was invited to teach two legal writing courses as a visiting adjunct at William Boyd School of Law in Las Vegas.  I find it hard enough to find the time to write as a full time faculty member.  As an adjunct who would also be working full-time —I don’t know how people do it.  I do know that some, like Mitch Rubinstein who edits the Adjunct Law Blog, have been very successful at publishing as an adjunct.  To me he -and adjuncts like him - have super-human qualities.

    AA: How have the institutions who employ you responded to your writing? (Do
    they support it? Ignore it? Even know about it?)

    Levy: I’ve gotten different responses depending on the school.  My experience has been that schools more highly ranked by USNWR, generally speaking, care less about skills training for law students than the lower ranked schools.  More elite schools are much more  focused on having faculty produce “paradigm-shifting” scholarship  and the placement of those articles in the most elite student-edited law reviews.  In that kind of environment, there isn’t much interest or support for professors—full-time or adjuncts—who teach skills training nor any writing we may produce that’s oriented toward the practice of law rather than theory. 

    At my present institution, the administration and colleagues are highly supportive of both the skills faculty and any writing we produce that relates to the practice of law or law school skills pedagogy  My school is pleasantly realistic about its role in producing students who can practice law so there’s a lot of support for what I do - both in terms of morale and financially. 

    It’s extremely difficult to find time to write during the school year as a legal writing professor.  There are so many demands upon one’s time.  Working closely with students who can be very stressed about grades can demand a lot of the teacher’s time, not only during the week, but also on weekends answering questions before assignment are due.  Legal writing profs are also constantly grading assignments throughout the semester, in addition to the time it takes to prepare for class.  And what doctrinal colleagues sometimes don’t understand is that our curriculum is built around hypothetical writing problems that often change from year to year in order to prevent plagiarism concerns or to just stay current.  Thus, we often have to learn a new problem, and the new cases that relate to that problem - each semester.  It’s a bit like being stuck in the movie Groundhog Day - each year can seem like one is starting over again as a brand new teaching with all the extra prep time that takes.  Although we gain classroom expertise over time just like our doctrinal colleagues, the need to change assignments each year and extra preparation learning new assignments requires can make it especially difficult to find time to write during the school year.  All of that can be exacerbated further if the writing teacher has a large number of students which, I did last year because I was teaching an overload. 
     
    And if the writing teacher is an adjunct who is also working full time during the day, teaching and meeting with students at night and grading on the weekends - it would seem almost impossible to find the time to write.  Although some do and to me these people are extraordinarily talented and dedicated.

    AA: What particular challenges/special attributes are there to legal
    writing/teaching legal writing? Does being an adjunct affect any of these at
    all?

     
    Levy: I think one of the most importance attributes for a legal writing professor to have is patience with students who are struggling with new material and are often frustrated that they are not getting the same results - in terms of grades - that they achieved at the undergraduate level.  I’ve found this to be more of an issue with younger students, fresh out of college, who generally comprise the day sections I teach. 

     
    One thing I’ve noticed this summer working as an adjunct is that maintaining morale can be a serious problem for adjuncts. One can be made to feel like a ghost - although we’re faculty, we don’t really feel like we’re part of “the team.”  Full timers generally don’t know our names - or even that we’re teachers rather than students - and it can be lonely and isolating to not feel connected to the institution in the way full time faculty are.  I guess that may be the nature of the best - we’re independent contractors hired to do a very specialized and limited task and then be on our way.  I hope this experience will make me more empathic to adjuncts at my own institution.

    AA: Any final thoughts on writing you’d like to share?  
    Levy: While I stated at the beginning of the interview that I don’t like to write because I find it incredibly difficult - I think that’s also what helps me be a good writing instructor.  I can really empathize with students who are intimidated by writing or don’t feel they are good writers because I do know exactly how they feel as opposed to a teacher who doesn’t struggle with their own writing as much.  I fervently believe that good writers are made, not born, so I try to inspire students that no matter how bad a writer they think they are, I can guarantee they can become an excellent writer if they are willing to work at it. 
     
    AA: Thank you!

    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

  • 03 Aug 2009 /  Uncategorized

    I’ve spent a lot of time in recent posts lamenting this or that aspect of the adjunct’s relationship with writing. I’d like to take a break from that to celebrate one of the many adjuncts who is also a successful writer. Carol Amato has been an adjunct for some time now…and she’s published close to 20 books and 200 articles. I have to admit I’ve only got one on my shelf right now— The World’s Easiest Guide to Using the APA—but I and my students both find it highly useful. Carol was gracious enough to answer a few questions for me.

    AA: Why do you write?

    Carol: I write because that’s my passion. I have wanted to be a writer since I was in the fourth grade. My teachers were my critique group back then. I wrote first chapters of novels about horses—the stallion overlooking the herd of mares—and cowboys. Westerns were big back then. As someone who owned and showed horses, this was my genre.

    The Amato family is full of artists and musicians. A few of us are writers. One cousin owns a publishing company that puts out several of the very popular fishing and hunting magazines. Another cousin has books she updates yearly on wedding information in Portland, Seattle, and a few other west coast cities.

    I also write to impart useful information to people. One book, How to Start and Run a Writers’ Critique Group, is geared to writers who would like to find like-minded people to critique their work. Then there are The World’s Easiest Guide to Using the APA and The World’s Easiest Guide to Using the MLA. I was a tech writer in a former life, and when one of my students at an onground campus threw the Publication Manual of the APA across the room in frustration, I knew there had to be an easier way to present this information.

    AA: How does your academic writing relate to your teaching? How about writing that doesn’t qualify as traditional scholarship, like The Phantom Hunters?

    Carol: As I mentioned, I try to produce writing that is useful to people. This includes students. There isn’t any reason why they should have to slog their way through books that are written by academicians rather than writers and that are meant for Ph.D.s writing for the professional journals. Students should be able to concentrate on the content of what they are writing, not spend their time deciphering esoteric code.

    I have also started a blog for adult learners called Carol’s Campus Chatter (www.carolscampuschatter.com), where I post articles of benefit to them. They cover everything from time management issues to how to do research. I want adult students to post questions there, too, so that dialogues can be carried on.

    While The Phantom Hunters, a paranormal mystery series for kids 8-12, may not seem to be academic in nature, it actually is. Its point is to teach kids tolerance for diversity. Each book in the series takes place in another culture. In the first book, The Lost Treasure of the Golden Sun, the main character goes to the Navajo Nation with her twin sister and her neighbor. She discovers that the visions and strange encounters she has had have been caused by ghosts, and it’s a medicine man who validates this for her. The readers are engrossed in what I hope is an exciting story while at the same time learning all about Navajo culture. One internationally known mystery writer called this story “a Tony Hillerman for kids,” which I consider a tremendous compliment.

    The second book, The Secret of Blackhurst Manor, the main character goes to England with her family; she has inherited a manor house from her recently deceased Grampa—a house the family didn’t even know he owned. Through the mystery in this story, readers learn about the unfairness of the class system. The story is set in Lincoln, a city at the top of Sherwood Forest, where my ex-husband was from and where I lived at one time. It was built by the Romans, so, of course, I had to put Roman soldier ghosts in the story. This lent itself to all kinds of references to Lincoln’s Roman past. This is perfect for 6th graders, who study Ancient Rome.

    Each book in the series is accompanied by a teacher’s guide, so that the books can be used in the classroom with social studies units.

    AA: As an adjunct, how do you find time to write?

    Carol: In short, with great difficulty. As a large part of my income comes from book sales (to date, I have sold 65,000 copies of my APA guide, for example, and I’m in the second print run of the first book of the mystery series), my teaching load can be lightened when I need a lot of time to write. At other times, I do my teaching first, then write the rest of the day in between handling issues at my publishing company,.  

    AA: How have the institutions who employ you responded to your writing? (Do they support it? Ignore it? Even know about it?)

    Carol: Without one of the institutions, The World’s Easiest Guide to Using the APA would have been a lot harder to produce. Back in 1995, I was teaching onground at a large private university for adult learners. I mentioned that one student had thrown the APA Manual across the room in frustration. I immediately went home and outlined a more user-friendly way to present this information. When I had a rough draft, I approached the Director of Academic Affairs and showed him what I was doing. He ordered 2000 copies on the spot, 1000 for faculty and 1000 for the bookstore. That launched Stargazer Publishing Company, which concentrates on books for the educational market, and the first and second print runs of the APA guide.

    Another university at which I teach adopted my book for several years as their required APA style guide.

    As they say, however, all good things must come to an end. The first university decided that they wanted rights to the book so they could earn the profits themselves, and when I wouldn’t hand them over, they stopped using it. The president of the second university decided that the school couldn’t require students to use a book that hadn’t been written by a Ph.D. Good thing the book, now in its 4th edition, has been and is selling to colleges and universities all over the country. Loss of these two accounts did not cause any major problems except a blow to the ego and major disappointment for the lack of ongoing support.

    AA: Unfortunately, your experience with these two schools sounds all too likely—part of academia’s ongoing push towards a professionalization that is too narrowly defined.

    Greg Beatty: Thank you for sharing your story with us, Carol, and for your work. 

    Tags: , , ,

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes