Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

You can fancy yourself a professor.

Not really, law schools make it pretty clear that you won't get tenure if you have too much practice experience. Adjuncts just tend to teach actual legal practice subjects in elective seminars. I thought it was mainly for immigration and personal injury attorneys to make supplemental income for a few hours a week while their paralegals hold down the ship.

I had an adjunct who was a former cabinet secretary who had universities tripping over themselves to offer tenure. I had another who was a circuit court judge. I'd be willing to bet they would have no trouble finding full time employment at a law school if they ever wanted it

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

People who are passionate about a subject and want to nerd out on it. The classes that I had adjuncts for were deep in the weeds of niche admin law and the people I know teaching now are incredibly into their subject matter

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

Adjuncting is intended for professionals who teach a course on the side, typically as a way of giving back. They money isn't that great.

The issue in many fields, especially liberal arts, is that the universities are producing too many PhDs with poor job prospects, so those PhDs ended up being adjuncts as their only job (often at more than one college at a time), then complain about lack of job security and benefits as an adjunct.. when adjunct isn't designed for that.

Your presence is needed in the PhD thread in the Colleges & Universities Forum. In that thread, PhDs are allegedly making very decent money.

Most of them aren’t working as professors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

Adjuncting is intended for professionals who teach a course on the side, typically as a way of giving back. They money isn't that great.

The issue in many fields, especially liberal arts, is that the universities are producing too many PhDs with poor job prospects, so those PhDs ended up being adjuncts as their only job (often at more than one college at a time), then complain about lack of job security and benefits as an adjunct.. when adjunct isn't designed for that.

What professionals do you think would be teaching humanities courses on the side? Sure, a published novelist might teach a class in an English department, but what about in philosophy? History? What awesome out-of-academia jobs do the Philosophy Ph.D.s have that would allow them to teach a course for cheap on the side?

It's surely a different situation for fields like law, but I think it's wrong to assert that as a rule, "adjunction is intended for professionals."

Maybe it’s good money for SAHPs to make a buck

I taught legal writing and it was so much work for not much money. I enjoyed it but honestly thought of it more as volunteer experience than work for pay at that rate.

I have a PhD in Computer Engineering with specialty in AI and my salary is 700K/yr at Apple. You can't get me to become an adjunct professor for peanut pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 this. Re law school - adjuncts are there to fill a need such as tax, immigration, family law, civil litigation, research. They are not and will never be on the same lev as tenured faculty which usually (at top schools) come right off clerking from scotus

"come right off clerking from scotus"

Really ? Can you refer me to one or two who did this ?

I'm assuming PP meant straight to a tenure track position from a Court clerkship rather than a tenured position. It's not uncommon, though probably less common than doing a Climenko, Bigelow, or other VAP program.

Anonymous wrote:+1 this. Re law school - adjuncts are there to fill a need such as tax, immigration, family law, civil litigation, research. They are not and will never be on the same lev as tenured faculty which usually (at top schools) come right off clerking from scotus

"come right off clerking from scotus"

Really ? Can you refer me to one or two who did this ?

+1 this. Re law school - adjuncts are there to fill a need such as tax, immigration, family law, civil litigation, research. They are not and will never be on the same lev as tenured faculty which usually (at top schools) come right off clerking from scotus

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

People who want to transition into full-time teaching at a college but need experience (adjuncting first). By “teaching full time” I mean full time lecturer, not tenured professor.

It doesn’t work this way. That is the “dream” they sell many oversubscribed PHDs who did not land a tenure track position. Universities rarely transition an adjunct or term faculty into a full time tenure track position with job security and benefits and decent non poverty wages. If you adjunct you do it for the love of teaching, mentoring, exposure to the newest trends/theories in your field, maintaining a university connection including the faculty ID cars which gets you access to resources like discounted software at “educational” prices rather than market rate.

PP here. I specifically said “full-time lecturer, not tenured professor.” Many universities hire full time “lecturers” who may not even have a PhD but whom have teaching experience & experience working in their field professionally. This is common in subjects like marketing, law, accounting, finance and management.

"Full-time lecturer" is not common in law schools. I don't understand why there are so many people in this thread with zero experience with law schools commenting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

People who want to transition into full-time teaching at a college but need experience (adjuncting first). By “teaching full time” I mean full time lecturer, not tenured professor.

It doesn’t work this way. That is the “dream” they sell many oversubscribed PHDs who did not land a tenure track position. Universities rarely transition an adjunct or term faculty into a full time tenure track position with job security and benefits and decent non poverty wages. If you adjunct you do it for the love of teaching, mentoring, exposure to the newest trends/theories in your field, maintaining a university connection including the faculty ID cars which gets you access to resources like discounted software at “educational” prices rather than market rate.

PP here. I specifically said “full-time lecturer, not tenured professor.” Many universities hire full time “lecturers” who may not even have a PhD but whom have teaching experience & experience working in their field professionally. This is common in subjects like marketing, law, accounting, finance and management.

I'm an adjunct at a T2 law school in California. I make $4k for a 2 credit class which I think is about average for peer schools. For the person who asked why people do it - in CA at least, many, many people are adjuncts to help burnish their resumes when they put in for state court judgeships. It's considered a desirable credential (when the governor announces appointments, it's one of the things listed in the short 3-4 sentence blurb they give about each appointee) and considered to reflect one's SME. For example, many current and former prosecutors teach various crim law-related courses.

correct. I'm a tenured law professor. You get tenure track jobs by writing and publishing, not by adjuncting. Teaching one or two courses as an adjunct WHILE publishing up a storm certainly does not hurt, but adjuncting won't help. We hire a very small number of people as full-time, non-tenure track lecturers, but it's very random and not a career path.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG that's so little for what seems like alot of work. what's the upside?

People who want to transition into full-time teaching at a college but need experience (adjuncting first). By “teaching full time” I mean full time lecturer, not tenured professor.

It doesn’t work this way. That is the “dream” they sell many oversubscribed PHDs who did not land a tenure track position. Universities rarely transition an adjunct or term faculty into a full time tenure track position with job security and benefits and decent non poverty wages. If you adjunct you do it for the love of teaching, mentoring, exposure to the newest trends/theories in your field, maintaining a university connection including the faculty ID cars which gets you access to resources like discounted software at “educational” prices rather than market rate.