A Portrait of Non-Tenure-Track Faculty in Technical and Professional Communication: Results of a Pilot Study

Lisa Meloncon ; Peter England Texas A&M University ; Alex Ilyasova University of Colorado Colorado Springs

Abstract

We report the results of a pilot study that offers the field of technical and professional communication its first look at material working conditions of contingent faculty, such as course loads, compensation, and professional support. Findings include that contingent faculty are more enduring with stable full-time, multi-year contracts; they carry a substantial teaching loads; and the majority are satisfied and happy in their present position, but half would prefer to be working on the tenure track.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2016-04-01
DOI
10.1177/0047281616633601
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (8)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Pedagogy
  4. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  5. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Show all 8 →
  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

References (51) · 4 in this index

  1. American Association of University Professors. (2013). The inclusion in governance of faculty holding conting…
  2. Background facts on contingent faculty
  3. The American academic: The state of higher education workforce 1997–2007
  4. Doing social research
  5. 10.1177/0002764211409194
     ↗
Show all 51 →
  1. Pedagogy
  2. Thirteen strategies to measure college teaching: A consumer’s guide to rating scale const…
  3. Review of Economics and Statistics
  4. Tenured bosses and disposable teachers
  5. Cargile Cook, K, & Meloncon, L. (2011). Unpublished raw data: The job market in TPC.
  6. Coalition on the Academic Workforce. (2012). A portrait of part-time faculty members: A…
  7. Professional employment practices for non-faculty members: Recommendations and evaluative…
  8. WPA: Writing Program Administration
  9. Consequences: An increasingly contingent faculty
  10. Technical Communication
  11. 10.3386/w10695
     ↗
  12. 10.1007/1-4020-5742-3_5
     ↗
  13. 10.2307/j.ctv1675b5d
     ↗
  14. 10.2307/j.ctv1675b5d.8
     ↗
  15. 10.1177/0091552108327070
     ↗
  16. Educational Policy
  17. 10.1007/s11162-011-9219-2
     ↗
  18. June, A. W. (2012). How universities treat adjuncts limits their effectiveness in the c…
  19. Programmatic Perspectives
  20. Kezar, A. & Eaton, J. (2014). An examination of the changing faculty: Ensuring institutional quality and achi…
  21. The changing faculty and student success
  22. 10.1177/0002764211408879
     ↗
  23. Knapp, L. G., Kelly-Reid, J. E. & Ginder, S. A. (2010). Employees in Postsecondary Inst…
  24. 10.1177/0021943611406276
     ↗
  25. 10.1177/0002764211409382
     ↗
  26. Universities and the public sphere: Knowledge creation and state building in the era of g…
  27. 10.2190/OE2C1
     ↗
  28. Technical Communication
  29. Meloncon, L. (2011). Unpublished raw data. A survey of TPC administrators.
  30. Intercom
  31. Sharing our intellectual traces: Narrative reflections from administrators of professiona…
  32. College English
  33. Textual carnivals: The politics of composition
  34. 10.2307/j.ctv1675b5d.7
     ↗
  35. Journal of online learning and teaching
  36. Essentials of nursing research: Methods, appraisal, and utilization
  37. Frontiers in Psychology
  38. Technical Communication Quarterly
  39. Gypsy academics and mother-teachers: Gender, contingent labor, and writing instruction
  40. 10.2307/j.ctt4cgjnm
     ↗
  41. 10.1080/08832320009599042
     ↗
  42. Street, S., Maisto, M., Merves, E. & Rhoades, G. (2012). Who is professor “Staff,” and how can this person te…
  43. 10.1002/he.119
     ↗
  44. 10.7748/ns.16.40.33.s1
     ↗
  45. Contingent faculty in a tenure track world
  46. Technical Communication Quarterly