Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Reading Room: Steve' Street's columns

Originally published March 21 2010, updated to correct bad links but worth republishing as current to bring it to your attention again... and mine as well for not following up on my exhortation to bring back the Reading Room series, which has only two other posts, "What are Universities for?" and "A Proposal to American Labor" (unless I retro-tag likely candidates among past posts).


Here's what I wrote introducing the first Reading Room post:
Remember the reading tradition in US union history? Reading Rooms in hiring halls. Samuel Gompers' cigar rollers voting to have a member on the clock read great books to them as they worked. Why not an online reading room right here
The call for suggestions still stands. Who and what are your choices? Cary Nelson, Keith Hoeller, Marc Bosquet.... all obvious choices. Let's include the less obvious as well. Accompanying links always appreciated. Post as comment or email me at vanessa.vaile@newfacultymajority.info

Thanks to NFM Board Member and Research Chair, Ross Borden, for list and heads up. Let's bring back the Reading Room and post more link lists. Suggestions welcome...

Steve Street: Select Bibliography 2008-2010


5 comments:

  1. I agree with Steve's proposal to equate pay with teaching load and I also agree with Naomi Wiley's assessment of the higher education today. I began teaching 7 years ago after serving 20 years as a Fortune 500 executive and entrepreneur. The public colleges where I now teach are a decade behind with their integration of new technology into the curriculum, tenured professors lack practical experience and are sadly out-of-touch with real world application, and even the newest text books are seven years behind current best practices. The idea that tenured faculty should assess adjunct and part-time lectures is problematic, because professors use outdated academic criteria to evaluate experienced practitioners. The results are predictable - part-time faculty and adjuncts consistently receive poorer evaluations than the tenured professors who evaluate them. If we want to align the university experience with real world opportunities, we not only have to pay adjunct and part-time faculty more, we need to link faculty pay with outcomes such as job placement rates and average starting salaries.

    ReplyDelete
  2. WSJ reading adjunctMay 11, 2010 at 5:24 AM

    Wouldn't that be Martha Riley, not Martha Wiley? If this is going to be a regular feature, shouldn't all sides be heard from?

    ReplyDelete
  3. WSJ reading adjunct: Do you mean "Naomi Riley, not Naomi Wiley"?

    And if you've got a side, post away.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pardon me for being a disciple of the obvious but specific references, preferably with titles, links, quoted passages illustrating mcapone's points, would help make better sense of his comments before responding to them, most especially the closing claim:

    "If we want to align the university experience with real world opportunities, we not only have to pay adjunct and part-time faculty more, we need to link faculty pay with outcomes such as job placement rates and average starting salaries."

    Which of Steve's articles is he referring to? Which Naomi Riley (so presumed based on Google search - THAT puzzle is the easy one) article? It's impossible to discuss any article intelligibly (let alone intelligently) unless we know which one it is and exchanges refer to the same one. Even if I read all of them, I'd still be guessing which was the one referred to.

    Another guess but I wonder if WSJ means we should cover both (or more or however many) sides. I'm open to guest posts but would like more conversation first, substantive and supported.

    ReplyDelete
  5. These all seem to link. A real treat.

    ReplyDelete

pull up a soapbox and share your 2¢

Printfriendly

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...