I can see that adjuncts could offer an advantage to students because their job is to teach. Ergo, they presumably devote their work-related thinking to teaching. Tenure-track faculty sometimes see teaching as a necessary evil and so don't necessarily put a lot of effort into it. However, the second part of my statement isn't always the case and the first part can be offset by the exhaustion incurred by commuting two or three times a day and the stress of not having a real job.
I was an adjunct for 2-3 years at a community college. It started as a favor for a tenured friend there. Some of the adjuncts were teaching because their kids had started school and they wanted to get back into the labor market. Others were on the adjunct treadmill, and things were hard for them. One member of the former group refused to be on campus if she wasn't actively teaching, meaning next to no office hours. Another one didn't have much time because he taught at three colleges (that I knew of). There were also faculty members who were unenthusiastic about working with students outside of class, but their job descriptions mandated office hours, so they had no choice.
Regardless of what happens to the students, the adjunct model is a raw deal for the adjuncts themselves. HK made a good point about them also not knowing the college and therefore not being able to advise students. And Dude is right about the research responsibilities. I agree with the people who say the two jobs should be separated. These days, though, with universities being run like businesses, that won't happen (unless the people writing checks to the universities start opting out).
ETA: Yes, students absolutely track down their professors after class. The people like my friend, who would spend time helping them, were ALWAYS surrounded by students. If students know they're available, they go to them. Which brings us back to the adjunct treadmill....
Last edited by Val; 09/03/14 09:29 AM. Reason: ETA...
