In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I am hoping to do a bit of crowdsourcing in order to get a sense of the norms of other departments when it comes to non-tenure stream faculty being involved and voting in tenure stream job searches. As a bit of context, I am in my first year as a teaching assistant professor in a fancy R1 department. This year, my department is running two tenure stream searches and one search to hire another teaching assistant professor. Our jobs are intended to be teaching-only with some service expectations (so, no research support, research funding for conferences, grad student supervision, etc.).

These teaching assistant prof. positions are relatively new to our department, and my concern is that the tenure stream (TS) faculty are expecting us to take on many of the downsides of being a TS faculty without any of the accompanying upsides. Our (very small) teaching faculty subset is already expected to run the teaching faculty search on our own (with the addition of the chair, who will presumably be quite busy with everything else going on). We are then also expected to meet individually with all 8 of the flyout candidates for roughly an hour interview, attend all 8 job talks, and pore through all of the 8 (mostly senior) candidates' materials. This will all be happening over the span of about a month, during which time we'll also need to be conducting interviews (and later flyout) for our own job search).

When I think of what TS faculty at previous departments tended to complain to me the most about, it's often been faculty meetings and the work that comes along with job searches. We are already expected to be at the faculty meetings (even if many of them have to do with things that don’t concern us and that we don’t functionally have a say over), which is fine. My thinking, though, is that I am not hired to be a researcher and I do not have any of the associated perks (chance for tenure, research funding, dedicated research time, the option to not always be teaching during department works in progress meetings, etc.) that come with being an R1 TS faculty member who was primarily hired to be a researcher. We are now being asked, however, to take part in one of the more unpleasant duties that would typically come with being hired into one of these positions. 99.9% of the conversations in our meetings so far on the candidates, after all, have to do with assessing the candidates' research. Given the fact that we are not hired (or in any way valued) as researchers, it's hard not to feel like we're expected to shoulder many of the negatives of the TS role without any of the positives (or the pay, prestige, etc.). If we’re being honest, it’s also not the case that any research-related input we might provide when assessing these candidates would be taken seriously.

The reason I am providing so much detail is that our chair seems open to hearing me out on this, and I am hoping to convince him to let us sit the two TS searches out when it comes to voting (which would then release us from some of the aforementioned burdens). I’ve already brought up in passing that the departments I've been a part of have not had NTT faculty vote on faculty hires, but I realize that sample size is small. So, I am curious: Do NTT faculty vote on tenure stream faculty hires at your department? If so, what are the associated expectations? Out of curiosity, I'm also curious how typical it is for NTT faculty to be running their own search (with flyouts and the whole nine yards), but that's the least of my worries at the moment!

I apologize for the long post! I suppose the last relevant detail is that I am legitimately worried about being able to juggle our own search and flyouts, these 8 TS flyouts, and my teaching duties this semester, as I am teaching an entirely new prep with three sections and over 100 students to grade. So, thank you in advance for any advice and/or insight!

I am curious to hear about norms here too. My university's faculty handbook reads, "The departmental service expectations, if any, are expected to be related to a Teaching Professor or Lecturer’s area of teaching. Any additional service expectations must be made clear and explicit by the department Chair and communicated to the Teaching Professor/Lecturer and the Dean." While this in principle leaves it open for non-TT faculty to be asked to do service like that described by the OP, the language is clearly intended to limit service expectations for non-TT faculty, and for my part, I can't remember non-TT members of our department ever being required to serve on a search committee. Hiring recommendations are also made by votes of search committees, not the entire department (though search committees may of course ask what other faculty think of finalists).

What are norms like elsewhere?

Posted in ,

5 responses to “Norms for service expectations for non-TT faculty?”

  1. anon R1 fac member

    I think this is something to be hashed out with your department, but one thing to keep in mind is that your chair may well be acting in (very) good faith. I’ll just say that as someone who works at an R1 with a grad program, this is genuinely shocking to me:
    “When I think of what TS faculty at previous departments tended to complain to me the most about, it’s often been faculty meetings and the work that comes along with job searches.”
    In my department, and I don’t think this is uncommon, hiring committee work/job searches are seen as some of the most valuable, important, and impactful service we do and they are service jobs that everyone seems to really want to do. It’s basically all the other service that is exhausting and horrible, but in this case, you’re getting control over something that matters deeply to you and your future: your future colleagues. (Also, if your department has a grad program: I guarantee you that hiring is a very, very small portion of what people are spending their service time on, that some people are doing insane levels of service, and that you are, in fact, being protected from that.)
    So, I just want to suggest that your chair might think they are helping you, not hurting you, by enabling you to participate in these searches. That doesn’t mean they are right, but it might be a helpful starting point for the discussion.
    This is also related to being a voting member of the faculty–that seems to me to be an extremely, extremely important department right that many people deeply value and which also is tied to equity stuff and not having a “second tier” faculty (which we have in my department, the non-tenure-stream faculty are just completely disconnected from everything). There are good and bad things about that second tier stuff for the second tier people, but a bad thing is that they have no say over anything and also are not treated as equal colleagues (and those things are obviously connected). So your chair also may well think: oh it’s so good that we’ve managed to create these positions with more equity of that kind.
    So perhaps a place to start the discussion is with assuming (extremely) good faith and looking at what is in fact best for you all. Do you WANT to be a second-tier faculty (where there are huge advantages to that: the second-tier faculty in my department teach only slightly more than us and have zero service expectations and zero research expectations and make nearly as much money than us–if you don’t care about being incorporated into the community and want an easy job, well, they have some of the easiest jobs I have ever heard of in academia)? Is there some way to figure out what kind of incorporation into the community you do want, and what would be best for you given that?
    Anyway, that’s just to say I don’t think it’s wrong that including non tenure stream people in searches and giving them a vote is generally valuable (for them!), and so I’d go at it with that background, thinking: this is all to try to create a more equitable community, and now I/my chair/the other non tenure stream faculty need to think about whether it needs to be tweaked. But with the baseline of: assuming no one was trying to throw work at you but rather that they assumed you would want to be included and would want that power/control. Even if that’s wrong, it’s still likely the best way to start the conversation, so it’s kind of a win-win, I think.
    Just my two cents.

  2. anon R1 fac member

    Also, it would perhaps be good to include the other teaching stream faculty in your discussion with your chair, since they may feel differently about some things than you do.

  3. teaching and service

    Teaching faculty members here have also been asked to take on a good chunk of service (not related to hiring, in my case anyway). We’re not even on continuing contracts, nor do we have votes in faculty meetings. Anyway, interesting to hear of another place where service is off-loaded onto faculty that aren’t tenure-stream.
    My complaint is that the service expectations weren’t clear at the time of hire. It seems to just be extra labor, put upon us without any warning, with the unstated but vague feeling that renewal might depend on it.

  4. If it were me, I would be happy to have a say in choosing potentially career-long colleagues, even if it meant a big time commitment one year. (Presumably this rate of hiring won’t be a regular thing.) There are big advantages to being part of the life of the department. Exercising a right to vote on searches could be a wedge for getting a voice on other things that matter in the department (curriculum decisions, say).
    If those aren’t things OP cares about, “work to rule” is the right position. Check your hiring letter, contract, and faculty manual, which together will define the expectations for service in your position. Look for definitions of workload. At my university, we divide the 100% of the total job into teaching, research and service, with specific amounts of time/effort for each. If it is not in your job description, you don’t have to do it. If service is only supposed to be a certain percentage of your total effort, you don’t have to go over that. (Informal expectations be damned.) BTW, it is not up to the department to decide what your workload is: That is up to the dean/university.
    At our place, the only full-time non-TT folks are Lecturers. Their jobs are 100% teaching, with no service or research expectations. We invite them to be part of hiring committees, including having a vote, but only if they choose to participate. They usually don’t.

  5. cheer up

    I want to be honest while hopefully still helpful. (1) A new course (multiple sections) and running a search may look daunting, but it is actually quite average load if I look at my colleagues’ loads. It may still be a lot but doesn’t sound saturated or abusive, just putting in perspectives. (2) Regarding TS search, you can put in more or less time, because I don’t think it is normal to expect anyone outside the search committee to scrutinize the materials closely. (3) The most problematic part is that they do not respect your input so you feel like time wasted. There are two scenarios here. a) They didn’t value your input (on research) simply because you are not TS. In that case, it is completely okay for you not to spend anytime evaluating the research and thus saving time. You can still give input on collegiality and teaching aspects if you want. b) They didn’t value your specific input in specific cases. This happens to all of us (research faculty included), especially junior ones. In that case you need to decide on how hard you want to work on your input to make it count (the answer is probably it is not worth it). Personally, I would not talk to chair about it but simply deprioritize TS search based on my schedule. The reason is that this is basically a form of honor and recognition. I also would not take the whining TS colleagues’s words at face value.

Leave a Reply to cheer upCancel reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading