Negotiating the Paradox: Adjuncts & Writing

  • Part of what I’ve been doing in this blog is noodling around the questions of how adjunct writers’ circumstances affect their writing (and writing teaching), and, by implication, to what extend adjuncts are working in special circumstances.

    Well, here’s one answer to that last question: Bedford /St. Martin’s thinks that adjuncts work in different circumstances. At least, that’s the implication in their online publication Lore. Interestingly, Lore is “a journal for adjunct and graduate student teachers of writing” but it is “edited by TAs, adjuncts, and assistant professors.” I’m tempted to hare off down the “What, no senior faculty need help teaching writing?” trail, but truth be told, comparatively few of them teach writing courses that this is probably simple realism on Bedford St. Martin’s part. So, start with what this dedication implies: graduate students and adjuncts are classed together. It suggests they may also need the most help, and perhaps that they’re the ones doing the composition instruction. (It’s certainly the case at all schools I’ve been associated with.)

    What, then, is Lore, why does it exist, and what does it do? The history of Lore can be found in A Journal Built Around Lore” by Nick Carbone. There Carbone reviewed Lore’s initial history in 2001-2004, as well as a 2009 special issue. Since then, Lorehas become part of Bedford St. Martin’s Bits, a multi-author blog providing advice on teaching composition. (That this new blog still acknowledges the role of the adjunct in composition can be seen in the fact that the blog includes Adjunct Advice from Gregory Zobel.)

    The idea behind Lore—creating a “journal built around lore”— is an intriguing one. On one hand, it represents a kind of theoretical and perhaps political breakthrough: scholarship focusing on pedagogy is undervalued, and so emphasizing it challenges that. The day-to-day elements of teaching that show up in lore is highly situated, and valorized personal experience: both of these depend on relatively recent theoretical structures to be considered worthy of academic writing. On the other hand, my cynical side suggests that Lore may simply have not been necessary until now—that it is a product of the fragmenting academic workplace. (It is definitely a sign of a changing academic workplace, both in the fact it is electronic and in being associated with a publisher.)

    My speculations aside, Lore is highly useful. Victoria Sandbrook, who is blog manager at Bedford St. Martin’s, indicated that the site’s getting a lot of traffic, and that folks are staying long enough to indicate that they’re reading, not just bouncing in and away. The publication’s being cited, and people are linking/referring to it.

    I’m going to take a simpler approach and claim that Lore and Bitsare both useful as personal testimony. I set out to simply sample the various blogs of Bits—and found myself taking notes for assignments and handouts. Some of the blogs won’t be useful for me, but others, including those I initially dismissed, will be. The best example is Barclay Barrios and his tips on teaching composition. I’ve been teaching writing for around 20 years now, and was highly skeptical that I’d learn anything.

    I was very wrong. The post from 11/6, on guiding students through paragraph organization through a formula, was immediately useful. I’ll tinker with it, but I’ll be applying it…within the week. What’s more, the idea behind the tip led me to consider if I could create similar heuristics for any other areas where students regularly face challenges.

    Some of the tips are pretty pedestrian, but they’d all be useful for the graduate student portion of the audience: new teachers need tips on even the basics. As to what might make this applicable to adjunct instructors primarily, or especially, it would have to be the brief tip format. These pedagogical nuggets can be read in a few minutes and applied immediately, anywhere in any course. You don’t have to have a lot of time to introduce a theoretical frame—you don’t even have to have control of your own course design. In that, Bitsis even more useful than Lore itself. Lore’sarticles and forums provide considerable useful perspective on being an adjunct, but they aren’t as immediately applicable as Bits. Taken together, though, very useful. Thanks, Bedford St. Martin’s.

    Tags: , , , , , , ,

  • 14 Dec 2009 /  teaching, time management, writing

    Blogging is a lot like teaching. You start with one project, and then you add another and another, until you’re juggling one more topic than you can track, and you hope that whoever is watching is enjoying the show, or at least paying attention.

    Along those lines, some follow-ups on earlier topics. First, I’ve touched on adjuncts working in the law; those interested in this field might look into the Legal Writing Institute’s upcoming workshop for adjuncts on December 4, 2009 (in both Chicago and New York).

    Second, still no word about the results of the adjunct writing faculty survey. I’m expanding my net.

    Third, and more locally, the adjunct writing conference I reported on earlier continues to bear fruit: faculty are more involved in discussing curriculum at Baker College, and there’s more discussion related to how to improve writing than before. On a related note, other schools who use adjunct faculty extensively have been having such conferences for a longer time. Consider University of Maryland University College (UMUC), who regularly hires adjuncts for online, domestic, and overseas positions. They have had several years of annual summer conferences on writing. You can find a brochure here, and a discussion of the experience here. I’ll also note that this last discussion is found in UMUC’s DE Oracle, an ezine dedicated to instructional quality. Yes, lots of schools have them; this one seems more genuinely committed.

    And now, the grapes.

    Sour grape #1 is standard for academics for hundreds of years: This has been a hard week as far as the relationship between grading student writing and completing my own. This week I had to deal with a complaint from a student that her paper wasn’t that heavily plagiarized, and so shouldn’t get so low a grade, a complaint from a second student that she didn’t know what she was doing wrong…that let me know she couldn’t find my comments on her paper, and a complaint from a third that I had corrected too many grammar errors on his paper and not told him how he could make his writing clearer. (Oh, the irony.) All this came while my own writing projects sat untouched on the shelf…

    Sour grape #2, is standard for adjuncts right now, and a great example of the elephant in the corner. I’m serving on a committee for one of the schools I teach for. It’s a paid gig, which is good, and it allows me access to some of the planning discussions, which is useful if disturbing. In the most recent discussion, one issue that was raised was how to make our students better writers. Another was how to retain more students through the introductory course sequence.

    I was literally speechless at the time, because the school in question has been raising class sizes. The introductory course sequence used to be insulated from this, and so have fewer students in those classes. Not any more. What’s more, the course design process puts a cap on the maximum number of pages students are asked to write, and forces a specific design on assignments, often producing bad and confusing assignments. The school has also been pushing instructors to treat the first instances of plagiarism as accidental. Finally, the school has become more arbitrary in scheduling, making it harder for adjuncts to know if and when they’re teaching.

    I was left saying “Bad and rigid assignments…free passes on plagiarism…much larger classes…scared teachers entering classes with only a little notice…and you want to know what we can do to help students write?”

     

    Oh, the humanity.

    Tags: , , , ,

  • 07 Dec 2009 /  publishing, research, writing

    Perhaps I should better call this, how not to write productively. I’m about to air my own dirty laundry, in the service of learning, blogging, and honesty. I’ll be sending this post in two days late, and the reason why is largely because of my adjunct work situation…or at least, how I dealt with it this week.

    You see, I teach for more than one school. One of the schools I teach for has been offering fewer sections for me to teach, and so I have been applying to new schools in hopes of, um, paying the mortgage. One of the schools I applied to hired me, and I’ve been going through their training to teach online this week. The problem? They gave very specific deadlines by which the training must be completed, and then their server crashed and slowed and sloooowed and…yeah. I spent the time I usually spend writing this waiting to move from page to page within a training website (more than a minute per click) and the sheer frustration drove the blog out of my head. Mea culpa.

    Now, about the question of if adjunct working conditions ever affect scholarly production…ahem. Suffice it to say that I admit it: the personal productivity gurus are correct. I could have overcome this. I didn’t. However, I would have had to overcome it if my schedule weren’t popping like popcorn.

    Turning back to the question of how to write productively (as an adjunct), I thought I’d draw a little inspiration from a few writing heroes.

    Take a glance here and here for lists of extremely productive literary writers. Immediately you’ll see that in terms of general productivity, you can take a lesson from the industrial age (and your savvy lazy students): write the same thing over and over, or the same sort of thing. This is done in genre fiction; it can be done in scholarship. Phrased more acceptably, you might think of it as capitalizing on your existing knowledge base, or as finding a rich vein you can explore in depth. In either case, working in what Kuhn called normal science would make it easier to be productive: work within an established framework, working out the implications of paradigms already established, rather than insisting on seeking groundbreaking discoveries.

    To write productively, you might also consult existing literature to see what research says about productive writers. A recent article in the Journal of Education for Business studied the characteristics of the most productive academic writers working in the field of accounting. It found that the most productive writers (in that field) collaborated with others, and tended to produce longer articles when they did so. Ambitious adjuncts might therefore seek out writing partners; this would also address the lack of connection many adjuncts feel.

    Another step that would generate connection and productivity but that might be difficult for adjuncts is hiring researchers to work for you. It’s a common tool of academic superstars. Lack the funds for that? Yeah, me too. (Remember where we started…)

    One set of tools that might work for anyone regardless of financial status is to use tools of academic productivity. In general, this means getting rid of excuses, writing on a schedule, holding yourself to deadlines and quotas, and setting up a writing/scholarship support group, so you aren’t in this alone.

    There are other suggestions, and I’ll be sharing those as well in future weeks. Promise.

    Tags: , ,

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes