Wanted: A Real Hiring Process

The Constructivist recently made a couple of suggestions for how hiring in the field of English might be improved. He suggested (only half-jokingly I think), the Reality TV Option and the Q-School Option. It is tempting to envision 30-second trailers where an announcer excitedly poses the question, “Who will be America’s next great lecturer?” However, and I think this was really The Constructivist’s point, the hiring system in most disciplines, well, leaves a bit to be desired and needs some serious attention.

Of course, from our standpoint, one big reason for that is that there are too few positions creating a situation where applicants must claw their way to the top of the pile face unbelievable odds in finding a job given their commitment to their field, and ultimately, IMHO, makes hiring committees a bit conservative (small “c”) in their choices.  But there is another problem in the hiring system that has little to do with the cattle calls of applicants and disciplinary association meetings. And that is the inconsistent hiring practices at the institutional level when it comes to hiring contingent faculty.I'm just thinking outloud here, so stay with me through the jump.

One constant problem that contingent faculty face, particularly in the four-year sector is that while colleges and universities may hire them year after year in a nontenure-track position, contingent faculty often have difficulty translating that service into a tenure-track position at the same college.  As Phil has pointed out, it is better in the two-year sector, particularly when you look at a system.  That said, I don’t think it is some misplaced perception that lack of upward mobility from long-term contingent to full-time tenure track faculty member is a reality and a problem.  And that is certainly the reason that FACE legislation calls for priority consideration for contingent faculty in the tenure-track hiring process.To accomplish this, we will not only have to get legislators to agree to that concept, but also get institutions to change their current hiring practices.  When we talk about priority consideration, we hear over and over that there are very few tenure-track openings and institutions want to conduct national searches to ensure that they get the best possible candidate.  And implied in that statement (whether intentional or not) is the assumption that the contingent faculty currently teaching at that institution are not the best candidates.  Why?

One answer certainly has to be because the hiring process that was used to hire those contingent faculty members was not (in most instances) anywhere as rigorous as the process for hiring full-time tenure track faculty.  How could it be, right?  The hiring process for a full-time tenure track position probably costs more money administratively than some colleges pay their contingent faculty!  In other words, the institution shortchanges the contingent faculty member in the hiring process just as it shortchanges the contingent faculty member when it comes to pay.  And that shortchanging has long term effects on how the contingent faculty member is perceived.

So, yes, I am going to suggest what people think is impossible.  We ought to work to make the hiring process for contingent faculty approximate the process of hiring full-time tenure track faculty.  Hiring should be done over time and not at the last minute.  It should be about getting a fit for the department and the institution, not about whoever is available.  It should make the applicant feel valued and excited when they get the job. And most importantly, it should make the institution feel as if they have made an investment in a person that they would like to see excel at that institution.

Now I know that without better pay for these positions, you will never be able to really have a similar hiring process—no one is going to fly across the country for an on-campus interview to teach two courses a week for inadequate pay.  But we have thousands of talented contingent faculty members out there who come from an institution’s community and state who, just as they excel in the classroom, would shine in an interview process. And (it seems to me) that a more involved hiring process would be an important step in helping those who are hiring for tenure track positions begin to develop a more professional relationship with their colleagues and better position contingent faculty to be considered for those occasional openings on the tenure track. 

Or am I dreaming?