Full messages below. Let the discussion continue. --gw
Scott Barker Chair, Informatics Information School University of
Washington says:
Don't assume that adjuncts, affiliates, visitors, lecturers, or graduate
student instructors should be equated with a lesser experience or poorer
quality. It just isn't true.
------------------------------------
I do intend to imply, suggest, or state, that non-tenured and/or
non-tenure track teachers specifically involved in training librarians to
work in libraries are *different" from tenured faculty in positions
Ãteaching graduate students in universities to understand the information
environment and the world of information, and to pursue research in these
areas.
The spice of a seasoned professional from industry is great, and I'm
delighted to know that you have such a wealth of them to draw from. Not
all of us do. But would you want to build an entire university-based LIS
curriculum on their backs and their experiences?
How do you draw the difference between an educational program as a part
of a university, committed to the diverse acquisition of knowlege, and a
training program?
--gw
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Gretchen Whitney, PhD, Retired
School of Information Sciences
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA [log in to unmask]
http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/
jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html
SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
-------------------------------------
I realize that I am opening up yet again the divisions between the world
of librarians (who want to shove books across the counter) and the world
of information scientists (who want to understand the role of information
in the communication and understanding of culture) and the role of
communication theorists (who want to understand the role and intersection
of information technologies and the preservation and communication of
culture).
I am not saying (and I didn't say it in the first place) that
non-tenured or contingent faculty were inferior. They have different
objectives in their intellectual development. They have different
objectives in their lives. They are just DIFFERENT in the objectives of
their lives. I would have loved to spend time with Steve Jobs, but he
would have been an adjunct in an LIS, focused on the advancement of
technology and a business, and not on the raw focus of the advancement of
knowledge through scholarly and scientific work (writing ¦papers and
teaching classes, eg.) although he would have been given credit for the
MacOS. Maybe, if he hadn't rocked a few boats.
You're exactly right, in that these two cultures, the corporate and the
university, have complementary contributions to enhance the educational
experience of the university for the student. They are very different,
but can equally contribute to the experience.
I strongly agree that there are many corporate (adjuncts) who could
teach LIS students about user research. I would also argue that there are
many seasoned LIS professors who could teach corporate (adjuncts) about
privacy issues and constitutional issues.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Gretchen -
Your message seems to imply that non-tenured and/or non-tenure track
teachers are inferior to tenure-track faculty and you express grave
concern that they are teaching so many classes in universities today. I
feel I need to step forward and say that I believe your basic premise is
flawed.
As chair of our undergraduate program here at the University of Washington
Information School, I can tell you that we have great faculty in both
categories. Many of our tenure-track faculty have extensive conceptual
knowledge and research experience that they bring to the classroom. Many
of our adjuncts have great professional experience or hands-on skills.
But I could flip those categories around. I can give you examples of
tenure-track faculty that have great professional experience and adjuncts
that are great researchers. Category doesn't matter.
In many of our technology courses, having faculty with state-of-the-art
knowledge is extremely important. In Seattle, if we have can hire an
adjunct or visiting lecturer from Microsoft, Amazon or Boeing, someone who
has deep knowledge of the technology and deep job experience, and that
person isn't tenure track, that's OK by me. Alternatively that person
might be a Ph.D. or graduate student in our program who is just coming
back to school after working for years in industry. These individuals may
have lots to offer that a tenure-track faculty member may not. They can
and they do deliver exceptionally high quality courses to students.
Similarly, if we can hire an amazing individual like Nancy Perl to teach
an LIS course on adult services in public libraries, wow! I really don't
care if she is tenure-track or not, she is going to (and she does) deliver
a fantastic course that excites and engages students.
In other words - the category someone is in doesn't tell me if they are a
good teacher or not.
Tenure-track or non-tenure track doesn't by itself define the quality of
the instructor or the quality of the class. Don't assume that adjuncts,
affiliates, visitors, lecturers, or graduate student instructors should be
equated with a lesser experience or poorer quality. It just isn't true.
Scott Barker
Chair, Informatics
Information School
University of Washington
----Original Message-----
From: Open Lib/Info Sci Education Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gretchen Whitney
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 5:51 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ALISEadjunct] Fw: New Faculty Majority Summit (fwd)
Greetings all,
A deeply disturbing read, and worth your attention. Whether faculties
like it or not, adjuncts and graduate students (whatever you call them,
that is, non-tenured and non-tenure track teachers) are teaching the
majority of university students at both the undergraduate and graduate
level. They are indeed the New Faculty Majority. This is a major shift
from the late 1960s, when a student would not run into a graduate student
or asst prof at the teaching level. I know that I never did at UNC-CH or
UM. And these were great universities, both for teaching and research.
In terms of LIS education, undergraduate courses in information
sciences are being tossed off to graduate students AFAICT as minor
contributions to the university mission, as are introductory courses at
the Masters level in the information sciences.
I would love to see some numbers here - who at what rank is teaching
who or what? Is ALISE collecting this data?
Ë --gw
---------- Forwarded message ----------
âDate: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 08:34:24 -0500
From: Lorna Peterson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ALISEadjunct] Fw: New Faculty Majority Summit
Inside Higher Education has a thorough essay on this by Modern Languages ËAssociation president Michael Berube:
http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/02/01/essay-summit-adjunct-leaders
I highly recommend this sobering read.
lp
?
ˆ
†
