The Adjunct Workforce in Social Work Education Study

Background

Part time, non tenure track faculty known as contingent or adjunct faculty comprise more than 50% of the teaching workforce.  This study explores the experience, motivation, profile and employment conditions of 320 adjunct faculty teaching in social work programs across the country. It is said that when experienced practitioners become adjuncts, they draw on their deep understanding of current practice and enhance practice preparation yet few studies have documented the profile of social work adjunct faculty and the extent to which they are integrated and supported in the Schools they work in.

Methods

Two waves of an online survey of adjunct faculty in campuses around the country were conducted using the Qualtrics platform. Contact information was obtained through school websites. Letters requesting assistance in recruitment with a link to the Adjunct survey were sent to program administrators in a large metropolitan area.  National participation was encouraged through messages on the Deans and Director Association list serve. The questions were designed to capture the benefits, supports and overall experience. The survey also replicated some questions from the Coalition on the Academic Workforce’s 2012 survey of undergraduate contingent faculty. A companion survey of deans and administrators was simultaneously conducted to capture management’s perspectives on the use of adjuncts.

Results

More than half the respondents reported teaching for one institution and teaching one course in Fall and two courses in spring, with 43% teaching at least one Practice course. Adjuncts do report substantial practice experience, a mean of 17.5 years post MSW work experience with 44.6% reporting 20 years of experience or more. Approximately 82% of the 320 respondents indicated that they did not consider their adjunct teaching as their primary form of employment. Slightly more than 1/3 (37.7%) were provided with some training and 36% were provided with a ' procedures manual'. Of note was the finding that 73% reported being required to have 'unpaid' office hours and 60% were required to attend departmental meetings without additional pay. Only 40% reported having an office or a cubicle for work. Perhaps as a result of limited supports, less than half feel they have input into the curriculum and 41% agree or strongly agree that they feel a sense of inclusion in their programs.  Approximately 50% stated that in addition to their teaching responsibilities they served as field instructors and/or advisors. The majority (80%) indicated they became adjuncts to give something back to the profession and approximately 70% felt strongly they bring 'real' practice to the classroom and enjoy teaching.  The qualitative responses indicate that a great deal of satisfaction is gleaned from their work with students. 

Implications

The implications from this descriptive study suggest that in the absence of concrete benefits, limited access to good working conditions and poor pay the vast majority of the respondents were motivated by a genuine desire to give something back to the profession and their enjoyment of teaching. Further, improved supports, working conditions and inclusion in curriculum development, adjuncts could be valuable assets for a program.