In the post-pandemic world, more and more voices from academia are trying to articulate the problems with the current state of the university system.
In remarks made at the 2023 meeting of the American Historical Association in Philadelphia, Erin Bartram talks of the “intentional systemic understaffing” that plagues universities exploiting the labour of adjunct professors due to a shortage of tenured positions. She makes the case that the AHA has not done enough to tackle the problem, which she believes is larger than tenured professors’ lack of solidarity with their adjunct colleagues:
“And it’s deeply connected to the broader problems facing history as a field of study in K-16 education—the perpetual concern over what majors get jobs, of course, but also the concerted political attacks on the field and its practitioners, most of whom teach without whatever protections academic freedom theoretically provides. And it’s about teaching, which is what every normal person in the world thinks is our main job, and which the field as a whole does not prioritize, train for, reward, or even really understand.”
Marymount University had recently created a furore when its Board of Trustees unanimously passed a plan “that will eliminate nine majors, most of which are in the humanities field.”
Lakshmi Subramanian wrote this disconcerting piece about her experience as a member of “a selection committee for recruiting an assistant professor in the Centre for Women’s Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.” She describes the whole process as “farcical.”
The UK government has announced that “[g]raduates from the top 50 non-UK universities can apply to come to the UK through a new visa scheme.” But measures like this do not address the problem of providing employment opportunities for all degree holders.
Reblogger 