Came across this comment on sessional instructors while wandering the web the other day:
Educational Technology Professor: The Value and Contribution of Sessional Instructors – Diverse Expertise and Relevant Professional Experience.

· The majority of GPE Sessional instructors hold full time employment elsewhere, and teach one or two courses per year with Werklund School of Education.

· Contrary to the national public discourse on sessional colleagues as under appreciated, underpaid individuals who “want to be on the tenure track”, the sessional instructors who teach in GPE are not seeking a tenure track position and they report high levels of satisfaction in their teaching roles, experience success in their teaching, and feel valued for what they contribute to graduate students’ learning and development

I used to teach in the faculty she talks about. I have a different take on it. I’ll tell you that at the bottom of this post.

This is the article she mentions: Sessionals, Posted on March 6, 2014 by Alex Usher

A problem in generalizing about sessionals is that they come in two distinct varities.  First are the mid/late-career professionals who already make good money from full-time employment elsewhere, and who help provide relevant, up-to-date content based on practical experience in programs like Law and Nursing.

…

In Arts & Sciences, on the other hand, sessionals are much more likely to be recent PhD graduates looking to get a foothold on the academic ladder.  Unable for the moment to make the tenure track, taking multiple sessional gigs lets them stay within the university system, but prevents them from doing what they (and indeed the entire higher ed system) value most: research.  As a result, being a sessional can sometimes take one further from the tenure track, rather than closer to it.  The sessional “crisis”, needless to say, focuses on this latter group, rather than on the professionals.

…

And why is their pay so low?  Partly, it’s a free market and there’s a heck of a lot of people willing to do academic work for very little pay.  But partly it’s because institutions have a conscious choice to prioritize pay rises for existing full-time staff (gotta pay more for research excellence!) over hiring new full-time staff. Had pay levels stayed constant in real terms over the last 15 years, and the surplus gone into hiring, the need for sessionals in Arts & Science would be practically nil.

Let’s take these point by point:

• [girlprof] & [Usher] Most sessionals have full-time jobs. (Usher says this only applies to the professional disciplines)
  • I’d really love to know what the actual numbers are, because my experience with the sessionals I know and talk to say that this isn’t true. Many actually try to make a living as sessionals b/c they love teaching.
• [girlprof] Don’t want tenure track positions.
  • I don’t know whether this is true or not. I know some of the sessionals I know would love to have full-time, tenure-track jobs. Some want positions that include research, but others don’t. Others – and I fall into this category – actually want something most universities don’t seem to know how to do: tenure-track (or at least long-term) part-time positions. I’m talking about 1/2 year full-time, or full-year 1/2 time (i.e. 5 full days every 2 weeks). I’ve never understood why universities don’t do this (unless it’s simply b/c they can use sessionals instead). Anyone who has ever work 1/2 time can tell you that the company always wins – they always get more than 1/2 time.
• [girlprof] Aren’t underpaid.
  • Here’s an article from someone who worked (note the past tense) at the very same school who begs to differ. There are many (MANY) more stories like this. I would suggest that girlprofs claims come from those who stay, not the ones who can’t afford to.
• [girlprof] Satisfied and feel valued.
  • Here again, this is likely based on the opinions of those who get re-hired. In order to get re-hired, you need to agree with the administration, because, although they say they support academic freedom, it only applies so long as you say good things about the institution, administration, and faculty. They won’t say anything obvious, of course. They will simply impose tighter and tighter restrictions on what you do, and likely won’t hire you again.
• [Usher] Arts & Science: Most are new grads.
  • I know plenty who have been at this for 10 years or more. That hardly qualifies as a new grad.
• [Usher] Low pay b/c schools focus on research.
  • I figure they pay poorly b/c they can. Working as a full-time faculty member I earned roughly $40/hr. not counting benefits. As a sessional, I earn about 1/2 that with NO benefits. For someone with a PhD and an international reputation (as is the case for many people I know), that’s kind of an insult.

As someone who has spent the bulk of her career teaching as a sessional, I don’t really have many warm and fuzzy feelings(*). I especially don’t have any warm and fuzzy feelings from how I was treated at the UofC. Although my early years there were great, the institution, in spite of what it keeps trying to tell people, is merely a dark shadow of its former self. Most of the people who stay there are either stuck (and can’t go elsewhere) or they have drunk the kool-aid.

(*) My current sessional position at MRU has been a breath of fresh air compared to the UofC. Part of the difference is that I am actually treated with some respect, rather than as a second-class citizen – even when I disagree with them. They even pay better. Go figure.

Be the first to like.

Like

Unlike