Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Jason Stanley's avatar
  2. Daniel Greco's avatar
  3. Nobody's avatar
  4. Roger of Invisible America's avatar
  5. Santa Monica's avatar
  6. Optimistic about LLM's avatar
  7. Ben M-Y's avatar

Being an “adjunct” rather than a VAP: a liability going forward on the job market?

Brian Leiter

A recent PhD writes:

This is the time of year when those of us on the job market who didn't get tenure track offers start to see ads for VAP positions.

Like many other graduate students and early career professors, I am married and have children. My children are very well-settled regarding their respective schools and childcare situations.

I'd like to ask a question of your readers who have been on search committees. How much of a demerit would it be on next year's job market if I continue as an adjunct rather than apply for a VAP position? 

I'm currently as an adjunct and happy at the school at which I teach. Last year, my first on the job market, I decided not to apply to VAP positions. Considering costs and benefits, it seemed that the financial and emotional costs of moving the whole family and possibly living apart from my spouse were definitely not worth a single year of employment at VAP salary. If continuing as an adjunct would significantly hurt my chances for next year on the tenure track market, however, that would be another cost I should consider.

I understand that if people see you are an adjunct, they might that you couldn't get a VAP, and thus lack a certain stamp of approval. Could this be a make-or-break issue for getting a job next year?

My instinct is that the reasons for not seeking a VAP are pretty compelling, and the young philosopher should just make sure that his/her recommenders note why s/he is continuing to work as an adjunct (e.g., "X has not applied for VAP positions so as to avoid unnecessary dislocation for X's family").  But what do others think?  Signed comments preferred, but all comments require a valid e-mail address.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

13 responses to “Being an “adjunct” rather than a VAP: a liability going forward on the job market?”

  1. George Rainbolt

    My thoughts are based on a sample that would not survive scientific scrutiny, but here they are. Ceteris paribus, a VAP looks better on the CV than an adjunct position. If all members of all search committees carefully read all of each candidate's file, comments such as "X has not applied for VAP positions so as to avoid unnecessary dislocation for X's family" in letters of rec would remove much (all?) of the difference. However, the world is not perfect. Faced with 200+ files, some members of some search committees may make a first cut based on CVs. "Could this be a make-or-break issue for getting a job next year?" It could be, but when I review files I see few make-or-breaks and many positives/negatives. Giving up a VAP position is giving up a positive. I would also add that multiple years of adjuncting is sometimes be seen as more of negative than one year.

    Reply
  2. J W Showalter

    "X has not applied for VAP positions so as to avoid unnecessary dislocation for X's family" may remove a suspicion that the candidate was not seen as VAP-worthy (though I'm not sure how much adjunct work would signal that in today's climate); but it also clearly indicates that a) the candidate has a family and b) the candidate has, in recent memory, made career decisions on the basis of that family.

    According to the folklore I've been weaned on, it's better not to disclose that information to an SC before they make an offer.

    Reply
  3. Current Job Seeker

    If you're happy with your work and able to support your family where you are, it would be crazy to give that up to move for a VAP. Sacrificing that much present happiness and financial stability for marginal advantages in the tenure-track lotto is not a rational bet.

    Reply
  4. Current VAP

    The OP should also consider that the VAP market is now heavily competitive. I think s/he should apply for these jobs just to see how well things go. It might say something about chances in the next TT season and s/he might even get a job offer that makes the costs worth it.

    Reply
  5. Gradjunct

    For the last year I have been neither a VAP nor an adjunct but rather a full-time Lecturer on a contingency contract at a major state university in the Midwest. How does this look on the CV? I plan to do it for one more year and then go on the job market in the fall of '14 with a newly minted PhD in hand. Also, I wondering whether there is a difference in assessment if the adjunct work was done during one's PhD studies (which seems to be the norm for me and most of my current peers)as opposed to adjuncting *after* one has the PhD in hand. Or do both look equally bad on the CV?

    Reply
  6. xyz

    I am faculty member at a College concerned principally with undergraduate education. From our perspective it is not held against a candidate that s/he works or worked as an adjunct. We know the reality of the job market, and we feel your pain. Many of us were in similar positions at some point in our careers. Indeed, we want people with teaching experience. Generally, it looks better if one has taught a full teaching load. When we hire someone we want to know they are not going to collapse under the workload.
    On the issue of continuing as an adjunct versus applying for a VAP – we all have lives and we should try to make them enjoyable, and to include in them all the things we value. But as one puts additional restrictions on the jobs one will apply for or take, one greatly reduces one's chances of getting a tenure track job.

    Reply
  7. xyz

    I might add, that we also expect applicants to be active researchers. We want to see they can publish in mainstream philosophy journals. Even at Colleges that are principally concerned with undergraduate teaching, tenure decisions are made on the basis of a consideration of published research (and teaching and service). So whether you are an adjunct, a VAP or an instructor, you are not even in the running if you are not publishing in recognized peer reviewed journals.

    Reply
  8. Landon W Schurtz

    May I ask your commentariat whether search committees make a distinction between multiple years of adjuncting while finishing the PhD and one or more such years after defending? My intuition would be that the former is not particularly damaging, or at least not as much as the latter.

    Reply
  9. NY Job Seeker

    The OP raises a great question. Moving a family to take up a one-year VAP could result in a month or so of distraction from research dealing with apartment hunting and other tasks. And, a 4-4 teaching load with several new courses as a VAP also means less time for research than, say, a 3-3 load of mostly the same course as an adjunct. I am in a similar position to the OP, so I encourage hiring committee members to weigh in with their thoughts.

    Reply
  10. Berit Brogaard

    I recommend against the "apply to see how well things go" approach. It's dishonest, and it's going to be hard for the candidate to turn down a nice offer (thus risking breaking up his or her family).

    I agree with Brian that letter writers should make sure to explain why the candidate kept working as an adjunct.

    -Brit

    Reply
  11. Rich

    I should probably stop reading threads like this, because every time I do, I end up aghast, discouraged, and a little disgusted. Can someone give me an actual, compelling reason *why* toiling in the trenches as an adjunct for more than a year–whether during or after one's PhD is finished–ought to be held against a job candidate competing against the chosen few who have worked as VAPs, ceteris paribus? Either you've produced publishable work or you haven't; either you can teach philosophy or you can't; either you can be relied upon to do committee work or you can't–and if you can do these things, it makes no rational difference whether you did so as a VAP, as an adjunct, or while standing barefoot in the public square.

    Discussions like this make me deeply skeptical that the investment of blood and treasure involved in getting a PhD in philosophy is worth it, when the gatekeepers of the profession seem almost to bend over backwards to find irrational bases for keeping otherwise good, qualified people out of their hallowed club. "Has a family and makes career decisions based on it" is disqualifying?!? Depressing. Truly depressing.

    Reply
  12. David Wallace

    Rich: because it is (defeasible) evidence that the candidate has been unsuccessful in previous applications, and therefore that previous assessors of their work have not ranked it as highly as candidates who currently hold better positions. I'm not especially defending giving it much weight – or any weight at all once you're at the stage of carefully studying a candidate's writing – but it doesn't seem self-evidently unreasonable to regard it as one among various pieces of evidence to allow for at the initial stage, and of course it has the advantage of being quickly assessable. (One of the most common pieces of advice I give to graduate students going on the market is to have some sense of how time-constrained a selection process is and how little time will be available to be given to each application at the initial stage.)

    Perhaps it might sound better put the other way around? "Does it look good on a CV to have managed to get a prestigious job previously?" Of course.

    Reply
  13. Current Job Seeker

    Rich – you're right to be discouraged about the job search process and skeptical about the value of the PhD as an investment. But given the numbers of the present job market, excluding many "good, qualified people" is inevitable no matter what criteria are used. Apart from that, this is just the same unfortunate phenomenon that occurs everywhere. It's easier to get a job (in any field) if you already have a job, because already having a job signals that somebody else thought you were worth hiring. Having a VAP is evidence that you were selected for that in a competitive process. Having an adjunct position instead is seen as evidence that you couldn't secure a more desirable position such as a VAP. But even if search committees stop making such inferences, so long as the ratio of candidates to jobs doesn't change there will be some other reason that leaves otherwise qualified applicants out of the hallowed halls of (tenure-track) academia.

    Reply

Designed with WordPress