Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The work identity of full‐time non‐tenure‐track faculty at a four year research university
(USC Thesis Other)
The work identity of full‐time non‐tenure‐track faculty at a four year research university
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY 1
THE WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
AT A FOUR YEAR RESEARCH UNIVERSITY
by
Lillian Coye
__________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2014
Copyright 2014 Lillian Coye
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
2
DEDICATION
For all my participants who were willing to give me their time and share their stories-
thank you! And for all other NTTF, I hope that this study along with future studies encourages
you to keep teaching, making a difference and empowers you to ensure higher education knows
how valuable a role you play.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First I would like to thank my chair Dr. Adrianna Kezar who guided me through this
process. Without her guidance and support I would not have been able to complete this journey.
Thank you for introducing me to the topic and the incredible need for more research on a
growing body of important individuals within higher education. Thank you for challenging me
and pushing me. You constantly provided timely feedback and encouragement to keep going and
to dig deeper. Thank you for the intellectual journey and being patient with me.
In addition I would like to thank my other two committee members Dr. Lynette
Merriman and Dr. Shannon Faris. Thank you for giving me your time and support in this
journey. Your feedback and support made completing this project possible.
I’d like to thank my family. To my parents who continue to be my biggest cheerleaders.
Thank you for always believing in me and supporting me in whatever I choose to take on.
Without your encouragement I would not be the person I am today! Thank you to my husband
for being on this journey with me. Thank you for all your edits and support. Thank you for not
letting me give up and encouraging me to keep going. And to the rest of my family for the
encouragement to keep going and for being understanding when life got busy with school.
A major part of this journey was being part of a great group of individuals working
together, each in the process of completing a dissertation. Thank you all, not only for your
support and feedback but for just being there to listen. I’d especially like to thank the soon to be
Dr. Yun Kim, for being a true partner and now a friend in this process. I would not have made it
through without your email and text support.
Thank you to my friends both near and far for your support of this journey. I know there
were times where I was not always available, but you were patient with me. Thank you
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
4
especially to my friends who themselves completed this journey before me and provided
constant advice, encouragement and laughter to help me make it to the finish line.
I could not end without thanking my work colleagues. You all gave me the gift of time
away to be able to complete this project and supported me through each and every step; without
this gift, the writing could not have happened.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………….. ...2
Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………… ...3
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………….....6
List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………....7
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………….. ...8
Chapter 1: Introduction………………………………………………………………………....1
Chapter 2: Literature Review………………………………………………………………. ...25
Chapter 3: Research Methods………………………………………………………………....73
Chapter 4: Findings………………………………………………………………………… ...92
Chapter 5: Discussion, Implications and Recommendations………………………………...166
References………………………………………………………………………………….. ...191
Appendices
Appendix A: Recruitment Email/Letter…………………………………………... ...200
Appendix B: Follow Up Email to Participants and Questionnaire……………….. ...202
Appendix C: Interview Protocol………………………………………………….. ...204
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Overview of 19 NTTF……………………………………………………………. ...82
Table 2. Positive and Negative Shapers of Full-Time NTTF Identity……………………....152
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
7
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Factors that affect the NTTF experience…………………………………………...71
Figure 2. Factors that affect the NTTF experience…………………………………………...94
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
8
ABSTRACT
In a 2010 report, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) found that full-time non-tenure
track faculty (NTTF) made up two-thirds of all faculty appointments in higher education.
Specifically, NTTF appointments constituted 800,000 out of the 1.3 million faculty hires (AFT,
2010). The rise in NTTF changes the structure of the faculty in higher education, creating a two-
tired system between tenure and non-tenure. Few research studies have investigated the impact
of this changing structure.
This study sought to understand the professional and work identity of full time NTTF by asking
the question: How does the department where a full time NTTF works, shape their work identity
at a four year research university? A qualitative study using narrative analysis was used to
interview 19 full-time NTTF at one private research institution across 7 different departments
and programs regarding their experience as a NTTF. Genevieve Shaker’s (2008) model
regarding the experience of full time NTTF in in a single discipline (English) was used to
analyze the data. While all elements of Shaker’s model were found in this study, two additional
elements could be added to her model including the importance of relationships and creating or
building a niche.
While full-time NTTF do not have a distinct professional and work identity, this study does shed
light on the positive and negative factors that shape full-time NTTF identity. As a result of this
study’s findings, there are factors that higher education and institutions of higher education
should consider with the growing number of NTTF on campuses today. Most importantly,
institutions and departments can learn from this study to create environments that positively
support NTTF and their professional and work identity. These include: valuing the role of
teaching that NTTF bring, creating professional development for all faculty, ensuring that chairs
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
9
are knowledge about NTTF and their needs and policies, and working to create a more common
streamlined experience for NTTF across institutions. These areas appear to have the most impact
as institutions and departments create the context in which these NTTF not only work, but look
to, when reflecting on their professional and work identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
10
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Background
Major changes in the nature of faculty appointments constitute one of the most significant
responses by universities and colleges to the challenges posted by fiscal constraints, and
by the need to stay competitive in a rapidly changing environment where flexibility,
responsiveness, accountability, and cost-efficiency are key. (Gappa, Austin, & Trice,
2007, p.15)
Traditionally, professional identity in academia is linked to tenure, academic freedom,
autonomy, shared governance, and one’s discipline. Today, however, these faculty identity
concepts are in flux, because the nature of American higher education institutions and their
faculty is changing. Colleges and universities have adopted a tripartite system for faculty
appointments: tenure track, full-time non-tenure-track, and part-time non-tenure-track
appointments (Gappa et al., 2007). Tenure-track appointments tend to resemble the traditional
model of a scholar engaged in research, teaching, and service. Full-time non-tenure-track faculty
tend to specialize in teaching or research, and their existence gives the employing institution
greater flexibility in hiring faculty and filling other teaching needs. Part-time non-tenure-track
faculty serve under temporary contracts, where the faculty member is hired for a specific purpose
and teaches for only one term. Both full-time and part-time non-tenure-track appointments are
considered non-tenure-track faculty (NTTF) appointments.
In a report in 2010, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) found that full-time
NTTF made up two-thirds of all faculty appointments. Specifically, NTTF appointments
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
11
constituted 800,000 out of the 1.3 million faculty hires. NTTF are mostly found in the health
sciences, teaching, humanities, natural sciences, business, and engineering fields. Full-time
NTTF tend to work longer at institutions than administrators expect, and NTTF are usually paid
less than their tenure-track counterparts. There are also more women than men in full-time and
part-time NTTF positions. According to the AFT report (2010), by 1998 over one-third (37%) of
full-time female faculty members were either off the tenure track or at campuses without a tenure
system. Moreover, while more racial and ethnic minorities are graduating with advanced
degrees, they are not gaining tenure-track positions. Kezar and Sam (2010) report that “racial and
ethnic minorities are overrepresented in non-tenure track positions” (p.43). Examining part-time
NTTF hires, the 2009 AFT report found that African American faculty increased by 0.5%, Asian
Pacific Islander faculty increased by 0.2%, and Hispanic faculty increased by 0.4%. The total
percentage of part-time NTTF classified as ethnic minority in 2009 was 9% (American
Federation of Teachers, 2009). Schuster and Finkelstein (2006) reported that, of the full-time
NTTF, Asians represented 7.3%, other non-white faculty were 9.8%, and white faculty were
82.9%. Representation of faculty of color in tenure positions increased by 40% during that time
period, while the representation of faculty of color in full-time NTTF appointments increased by
an astonishing 87% (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001).
This non-tenure-track group of faculty is growing at a fast rate. The rise in NTTF is
beneficial in that it allows campuses to retain a variety of talent while maintaining flexibility and
cost savings. But in their haste to keep pace with the current fiscal and economic environment,
campuses have neglected to consider the long-term impacts of the rise in NTTF on their faculty’s
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
12
professional and work identity.
1
Gappa et al .(2007) state that “[t]he shifts in faculty appointment
types have created a bifurcated faculty, where those with full-time tenure-track appointments
enjoy the traditional benefits of professional work—respect, autonomy, collegiality, and
opportunities for professional growth—while those who are not on the tenure track do not
necessarily receive those benefits” (p. 16). For example, unlike their tenure-track peers, NTTF
are often not offered orientation to campuses and departments, lack resources and supplies, are
hired and let go on very short notice, have less significant relationships with their peers, and as a
result are never fully integrated into their workplace. As a result of these changes, a significant
portion of the faculty are losing the autonomy that has traditionally been associated with
professional identity in academia and instead are becoming “managed professionals” (Rhoades,
1998) who are much more accountable to administrators, state legislators, governing boards, and
funding agencies than their predecessors were. As colleges and universities increasingly rely on
NTFF to play a substantial role in teaching, it becomes vital to understand the corresponding
changes to professional and work identity within the academy.
Gappa, Austin and Trice (2007) argue that four major forces are impacting the change in
faculty composition from tenure-track faculty to NTTF. First, colleges and universities are facing
greater fiscal constraints and increased competition. Local and national allocations of funds are
not only limited, but also unpredictable and unstable as there are fewer dollars for federal student
aid and for research grants. Second, institutions and faculty are facing greater calls for
accountability. In the aftermath of a major recession, the public is demanding to know what it is
1
This dissertation uses the phrase “professional and work identity” because the phrase
“professional identity” is insufficient to describe how NTTF understand their roles. NTTF are
not members of a “professional body” in the same way as their tenure-track counterparts.
“Professional and work identity” is therefore better suited to describe how NTTF might
understand their working world and conditions.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
13
that campuses are producing for the economy. Higher education is being asked to respond to the
needs of society, provide better access, and produce higher quality research, all the while
engaging the local community to solve local and national problems. Third, enrollment numbers
and student-body diversity are growing. In the past 25 years, student enrollment in higher
education has increased by over 50% (Gappa et al., 2007); over 17 million people are now
seeking post-secondary education. Today’s student body is more diverse than ever before in
terms of age, race, ethnicity, gender, and educational expectations. Fourth, the information age is
causing significant changes. The rise of new technologies has created new areas of specialization
that are challenging the traditional disciplines. New technologies also help facilitate teaching and
learning in new ways and are changing the nature of teaching and communication. Technology is
even starting to make face-to-face interactions seem less necessary than before.
These four changes have impacted the academic profession significantly. New patterns in
faculty appointments have changed how work happens in higher education. Campuses are
increasingly hiring NTTF to teach and provide the services necessary to handle the growing
student enrollments, a more cost effective solution than hiring additional tenured faculty
(Baldwin & Chronister, 2001). Due to the nature of their appointment type, tenured faculty are
granted more autonomy and focus primarily on research. Tenured faculty participate in faculty
governance and help shape the work within their departments, making decisions about
curriculum and choosing when and what to teach. NTTF have less autonomy and control. They
also face faster pace work environments, expanding workloads, and pressure to do more with
less than their tenured peers. These pressures have tended to undermine the NTTF’s commitment
to the community and the institutions they work for. Correspondingly NTTF do not identify as
strongly with traditional concepts of tenure, academic freedom, autonomy, shared governance, or
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
14
membership in a specific discipline—the factors that in the past have shaped the professional
identity of the academy. These changes leave the professional and work identity of NTTF in
flux. Gappa et al. (2007) point out that these changes demand ongoing, continuous professional
development, for all faculty, if the academy’s professional and work identity is to survive.
Non–Tenure-Track Faculty and the New Professional Identity
Several factors are likely to affect NTTF professional and work identity. These include
the type of appointment NTTF hold (their contract), the title they are given, their socialization
into their work environment, their relationships with peers, and NTFF’s own self perception of
their role.
NTTF faculty are hired on different types of contracts. The contract status of NTTF has
an important impact on their professional and work identity. The length of the contract (or lack
thereof) can impact their commitment to the institution, their job stability, and their perceptions
about their value to the institution. NTTF are classified as either part-time or full-time. Part-time
NTTF tend to work in two-year community colleges. Historically, they were hired as enrollments
in community colleges boomed in the latter half of the 20
th
century. Community colleges see
part-time NTTF as a flexible, cost-effective way to fill teaching needs, partly because retaining
them does not require long searching and hiring processes (Anderson, 2002; Gappa, 1984;
Wyles, 1998; Monks, 2007; Gappa & Leslie, 1993). Part-time NTTF are often hired, and then let
go, on short notice (Levin, Kater, & Wagoner, 2006). The use of full-time NTTF similarly
emerged as enrollments grew and funding was reduced at four-year institutions (Baldwin &
Chronister, 2001). Four-year institutions struggled with an aging faculty, who were ready to
retire, but were forced to reduce the resources that were needed to hire new tenure-track faculty.
As a result, four-year institutions turned to newly granted Ph.Ds, who were looking for jobs, and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
15
hired them on a contract basis. The contracts tend to last anywhere from one year to five years
and can be renewed or lead to a tenure-track position (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001).
Job titles also impact professional and work identity, often providing indicators about an
individual’s role in the work environment. NTTF’s titles vary from institution to institution and
carry different meanings, thus shaping how NTTF view themselves professionally in different
ways. For instance, one campus may use the term “lecturer” to describe a part-time NTTF
member, while another campus may refer to someone with the same role as an “instructor”
(Kezar & Sam, 2010). The ambiguity in titles also extends to other positions, like “adjunct” or
“fixed term,” which may refer to a full-time NTTF position on one campus and to a part-time
NTTF position on another. Sometimes these titles may indicate something about the person’s
contract. As Kezar and Sam (2010) state, the “inconsistent use of titles across higher education is
only one of the challenges when trying to understand non-tenure-track faculty” (p.38).
NTTF’s professional and work identity is also impacted in ways that are different from
their tenure-track peers due to differences in their socialization into the work environment,
relationships with colleagues, and NTTF’s self perceptions of their role. The recruitment, hiring,
and orientation of NTTF is inconsistent. There generally is no formal or systematic process for
hiring NTTF (Cross & Golden, 2009; Gappa & Leslie, 1993). Instead hiring is handled in a
casual manner, usually done by departments. As a result, there generally is no orientation process
or invitation to participate in orientation, resources that are often available to those in a tenure-
track appointment (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001; Gappa & Leslie, 1993). Salaries and benefits of
NTTF are more limited than those provided for tenure-track appointments, though full-time
NTTF tend to receive more pay and benefits than part-time NTTF (Hollenshead et al., 2007).
Both part-time and full-time NTTF lack access to various support services on campuses designed
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
16
to help faculty. Full-time NTTF are more likely to have the space and supplies needed to do their
jobs, whereas part-time NTTF often lack a physical office space and access to supplies (Gappa &
Leslie, 1993). The availability of professional development resources is also limited for NTTF, if
it is offered at all, even though professional development is of growing importance to the
experience of NTTF (Kezar & Sam, 2010). NTTF also worry about their job security, since most
work on a contract basis with an average contract length of one year (Baldwin & Chronister,
2001). The job responsibilities and expectations of NTTF are also inconsistent. Generally, the
primary role of NTTF is to teach, but NTTF’s role can be unclear on other issues like office
hours, space, and curriculum development. The working conditions of NTTF vary greatly based
on the institution and the department in which they are housed. This inconsistency can cause
NTTF to feel lost and leave them unsure about their professional role and work identity.
Much of the research (Gappa & Leslie, 1993; Baldwin & Chronister, 2001; Kezar &
Sam, 2009) on NTTF has focused on the differences in their working conditions. This research
provides some insight into factors that likely shape NTTF professional and work identity. Gappa
and Leslie (1993) and Baldwin and Chronister (2001) collected qualitative data from both part-
time and full-time NTTF. These studies give insight into qualitative aspects of the NTTF
experience, but more research is needed. NTTF report that their work environments are hostile.
There are tensions between NTTF and their colleagues, which can cause the workplace to seem
negative and disrespectful. These tensions exist not only between tenure faculty and NTTF, but
Kezar and Sam (2009) note that full-time NTTF also report challenges from working with part-
time NTTF, because they feel as if they are competing for courses and job security. Moreover,
the job titles and classifications create a two-class system, segregating between those who have
tenure and those who do not (Kezar & Sam, 2010). These hostile working conditions shape how
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
17
NTTF view themselves, and likely cause their professional and work identity to diverge from
that of the traditional academic.
Despite these negative experiences, NTTF report high levels of satisfaction, which could
positively affect their professional and work identity. NTTF appreciate the flexibility in their
roles, which often allows them to teach, work with students, and work within their disciplines
without having to worry about the pressures that a tenure-track position demands, such as
publishing and research (Shaker, 2008). While many choose NTTF positions to find a balance
between work and personal life and report being satisfied overall, Benjamin (1998) found that
NTTF are less satisfied than tenure-track faculty when it comes to pay, benefits, and job security.
Given that some NTTF report hostile working conditions, confusing titles, and differing
roles, NTTF have several unique concerns about their positions and their work, which are likely
to negatively affect their professional and work identity. They worry about salaries, job security,
involvement in faculty governance, inconsistent policies, teaching restrictions, evaluations and
promotion, contracts, academic freedom, and restrictions on their ability to pursue tenure
positions (Kezar & Sam, 2010). Kezar and Sam (2010) suggest that professionalizing NTTF may
help improve their status in higher education and, accordingly, help them develop a more
positive professional and work identity. They describe that the process of professionalization
includes communicating a message of respect, regularizing hiring, creating a systematic
inclusion process, rethinking hiring practices, offering compensation and benefits, using
promotion and evaluation systems, providing opportunities for professional development,
incorporating NTTF into faculty governance, protecting academic freedom, and ensuring that all
NTTF have the necessary resources to do their jobs well.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
18
Given the variations in the NTTF experience, it is likely that their professional and work
identity is different from tenured faculty. In order for NTTF to become their own advocates and
help professionalize their status, we need to know more about NTTF’s professional and work
identity as it is currently constituted. We need to understand what professional identity is, and
how NTTF currently explain and experience their professional and work identity.
Statement of the Problem
As described above, the experience of NTTF is quite different from that of the traditional
tenured faculty member. The professional and work identity of NTTF not only appears to differ
from that of tenured faculty, but also is likely fragmented among the different types of NTTF
positions. NTTF clearly do not have the same experience as tenured track faculty; they do not
have the autonomy or enjoy the same level of academic freedom that tenured faculty do. And
while a NTTF may be associated with a specific discipline, their role within that discipline is
quite different from that of a tenured faculty member. Our traditional understanding of
professional identity within the academy may no longer apply to the unique experience of NTTF,
a group that now makes up a substantial number of faculty appointments.
Unfortunately, few researchers have examined the professional and work identity of
NTTF. Past research on NTTF has attempted to understand how the use of NTTF has developed,
why NTTF experience poor working conditions, and has offered recommendations for improving
NTTF working conditions (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001; Gappa & Leslie, 1993). Studies have
also looked at how changes in economics and the commercialization of higher education have
impacted faculty classification (Rhoades, 1996; Gappa et al., 2007). Other studies have looked at
how the use of NTTF impacts graduation and retention rates (Ehrenberg & Zhang, 2005; Jacoby,
2006; Umbach, 2007). Many of these studies have been quantitative, secondary analyses from
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
19
large data sets. They focus on the negative aspects of the use of NTTF and omit the voice
coming directly from NTTF about their own experiences. These studies ask a limited set of
questions that do not give NTTF an opportunity to share their own thoughts about what is
important to them for their work life and experience (Kezar & Sam, 2010; Levin & Shaker,
2011).
Many of these studies paint a negative picture of NTTF and their experience. They
strongly suggest that the collective professional and work identity of NTTF is likely fragmented.
Levin, Shaker, and Wagoner (2011) state:
Insomuch as the faculty corps [NTTF] is characterized by self-doubt, a shortage of
agency and opportunity, persistent reminders of a second or third class status, and
demonization as being a source of what is wrong with the academy, it is no surprise that
their identity as professionals is tenuous at best (p.208).
If professionalizing NTTF is one way to help improve their standing and experience, it is
important to understand what it means to be a professional and how NTTF experience and
describe their professional and work identity.
Professional identity is not fixed. It is shaped by experience and the roles people play. It
is complicated and influenced by personal and contextual factors (Clarke, Hyde & Drennan,
2013). Past literature that has examined professional identity within higher education has looked
at various factors, including the academic discipline the individual is working within, how the
individual views him or herself, the socialization process of entering a profession, and the role
that building networks can play (Henkel, 2000; Kogan, 2000; Weidman, 2001; Podolny &
Barron, 1997; Sweitzer, 2009; Hansen, 1999). This literature focuses on the experience of
tenure-track and tenured faculty and omits information on NTTF.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
20
NTTF are not a homogenous group and have different experiences within their
institutions, departments, and academic disciplines. As explored further in Chapter Two, their
experiences also vary by the appointment type (e.g. part-time or full time) they hold. No matter
what type of appointment they hold, we know that some NTTF report poor working conditions,
including tense relationships with peers, lack of orientation and access to recourses, and an
overall feeling of not being integrated into their work environments. But we know little about
how these experiences, relationships, and working conditions are shaping their professional and
work identity.
There is some, limited research that has attempted to examine factors related to NTTF
identity. Specifically, Gappa and Leslie (1993) identified types of NTTF. This study has
ramifications for NTTF professional and work identity in that NTTF might identify
professionally with a particular type of NTTF role. Levin and Shaker (2011), who examined
NTTF academic identity, agency, positionality, and self-authoring, found that NTTF experience
a hybrid and dualistic identity. This study will build off this prior work. Shaker (2008) asked a
broad question, looking at the experience of full-time NTTF in English Composition. She found
that the NTTF experience varied based on personal preference, personal characteristics,
organizational forces, and academic conditions. Hart (2011) looked at the experience of 40
NTTF women and found that the experience was fragmented, and as conditions changed, like a
new department chair, or other relationships changed, the work experience also changed. Each of
these studies not only shed light on NTTF professional and work identity, but also show how the
NTTF experience varies and how NTTF have distinct and different needs. Kezar (forthcoming)
points out that past studies of NTTF have “conceptualized [them] as a uniform mass of workers”
(p.8). This study will create new knowledge regarding NTTF professional and work identity and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
21
will approach NTTF as heterogeneous individuals, rather than as a homogenous mass (Kezar,
forthcoming).
In summary, the experiences of NTTF vary and some research has examined possible
aspects of NTTF professional and work identity. This research project seeks to build on the
previous studies, while recognizing that NTTF are not a homogenous group, by looking at how
different types of NTTF appointments in different departments might shape how NTTF develop
a professional and work identity.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study was to interview NTTF holding different types of
appointments from different departments at a four-year institution in order to hear directly from
NTTF about how they describe their professional and work experience, to gain insight into how
they develop and perceive their professional and work identity. Limited research has been
conducted examining the NTTF at four-year institutions. Most research on NTTF has come from
two-year community colleges.
Research Question
Traditionally professional identity in higher education has been associated with concepts
such as tenure, academic freedom, autonomy, shared governance, and membership in an
academic discipline. The rising use of NTTF has undermined the traditional model and left us
unfamiliar with the professional and work identity of a large portion of the faculty in higher
education. Researchers even suggest that the professional and work identity of NTTF appears to
be broken. One thing, in particular, that we do not understand about NTTF professional and work
identity is how the type of NTTF appointment may impact it. Therefore, in an attempt to
understand what shapes NTTF professional and work identity development, the main question of
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
22
this study is: How does the department within which a full time NTTF work, shape their work
identity at a four-year research university?
Significance of the Study
American higher education is changing. Due to fiscal constraints, the public demanding
more accountability, growing enrollments with more diverse students, and changing technology,
traditional structures of higher education have changed and continue to change. The faculty that
work within institutions of higher education are also affected by these changes. The traditional
tenured faculty member is no longer the norm. Instead, the structure for academic faculty now
includes a growing population of NTTF.
Since the number of NTTF are growing and will likely continue to grow, institutions
cannot continue to ignore them as an important part of their faculty. Institutions must begin to
address NTTF issues and concerns. As quoted in Kezar and Sam (2010) “[r]esearch from
business suggests that companies that address the concerns of contingent and part time workers
and set up effective policies have much stronger organizational outcomes” (p. 88) (Arnold,
Cooper, & Roberston, 1995) . In other words, institutions will have better student outcomes and
run more effectively if they invest in their contingent and part-time workers, the NTTF.
Furthermore, Levin, Shaker, and Wagoner (2011) state:
[I]nstitutional commitment to continuance of the faculty corps [NTTF] is significant, and
their identity challenges are likely to become increasingly relevant. The faculty corps is
shaped and framed by structures and conditions that deprive them of a coherent
professional identity and, as their numbers are critical mass, their professional condition
affects the overall condition of all U.S. faculty (p. 212).
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
23
If universities value having a body of academic professionals and desire to move teaching and
learning to a more central position within institutional functions, then institutions must work to
foster and develop professionals, especially among the NTTF, who do much of the teaching
(Levin & Shaker, 2011).
This study adds to previous qualitative research examining the NTTF experience. But it
also fills a gap in the research, and works toward an understanding of NTTF that goes beyond
treating NTTF as a homogenous mass, by examining how the NTTF experience and professional
and work identify differs among departments. It will also help to better define what it means to
be a “professional” in the changing context of higher education. By understanding NTTF
professional and work identity, hopefully NTTF can feel more empowered to work toward
improving their status within higher education. Administrators and campus leaders can also use
this information to help foster the professional development of all their faculty, which in turn
will allow institutions to meet their goals more effectively.
This research study is significant for different audiences. For administrators, they will
gain insight into the NTTF experience. Research on NTTF is important because NTTF are a
growing segment of the faculty on campuses today. Administrators will want to invest in the
NTTF experience to support NTTF. This will in turn improve not only the NTTF experience but
also their commitment to their institutions. As mentioned NTTF struggle in their commitment to
their respective institutions based on short term contracts. This can impact their performance,
which in turn can impact student outcomes. Administrators should want to make efforts to
improve student outcomes by working to retain good faculty (including NTTF). Retention of
NTFF is important in order to avoid high turn over of teaching faculty. The more committed
faculty are to the institutions, the less turnover there will be and better learning environments are
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
24
created. It is hoped that this project will also empower NTTF to learn more about themselves and
their work experience. It will allow NTTF the opportunity to have a voice and learn from their
peers. Hopefully it will empower them to become advocates and create change within the
institutions where they work.
Organization of the Study
This study is presented in five chapters. The next chapter will review the relevant
literature regarding professional and work identity within higher education and provide the
guiding framework for this study. The third chapter will discuss the methodology of this study
and why it is appropriate for the purpose of the study. The fourth chapter will review the results
of the study and answer the research question identified in this chapter. The final chapter will
give recommendations for future research and implications for practice.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
25
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
In the previous chapter I argued that the rising use of NTTF has undermined the
traditional model of hiring in higher education, and left us unfamiliar with the professional or
work identity of a large portion of the faculty in higher education. Researchers even suggest that
the work identity of NTTF appears to be complex and lacking professional status. Therefore, the
purpose of this qualitative study was to interview full-time NTTF from different departments at a
four-year institution in order to hear directly from NTTF about how they describe their work
experience and gain insight into how they develop and perceive their work identity. The main
question of this study was: How does the department within which a full time NTTF work, shape
their work identity at a four-year research university?
In order to explain the context of this study and evaluate its contribution to the research,
the existing literature must be reviewed. The first part of this chapter examines what
professional/work identity is, what it means in higher education, what shapes it, and how
concepts of work identity are changing in higher education. There is no single definition of what
professional or work identity is, but we can identity several features of it, including its dynamic
nature and that it involves individuals’ reflections of themselves in a given context. The
environment or the context in which someone works shapes not only the work she does, but how
her work is valued, and how, as an individual, she views her work identity. For NTTF working
in a research university, this literature is important to understand, because NTTF often feel that
their work (teaching) is not as valued as the work (research) of a tenured faculty member.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
26
The second section will examine three layers of the environment within higher education
and how these contexts might shape identity. These include differences among institutional
types, department and discipline, and, finally, appointment types. Every type of institution serves
a different purpose and these differing missions guide the work and the roles that faculty
experience. For instance, at a large research university, research is highly valued and teaching is
not; but in a smaller liberal arts college, the faculty are encouraged to be a part of the
community, not just as faculty members, but in developing the students they serve. Disciplinary
differences matter, because they provide a lens for faculty to see themselves and their work.
Each discipline has its own set of values, knowledge, and culture that shape the experience of the
faculty members working within that group. The type of appointment that a faculty member
holds matters, because, as mentioned, different benefits, including job stability, increased
income, participation in shared governance, and autonomy, are awarded depending upon whether
one is a tenure-track or tenured faculty member. For NTTF, their job is less secure and their roles
are often dictated for them, without allowing NTTF much say in shaping their work.
The review of the literature will help us understand that professional and work identity is
complicated. It can be shaped not only by the type of institution in which one works, but also the
discipline or department and the type of appointment one holds. The final section summarizes
the literature and what it means for this study and presents the conceptual framework that will
serve as a lens for this research study.
Concepts of Professional and Work Identity
Identity work is ongoing work. It is work that is constituted by history and by the
conditions within which we live and work, including the conflicts and tensions within
specific workplaces (Taylor, p.27, 2008)
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
27
In order to understand professional or work identity, it is important to have some
background in identity development, because professional identity is an offspring of an
individual’s identity. This section will begin with a brief historical overview of some key
concepts of how people have thought about identity. These concepts include that identity is not
fixed, that it constantly changes as one’s context changes, and that it involves relationships, self-
reflection, symbols, and values. These concepts are important because they provide some insight
into how professional or work identity is framed. Following the foundation in concepts of work
identity, there will be an overview of the concepts of professional identity in higher education,
including professional autonomy, academic freedom, the merit principle, and shared governance.
These concepts are changing as the structure of the faculty hired changes, leading to changing
concepts of professional or work identity.
Historical Concepts of Identity
Mead (1934), a social theorist, described identity through the idea of symbolic
interactionism. According to symbolic interactionism, individuals develop identity through
interactions between self and environment. From these interactions, the self learns the role that
S/he assumes based on how others within the environment respond to him or her. Erickson
(1968), a psychologist, developed a biological and psychological approach to identity. In his
model, individuals pass through stages in which they develop over time. Identity for Erickson is
something that one develops over a lifetime, not something one simply has. Beijaard et al. (2004)
state that “identity is not a fixed attribute of a person, but a relational phenomenon. Identity
development occurs in an intersubjective field and can be best characterized as an ongoing
process, a process of interpreting oneself as a certain kind of person and being recognized as
such in a given context (p.108).” In this sense, identity can answer the question of ‘who am I at
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
28
this moment.’ While definitions and concepts of identity vary, most appear to describe identity as
something that is not fixed. Identity can be characterized as relational, an on-going process
where one interprets herself as a certain kind of person and is recognized as that person in a
given context (Gee, 2001).
Taylor (2008) argues that the concept of identity has a history and points to the work of
Donald Hall (2004). Hall states that “one’s identity can be thought of as that particular set of
traits, beliefs, and allegiances that, in the short- or long-term ways, gives one a consistent
personality and mode of social being” (p. 3). Hall goes on to argue that there are in essence four
stages in the historical development of the Western concept of identity. The first period began in
the early 17
th
century, and was influenced by Greek philosophy and Christianity. Identity was
seen as outwardly-focused and expressed through stability and tradition, with a need to be
aligned with larger moral purposes, like religious truths. Identities were taken on through one
accepting shared practice of these truths. The next stage in the historical development of identity
thinking came from Descartes’ challenges to this acceptance with his “I think, therefore I am.”
For Descartes, identity was formed through one’s self-reflection and not taken on by what others
might dictate for one to believe. The work of Hegel and Freud influenced the third stage of the
history of identity. Instead of focusing just on the rational self, they introduced the ideas of the
“non-rational, the subconscious and the emotional” (Taylor, 2008, p. 28). Identities became a
concept that was co-constructed by not just the self, but what the self was a part of, in the large
sense of the human experience. The final stage of human identity development described by Hall
(2004) comes from postmodern philosophers like Foucault and Butler who see identity as “the
relationship between an individual’s sense of existential fragmentation and the need to assert
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
29
some level of ‘self-unified identity’” (Hall, p. 83). Here identity is something that is always
under construction.
Taylor (2008) summarizes these four stages to characterize identity as something that is
taken on through shared practices and acceptance of given truths; individually constructed
through one’s self reflection and thought rather then what is dictated to one; and co-constructed
and constantly under construction. Since identities are constantly under construction, Stryker
(1968) argues that people have multiple identities. Individuals live and work within several
different social networks. Often individuals will find these identities in conflict and this will
cause stress to the individual. This stress causes individuals to have to commit to an identity that
is most salient to the individual. This commitment is shaped by an individual’s social
connections, roles, and how an individual sees his role in relation to others. One of the multiple
identities to which an individual commits is the professional or work identity. In the next section,
I explore how this identity is shaped by the context in which an individual works, including the
roles played and the relationships formed in the working environment.
Professional and Work Identify
Clake et al. (2013) state “professional identity is not a stable entity; it is complex,
personal, and shaped by contextual factors” (p.8). Since professional identity is not fixed, there is
not one sound definition of it. When thinking about professional or work identity in higher
education, it can be helpful to see how others in similar fields have studied the impact of the
context in which one works and how it can shape professional or work identity. Parallels may be
seen between teachers and NTTF, since the majority of NTTF are hired to teach. Therefore, I
present some of the key research on teachers’ professional identity, because it provides some
context and ideas in the literature that might help to understand NTTF professional or work
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
30
identity. Bejaard et al. (2004) reviewed nine studies that looked at teachers’ professional identity
development. These nine studies saw “professional identity as an ongoing process of integration
of the ‘personal’ and the professional sides of becoming and being a teacher” (p. 113). Other
concepts of professional identity include the struggle to balance between one’s professional self-
image and the various roles one must play (Volkmann &Anderson, 1998); the tension between
agency (the self) and the structure (the socially ‘given’) (Coldron & Smith, 1999); that it can be
multifaceted (Cooper & Olsen, 1996); that it can contain several sub-identities that may either
conflict or align together (Mishler, 1999); and, finally, that individuals can take on different
professional identities depending on their social setting, but that these different identities are
related to one another (Gee & Crawford, 1998).
Although no one definition can be found to define professional identity, Beijaard et al.’s
(2004) study did identify several different features to professional identity. First, professional
identity is “an ongoing process of interpretation and re-interpretation of experiences” (Kerby,
1991, p.22). Professional identity is therefore not fixed, and it not only answers the question
‘who am I at this moment?’ but also ‘who do I want to become?’ In this way, professional
identity development is dynamic and calls for reflection by the individual (Conway, 2001).
Second, professional identity involves both the person and the context. For instance, one might
describe him or herself as a teacher and act in a certain professional manner that teachers should,
given the context of working in a school and being a teacher. However, as an individual, one
might value different parts of teaching more than someone else might and, as a result, develop
his or her own teaching culture (Feiman-Nemser & Floden, 1986). Third, professional identity
consists of different sub-identities. These sub-identities should be in harmony with one another
and result from the individual’s changing contexts and relationships. Finally, agency (the self) is
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
31
an important shaper in one’s professional identity. Individuals need to be active in their own
process of professional identity development (Coldron & Smith, 1999). Through this process,
individuals learn that professional identity is not something they have but something they use to
help make sense of themselves as professionals.
In summary, generally one’s identity comes from one’s lived experiences and the
relationships one forms. Identity is individually constructed through one’s self-reflection and
thought rather than what is dictated to one, and it is co-constructed and constantly under
construction. Since identities are constantly under construction, individuals can take on multiple
identities. One important identity that individuals take on, and the focus of this study, is
professional identity. While no concrete definition of professional or work identity exists,
characteristics of it include its dynamic and evolving nature; that it is shaped by the personal and
public world in which individuals live and work; and that it calls for the active involvement of
the self, prompting one to constantly interpret and re-interprets one’s experiences.
Since professional and work identity are the focus of this study, in the next section I
explore concepts of professional and work identity in higher education and how these concepts
are evolving today, given the changing context of higher education.
Concepts of Professional and Work Identity in Higher Education
Since the late 1880s faculty work has been considered a profession, and so a work
identity is typically understood using these concepts, including tenure, autonomy, academic
freedom, shared governance and a tie to one’s discipline. Professional identity in higher
education in this sense is often referred to as academic identity. There is a shared concept of
being a professional, as with doctors and lawyers. Doctors and lawyers attend specialized
educational programs in which they are socialized to behave and become members of
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
32
professional organizations. This socialization and membership allows doctors and lawyers to
have a set of shared values that make up their profession. This concept will be explored later in
this chapter but is important to mention now. Many of these concepts are tied to the historical
development of the faculty profession. Finkelstein (1984) argues that professional identity of
faculty centers around three core values: professional autonomy, academic freedom, and the
merit principle. A fourth concept that Finkelstein does not include is the participation of faculty
in a shared governance system. Each of these values is gained through a socialization process.
Professional Autonomy. Professional autonomy centers around the belief that faculty
are experts. They are experts hired to work in specific departments because they have a specific
kind of expertise. As a result of this expertise, faculty are in a position where they can manage
their own work and are only responsible to their professional peers (Finkelstein, 1984).
Baldridge et al. (1978) identified six dimensions of faculty autonomy: (1) the extent to which
faculty employment contracts specify work to be performed or are relatively open ended; (2) the
extent to which faculty travel expenditures are regulated; (3) the locus of control over faculty
teaching assignments; (4) the extent to which faculty are evaluated by their professional
colleagues rather then administrators; (5) the locus of control regarding faculty hiring; and (6)
the locus of control over tenure-departmental decision versus administrative decision. Their
research found that the extent of professional autonomy among these six categories varied
depending on the type of appointment held by the faculty member. However, they found that the
majority had the most professional autonomy in their teaching assignments, contractual
obligations and departmental autonomy in hiring colleagues. They lacked mostly in travel and in
faculty evaluation and promotion. Another factor that seemed to influence professional
autonomy was institutional size. The faculty in larger more differentiated institutions (primarily
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
33
research universities) tended to have more professional autonomy than their peers at smaller less
comprehensive colleges and universities, because the larger universities tended to have more
doctoral trained faculty in departments that recognized the importance of professional autonomy.
Academic Freedom. The concept of academic freedom comes from the German concept
of Lehrfreiheit, the belief that faculty should have the freedom to pursue problems and issues in
their field of expertise and communicate their findings in research, teaching and other academic
publications (Finkelstein, 1984). Academic freedom is a unique concept and very specific to
being a tenured faculty member and not a concept that is shared by other professionals.
In 1940 the American Association of University Professors issued a Statement of
Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure. This statement includes the following three
principles regarding academic freedom:
Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results,
subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for
pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the
institution.
Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but
they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has
no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other
aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and
officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be
free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the
community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
34
remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their
utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate
restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to
indicate that they are not speaking for the institution. (AAUP)
In essence, if academically free, faculty are allowed to conduct research and share those results
in their teaching and publicly without penalty; but they must remember who they are
professionally and exercise caution within the classroom and in public so as to not offend their
students or violate institutional standards.
The Merit Principle. The merit principle refers to how faculty should be rewarded for
their work. Under this principle, faculty should be evaluated and rewarded based on their merits
as scholars and teachers, without any consideration of social characteristics, such as sex, gender,
political ideology, religion and race (Finkelstein, 1984). Similar to professional autonomy, the
merit principle is connected to tenure. In the same statement in which the AAUP lays out the
foundation for academic freedom, it also addresses economic security for faculty through the
tenure process (AAUP). Finkelstein (1984) points out that most faculty feel that tenure and
salary increases should be awarded on merit, specifically, whether the individual has engaged in
significant research and publication.
Shared Governance. The concept of shared governance was described by the AAUP in
the early 1920s. Shared governance enables faculty to be involved in almost all decisions that
might impact their roles and jobs. Through a system of shared governance, faculty are involved
in personnel decisions, budgeting, the development of educational policies and the selection of
administrators (AAUP). In essence, the process of shared governance enables tenured faculty to
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
35
have control and a say in their working environment. This is unique to the faculty profession, as
many professions do not include all members in their operations management.
Socialization to a Professional Identity
If the values of autonomy, academic freedom, shared governance and the merit principle
shape professional identity in higher education, how do faculty learn these values? Generally, it
is believed that these values and a faculty identity come from a socialization process that begins
in a Ph.D program. Weidman et al. (2001) define socialization as “the process by which persons
acquire the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that make them more or less effective members of
their society” (p.4). Through this socialization process, doctoral students acquire the information
needed and the ability to communicate that aid in their transition into the academic profession
(Weidman et. al, 2001). Similarly, Colbeck (2008) asserts that future faculty acquire the
professional knowledge and skills necessary for a faculty member during PhD programs. In their
PhD programs, students serve as apprentices and “observe the behaviors, attitudes, and norms for
social interaction prevalent among practitioners of their profession” (Colbeck, 2008). Through
this process, students are able to “interpret their observations in light of their own prior
experiences, their goals for the future and their current sense of who they are and will try on
possible professional selves to see how well they fit” (Colbeck, 2008, p.9). Tierney and Rhoads
(1993) see the socialization process as a “ritualized process that involves the transmission of
culture” (p.21). They argue that the faculty socialization process occurs in two stages:
anticipatory and organizational. The anticipatory stage occurs while in a graduate doctoral
program “where individuals learn from attitudes, actions, and values about the faculty group in
their discipline and the profession at large” (Clarke et al., 2013). Organizational socialization
happens as the young academic makes the transition into becoming a faculty member on a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
36
campus. The faculty member builds on what she learned in the anticipatory stage as she faces
challenges in the faculty profession. While the challenges can be tough, young faculty members
are able to cope due to what they learned during the anticipatory stage.
Today there is a rising debate about changing doctoral education to better prepare PhD
candidates for the changing context of the academic world in the 21
st
century (Bataille & Brown,
2006). There is a call for a redefinition of scholarship away from rewarding faculty for research
endeavors and focusing more on undergraduate teaching and public service. Bataille and Brown
(2006) argue that PhD programs need to be more responsive to what is currently happening in
society. Specifically, that PhD Programs need to move away from the traditional socialization of
the academic values of tenure, academic research, shared governance, and autonomy, because
most new faculty members will not end up working in research universities. Instead, Bataille and
Brown (2006) argue, they will work in liberal arts colleges and community colleges, where
faculty life is focused more on teaching and service and less on research. Colbeck (2008) sees
the socialization process of PhD programs as focusing too much on research, and viewing
teaching and service as separate roles apart from that of a scholar. She argues that doctoral
programs should be challenged to change in a way that allows future faculty to see more of an
integrated professional identity where teaching, research and service are not separate but
connected.
Personal Characteristics and Work Role in Professional Identity
While professional autonomy, academic freedom, the merit principle, and shared
governance are ideals gained through a socialization process in PhD programs, there are other
factors that add to this discussion of professional identity among the faculty. For instance, who
the individual is and how the individual defines him or herself matters. These personal
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
37
characteristics that shape the individual’s professional identity include, but are not limited to,
gender, race, and class. Beyond the personal concepts, faculty develop roles in their jobs that are
intertwined with their professional and work identities.
Ralph (1978) outlines five stages of faculty development. He conducted a qualitative
study, interviewing 24 faculty at a large state university, asking questions about personal and
educational background, views on teaching, students, colleagues, and professional goals. Ralph
took this data and aligned the faculty along a continuum creating a stage model. In the first stage,
the faculty member has a simple view of her role and work. Expectations of the role and work
come from her colleagues, who serve as a reference group. Knowledge is seen as an absolute.
During the second stage, the Professor has an idea of her role and begins to distance herself from
her reference group while her views of knowledge and education become more complex. In the
third stage, the faculty member begins to discover alternatives to her teaching and professional
role and further distances herself from her reference group. However, she will likely show
uncertainty in how to implement these alternatives. In the fourth stage of Ralph’s faculty
development model, the faculty member finds more freedom in her role as she finds her own
personal style of teaching. The faculty member can now understand the student experience and is
able to gear instruction to be more student-centered, allowing students to be involved in the
learning process. In the final stage, the faculty member is able to articulate her own educational
philosophy that includes her values and character. She finds a new appreciation for her students
and enjoys working with them.
Changing Concepts of Professional and Work Identity in Higher Education Today
As mentioned previously, the context of higher education is changing. As the context
changes and new types of faculty appointments arise, the traditional concepts of academic
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
38
freedom, professional autonomy, research, the merit principle, and shared governance are no
longer the foundation for being a professional in academia. Rice (1986) argues that as higher
education changes we need to recognize that faculty roles have been altered and that the
traditional concepts of the academic profession are no longer the foundation for being a
professional in academia. Levin and Shaker (2011) recognize that the structure of the faculty has
changed and that new faculty (NTTF) experience a hybrid and dualistic identity, this leads them
to the conclusion that the traditional concepts likely do not apply to the NTTF.
Rice (1986) outlines seven items that describe what it means to be ‘fully professional
academically.’ These items are assumptions that faculty hold as part of their profession and are
key aspects of being a professional in academia. First, research is the focus of academic life and
the center of the profession; second, quality in the academic profession is maintained through
professional autonomy and the process of peer review; third, knowledge is pursed for its own
sake; fourth, the pursuit of knowledge is best organized according to discipline; fifth, reputations
are established through national and international professional associations; sixth, the distinctive
task of the academic professional is the pursuit of cognitive truth; and seventh, professional
rewards and mobility accrue to those who persistently accentuate their specializations (Rice,
1986, p. 14). These assumptions overlap with the traditional values of being a faculty member
described above. However, Rice (1986) points out that these items come from a time when
higher education was expanding. The items listed above were internalized during the 1960s,
when large number of new PhD candidates entered academia. Now, many decades later, these
faculty are at the height of their careers feeling lost as higher education changes and their
profession evolves. Rice states:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
39
As faculty members look forward at what is at best an ambiguous future, they cling
tenaciously to that established professional image internalized during graduate school
days. Rather than looking for new ways of dealing with the difficult problems
confronting higher education or responding to opportunities for renewal or new career
options, they accentuate and narrow further the older, established career path (p.15).
In other words, Rice calls our attention to the fact that the context of higher education is
changing, and the traditional concepts of academic freedom, professional autonomy, research,
shared governance, and the merit principle are no longer the foundation for being a professional
in academia. Instead of clinging to these traditional values, Rice challenges faculty to see an
opportunity.
As Rice (1986) suggests, the make up of the academic profession is changing and the
professional and work identity of faculty can no longer be described with the traditional values
of tenure, attachment to a discipline, professional autonomy, the merit principle, and shared
governance. As mentioned in chapter one, these faculty identity concepts are in flux, because
faculty positions are changing as institutions must respond to changes occurring in society.
Specifically, structural changes in colleges and universities have led institutions to adopt a
tripartite system for faculty appointments: tenure track, renewable contracts, and fixed-term or
temporary appointments (Gappa et al., 2007). While we do not know what comprises the current
professional and work identity of these new faculty appointments, there have been some attempts
to describe these changes.
Specifically, the work of Levin and Shaker (2011) describes NTTF as having a hybrid
and dualistic identity. NTTF can work in more than one place, serving on campus as instructors
while also holding professional jobs off campus. Their work and roles contain some parts of jobs
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
40
and some parts of a profession. As teachers, they are satisfied, but, as members of the
Professorate they are restricted and show lower-levels of self-esteem. Levin and Shaker (2011)
argue that studies have not addressed the academic identity of full-time NTTF. Academic
identity (the professional and work identity of faculty) refers to how faculty come to understand
and conceptualize their role in colleges and universities, as well as their understanding of their
relationships to their institutions. Levin and Shaker (2011) state that identity is interwoven
between “what a person does- an occupation- who a person is- a professional within institutional
context” (p.1464). The context of the institution matters because it serves as a “powerful
institution for the institutionalization of professionalism both as preparation for the profession
and as the site for practice of the profession” (Levin & Shaker, 2011, p.1464).
Levin and Shaker (2011) use a framework of identity development and projection in
cultural worlds, that looks at individual internal logic and social situations as shaping identity
(Holland, Lachicotte, Skinner, & Cain, 1998). This framework focuses on identity bringing
together personal experiences and expectations, within a social-cultural environment (the
university and its structures, norms, and practices). Using the concept of a “figured world” (the
university setting), Levin and Shaker (2011) look at how individuals position themselves (with
the roles and status assigned to them) through self-authorship. Self-authorship explains how
individuals reflect their position within their figured world. In other words, how full-time NTTF
see themselves within their university positions.
Levin and Shaker (2011) found that full-time NTTF are not exactly professionals or part
of an occupational class. Professional theory does not apply neatly to full-time NTTF faculty;
this is why, when referring to NTTF, I use ‘work identity’ and not ‘professional identity’. This
group is “burdened with the connotations simultaneously associated with the non-tenure label
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
41
and out of place in traditional concepts of professional identity for faculty” (Levin & Shaker,
2011, p.1479). This is evidenced by self-doubt and inconsistent identities experienced by full-
time NTTF, resulting from the ongoing shifts in their self-authoring and positionality. Identity
for full time NTTF is a product of personal characteristics and the institutionalization of
university practices and status. As the environment changes so do their professional identities
from being in the classroom to interacting with other tenured faculty. As a result, full-time NTTF
possess a ‘hybrid’ or blended identity. They maintain a distance from their institutions; few are
comfortable with the institution and their placement in it. They seem to have one foot in the
door and one foot out. They maintain a figured world outside of the tenure setting. But unease
with non-tenure status creates a barrier to their agency. Full-time NTTF cannot escape the title of
non-tenure and it will overshadow everything they do in the academic context. This dualistic
identity and on-going lack of agency suggest that FTNTTF faculty are limited in their
development and that their principal work, teaching, is not valued by the academy.
In summary, traditional concepts of professional identity in academia have centered
around the values of professional autonomy, academic freedom, the merit principle, and shared
governance. These values are instilled through a socialization process that generally occurs in
PhD programs. As shifts in society have caused the context of higher education to change,
changes are occurring in the academic profession. Specifically, these changes are bringing about
new types of faculty appointments. These new appointments no longer fit the traditional values
of the academic profession, thus professional and work identity in higher education appear to be
in flux. Recent research (Levin & Shaker, 2011) has started to examine these new identities.
These new concepts bring our attention to the influence that institutional type, departmental and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
42
discipline type, and appointment type can have on shaping work identity in higher education
today.
Institutional Type Differences
Universities, then, help define the professions (Brint, 1994) and whatever model of
professionalism prevails on campuses shapes the nature of professionals in all professions
(Klay, Brower, & Williams, 2001, p.46)
Institutional type differences matter when thinking about what shapes professional and
work identity, because institutions serve as the context in which professionals work. Put another
way, institutions serve as the backdrop and stage for the actors (faculty, students, administrators,
etc.) to perform and interact with one another. As Ward and Wolf-Wendel (2012) state,
“organization and structural differences impact how different campus actors interact with and
within particular contexts, and also how people spend their energy in the workplace” (p. 111).
The type of institution thus shapes the experience that faculty have. This section will explore
different types of institutions and the cultural environments they create, and how they impact
how professional and work identity is shaped.
Finkelstein (1984) provides three reasons why the experience at different types of
institutions can be different for faculty. First, there are differences in the reward system. At elite
research universities, the reward system is more significant and emphasizes research, while other
institutions are geared more toward teaching. Faculty will expend the most effort where it is
perceived to have the most pay-off. Secondly, there are differences in workload assignments. At
more elite universities, teaching loads are smaller to allow for research, whereas at other
institutions teaching loads are higher and allow less time for other academic pursuits. Finally,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
43
there are differences in faculty selection, which means that institutions select their faculty with a
certain sense of their professional responsibilities and internal standards for effort. For each of
these reasons, it is important to examine further the differences in institutional type.
Research Universities
Traditionally colleges and universities are classified as research universities,
comprehensive colleges and universities, liberal arts colleges and community colleges. Research
universities are large four-year universities that can be private or public. They offer a variety of
degrees from undergraduate to masters to doctoral programs. The emphasis, however, tends to be
on graduate students and tenured faculty who produce new knowledge. For faculty at research
universities, their research defines them, and teaching and service come second (Ward & Wolf-
Wendel, 2012). This is important because, if research is highly valued, then professional and
work identity is likely to be shaped by the type of research an individual conducts. For NTTF,
however, research is not a primary activity. In fact, most research universities hire NTTF to
teach. If research is what is valued, then NTTF may feel their work as instructors is not valued.
This leaves the professional and work identity of NTTF at research universities to be different
and in flux compared to their tenure peers, depending on their role.
Comprehensive Colleges
In comprehensive colleges, the faculty focus is on teaching with some research and
service. Clark (1987) explains these types of institutions can be hard to characterize because they
can include former liberal arts colleges that now have vocational programs or masters programs.
They can also include state campuses desiring to copy their research university counterparts. The
faculty life at one of these campuses can seem adrift, since their missions change over time. The
culture of academic life is often seen to be one striving to change and adapt to be more research
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
44
orientated, while still trying to hold on to their foundations in teaching. There are also campuses
that have more of a regional serving mission. These types of campuses are tied closely to the
local communities and focus on teaching, providing mostly undergraduate and master’s degrees
(Cohen & Brawer, 2008). Since research is not at the core, faculty at these institutions are able
to engage in more service. Ward and Wolf-Wendel (2012) found that faculty who participated in
service at these campuses were able to bring about change in their departments, programs and
across the whole campus. In doing service, faculty are able to develop a sense of agency.
Developing a sense of agency, as mentioned earlier, is critical in shaping an individual’s
professional and work identity.
Liberal Arts Colleges
Liberal arts colleges are typically private four-year degree granting institutions that offer
a broad base of courses in the liberal arts, which include areas such as literature, history,
languages, mathematics and life sciences. Ward and Wolf-Wendel (2012) describe liberal arts
colleges as family-orientated, and as places where faculty take an active role in creating a
community on campus and with student development. Service is highly encouraged and it is
expected that faculty be an active and involved member of the campus community (Tierney &
Bensimon, 1996). Clark (1987) describes the faculty at liberal arts colleges as focusing on
teaching but also engaging in research (often with students) and reporting high levels of service.
Ruscio (1987) notes that faculty at elite liberal arts colleges share much in common with those at
research universities, excepting that research at liberal arts colleges is also perceived as an
investment in students. Liberal arts campuses integrate teaching and research to foster the
teaching, learning and development of students. In an environment that values both teaching and
research, professional and work identity may be similar to that in the traditional model.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
45
However, given that faculty become active members of the community at a liberal arts college,
professional and work identity is likely shaped by more then just teaching and research, and may
include relationships with students and other members of the community.
Community Colleges
First opened in the early 20
th
century, the American community colleges arose from the
need to train workers to operate in expanding industries (Cohen & Brawer, 1989). Known
first
as “junior colleges,” they might have been branch campuses of larger institutions that offered
lower division course work. By the 1950s, “community college” was defined as any “institution
that is accredited to award an associate in arts or associate in sciences as the highest degree”
(Cohen & Brawer, 1989, p.4-5). The growth of community colleges paralleled that of four-year
institutions, but without much coordinated thought, and allowed for greater access to higher
education for a more diverse population, who were not being served by traditional institutions of
higher education. The result is a confused image of what a community college should do and
who should pay for it. Ideally, they are and were built for transfer preparation, vocational and
technical training, continuing education, remedial education and service to the community
(Cohen & Brawer, 1989).
Community colleges offer a 2-year Associates degree and are not four-year degree
granting institutions. They typically prepare students to transfer to a four-year institution or grant
certificates or degrees to prepare individuals for a specific career. Community colleges do not
provide a broad-based liberal arts education the way four-year institutions do. Instead
community college seek to serve the local community needs and as result they are often evolving
as institutions. Consequently, the environment of the community colleges and their faculty
change frequently, seeking new programs and people to serve.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
46
Faculty members at community colleges do not all have terminal degrees like their peers
at liberal arts colleges and research universities. Teaching loads can be high where faculty are
teaching lots of introductory courses that serve a diverse student population (Ward & Wolf-
Wendel, 2012). Clark (1987) describes the community college Professor as one who is excited
about their topic and can convey this to their students and someone who keeps current within his
or her field. The community college Professor is also one who is student-centered and caring
(Cohen & Brawer, 2008); teaching is their primary role, and is the basis for their hiring and
promotion. Since the nature of the community college is different from other four year
institutions, the environment can be different, and therefore likely shapes professional and work
identity differently. NTTF are more common in community colleges than in four-year
institutions, and NTTF can likely find an environment which is more supportive and rewarding
of their work and needs than other types of institutions. The faculty and the students are also
more diverse and the relationships that NTTF form likely play a part in their perceptions of their
work environment. This can create a positive perception of their work and the role that NTTF
play, which could shape how they view themselves professionally.
Culture of Institutions
The culture of institutions plays a large role in how individuals approach work. Where
one chooses to work shapes how they approach, not only their lives as Professors, but also their
personal life outside of work (Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2012). Bergquist and Pawlak (2008) and
Robert Birnbaum (1988) have described how institutional culture plays a role in defining
patterns of thinking and feeling about the nature and scope of education. By looking at culture,
we can understand individuals’ reactions to things that are important to those living and working
in that culture. Each type of the culture says something about the educational mission, vision,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
47
values, purposes, and roles that are played out by faculty, students, administrators, and trustees.
Understanding types, classifications, and cultures of institutions provides a good overview of the
context in which faculty work and shapes their professional and work identity.
Bergquist and Pawlak (2008) describe a collegial culture where meaning is held in the
disciplines and by the faculty who represent them. Within this culture, faculty research and
scholarship are highly valued, as is the faculty governance system. Rationality dominates and the
main mission of the institution is to generate, interpret and spread knowledge that will shape the
future leaders of society. Autonomy is highly valued which is reinforced through the doctrine of
academic freedom. Faculty are judged and seen as effective only if they have established
themselves through strong publication and not through their teaching (Bergquist & Pawlak,
2008). In most cases, a research university or a doctoral-granting institution would be classified
as having a collegial culture.
Robert Birnbaum (1988) describes a collegial institution as one in which power is shared
and one that fosters a community of equals. The emphasis is on consensus, shared power,
common commitments and aspirations. Leadership seeks collaboration and collective
responsibility. Hierarchy is not something that is very important and interactions are informal. It
is egalitarian and democratic. As a result, faculty and administrators see each other as equals.
Since power is shared and consensus is valued, decisions take a long time. There is an
administration that acts in support of, and to represent, the college in public, but it is subordinate
to the collegium. The president is seen more as an agent than as a leader who makes decisions.
Faculty are locals and are associated with academic guilds. Curriculum changes are slow.
Academic freedom and autonomy are highly valued. Coordination within this type of institution
is horizontal. In a collegial setting, professional identity is likely shaped by one’s discipline and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
48
the traditional faculty values of autonomy, academic freedom, and shared governance, since
these are the values upheld in the collegial culture.
In a managerial culture, meaning is rooted in the organization, implementation and
evaluation of work that is directed toward specific goals and purposes (Bergquist & Pawlak,
2008). Fiscal responsibility and effective supervisory skills are valued. Birnbaum (1988) would
describe this as a bureaucratic institution in which rationalization is used to create structure and
make decisions. These institutions are able to define and measure their goals and objectives
easily. As these institutions grew and became more specialized with the creation of sub units,
more structure was needed to control work and behavior. Creating structure allows a larger scale
organization to accomplish tasks, while managing the workflow of people within the
organization. Within these types of institutions, there are organizational charts that show the
work flow and how people are organized. Terms like “line of communication” or “line of
authority” are used often. People have written job descriptions and policies to guide behavior and
create certainty and efficiency. Effective and efficient operation of the organization depends
upon compliance with rules and policies. Promotions are based on merit. The coordination
within this type of institution is considered vertical with a clear organizational hierarchy.
A faculty member is successful in the managerial culture by being an efficient and
competent teacher and manager of instructional process. Leadership comes from classroom
performance and collaboration with other faculty. Institutional research is valued, so that faculty
can understand their own institution and work to improve it. Professional identity in this setting
is shaped by the rules and policies that are created through the strict structure. Roles are dictated
by written job descriptions. There is less emphasis on the individual and relationships and more
emphasis on being an efficient and effective employee.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
49
Developmental culture is the third described by Bergquist and Pawlak (2008). In this
culture, meaning comes from creating programs and activities that foster the personal and
professional growth of all members of the academic community. Individuals value personal
openness and serving others, as well as systematic institutional research and curricular planning.
The institution is guided by fostering the cognitive, affective and behavioral maturation among
all members of the community. In a developmental culture, the focus is on faculty development
to enable faculty to better understand student development. This can be seen as an ideal place to
foster an individual’s professional identity because of the emphasis on professional growth. This
attention allows time for individuals to reflect and grow in order to become the professional they
wish to be. This is very different from the collegial and managerial cultures, because there is a
focus on the individual and growing as a professional.
The fourth culture described by Bergquist and Pawlak is an advocacy culture. Advocacy
culture gains meaning in “establishing equitable and egalitarian policies and procedures for the
distribution of resources and benefits in the institution” (Bergquist & Pawlak, 2008, p.111).
Confrontation and fair bargaining are valued, especially when managing faculty and staff who
have vested interests that are, naturally in opposition. Birnbaum (1988) would describe this as a
political institution. Political institutions are generally large complex campuses with groups of
individuals who have different interests and needs that interact by forming coalitions, bargaining,
compromising and reaching agreements in order to gain power. In this large environment,
decision-making is decentralized and diffused. There is often a power struggle and a need to
bring in outside mediation. Power is diffused, not concentrated and many individuals and groups
have power over different situations. Political institutions call for choices to be made, and people
must fight to prove their needs are the most important. On many of these campuses, some groups
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
50
will be stronger than others, but no one group is strong enough to dominate all of the others. This
culture came as a response to the managerial culture. Unlike managerial culture, advocacy
culture members approach issues as negotiable and not dictated by rules. Individuals learn to
become advocates for what they want. In the traditional view of professional identity among the
faculty, the concept of shared governance is a key shaper here. In this setting, professional and
work identity is shaped by the individual feeling empowered to be his or her own advocate.
Culture matters because it sets the context in which work is conducted within an
institution. As this section describes, there are many different institutional cultures that shape
how work happens and what work is valued. Culture helps us understand why institutions run the
way they do. It is interesting to note that NTTF have been teaching in, and been members of,
these cultures for years. But the first culture where Bergquist and Pawlak (2008) begin to
mention the use of NTTF is in the advocacy culture. NTTF are not mentioned in any other of the
institutional cultures described. This is interesting to note because this culture involves
individuals participating in fair bargaining and becoming advocates for their working conditions,
which NTTF often do not feel they can do.
Conclusion
In summary, the type of institution (research, comprehensive, liberal arts or community
college) and the culture of an institution vary in size, order, and mission. All of which impact the
working environment in which faculty conduct their work. The type of institution dictates the
work that faculty are hired to do. Furthermore, the culture of the institution reflects what the
institution values, particularly what is valued in the work that faculty perform.
For a research university, this means the value is held in producing quality research.
Since they generally are not involved in producing research, NTTF may not be valued, and,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
51
therefore, may have a poor perception of their work identity. For a liberal arts colleges, teaching
and service appear to be stronger values. NTTF may find a more positive work identity in this
environment, since they are primarily hired to teach and serve. As with liberal arts colleges,
Comprehensive colleges value teaching, which allows for faculty to engage more in service and
participate in their community. Since NTTF are hired primarily to teach and since teaching in
this environment is held as a primary responsibility of faculty, this type of environment may be
well-suited for their professional and work identity. Community colleges as an institutional type
are constantly changing and evolving, since they are traditionally meant to serve the local
community. This means they are constantly hiring people for full-time and part-time teaching. In
a way, the community college setting could be similar to that of a liberal arts college, where
teaching and knowledge are valued for all faculty. Therefore, NTTF are likely to have positive
professional and work identity in a community college. All of this is to say that the larger context
of the institution is just one of many layers that shape the professional and work identity of
NTTF.
Discipline and Departmental Differences
Now that we understand how the larger environment might shape the experience of the
faculty and, thus, impact their professional and work identity development, we turn our attention
to the disciplinary differences. Like institutions, departments add another layer of culture to the
faculty experience. Since it is associated with one’s discipline, the departmental layer is where
academic identity is established. Clark (1983) described the disciplines as the “lifeblood” of
higher education institutions. They provide the organizational base and social framework for
how faculty work. Furthermore, they provide a lens for how faculty view themselves and their
work, impacting how faculty view their professional and work identity. This section will give a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
52
brief overview of how the disciplines differ and how that might impact an academic’s
professional identity.
Becher (1994) explains that each of the disciplines have distinct and unique cultures.
Generally, the disciplines within higher education include: natural sciences, humanities and
social sciences, science-based professions and the social-based professions. These groups can be
“regarded as tribes, each with their own set of intellectual values and their own path of cognitive
territory” (Becher, 1994, p.153). Biglan (1973) classifies the tribes as hard pure, soft pure, hard
applied and soft applied. Kolb (1981), on the other hand, describes them by their type of
knowledge. These include abstract reflective, concerted reflective, abstract active and concrete
active.
Each of these domains has a different type of knowledge and culture associated with it.
Becher (1987) argues that we need to understand both the knowledge and culture, because they
serve as the way individuals are inducted into each academic field. This is important, because it
can be unclear if university faculty members are part of a single profession or many. The
discipline of a faculty member gives him or her a frame of reference for knowledge and culture.
This is also critical in shaping faculty professional identity development, because this frame of
reference impacts how faculty view themselves not only as academics but as professionals. Each
discipline has a set of values that, as a profession, the faculty within them share.
First is the disciplinary grouping of the pure sciences, like physics. The nature of
knowledge (knowledge tradition or categories of thought) in this discipline is described as
cumulative, concerned with quantities, universals, simplification that can result in discovery and
explanation. The culture or “codes of conduct” for the pure sciences is characterized by being
task-oriented, competitive, politically well-organized and published at a high rate. For tenured
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
53
faculty in the pure sciences, faculty life is spent in labs conducting research to be able to publish.
For NTTF in the pure sciences, academic life may be different because they are focusing on
teaching and not conducting research. Since the roles in the group may be different due to the
type of work values in the pure sciences, the professional and work identity of the tenured and
NTTF will likely be different.
The second disciplinary grouping is the humanities and pure social sciences. The nature
of knowledge here is classified as holistic, concerned with particulars, qualities and complication
that result in understanding and interpretation. The disciplinary culture of the humanities is found
to be individualistic, loosely structured and person-orientated with low publication rates. Unlike
the pure sciences, the humanities have a more holistic view that can be a more supportive culture
for both tenure and NTTF. With a more people orientated holistic environment, individuals may
find a more positive professional and work identity.
Becher’s (1987) third disciplinary grouping is technological sciences, like mechanical
engineering. Here the nature of knowledge is purposive and pragmatic, concerned with the
mastery of physical environment and results in products and techniques. The culture is
entrepreneurial, in which patents are sought to to be published and positions are seen as very
role-oriented. Because the environment is very role oriented, faculty’s professional and work
identity might differ between tenure and NTTF. For instance on role might be research or patent
producing focused while another role would be more teaching and student focused.
The final disciplinary grouping described by Becher (1987) is the applied social sciences,
like education. The nature of knowledge here is functional, concerned with enhancing practice
and results in protocols or procedures. The disciplinary culture is outward-looking, dominated by
intellectuals, concerned more with consulting than publication and can be power-oriented. NTTF
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
54
are often hired to teach because of their practical backgrounds. Like NTTF in the humanities,
NTTF here may experience a more positive professional and work identity in the applied
sciences since their backgrounds and knowledge are likely to be valued.
As mentioned, the NTTF experience is different because some NTTF identify with a
discipline and others do not. NTTF come from a variety of backgrounds from outside academia
and, therefore, are not necessarily connected to a body of professionals attached to a discipline.
But there are some disciplines, like education, where NTTF feel more connected than not and are
members of national organizations. While some NTTF will attend PhD or other master level
programs, many NTTF do not and, therefore, are not socialized with the same disciplinary values
as other faculty who have been through PhD programs and have joined professional
organizations tied to a specific discipline. In fact, many NTTF have contracts that have them
serving in multiple departments, so they are often not associated with a professional discipline
and, therefore, may not have the same lens to view themselves with the same professional and
work identity that a tenured or tenure track faculty member has. As a result, some NTTF will
identify with a discipline and others may not. The extent to which they do or do not may shape
their professional and work identity, because that membership can provide a lens for how they
view themselves at work.
In summary, the disciplinary differences matter because they dictate the types of
knowledge and cultures faculty work within as a member of that disciplinary group. These
disciplines give faculty a lens to see themselves and their professional work, which shapes how
they view themselves as a profession in that community. Since NTTF may or may not be part of
these disciplines the same way that tenured or tenure track faculty are, they likely view their
work and their identity at work differently. Each discipline as described is different and, as
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
55
disciplines become mixed and blended (such as an interdisciplinary major in Health and
Humanity combing the life sciences with philosophical backgrounds), the lines between
disciplines will blur and new knowledge and cultures will emerge that will further impact and
shape professional identity among faculty. As this happens, it could be possible that NTTF come
to have a more comfortable professional and work identity than that of their tenured or tenure
track peers, since NTTF appear to be those causing the blurred lines and bringing new
knowledge to higher education. Similar to how institutional context matters, disciplinary context
matters and adds a layer of complexity to a faculty member’s professional and work identity.
Differences in Appointment Types
Having explored how the institution and then the discipline shape the faculty experience,
we turn to our last section and explore differences of experience by appointment type. As
mentioned in an earlier section when describing concepts of professional and work identity
within higher education, tenure track appointments have certain features that shape professional
and work identity. Today, the faculty profession is one that is stratified and characterized by
varied employment statuses, like full time v. part time, active and emeritus, assistant, associate,
and full Professor, tenure and non-tenure track (Baldwin & Chronsister, 2001; Cross &
Goldenberg, 2009; Schuster & Finkelstein, 2006). These titles not only come with specific roles
and expectations but also with a foundation for development of a professional and work identity
that can make examining differences by appointment type important (Levin & Shaker, 2011).
In order to best understand the changes in the faculty and the characteristics that might
shape the professional and work identity of NTTF, this section begins with a historical overview
of the American faculty in higher education. The historical overview is important because it
provides background into how the faculty role has emerged into a profession and the evolution of
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
56
different appointment types. The chapter then examines the difference among appointment type
from tenure track faculty to the community college Professor and finally to the non-tenure-track
faculty.
History of the Faculty
The history of the American faculty begins in the late 1700s when American colleges
were modeled after the British system and comprised of instructional staff of young men who
served as tutors. (Finkelstein, 1984) These young men lived among and taught students. From
the founding of the American colleges, the role of the American faculty was to teach (Metzger,
1987). However, by the late 1700s a small core of “permanent” faculty was established and
called Professors (Finkelstein, 1984). These faculty were different from tutors in that they took
charge of one specific subject area, like ancient languages, were older, more experienced, and
were permanent. In the 1800s, with the development of the research university, permanent
faculty began to outnumber the tutors and a ‘Professor movement’ emerged (Finkelstein, 1984;
Metzger, 1987). Toward the end of the 1800s, two ranks of faculty developed: junior faculty in
temporary appointments with no room to move up and senior faculty holding long-term
appointments. It was also during this time that John’s Hopkins University, one of the earliest
research universities, was established; there the role of the faculty began to develop into that of a
researcher, away from that of a teacher. Following the development of the research university,
came the clear organization of the academic disciplines. Metzger (1987) states:
Between 1870 and 1900 nearly every subject in academic curriculum was fitted out with
a new or refurbished external organization- a learned or disciplinary internal organization- a
department of instruction made the building block of most academic administrations (p.136).
During this period, scholarship in America became divided into professions and disciplines,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
57
which became institutionalized into new professional associations and a growing system of
higher education (Rice, 1986).
In the 20
th
century, the faculty role became professionalized. According to Schuster and
Finkelstein (2006), this meant four things: the beginning of specialization in teaching where one
was hired to teach a specific topic that they knew and taught well; second, that academic staff
required formal graduate education that gave proper preparation for teaching; third, the time
dedicated to preparing for a more permanent spot meant the lifelong career commitment of the
individual; and, finally, because of the time taken to become specialized, faculty became experts
in a specific topic.
In 1915 the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) was formed by 18
academics from different institutions, creating the first real “sense of collective Professorial self-
consciousness, sense of colleagueship or fraternity” (Finkelstein, 1984, p.24). Between World
War I and World War II, there was considerable growth in those seeking a graduate-level degree.
In 1920, 640 individuals sought graduate-level degrees; by 1940, it was 3,300 (Finkelstein,
1984). This growth spurred new academic societies to form, each having a publication associated
with it. The academic path was becoming that of a specialized expertise. There was also
explosive growth in individuals enrolling in higher education and more diversification in the
types of institutions and the missions of the institutions. As faculty became experts, it allowed
them to find power on their campuses (Finkelstein, 1984).
In the last three decades, the faculty profession has continued to grow and diversify. The
demographics of American faculty have changed with more women, more non-whites and more
foreign-born persons serving as members of today’s faculty. As this history has demonstrated,
the faculty profession has evolved as the context and needs of higher education have changed.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
58
There are now multiple types of faculty appointments, including tenure track faculty, the
community college Professor and, the newest appointment, non-tenure-track faculty. The
following sections provide an overview of these appointments and their different characteristics,
which serve as yet another layer that could shape professional and work identity.
Tenure Track Faculty
As mentioned briefly, the concept of tenure came from the AAUP 1940 statement of
Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure. The AAUP (1940) states:
After the expiration of a probationary period, teachers or investigators should have
permanent or continuous tenure, and their service should be terminated only for adequate
cause, except in the case of retirement for age, or under extraordinary circumstances
because of financial exigencies.
Tenure is a unique concept in the faculty profession, because, if it is achieved, an individual, as it
is stated, cannot be terminated. With this position, comes the benefits of professional autonomy,
academic freedom, the merit principle and engagement in faculty governance. As previously
described, each of these concepts shapes the tenured faculty’s professional and work identity.
As the context of higher education evolves, forcing changes in the faculty structure, the
tenure track faculty role appears to be changing, resulting in shifts in their professional and work
identity. Today’s tenure track faculty positions are more diverse than their senior colleagues
(Gappa et al., 2007). Young academics enter the faculty profession because they feel they will
find flexibility, autonomy and freedom to pursue their academic interests. Instead, they find
multiple demands on time and high expectations for accomplishment in teaching, research and
service. Schuster and Finkelstein (2006) point out that tenure track and tenured faculty members
have more pressure than before to publish and, as a result, have little time to participate in shared
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
59
governance. This pressure limits the autonomy of the tenure track and tenured professional.
Young tenure track faculty see the job as one that can be flexible but find that is not. The
timeline to achieve tenure is too rigid, and there is a highly competitive environment to publish
in journals and earn grants. The traditional academic career is one based on a male model and
what is normal in a man’s life. Women, however, feel the pressure of their own biological
clocks. If they choose to have a family, academic life can alter their choices of when and how
many children to have (Ward & Wolf-Wendel, 2012; Gappa et al., 2007). Early tenure track
faculty report looking for a sense of community where they can collaborate, interact and talk
about one’s ideas, work and the institution, but instead they feel isolated and separated. In other
words, the climate is not as friendly as it may have been in the past. As a result, tenure-track
probation faculty are finding it hard to be committed to an academic career. They do not like the
rigid tenure timeline, lack of community, excessive workloads and inability to find a balance
between personal and professional life. Traditional faculty life is changing, as there are more
people aspiring to become tenured Professors but fewer positions available as more NTTF
positions are created (Gappa et al., 2007).
Community College Professor
One alternative to the typical tenure track research faculty role is the role of community
college Professor. These positions have evolved into primarily teaching only and part-time
positions. The role and the identity of the community college Professor comes from the unique
ever-changing nature of the environment of the community college. According to Cohen and
Brawer (1989), the community college Professor has yet to achieve professional maturity. The
community college Professor as a profession lacks a distinct identification and direction and has
poorly articulated goals compared to their peers at four-year institutions (Cohen & Brawer,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
60
1989). The community college Professor’s professional and work identity is different from that
of her peers at four year institutions because the overall context in which she works is different.
Furthermore, the community college Professor’s work focuses mainly on teaching, most often
precluding research or writing for publication.
Community college Professors come from diverse backgrounds. Some community
college Professors come from Ph.D. programs, but many come from a variety of professional
backgrounds, including schoolteachers, graduate students and other professional experts, who
enjoy sharing their knowledge and teaching. Most hold master’s degrees or have equivalent
experience in the occupations they teach. On average, the community college Professor will
teach four to five classes per term and work between 13 to 15 hours per week. Around 60% of
community college Professors are part-time, yet full-time Professors teach about two thirds of
the classes. Community colleges look for Professors who have a breadth of experiences and are
sensitive to the goals of a community college. Graduate programs prepare students with
knowledge in their disciplines, but do not prepare them to teach. Teaching is the main goal of a
community college Professor. As a result, community colleges employ in-service training
programs that focus on pedagogy. Professors seek out courses and programs in their teaching
fields offered by local universities to gain more knowledge in their area of interest and degrees or
credits that will enable them to get paid better.
The community college Professor is eligible for tenure, however the system is different
from that of four-year institutions. Tenure can be awarded after a single year of service or there
can be a period of probation from 2 to 3 years. Generally tenure is awarded when someone
obtains a full-time teaching contract. Through a unique system of collective bargaining, the
community college Professor can negotiate parts of his or her contract. Factors in negotiation
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
61
include teaching load, class size and benefits. Part-time instructors are also common in
community colleges. These part-timers are often secondary teachers or professionals who want
to teach. Administrators of community colleges like having part-time faculty, because they are
willing to teach at off times and are more cost effective. The balance between full-time and part-
time has varied over time. By the 1970s, two thirds of part-timers were employed somewhere
else in addition to a community college (Cohen & Brawer, 1989). It is not clear if part-time
instructors are as effective or qualified as their full-time counterparts. They are less likely to hold
membership in professional associations; they read fewer scholarly and professional journals and
are less worried with the broader aspects of the curriculum.
The full-time community college Professor is hard to categorize professionally. They are
teachers but are not members of the teaching profession. Professionalism can “lead to a form of
cosmopolitism that ill suits a community centered institution” (Cohen & Brawer, 1989, p.87).
The disciplinary affiliation among community college Professors is weak, because they focus on
teaching and not research and scholarship. As a result, community college Professors do not
have a connection to larger professional body like their tenure peers at four year institutions. In
other words, the community college Professor does not have connection to a discipline that
might then connect her to a national professional organization. However, she can find
professionalization around the discipline of instruction. There have been efforts to assist
professionalizing community college Professors through journals geared toward two-year
college, as well as national organizations. The part-time instructor is more difficult to classify,
because they are only marginally connected to the profession of being a community college
instructor. The part-timer may be a professional in another field or a graduate student. They hold
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
62
a different status from their full-time peers, mainly because the institution is not making a long-
term commitment to them.
In summary, the community college Professor is unique. His or her professional and
work identity is different from that of a tenure track faculty member at a four year institution,
because the overall context in which S/he works is different. Tenure in the community college
can be awarded quickly and is generally given to those who sign full-time contracts. Part-time
community college faculty are those on short-term contracts, who often have other jobs outside
of the community college and are hired because of their knowledge and cost-effectiveness.
Through the process of collective barging, the community college faculty member is able to
negotiate his working conditions. The community college Professor focuses solely on teaching
and hardly, if ever, participates in research or publication. Since the focus of many community
college faculty is on vocational training, some community college Professors will have ties to
disciplinary associations, while others will not. In other words, the community college
Professor’s professional and work identity is shaped by the process of collective bargaining, his
or her primary role of teacher and the length of his or her contract, which can impact his or her
commitment to their school.
Non-Tenure-Track Appointments
The final appointment type this chapter explores, and the focus of this research study, is
the non-tenure track faculty, both full-time and part-time. As higher education has moved away
from hiring tenure track faculty whose primary role was to teach and not do research, they began
hiring NTTF. For the last forty years, NTTF have been hired as part-time appointments with an
increasing number of full-time NTTF appointments in the last few years.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
63
As previously mentioned, this group of faculty is growing in large numbers. Gappa et al.
(2007) argue that, as a result of changes in academic workplace (due to the changing context of
higher education that was explained in chapter one), there is a diminishing core of tenure track
faculty and an increase in the hiring of specialized freelance professionals and technicians for
specific needs, as well as a growing group of contingent workers. These new professionals are
the NTTF. Generally NTTF are hired on one of two contracts. Contract renewable appointments
(full-time NTTF) offer instructors full-time, long-term employment as a faculty member. This is
an alternative to the traditional tenure track and is often associated with “off the track” or “full-
time-non-tenure” (FTNTTF). The second type of contract is a fixed-term appointment (part time
NTTF). These contracts are temporary in nature and are filled by part-time faculty members,
who are often described as “temporary” or “contingent” (Gappa et al., 2007).
Full-Time NTTF. The hiring of FTNTT is appealing to institutions, allowing for special
expertise and employing people who would not necessarily seek or be qualified for tenure track
positions. In 1975, 58% of all faculty held tenure track positions (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001);
now, 32% of full-time faculty members have contract-renewable appointments and 46% of all
faculty are part-time. These changes are a result of the affordability and flexibility of these
appointments for institutions. FTNTTF positions are most common in research universities and
professional schools, where they are seen as alternatives to tenure positions. Clinical positions,
which are a specific title of FTNTTF, are common in professional schools, where those who
have practical experience in a profession are hired to share knowledge of practice.
Baldwin and Chronister (2001) offer two different types of employment models for
FTNTTF. The first is the alternative career in which an individual finds it to be a viable
alternative to a tenure career. These instructors have the same credentials and similar
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
64
employment conditions as to their tenure, but they opt out of tenure because they are fully
employable in their professions or the tenure track appointment does not fit their lifestyle.
Typically these types of positions enjoy voting rights and are integrated into their departments
like tenure track or tenured colleagues. Instructors are initially hired on an annual or multi year
contract, but upon completion of a probationary period can be hired for three to ten years.
Teaching loads are similar to tenure peers, as are opportunities for professional development.
They are also eligible for sabbatical leaves and have similar salaries to tenure.
The second model is the integrated Model. It is used to hire individuals with “distinctive
skills and interests that enhance program offerings and complement the qualifications of tenure
track faculty” (Baldwin & Chronister, 2001, p. 86). These faculty are hired on contracts for a
probationary period of three to six years, after which they can be eligible for multi-year
contracts. Their evaluations are structured and consistent. They have sequential ranks and titles,
as well as the potential for promotions. Salaries can be lower, but they have full benefits. They
have some voting rights, mostly with regards to curricular matters. These individuals are viewed
as different from their tenure eligible faculty by their institutions in that their teaching loads may
be heavier and they may carry administrative duties.
Full-time appointments are for one year or longer and are either renewable without limit
or of fixed duration with the possibility of renewal. Generally, opportunities for promotion are
available, although the range in titles is usually limited. FTNT faculty compensation includes
some benefits and some support for professional development, but is limited (Baldwin &
Chronister, 2001). There are also status differences among FTNTT faculty appointments. A high
status FTNTT position is often an equivalent to a tenure-track appointment and includes not only
teaching, but research. An example would be a FTNTT position in a private research university’s
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
65
business school, where a NTTF person has been hired to share her professional background in
the classroom. A lower status FTNTT appointment is used primarily for teaching and is
distinguished from tenure track peers through the use of different employment policies. A low
status example might be a FTNTT hired at a public four-year institution to teach remedial math.
Baldwin and Chronister (2001) found that status differences among FTNTT result either
because of explicit institutional polices and actions or because of implicit or inferred differences
in faculty quality. Status varies based on seniority and the education of the faculty member in the
FTNTT position. Baldwin and Chronister (2001) suggest nine things that institutions can do to
address the areas of concern with FTNTT appointments: define probationary periods; offer
multiyear appointments after probation; define dates for contract renewal or termination; create
equitable salary and benefits; create career-progression systems; support professional
development; allow involvement in governance; protect academic freedom; and create access to
recognition and rewards.
Part Time NTTF. Part-time NTTF are hired primarily to teach. They represent 67% of
faculty in public 2 year colleges and 22 % in research universities (Gappa et al., 2007). Part-time
NTTF mainly teach in business, health sciences and the law both because they are readily
available and, as practitioners, they bring value to the classroom. These individuals are often an
expansion of community college Professors. Institutions use them in order to be able to handle
more students efficiently and effectively without increased cost. Most recently, they have been
used with the growth in distance education, where they can serve as facilitators to online learning
at off hours, while maintaining a full-time job outside of teaching. In general, they are hired for
their specific expertise in a specialized area; most will have positions or careers outside of this
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
66
part-time appointment. Due to their experiences outside of teaching, they add value to student
learning and experiences.
Baldwin and Chronister (2001) refer to the use of part-time NTTF as a marginalized
model. In this model, part-time appointments are used to achieve staffing flexibility and cost
savings. These positions are similar to part-timers who make up the majority of the fixed-term
appointments. They are hired primarily to teach. Policies make it clear that they serve a special
function and are different from tenure track peers.
Gappa and Leslie (1993) offer four different categories of part-time NTTF. First are the
professionals, specialists or experts who are employed elsewhere but teach because they find
intrinsic satisfaction with the work and are dedicated to the constituencies they serve. Second are
the career-enders. These individuals are in life transitions to retirement or are retired and now
have time and desire to teach. The third group comprises the freelancers who simultaneously
hold a variety of positions, including part-time teaching. Finally, there are the aspiring academics
who are seeking full-time, tenure track faculty positions. The type of part-time NTTF role will
impact professional and work identity because NTTF are split between one role as a part time
instructor and other roles that might be as full-time professionals, as well as personal life roles.
These individuals do not identify with the concepts of professional autonomy, academic
freedom, faculty governance and tenure.
Because of institutional need to hire quickly and short term, part-time NTTF serve their
positions for short periods and their recruitment is usually informal and handled by faculty
department heads. They are appointed for a single term and are notified of renewal late in the
academic year. As a result, part-timers are left with little time to prepare for classes. This can
disrupt their lives and those who are financially dependent upon them. Institutional resources,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
67
support services, supplies and office space are all limited and NTTF receive the lowest priority.
Salary policies vary according to institutional culture and ability to pay. As a result of these
conditions, part-time NTTF’s sense of membership to their academic communities and their
satisfaction vary and are based on the treatment they receive within their departments. Since the
length of contract varies and their working conditions are often poor, it is unclear what might
shape how these individuals view themselves as professionals within academia.
Part-time or full-time is one way that NTTF can be classified. Researchers have
developed various typologies to describe the different NTTF roles. The differences among types
of NTTF arise from differences in job function, motivation and title. The type of positions that
NTTF take on are important, because they shape their role in the workplace, as well as their
professional and work identity. Part-time NTTF were first categorized in 1978 by Tuckerman’s
study. His seven types of part-time NTTF include: semi-retireds, graduate students, hopeful full-
timers, full-mooners, homeworkers, part-mooners, and part-unknowers. Gappa and Leslie (1993)
felt that Tuckman’s model was too narrow; they offered four broader ways to describe part-time
faculty: (1) career enders; (2) specialists, experts, and professionals; (3) aspiring academics; and
(4) freelancers. Later, Baldwin and Chronister (2001) described full–time NTTF in terms of their
employment responsibilities. Their four categories include: teachers, researchers, administrators,
and other academic professionals. “Voluntary” and “involuntary” are other terms used to
describe both full-time and part-time NTTF (Tilly, 1998; Maynard & Joseph, 2008). Those who
choose an NTTF position over a tenure-track one are described as voluntary, because they
actively choose to take a full-time or part-time NTTF position (Gappa, Austin, & Trice, 2007).
Those who are involuntary are looking for a tenure-track position, or hold an NTTF position in
hopes of it turning into a tenure track position (Gappa, Austin, & Trice, 2007).
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
68
In summary, NTTF appointments are either full-time or part-time. Full-time NTTF often
are extended long-term contracts that enable them to become members of their academic
communities. Part-time NTTF, however, are on short-term or fixed-term contracts that do not
allow for them to become members of the academic community. For some professionals, part-
time is a choice and for others it is not. In addition, the different NTTF appointment types have
different titles across campuses and each seems to carry a different meaning. The differences in
title may indicate something about the contract or the status of the NTTF appointment.
Furthermore, the appointment types impact how each faculty member is socialized and, thus,
treated in their environments. This results in a variety of experiences in teaching, activities
beyond teaching and how much control they have in their working conditions. As a result, it
appears that NTTF do not relate to the concepts of professional autonomy, faculty governance,
tenure, academic freedom or the merit principle in shaping their professional and work identity.
In essence, the type of NTTF appointment impacts the individual experience, role, title, and
network. These concepts impact NTTF professional and work identity. As the workplace
changes, it places the professional and work identity of NTTF in a state of flux. This study hopes
to gain insight into that flux in order to better understand the current NTTF professional and their
work identity, and the important factors that shape this identity.
Conceptual Framework
The themes from the literature provide insight into what might shape professional and
work identity of NTTF. These concepts include the environment one works in, the relationships
one forms, and how the individual views him or herself. As the literature in the beginning of this
chapter points out, identity is a phenomenon that cannot easily be framed or placed, since it
changes over time and can change from one context to the next. A framework is important
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
69
because it serves as a lens for the research to be conducted (Merriam, 2008). The work of
Genevieve Shaker (2008) attempted to understand the experience of full-time non-tenure track
faculty in one specific department. Shaker (2008) developed a framework to explain what shapes
the FTNTTF experience in a department and appears to be a good fit for this study. Through her
research, she was able to understand different pieces (contexts) of the full-time NTTF
experience. She found that several factors impacted the experience of NTTF, including their
education, the time spent at the institution, their age, their career path, and contextual factors.
From her research findings, Shaker designed a model (see Figure 1 below) to help
explain the differences in the experiences among the full-time NTTF in English. The model is
composed of concentric circles that represent the overlapping layers or contextual elements that
affect the NTTF experience. These elements include personal preferences, personal
characteristics, organizational forces and academic conditions, which were noted at the
beginning of this chapter as likely shaping professional and work identity. Personal preferences
include prioritization of personal life, commitment to students and love of teaching.
Organizational forces include the institutional and departmental environment, workload, salary,
reappointment and the promotion process. The academic conditions include faculty stereotypes
and conceptions, disciplinary context and tenure versus non-tenure status. Since they came from
the same discipline, many of the full-time NTTF experienced commonalities. However, Shaker
(2008) still found that the individual experiences varied among the full-time NTTF in light of the
different elements.
The elements that Shaker (2008) has included in her model mirror the concepts that have
been examined in this chapter. Personal preferences and personal characteristics align with the
literature regarding identity and how self-perception plays a role in how individuals view
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
70
themselves personally and professionally. The organizational forces resemble the literature that
describes differences in institutional type and discipline and departmental differences. The
academic forces described by Shaker (2008) mirror the literature regarding differences in
appointment types. These elements, as noted at the beginning of this chapter, likely shape
professional and work identity, and, therefore, serve as a good lens to explore the professional
and work identity of NTTF.
In essence, what Shaker (2008) identified was that the full-time NTTF experience in
English Composition varied based on different contextual elements. However, her study was
limited in that it only reviewed full-time NTTF from one specific department. This study seeks to
expand on Shaker’s (2008) study to understand how different disciplines shape the NTTF
experience at a four-year university. As examined in this chapter, the faculty experience is
shaped by various layers of the environment in which they work. These layers include
institutional type, departmental or disciplinary type and appointment type. Therefore Shaker’s
(2008) framework, with an understanding of the contextual elements presented in this chapter,
will help guide this research project to understand how the department within which a full time
NTTF work shapes work identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
71
Figure 1. Factors that affect the NTTF experience
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
72
Conclusion
The changing context of higher education has forced a change in structure of the faculty.
Institutions have moved away from hiring tenure and tenure-track faculty to adding new faculty,
non-tenure-track faculty, who are hired on a short-term and longer-term basis. This shift has
caused a move away from traditional ideas of professional identity in academia to something
uncertain. This uncertainty is what this study hopes to explore. While we do not know
specifically what shapes the professional and work identity of NTTF, we do know from the
literature reviewed that some factors that might shape professional and work identity include the
environment (institution, department) role (appointment type, job), self and self-reflection
(agency) and one’s relationships. This study will specifically examine these factors and the
differences among them within a research university context.
Building off of the literature review, the next chapter focuses on the research design and
methods that were used to collect data in an attempt to understand what contextual factors do
shape the professional and work identity of full-time NTTF within a research university context.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
73
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODS
Introduction
In Chapter Two, I argue that the context in which individuals work shapes how they view
themselves professionally. For the purpose of this study, the best way to understand the context
of the environment that shapes the work identity of NTTF, was to speak directly to NTTF and
hear their stories. This chapter presents an overview of the methodology and research design that
was used to answer the following question: How does the department within which a full time
NTTF work shape their work identity at a four-year research university? This chapter explains
the rationale for the design and provides information about the site and selection of participants,
as well as how the data was analyzed. The chapter ends by identifying any bias or background
that might have influenced the study.
Rationale for Design
This study used qualitative research design to gain a comprehensive understanding of the
working conditions and environment that shape NTTF work identity. Merriam (2009) states that
“qualitative research is interested in how the meaning is constructed, how people make sense of
their lives and their worlds” (p.24). The value in using a qualitative research method was that it
allowed me to understand in detail the conditions that construct NTTF’s professional and work
identity. It also allowed me to hear directly from NTTF. Denzin and Lincoln (2011) state:
Qualitative research is a situated activity that locates the observer in the world.
Qualitative research consists of a set of interpretative, material practices that make the
world visible. These practices transform the world. They turn the world into a series of
representations, including field notes, interviews, conversations, photographs, recordings,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
74
and memos to the self…qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings,
attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people
bring to them (p.3)
This definition is helpful because it laid out my role as the researcher and how I could approach
my study. As the researcher, I worked collaboratively with my participants in their natural setting
to collect their stories. Then, I worked through my recordings and notes to retell their stories to
bring new meaning to them. Creswell (2013) summarizes several common characteristics of
qualitative research that will serve as guidelines for my approach as a researcher conducting a
qualitative study. These characteristics include that the data collection happens in a natural
setting, the researcher serves as a key instrument, and that the study uses multiple methods,
complex reasoning through inductive and deductive logic, participant’s meanings, emergent
design, reflexivity, and provides a holistic account. A qualitative study was a good fit for
understanding identity because identity is formed through one’s experience. Participant’s
understandings and personal reflection on the topic are key to developing an understanding of the
work identity of NTTF. Through a qualitative study, I heard directly from NTTF and came to see
how their stories gave meaning to their work identity. The best way for me to have done this was
to go directly to NTTF in their environment and conduct interviews to hear their stories and how
those stories affect NTTF professional and work identity.
Narrative Approach
Creswell (2013) identifies five types of qualitative inquiry. These include: narrative,
phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography and case study. This research study used a
narrative approach to hear directly from the full-time NTTF about their professional experience
and how that experience might shape their professional and work identity. Jonassen and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
75
Herandez-Serrano (2002) state “the oldest and most natural form of sense making are stories or
narratives” (p.66). Narrative research examines how a “story is constructed, what linguistic tools
are used, and the cultural context of the story” (Merriam, 2009, p.33). Narrative research is best
suited when the researcher needs to tell the stories of individual experiences. It draws from the
social sciences including anthropology, sociology, psychology, and history (Creswell, 2013).
Riessman (1993) states:
The [narrative] approach examines the informant’s story and analyzes how it is put
together, the linguistic and cultural resources it draws on, and how it persuades a listener
of authenticity. Analysis in narrative studies opens up from of telling about experience,
not simply the content to which language refers. We ask, why was the story told that
way? (p.2)
It was hoped that themes would emerge from the stories of NTTF that shed light on what shapes
NTTF professional and work identity. Identity generally is not something that can be easily
observed or brought out through other research methods, because it is an internal phenomenon.
Researchers often chose a narrative approach when examining identity because it allows
individuals to express themselves, using their own words, about what they experience internally.
Riessman (1993) states that “a primary way individuals make sense of an experience is by
casting it in a narrative from” (p.4). More specifically, this study employed an oral history
narrative in which I, as the researcher, gathered “personal reflections of events and their causes
and effects from one or several individuals” (Creswell, 2013, p. 73; Plummer, 1983). In other
words, the stories of the NTTF provided a lens to understand what shapes their professional and
work identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
76
There are many defining features of a narrative study that made it a good fit for this
research project. First, narrative studies collect stories from individuals about their lived and told
experiences (Crewell, 2013). I did this by directly speaking to NTTF and recording the
conversations I had. Second, not only do these stories tell the experiences of individuals, but they
also allowed me as the researcher to see how the individual may view him or herself and
provided a glimpse into the individual’s identity. Through the questions I asked and by allowing
the NTTF to reflect on their personal experiences, I gained insight into NTTF work identity.
Third, the narrative stories come from a variety of sources including interviews, observations,
and documents. While I primarily used stories from the NTTF, I also observed how they
responded to the questions I asked and the environment in which they work, because this
provided context for their stories. Fourth, the researcher recording a narrative story often places
the narrative in a chronology that may not be the way the participant told the story. Fifth,
according to Riessman (2008), the narratives can be analyzed in different ways, thematically, by
what was said or the nature of how the story was told (structure) or who the story is directed to.
These two pieces came after the data (stories) had been collected and reviewed, which is further
explained below in the data analysis. Finally, narrative stories occur within specific places and
often contain turning points, both of which make the context of the story as told by the researcher
very important (Crewell, 2013; Denzin, 1989). The narratives that the NTTF told me, provided
me with different themes pertaining to work identity and allowed me to form some conclusions
about how the context in which NTTF work shapes their professional identity.
Narrative inquiry can be challenging. Creswell states that “the researcher needs to collect
extensive information about the participant and needs to have a clear understanding of the
context of the individual’s life” (p.76). As the researcher, I had to pay close attention to the
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
77
individual stories in order to identify the themes that enabled me to capture what shapes NTTF
professional identity. It was critical for me to be an active, collaborative partner with the
individuals I interviewed, in order to discuss their stories. It was important that I also reflected on
my personal background, as that shaped how I “re-storied” their accounts (Crewell, 2013). I kept
a small notebook of notes with each interview that tracked my observations as well as my biases
and assumptions.
Site Selection
Southern University (“SU”), a large, private research university in the southwestern
United States, was the site where I collected the data. Data only came from SU. All participants
came from one institution because one of the underlying assumptions of this study was that the
context (the environment, here SU) shapes work identity of NTTF. I wanted to keep the context
the same as I interpreted the NTTF’s stories to understand what shapes NTTF work identity.
SU’s population is approximately 32,000 graduate and undergraduate students. Students come
from all over the country and world, making SU a very diverse campus. There are approximately
3,500 full-time faculty at SU. SU has several professional schools, including medicine,
communication, and business. The University also maintains a college of letters, arts, and
sciences, which offers liberal arts majors.
There are several reasons why the SU was a good site for this project. First, I choose a
private, four-year research university because much of the data on NTTF has focused on two-
year community colleges, and little if any attention has been given to private research
universities. Furthermore, private colleges and universities are hiring more NTTF than their
public counterparts (Hearn & Deupree, 2013). In addition, as mentioned in Chapter Two, within
research universities there tends to be more hierarchy and elitism, and research tends to be
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
78
valued over teaching, a factor that might also shape the work identity of NTTF. Second, I had
access to the campus, it’s schools and departments through professional connections. This
enabled me to use my own connections to find participants at SU. The site was also physically
convenient for me as a researcher, which enabled me to be more efficient in conducting my
interviews since time was a constraint. Finally, as mentioned, private institutions are moving
faster in growing their NTTF and SU in particular has been on the forefront of this movement.
SU utilizes a two-tiered faculty system consisting of tenured and non-tenured faculty.
Tenured and non-tenured faculty serve SU and their home department or school under different
kinds of contracts. Tenured faculty contracts consist of three parts: research (40%), teaching
(40%), and service (20%). The non-tenured faculty have contracts that consist of 70% teaching
and 30% service. There is no research component for non-tenured faculty. Each faculty group is
evaluated and reviewed on the different parts of their contacts. Anything beyond the contract, or
not stipulated to in the contract, is not considered in the evaluation and contract renewal process.
SU has 3,321 full-time faculty and reports a faculty-to-student ratio of 9 to 1for undergraduate
students (NCES, 2011). Of the over 3,000 faculty, 1,128 have tenure, 290 are on track for tenure,
and 1,903 are not on a tenure track. This means that 57% of SU faculty hold NTTF positions, a
much larger percentage than the 34% who are tenured and the 9% who are on track for a tenure
position. NTTF therefore make up the majority of the faculty population at SU. Moreover, in the
fall of 2011, SU hired approximately 200 new faculty members. More than 150 of these new
hires were NTTF positions; the remaining fifty positions were split between new tenured hires
and new hires on a tenure track (NCES, 2011).
In 2002, the SU Academic Senate voted to create a committee on NTTF. McCann (2002)
who at the time was the Administrative Vice President of the Academic Senate, stated “these
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
79
faculty colleagues make invaluable contributions to the University’s mission, and offer special
talents and professional accomplishments that complement those of their tenure-track
colleagues.” He went on to explain that SU has three types of NTTF: teaching faculty, research
faculty, and clinical faculty, all of whom make great contributions to the university. SU defines
each type of faculty role in its Faculty Handbook, Section 3-1(C). McCann explains that NTTF
are valuable to the teaching and research mission of the university. They provide experiences
that many tenured faculty cannot and “carry out projects which don’t directly feed into the
established curriculum, especially the undergraduate curriculum, in their discipline.” According
to McCann (2002), NTTF are vital to the success of each academic unit within SU. For all of
these reasons, SU serves as a ideal site for this research project.
Participants
The participants for this research study were full-time NTTF who serve in seven different
departments and programs. The sample was selected through a process of purposeful sampling.
Purposeful sampling “is based on the assumption that the investigator wants to discover,
understand, and gain insight, and therefore must select a sample from which the most can be
learned” (Merriam, 2008, p. 77). In the sample of full-time NTTF that I sought, I looked for
individuals with a variety of experiences from time at the institution, educational and
professional background, gender, etc. This allowed for a diverse sample with different
characteristics that added to what might shape their work identity. The sample came from
different disciplines including the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences, particularly
those that tend to have higher numbers of NTTF. Participants were asked to complete a survey
(see appendix B) to help ensure a diverse sample. This allowed for rich narrative stories from a
variety of NTTF that provided insight into what shapes NTTF work identity. As mentioned in
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
80
chapter two, the NTTF experience varies not only by appointment type (full-time v. part-time)
but also by discipline and department, and personal characteristics like race and gender. All of
these elements likely shape professional and work identity and warranted a diverse sample.
This study sought to build off of Shaker’s (2008) study and looked at more then one
discipline. As the literature in chapter two demonstrated, each department and discipline
provides faculty a lens to view knowledge and work and therefore choosing faculty from
different areas like the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences differences were brought
out. The variety in disciplines showed differences among the experiences of full-time NTTF at
SU. Chapter two pointed out that some NTTF describe themselves as aspiring academics, some
are more specialists with a certain kind of knowledge, while others may work full time outside of
the institution and enjoy teaching on the side.
Through individual personal connections as well as finding individual names on
department websites I solicited participation via email. Once an individual confirmed interest in
the study I followed up with a second email invitation that included a brief electronic survey (see
appendix B). This survey was used to gather background information on the NTTF participants
and provide more context for their story. Twenty-three individuals replied to the survey and 19
were interviewed. Not all survey respondents completed the full survey. Most NTTF reported
teaching an average of three courses per semester without any additional support like a Teaching
Assistant or fellow faculty member. The average class size varied from 20 to over 200 students.
The Survey also collected general demographic information on the respondents like education,
sex and time at the institutions, which helped to gather a diverse sample. The survey was an
initial starting point to gather information on the participants prior to the interview. Each
response was reviewed to ensure that the final sample provided a diverse group of NTTF with
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
81
various backgrounds including gender, race, time at SU, and the department within which they
work in. After the sample was selected, I followed up and worked with each individual to
schedule a time to interview those selected.
With this information in mind a sample of 19 participants was found from the three
academic clusters within the College of Letters, Arts and Sciences at SU: natural sciences, social
sciences and humanities. Table 1 below summarizes some key characteristics of the sample.
These individuals came from seven different departments and programs across the College of
Letters, Arts, and Sciences. These departments and programs include: chemistry, environmental
studies, anthropology, English, writing, sociology, and political science. Of the 19 individuals
nine were women and ten men. All but one of the individuals interviewed holds a Ph.D. Three of
them hold a legal degree in addition to their PhD. Their time at the University ranges from 1 year
to over 20 years. The titles they hold include lecturer, Assistant Professor of Teaching, and
Associate Professor of Teaching. Two of the nineteen hold administrative positions that
including running different types of centers on campus and as a result do not teach full time as
the other seventeen do. As this description demonstrates this sample of NTTF is quite diverse.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
82
Table 1
Overview of 19 NTTF
P#
Male/
Female Department Title Degree
Years at
SU
1 F Chemistry Assistant Professor of Teaching PhD 11
2 F Environmental Studies Lecturer PhD 4
3 F Anthropology Associate Professor of Teaching JD, PhD 22
4 F Environmental Studies Lecturer PhD 1.5
5 F Writing Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 13
6 M Writing Assistant Professor of Teaching PhD 6
7 F Sociology Lecturer PhD 3
8 M Writing Associate Professor of Teaching JD, PhD 12
9 F English Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 21
10 M Writing Assistant Professor of Teaching PhD 5
11 M Political Science Assistant Professor of Teaching JD, PhD 6
12 F Sociology Lecturer PhD 2
13 F Chemistry Lecturer PhD 3
14 M English Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 7
15 M Anthropology Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 16
16 M English Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 8
17 M Anthropology Associate Professor of Teaching PhD 8
*18 M Environmental Studies Adjunct Associate Professor of
Teaching
PhD 27
*19 M Political Science Assistant Professor of Teaching BA 6
* Indicates that this person in addition to NTTF position they hold, they also administration position
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
83
Data Collection
Qualitative data, primarily stories, were collected through recorded semi-structured
interviews. Semi-structured interviews are a hybrid of structured and unstructured interviews,
and they allow the researcher flexibility in wording and also the ability to ask follow up
questions or questions which may not be listed in an interview protocol (Merriam, 2009).
Narrative interviews lend themselves to semi-structured interviews because they allow for
individuals to tell their stories. To guide my interviews I used an interview protocol, which was
adapted by the one that Shaker (2008) used in her study (see Appendix C). I tested my interview
protocol by conducting mock interviews with a peer as well as with a NTTF who was not used in
the study. This helped me become more confident in interviewing as well as making sure my
questions were clear and effective. The interview process started with broad, open-ended
questions and then follow-up questions as the individual responded to my initial questions. This
allowed for the NTTF’s story to flow in a more natural way than it would have in a structured
interview. Creswell (2013) states that we “conduct qualitative research because we need a
complex, detailed understanding of the issues. This detail can only be established by talking
directly with people, going to their homes or places of work, and allowing them to tell the stories
unencumbered by what we expect to find or what we have read in the literature” (p. 48). Since
narrative studies seek rich detail, interviews seem the best way to gain useful data from the
participants.
As a researcher, I do not have access to the participant’s experiences. Instead I had to
work with the representations of the participant’s experiences during interviews, observations,
and interpretation. According to Riessman (1993), the first way to work through these
representations is by attending to the experience. This involves learning about NTTF and their
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
84
experiences, which enabled me to have some background to ask them questions about their
experiences as NTTF in order to gain insight into their work identity. In other words, I needed to
take time to gain more context to best understand the full time NTTF experience at SU. I was
able to do this in a few different ways. Frist through previous coursework by working with a few
NTTF and testing out a few interview questions. Second, I worked to, and plan to continue to,
build rapport with NTTF at SU by meeting with a one of the NTTF faculty affairs
representatives, an interaction which helped me gain insight into the overall issues and
experiences of NTTF at SU. Third, I observed one of the campus wise committees on NTTF,
which allowed me to hear about current issues facing NTTF at SU. I also visited the departments
from which I interviewed the NTTFs, in order to get a sense of the environment. Finally, I
sought out any documentation that departments or SU may have on full time NTTF. These
documents included past meeting agendas to gain an understanding of some of the NTTF issues
as well as the White Paper that was written on NTTF at SU in 2012. All of these activities and
engagements helped me better understand the context in which the full time NTTF at SU work,
and better attend to their experiences.
The next step in the narrative approach was to have the “performance of a personal
narrative” or the telling of the narrative (Riessman, 1993). This occurs when the participant
began to tell me about their experience. During a narrative interview, open-ended questions are
used to encourage individuals to tell their story. Riessman (1993) states that “its preferable to ask
a question that opens up topics and allow respondents to construct answers, in collaboration with
listeners, in the ways they find meaningful” (p.54). For my research, this process occurred in the
form of semi-structured interviews. During the interviews I used an interview protocol as a guide
to help facilitate the telling of the NTTF narrative (see Appendix C). These questions came from
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
85
the work of Shaker (2008) and are broad open-ended questions regarding a variety of
experiences that full time NTTF encounter and that provided insight into what might shape their
work identity. The protocol served as a guide, questions were added as the interviews occurred
or if I found something to be reoccurring in the interview process.
Identity is an internal phenomena and getting thoughtful responses regarding elements of
individuals’ identity requires time for the individuals to reflect on what might be meaningful to
them. Therefore, in an attempt to gather quality descriptive data from my participants I took a
few, additional steps. After each individual agreed to be a part of the study, I sent them the list of
questions ahead of time that I had planned to ask. Reissman (1993) explains that providing this
additional time to ruminate on the questions can “facilitate recall” when the individuals tell me
their stories. After the interviews I asked the individuals to reflect on our time together, and to
follow up with me via email if there was anything we left out or if there was more they felt they
needed to say.
All but three interviews were conducted in the office space of the NTTF. I did this
because I wanted them to feel comfortable. However, a few did not want to be interviewed in
their offices and interviews were conducted in a quiet room with no distractions, like in the
library. Once a participant agreed to participate in this study, I emailed him or her the list of
questions (see appendix C).The questions in the interview protocol were derived from the themes
that came from the literature reviewed in Chapter Two. Due to the nature of narrative research
and the questions I sought to answer, I believed it was important to allow individuals time to
think and reflect about their own personal and professional background. As pointed out in the
literature on identity, the concept of self and self-reflection are critical to helping individuals
understand their personal and work identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
86
Another key component is establishing good rapport with my interviewees, because this
not only enabled the NTTF to trust me as a researcher but also allowed me as a researcher to
better attend to their stories. As mentioned previously I build this rapport in a few different ways
including: I first started by working with NTTF in one of my research methods classes through
writing and testing an interview protocol with NTTF in Education; meeting with one of the
NTTF who serves as a representative for faculty affairs for NTTF to gain more insight into the
working world of NTTF at SU. This helped me greatly since the topic I was researching can be
personal and require NTTF to reflect on their personal life. I wanted to respect the NTTF and
their stories. In order to better facilitate this process, I conducted the interviews in person and
allowed for follow up with participants which allowed me to collaborate better with each of
them. As Creswell (2013) states:
As researchers collect stories, they negotiate relationships, smooth transitions, and
provide ways to be useful to the participants. In narrative reproach, a key theme has been
toward the relationship between the researcher and the researched in which both parties
will learn and change in the encounter” (p.75; Creswell & miller, 2000)
In addition to interviews, the survey that was used to select a sample provided background for
their stories. Some of this data is presented above in Table 1. All data (NTTF stories) was kept
confidential and secure in the hands of the researcher to ensure the protection of all participants.
Data Analysis
After each interview I wrote notes and reflections to myself in a notebook that I carried to
each interview session. This allowed me to not only begin to see some possible themes across
interviews but also ensured that I was addressing any assumptions I maybe forming. Furthermore
this self-reflection allowed me to see how my interview protocol was working and if I needed to
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
87
make adjustments. When I saw a reoccurring theme I added a question(s) that addressed that
theme. This is a critical aspect of qualitative research in that it is emergent and can change as you
go through your research process (Creswell, 2013; Merriam, 2008).
Riessman (1993) describes three steps to narrative analysis: telling, transcribing, and
analyzing. I have already addressed the telling component above, by describing how data was
collected. Transcribing is the process of writing out the recorded interviews. Riessman states that
“taping and transcribing are absolutely essential to narrative analysis” (p.56) Since this process
can be time consuming, I hired someone to transcribe the interviews. However, since I conducted
the interviews, I also read through the transcriptions while listening to the recorded interviews to
ensure the narrative was captured correctly. This allowed me to review the interviews to better
understand the narratives I had captured. After the interviews were transcribed, I read them over,
and organized the data into files. Reissman (1993) refers to this process as analyzing the
narrative. I read through the text, took notes to make sure things made sense, and followed up
with participants when it was necessary or if I had further questions. The next step was to
describe the experiences of the participants by placing them into some kind of preliminary order.
This involved putting the data (their stories) into codes and themes. From here, I was able to
classify the data by identifying stories and quotes that fit the codes and themes. Interpreting the
data came next, and here I attempted to deduce a larger meaning from the NTTF stories. These
emergent meanings are explained in the next chapter. Creswell (2013) refers to this process as
“restorying” or “the process of reorganizing the stories into some general type of framework”
(p.74). I referred back to my research question to develop a theory about what shapes the work
identity of NTTF. This data is presented in chapter four and is described by Creswell (2013) as a
narrative about the stories of the lives of individuals who participated in the research project.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
88
Role of the Researcher
Qualitative research is unique in that the researcher plays a major role in the process. The
researcher is particularly involved in a narrative inquiry process and I played an active role
collaborating with the NTTF that I interviewed. It is therefore important for me to address any
bias that I might have had as I conducted my research.
I acknowledge that my own personal experience and life needed to be considered since I
am the one retelling the NTTF’s personal stories. My own personal background can impact how
I viewed and retold these stories. In order to address these issues I kept a notebook as I
conducted my interviews in order to get my bias out and be upfront about any opinions I might
have had that could impact the retelling to the NTTF stories. Furthermore, I approached this
study as a student with sound ethics who truly wants to provide a voice for NTTF. Part of this
process was reviewing the literature and understanding the working conditions that NTTF
experience. I wanted to record the NTTF stories and allow them an opportunity to be heard
because very little research exists that allows for NTTF stories to be told directly from NTTF.
Limitations of the Study
With any research project limitations will exist. There are a few important ones to
mention related to my study. First, the data was only collected from one institution and therefore
the shared experience of the NTTF at SU may be very different from another comparable four-
year private university. Second, this study was not longitudinal. While I collected stories from
the past, the current data is limited because it only captures the current moment in what might
shape identity and not how that might change over time. This is an important limitation to note
because as chapter two explains, identity shifts and changes over time and therefore attempting
to capture it a one point in time has its limitations. A third limitation is that I only interviewed a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
89
small number of NTTF from each discipline. This makes it difficult to know the extent to which
the department or discipline may impact identity.
Trustworthiness
Qualitative research can be challenging because there is no one way to test the reliability
and validity of a study. With a narrative study it can be even harder because one’s story is not
meant to be read as an exact recollection of what happened or as a “mirror of the world”
(Riessman, 1993). Each person tells a narrative that is one possible version of that narrative. A
week later, the individual might tell the narrative slightly differently. But that does not mean one
story is more valid than the next. This is why, as Riessman (1993) states:
Validation, the process through which we make claims for the trustworthiness of our
interpretations is the crucial issue. Trustworthiness not truth is a key semantic difference:
The latter assumes an objective reality, whereas the former moves the process into the
social world (p.65)
There are four different ways to achieve validity in a narrative according to Riessman (1993).
First is the criteria of persuasiveness and plausibility. This examines whether the interpretation of
the narrative is plausible and whether the theory presented matches what the individual
participants told in their stories. The second way is through correspondence or “member
checking.” Through this process, I took my findings and presented them back to the participants
to ensure that what I am saying accurately reflects their narratives. This is important because as
the researcher, I shared my work with my participants and thus added to the collaborative
process of qualitative research. This also ensures that what I found and said about the NTTF and
their work identity appears accurate to the NTTF, because my research could be used as a way to
improve their working conditions.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
90
The third criteria that Riessman (1993) describes is coherence. The narrative must be
coherent on the global, local, and thematic levels. A narrative is coherent on a global scale when
the overall goals of the narrator are achieved, in order words, if the NTTF is pleased with what I
recorded as their story. Local coherence refers to what the narrator is trying to affect in their
narrative, like using analogies or juxtaposing events to make a point. Finally, thematic coherence
involves the actual content of the narrative and ensuring that when I used chunks of an interview
to demonstrate a particular theme, it was done in an accurate and fair matter.
The final criteria Riessman (1993) suggests to ensure validity is pragmatic use. She
states:
Can we provide information that will make it possible for others to determine the
trustworthiness of our work by (a) describing how the interpretations were produced, (b)
making visible what we did, (c) specifying how we accomplished successive
transformations, and (d) making primary data available to other researchers (p.68)
Pragmatic use is future orientated and determines if the narratives collected can be used as a
basis for future research. Ultimately, as a researcher I asked the questions above to ensure that
my research is not only valid but trustworthy and transparent.
Equally important to the criteria described above is to remember that I am a student and a
professional who wishes to provide a way for the NTTF’s voices to be heard. I took time to
understand more of the context in which the NTTF work within SU, by speaking to a
representative for faculty affairs for NTTF as well as spending time in the environment in which
the NTTF work. This helped me improve my ability to interpret the stories told by the NTTF
because I had a more sound understanding of the context in which their stories were told. While
many NTTF may provide the same idea and voices from past research on NTTF this study has a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
91
more diverse sample and allows for a more diverse perceptive on the NTTF experience at SU. As
Creswell (2013) states “we conduct qualitative research when we want to empower individuals
to share their stories, hear their voices, and minimize the power relationships that often exist
between a researcher and the participants in a study” (p.48). Through this study I hoped to
empower NTTF by giving them an opportunity to share their stories with me. With this goal in
mind, I worked to ensure that I retold their stories in an accurate and ethical manner.
Conclusion
In summary, this chapter provided the methodical design and rationale for this study. In
order to best understand what shapes the work identity of NTTF, the study used a narrative
approach through semi-structured interviews to capture the stories of NTTF. After conducting
each interview, I kept track of my own reflections and transcribed each interview. From there, I
evaluated the data and analyzed it to find common themes among the stories from the NTTF that
help to answer what shapes NTTF professional and work identity development.
The next chapter provides an overview of the study findings and answers the research
question.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
92
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
Introduction
This chapter presents the data collected from 19 full-time-non-tenure-track faculty who
were interviewed to answer the question: how does the department within which full time NTTF
works shape their work identity at a four-year research university? The first part of this chapter
will present an overview of the findings and how they align to the four themes found in Shaker’s
(2008) model. The second part will cover two significant themes found in the interviews that
could be added Shaker’s model. In the third section, a table of positive and negative shapers of
full-time NTTF work identity is presented with a brief summary of what the work identity of
these non-tenure-track faculty might look like, given what was found from the interviews. The
fourth section of this chapter presents three stories to demonstrate how the different themes
found in the data might shape one’s work identity. Finally the chapter will conclude with some
summative points regarding what factors appear to shape full-time NTTF work identity.
Themes Found in Shaker’s Model
As mentioned at the end of chapter three, the work of Genevieve Shaker (2008)
attempted to understand the experience of full-time non-tenure track faculty in one specific
department. Shaker (2008) developed a framework to explain what shapes the FTNTTF
experience in a department. She found that several factors impacted the experience of NTTF,
including their education, the time spent at the institution, their age, their career path, and
contextual factors. From her research findings, Shaker designed a model to help explain the
differences in the experiences among the full-time NTTF in English. The model (presented
below in Figure 2) is composed of concentric circles that represent the overlapping layers or
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
93
contextual elements that affect the NTTF experience. These elements include personal
preferences, personal characteristics, organizational forces and academic conditions. Personal
preferences include prioritization of personal life, commitment to students and love of teaching.
Organizational forces include the institutional and departmental environment, workload, salary,
reappointment and the promotion process. The academic conditions include faculty stereotypes
and conceptions, disciplinary context and tenure versus non-tenure status. Since they came from
the same discipline, many of the full-time NTTF experienced commonalities. However, Shaker
(2008) still found that the individual experiences varied among the full-time NTTF in light of the
different elements.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
94
Figure 2. Factors that affect the NTTF experience
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
95
This study sought to explore how differences in departments and programs might shape
full-time NTTF work identity. While identity is not experience, experience does shape identity
and therefore Shaker’s (2008) model appears to fit the stories I heard. Her model pictured above
in Figure 2 provides a roadmap to the findings presented in this chapter. Each of the four circles
in Shaker’s model were found in the stories I heard and can help understand what full-time
NTTF work identity looks like through their experiences. These experiences ultimately become
the conditions, which shape how individuals view their work identity.
Personal Preferences
Personal preferences are at the center of Shaker’s model. This circle represents the inner
most personal part of the full-time NTTF experience. For Shaker the elements here include how
the individual prioritizes their personal life, the love of teaching, a commitment to students, a
desire to serve and an appreciation for academia. As the literature from chapter two explains, the
person is the shaper of their identity and thus the decisions that he or she makes can shape their
identity. The personal preferences of these full-time NTTF can help us to understand how they
perceive themselves personally and professionally and provide insight into their identity.
Prioritization of personal life. For many of the NTTF interviewed, their personal lives
are at the center of who they are and the decisions they have made. How each individual
prioritized their personal life by making certain decisions shaped who they are personally and
professionally at this point in their life. In essence the personal and professional worlds melded
together. These decisions, as will be explained in this chapter, contribute to their work identity.
Prioritization of one’s personal life can play a critical role in shaping one’s identity
because individuals make certain decisions that will shape their experience and thus shape their
identity. For many of the NTTF this meant that their personal life became more important then
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
96
their professional life and as a result they made certain decisions that impacted their careers. For
one writing Professor this meant leaving a tenure track job to follow a spouse:
After four years, I made the decision to quit that job and relocate to California, because
my spouse got an offer at a Cal State, and I am from California, and I wanted to come
home. (P5)
By making a personal decision to follow her spouse she also realized something about herself
professionally, in that the tenure track was not working for her. But for others giving up a tenure
track position and making personal choices was not easy. One woman told me a story about how
she had her dream job of a tenure track position all lined up, and had even picked out her office
paint colors. But came to realize she would have to give it up because her ex-husband would not
allow her to take her daughter out of the state. She told me:
I had to decline the position and I was actually unemployed for a semester, thinking that I
was starting my job in August or September. So from there until December, I had no
employment…it was really demoralizing, it was devastating. (P12)
Unlike the previous person who felt comfortable giving up a tenure track position for personal
reasons, this person described giving that opportunity up as a very negative experience and
damaging her identity. For others, making personal decisions meant choosing to never follow a
tenure track job because of job search limitations arising from being geographically bound
because of a spouse’s career; for others it meant making a career change. As one person
described “I am what’s called a place bound faculty member because of my wife’s profession, I
can’t go anywhere else. I’ve got to stay here” (P18). And three of the nineteen NTTF
interviewed actually left legal careers and decided to pursue an academic life later in their lives.
But for many the most important piece was their family.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
97
I chose this track. I was raising a family. Every time we were looking for new positions
in other places and when it would come, my husband would say, let's bargain for two
tenure track positions, and I thought, oh my God, I don't want that double stress. (P3)
In essence choosing a non-tenure track position allowed these individuals to care for their aging
parents, be a dad, be a mom or stay at home at certain points in their careers. For some this was
an easy decision and a matter of figuring out what they valued. For others it was a decision made
for them and quite upsetting. Each of these choices, these personal priorities has led these NTTF
to different career opportunities and thus created a condition that impacts their identity.
For some, by making their personal priorities central to their work, they were able to find places
where their personal and professional worlds could meld together. One of the NTTF who chose
to leave the legal field said this:
I think what motivates me is the fact I left the practice of law and I still loved it and I still
do love it. I still have a real genuine respect and passion for law and lawyers and I like to
help students decide whether the law’s for them or not. (P11)
He is expressing that while he still has a passion for the law he is able to bring that personal
passion to his new profession of teaching. This idea of blending the personal and the professional
aligns with the literature in chapter two that sheds light on how individuals form a professional
identity. An English Professor said this:
I try to publish fiction but – frankly, teaching has always been the way that I earn my
living, not necessarily the thing I set out to do. What I set out to be was a writer and
teaching is how I earn my living. (P9)
While she may identify more as a writer and that teaching supports her writing, it is her personal
interest in writing that melds together with her profession of teaching. Through her NTTF
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
98
position she is able to bring together her personal love of writing and professional job of teaching
thus forming her identity.
Love of teaching. A second element among the personal preferences appeared to be the
individual’s love for teaching. For the NTTF interviewed, this love came through by sharing
their own personal or professional interest with their students. Teaching is what motivates these
individuals in their roles. Teaching allows them to find great satisfaction and fulfillment in their
jobs and therefore can positively shape their work identity.
A love of teaching was a theme that for each of the nineteen individuals they shared in
common. Each one of them spoke with passion about sharing their topic of interest or
introducing something new to students. One Anthropology faculty member had this to say:
I really enjoyed it [teaching] and so I thought prior to that that I would just be a research
anthropologist but I found that I enjoyed teaching, conveying what I was learning in my
research and developing classes. (P15)
At first he may have thought he would be a tenured faulty member who spent most of his time
researching and not teaching but he has found teaching to be more rewarding. In fact many
expressed that teaching in the classroom is what motivates them. A Writing Professor shared:
I’m actually very happy when I go into the classroom … I love teaching. And most of
my cells in my body are completely committed to teaching and want very little to do with
the kind of publish or perish culture that’s part of the tenure-track. (P10)
Motivation and the enjoyment of teaching are elements of one’s identity. If an individual is
enjoying his or her role, and motivated by certain aspects of that role, they tend to identify more
with those elements of their work. These faculty are expressing their enjoyment for their roles as
teachers and how that is different from those who might be on a tenure track. However, not all
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
99
would describe teaching as wonderful. For some it can be an up and down cycle. As one English
Professor stated:
Sometimes it’s fun, sometimes it’s the most miserable thing I ever encountered,
sometimes it’s just like what the hell am I doing here today… It’s different teaching at a
big research place like this than it is at a little college. Student relations are different,
different kinds of demands are asked…so some days, it’s great … Some days you walk
into a class and everything’s hit right and you’re just happy as a pig in shit … And then
some days you go in and you think everything’s hit right and you feel that your soul is
being pulled out through your left nostril, it’s like—it’s just awful. You can’t figure out
why, you don’t know what you’ve done and you’ve over-prepared one day and it sucks
and the next day you come in and you’ve got two sentences on the back of an envelope
and the class takes off. It’s performance, it’s lying, it’s truth-telling, it’s irritating. (P16)
While he may seem a little more down on teaching than his peers he is also expressing his love
of it. His description is key because he lets us know that the context in which one teaches can
change the nature of teaching and thus impact teaching conditions. The context in which
experiences happen can shapes one’s identity. For this faculty member some days teaching is
amazing and sometimes it can be challenging but it is still very much a part of his identity.
Commitment to students. The final element of the personal preferences that these
individuals expressed related to their love of teaching and their strong commitment to their
students. This commitment is expressed in different ways from advising students, being able to
share their passion with them, to writing letters of recommendation for students. This
commitment matters greatly because it creates a relationship with the NTTF and their students,
which allows the NTTF to share their passion for teaching, as well as a passion for the topic they
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
100
teach. This passion and relationship can positively shape how the NTTF view their work identity.
This commitment through their relationships not only provides meaning but also motivation for
the work the NTTF do.
For these nineteen NTTF, commitment to their students is similar to their love of
teaching. As one writing faculty member said “I really enjoy working with the students. They’re
great, they’re really smart” (P6). This commitment ranges from advising students, to spending
time with them, to sharing their passion with them. For some, working with students is what
motivates and drives them. An English Professor said this:
What motivates me is the opportunity to meet and help and mentor young writers. I might
be the first person that’s ever talked to them about what really good writing looks like
and just I really love teaching beginning writers and getting to help shape their ideas
about what good writing is. So I guess the students are really what keeps me going. (P9)
Students allow these NTTF to share their passion for a topic. Teaching allows the NTTF to share
with students who they are. For some faculty, being a teacher may be part of their identity and
the other part may be more related to their discipline. As the above English faculty points out,
being able to mentor young writers through her teaching is important to her. She is reflecting on
her identity as not only a teacher or mentor but as a writer.
Through their teaching, NTTF build relationships and connections with their students.
These relationships matter when thinking about identity because one of the ways we understand
identity is through relationships. For NTTF one of the major relationships they have in their
work life, are those they have in the classroom with their students. As one writing Professor
reflected:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
101
Meaningful connections, opening minds, sharing the information that I've learned in my
education to enable other people to make decisions based on a greater amount of facts. So
in other words, I am a firm believer in the educational process, and I have moments with
students that are absolutely priceless. So at this point, I would have to say the most
important thing is when a student comes back to me and says you changed my life. You
changed my world. I'll never be the same. It's because of you. (P5)
For her the connections or the relationships with her students are what bring meaning to her
work. Similarly, these relationships motivate the work of other NTTF and thus shape their work
identity. Through their students, NTTF are able to share their passions and watch their students
learn something new. This brings great satisfaction in their roles as teachers.
Personal preferences are at the heart of Shaker’s model and represent the very individual
piece of the NTTF experience. As a result these elements play a critical role in shaping NTTF
identity. From making decisions about one’s personal life, to a passion for teaching, to building
relationships with students each of these elements are part of the NTTF experience that
contribute to their identity. When NTTF prioritize their personal lives over the professional lives,
they are often able to meld their personal and professionally lives together and thus seem to have
a more positive work identity. All of the NTTF interviewed expressed their love of teaching,
which includes sharing their topic of interest with students, and this further motivates them in
their role as teachers. Through their teaching the NTTF are able to create relationships with
students and show their commitment to them in various ways.
Each of these elements of personal preferences create conditions which impact identity,
and help the individual to see themselves differently in the changing context of their work
environment. As a person the NTTF are the center of their identity and the shaper of their
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
102
identity, the decisions they make thus shape their personal and professional identity. Teaching
drives and motivates them in their roles. Through their teaching they build relationships with
students and this relationship can serve as another key element to their identity. Teaching is their
primary roll, and is an area in which NTTF share a common practice and may be part of a work
identity that all NTTF share. Finally for many NTTF their roles allow their personal and
professional lives to meld together, be it from bringing their legal experience to the classroom or
sharing their fiction writing. This fusion of the personal and the professional is another key
element to a work identity.
Personal Characteristics
In Shaker’s model the personal characteristics consist of an individual’s age, their
educational degree, their career path and their time at the institution. As mentioned earlier the
nineteen individuals interviewed for this study have a wide variety of backgrounds. All but one
holds a PhD, three have legal degrees in addition to their PhDs, and a number of them earned
their PhD from SU and thus already had some connection the University. In addition, their time
at the University ranges from just one year to over twenty years. Each of them has chosen
different career paths from falling into a NTTF position to choosing to accept one. Since they
each have differing years of experience they are each in different phases of their career. The
following section explores personal characteristics that include the NTTF career path, the stage
they are at in their career and how they describe themselves at this current point in their career.
Each of these elements, along with how they describe and identify themselves as a professional,
shapes their work identity.
Career path. Each of the nineteen NTTF interviewed for this study has taken a different
path in their career. These paths and the decisions they have made have shaped who and how
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
103
they view themselves when I interviewed them. These decisions about their career were both
intentional and unintentional, involved making decisions about tenure and non-tenure and were
often shaped by knowing someone. As each decision made seemed to impact their career path, it
also seems to impact their identity because with the decision they made, they often had to break
away from a known identity and look to find something new.
A key observation about each of the 19 NTTF and their career paths is that all but one
holds a PhD. As mentioned in chapter two, when individuals go through a PhD program they are
socialized into an academic profession that likely sets them up for a tenure track position.
However, NTTF do not enter the world of a traditional tenure track position. As a result, they
must break away from their formed PhD identity and find or navigate a new identity as a NTTF.
These choices create certain conditions in their career paths that shape how they view
themselves.
How these individuals made decisions about entering their NTTF position is part of their
NTTF identity. This is the first step in their career path. For some faculty the decision was easy
and they choose to take a NTTF position over a tenure position because they wanted to focus on
teaching and not researching. As one Chemistry faculty stated “I realized fairly early on that I
liked teaching, and that's how I wanted to focus my career. And in my fifth year, my research
was wrapping up, and they opened a position within the department for non-tenure track teaching
faculty” (P1). For her the decision came easily and thus she adapted to teaching and breaking
away from the roles of a tenure position. For others becoming a NTTF became a back up plan to
a tenure position, because the academic job market was limited. As one writing Professor
explains, that after not being successful on the market for a tenure track job, making the
transition to a NTTF position was not easy:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
104
When I got here, it was definitely a struggle in some ways because I was trained and
professionalized to be a post-colonial scholar, and a literary theorist and trained to kind of
picture myself in that life. And from the first few days and weeks of being here, I really
felt this, kind of personal—it was both kind of fear and desire not to become irrelevant
and not to just be a writing teacher for the rest of my life. So I really sought out, I was
really looking for all the things that I could do in addition to writing, teaching writing.
(P10)
He is honest, explaining his fear of losing the identity he had been professionalized to be a part
of. His fear demonstrates this break with what he knew as his identity, and that now he must
work to navigate something new and different. For others finding a NTTF happened by chance
with someone simply asking them to teach a course. An anthropology faculty, after spending a
few years abroad and then working for a research think tank, said:
I had met the chairman of the department and he invited me to send my CV because they
hired adjuncts and lecturers to teach classes. And he was interested in my research. And
so I started teaching on a class by class basis in 1997, but very quickly—I don’t know if
it was the following year or—it happened very quickly where I started teaching a full
course load and so I was a full-time lecturer. (P15)
For him it was more a matter of knowing someone who asked him to teach a course. In other
words, it was not a deliberate move but something that evolved for him. For others the decision
to become a NTTF came as a result of a professional change. As one Political Science Professor
shared:
At about age 32, I decided after my 10th year at the attorney general I went ahead and left
the AG and came to Southern University to do my graduate work… I started teaching at
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
105
City College to sort of cut my teeth at the community college level. About two years
after that, I got an opportunity to teach at state school which was really wonderful and I
taught there for several years … Later I got an email (from SU) that said would you like
to teach five courses in the fall, which of course I jumped at the opportunity. And that
was 2007-2008, I was still teaching over at the state school. So I was doing the sort of
frequent flier back and forth thing which a lot of lecturers tend to do. And one year led to
a second year. (P11)
Each of these individuals went through a PhD program that prepared them for a career in
academia, specially a tenure track position. But as each story illustrates, each person found their
career path differently. As the identity research from chapter two explains, identity is not fixed
and sometimes people take on multiple identities like a researcher, a teacher and a lawyer. But
each of these individuals had to break away from what they were socialized into, a shared
identity of the world of a tenure track Professor. In these decisions (their career paths) the
individuals must break away from a shared identity and navigate a new identity. The paths that
take them there are each different whether by choice, a poor job market, knowing someone or
wanting to make a professional change. Each of these factors, creates conditions that shape their
identity. Later in this chapter, other job elements like the university and department environment
will also be explained as playing a role in shaping one’s identity.
There were three individuals who either had a tenure position for several years or had a
tenure track position offered and had to give it up. Each of the three ended up on the NTTF path.
One writing Professor shared this:
I had been confused kind of about my role as a scholar at XXX. I had never intended to
be a Professor. I wanted to be a lawyer…So when I got the PhD, it wasn't so much like,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
106
oh boy, I can't wait to go be a college Professor and write books and publish scholarly
articles, but that's what I ended up being slotted into and succeeding at. When I got to
quit my tenure track job, and this job has zero publication requirements, I stopped my
research program entirely. I quit going to conferences. I quit trying to turn my
dissertation into a book. I quit looking to publish scholarship. (P5)
While she may have been socialized to research and write she never felt like this fit her identity.
She knew that early on—by mentioning feeling “confused” but entering the NTTF, allowed her
to quit doing the aspect of her job she could not identify with. She went on to explain how much
passion she has for her students and teaching. The context of a tenure position was not one she
could identify with. One of the English faculty I spoke to, also decided to leave his tenure track
position. He left his position for personal reasons. While he never really spoke about his tenure
experience he described coming to the University and taking initiative to build a career:
I came across to the English department with my resume with my CV and said hello, I’m
here, I need work. And it turned out that that chair, his term was up and he was going to
be gone for a whole year and we overlap almost exactly in specializations. So they
basically replaced him with me for a year as just a regular teacher. Then that year, I went
to Gender Studies and said here’s my CV, here’s what I do and do you have anything?
And they did have stuff. So I did a lot of kind of entrepreneurial looking around. (P14)
In his previous position he would not have had to take on an entrepreneurial role. His choice to
make a change in career has led him to take on a new set of traits in order to ensure his survival
as a NTTF. Specific traits are a feature of work identity as explained in chapter two. Certain
professions share specific traits, for example, tenure faculty members might share the traits of
tenure, academic freedom, shared governance and an appreciation for their discipline. But for
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
107
some the path to NTTF was not intentional and was disappointing. They wished to share the
traits of a tenure faculty member. As one Sociology Professor explained:
With a PhD in sociology my goal was not after I graduate, I want to be an adjunct
Professor. That was not my career goal. I actually graduated with a job, so before I
defended my dissertation, I had a tenure-track job … it was an amazing job, great
opportunity, in sociology. (P12)
She went on to say:
And in a certain way, it feels like I don’t have any control over that, so many times when
people ask me, what do you do, I just say I teach. And my friends get really mad, you’re
a Professor. I’m like I just teach, you know, I don’t—it’s really—it’s been hard on me
because I don’t have a sense of pride, you know, like I don’t feel proud saying oh, I’m a
Professor… (P12)
For her the transition from a PhD program was one of heartache, having to give up a dream job
for a NTTF position. And she is struggling with that both personally and professionally as she
struggles to take on the title of Professor. To her that title is reserved for tenure track, and she is
not that, she is simply a teacher.
Career stage. While career path involves making decisions throughout one’s life, a
different way to understand that path is to explore where individuals are in their career. This is
important, as the identity research in chapter two explains, identity is tied to a reflection in a
point in time. These interviews allowed for the NTTF to reflect on a certain point where they are
in their careers. Career stage can be impacted by many factors. For these NTTF some of the
factors of their career stage that appear to shape their work identity include the number of years
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
108
they have been teaching, their confidence, their job security, and whether or not they have shifted
careers to take on a NTTF position.
This group of NTTF have a wide range of teaching experience from one year to over
twenty years, and therefore are at different stages in their careers. This is important to note
because as the literature in chapter two explains, identity is tied to reflection at a given point and
is not fixed. So as each person moves through their career, their identity is likely to change. For
instance, I found that there appeared to be a difference in the level of confidence between those
who were just starting their careers compared to those who have been teaching for several years.
The younger cohorts (those with less then 5 years experience teaching) seemed less confident in
their roles and trying to find their way. As one Environmental Studies faculty member in her
second year explained:
So my job, I'm lecturer, and so I'm nearly 100% focused on teaching. Technically it's
like 80% teaching and then the rest is professional development … this is my first NTT
position, so I can't compare it to other people who have had NTT, positions somewhere
else, but from what I experienced, it's very flexible … I didn't have to necessarily totally
give up the research that I've done. I can incorporate and teach students about it and get
them to experience what it's like to collect data, and so that's been really good, so I guess
when I'm not teaching, say 90% of my time is taken up either lecturing or preparing
lectures so far, because when you're new, you're still getting into so many things and
learning lectures, but then the rest is like developing or figuring out how to incorporate
some of that hands on stuff for the students, and also developing new courses. (P4)
For her, being new to her career, she focuses her time on teaching but she is also expressing how
she is not giving up on her research, which is still a part of her identity. She also demonstrates
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
109
that if she is not teaching, her time is spent preparing to teach which matters greatly to her. For
the younger NTTF, early in their careers the teaching identity is critical. Another young faculty
in Chemistry said this:
I would prefer not to teach so many different courses because I feel like I (sighs) –
sometimes I feel like I’m low on the totem pole and so as a result, I just get thrown
whatever course other people don’t want to teach. I’m the newest lecturer in our
department, so everyone else kind of has their niche and because I teach – I can teach
general chemistry because I teach something higher than it, I often get that. (P13)
Being one of the younger NTTF in her department, she feels pressured to pick up the courses
others will not teach. She is afraid to say anything regarding her situation, and at the same time
worries her teaching will suffer because she is spread so thin. As a result, she strives to improve
her teaching by doing a mid-semester check in with her students and this feedback helps her not
only to improve but feel more confident in her role.
Some of the younger faculty even felt so unsure that they held positions at multiple
campuses:
So I started teaching classes as a lecturer, not a professional TA since the fall of 2011. At
the same time, I also taught at XXX College and also taught at XXX University. So the
busiest I’ve been was teaching six classes, three were new, on three different campuses
and working as a graduate writing tutor about like 14 hours a week. (P7)
She is expressing her insecurity in her role and needing to teach at more then one campus in case
one job does not work out. But at some point NTTF begin to see shifts in their identity as more
time passes in their careers. Maybe certain experiences have impacted them or they’ve had more
time to self reflect on their journeys. One writing faculty member shared this:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
110
I’m starting to make a pivot because what I get kind of evaluated on and rewarded for is
teaching and kind of my profile, you know, in—if I do conferences and publications, it
should be about writing or it should be about teaching. So I published a couple of book
chapters in, you know, volumes, and they were on, you know, Dumas and Jules Verne
and stuff, but that didn’t—that doesn’t help my merit evaluation, it doesn’t help my
promotion, just sort of stuff that I did. So you know, I’m at this phase now where the
kind of being that sort of literary, colonial studies scholar, it’s kind of going to have to
become more of a hobby, you know, it’s not that much of a personal or a professional.
(P10)
He explains a shift that is occurring for him as he reflects on where he is on his career path. This
demonstrates how identity is tied to reflection at a given point in one’s career. It also reinforces
the role that the self plays in shaping one’s identity as he reflects on his journey and transition.
For him he is leaving the parts of an old identity, his scholarly work, behind and focusing on a
new identity. It is also important to note here that he is addressing the changes in the context as
he mentions his merit evaluations are based on specific criteria so that those elements become
more central to what he does and thus become a shaper in his new identity.
As their career paths evolve and individuals have more time at the institution they appear
more confident and secure in their role. As one writing faculty member said “I don't feel
marginalized anymore, because I'm not. I'm right in the center of everything. I'm saying yes to
these service commitments, I'm on these committees. I know people” (P5). The older cohort
while more confident in their teaching and their identity as teachers, appeared more interested in
being advocates for NTTF issues on campus and networking with other NTTF on campus. That
same faculty member went on to say:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
111
And the argument is non-tenure track faculty won't ever [speak up], because we're too
afraid, because we don't have the protection of tenure. Well, I'm not afraid, and I've been
here13 years and SU is not going to fire me for what I'm saying and doing, so I think the
bottom line is, I have two minds about it. Clearly there's inequity, clearly it's exploitative
to have adjuncts—there are clearly adjuncts [who] were more exploited than me. (P5)
Her voice and passion is quite different from the other two younger faculty members. She is
reflecting on her career and is in a different position then the others, who are at an earlier stage in
their NTTF positions and more focused on their teaching and holding on to their jobs. Part of
understanding identity is a reflection in a given context, and here that context is the point at
which the person finds themselves in their career, as an NTTF member.
Professionally identity. The literature in chapter two regarding professional and work
identity, describes that there are certain components to being a professional that make up what it
means to have a professional or work identity. Professional identity or what these NTTF might
call their work identity is a self-reflection at a certain point in their career. When asked how they
might describe themselves professionally their answers varied. “I am a simple classroom
teacher” “I am a writer” “ I am writing Professor” “I am not an academic. I am not a researcher”
“ I am [an] Anthropologist.” Each person found a different way to describe themselves. Many
spoke about having multiple identities. As one English faculty shared:
The way I describe myself professionally is [that] I’m an active scholar, I am a Professor.
When people ask me what do you do, I say I’m a Professor at SU or I say I teach English
and Gender Studies at SU according to where I am, whether I want to use the Professor
word or the teacher word. (P14)
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
112
For him, he identifies and describes himself as both a scholar and Professor taking on two
different yet related identities. It is also interesting that he points out that he will use either
“Professor” or “teacher” to describe what he does. He does not give one or the other a higher
value but implies that the two are different and mean different things to him. A political science
faculty member shared:
I think most people see me as, part educator and part practitioner in a sense, even though
I don’t practice law anymore. I think people within the department understand that part
of my value here is that I’ve had 10 years as a state prosecutor, I can tell students what it
really means to practice law, I can tell students what it really means to be yelled at by a
judge or even deal with judges, which is—I think there’s a lot of value in that. As
opposed to this is the book I wrote, this is why it’s so great and this is what you’d learn
from it. (P11)
By explaining how others view him, he identifies as both an educator and a practitioner because
of his prior experience before becoming a NTTF. This is valuable not only to his department but
to his students. He sees value in taking on more then one identity because he recognizes that this
gives him value in his role as a NTTF and thus likely shapes his work identity in a positive way.
While teaching is the primary role of NTTF, many of them mentioned that they could not
give up their ties to their disciplines. One English faculty shared: “I’m a fiction writer so I never
was going to be a researcher or anything. I mean, writing, my own writing, fiction writing, you
know, is still what I consider to be my first job” (P9). For her, teaching comes second and what
comes first in her work identity is that of a writer and her tie to the discipline to English. Others
described the tie to their disciplines by saying “ I am a Chemistry teacher.” In essence, they
could not give up the attachment to the subject that brought them to their roles as teachers.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
113
One interesting thing to note was that no one ever said “I am a non-tenure-track
Professor.” But some did find a way to describe that they were not content with their current
identity. As one Sociology faculty expressed:
I identify more as a teacher and I hope to one day [to] identify as a Professor. And for
me, being a Professor means producing knowledge, sharing that knowledge with your
students and being part of the academic culture as a whole... (P12)
While she is able to describe how she currently views herself in this stage in her career,
she also expresses that she wants to change that identity. She implies that she wants to be more
then a NTTF (a teacher) and to become a tenured Professor. But at this moment in time she is
unable to identify as a Professor and wants to change that. Both her career path and current stage
allow her to only see herself as a teacher, and not the Professor she aspires to be.
Personal characteristics include the individual’s age, their educational degree, their career
path and time at the institution. This group of nineteen individuals is quite diverse in terms of
each of these components. As a result, their experiences vary and thus their identities change
over time. Certain aspects of their personal characteristics will have more impact on their
identity then others at different points. This fits the literature in chapter two, which explains that
identity is something that is not fixed, but rather on going. In fact, identity—especially work or
professional identity—is a reflection on a given context or point in one’s career. The decisions
they make to become NTTF, and the paths their careers follow, shape how each of them comes
to view themselves as a person and a professional. As each NTTF gains more experience their
identity shifts, and consequently how they describe themselves changes.
For this group of NTTF, each made different career decisions, which were both
intentional and unintentional. They were interviewed and asked to reflect on their careers at a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
114
certain point, thus giving me a snapshot of the current stage in their careers. And finally, each
seemed to make decisions and the path they took reflected their professional identity in different
ways. As their stories show, their age or current stage in their career impacts the confidence they
have. As does the time they have spent at SU teaching. All but one of the participants for this
study, has a PhD. These degrees socialize individuals into a professional world, which they may
not end up finding and thus they must break away from a known identity to create a new one.
Each one of these elements, just like the personal preferences, plays a role in shaping identity.
Organizational Forces
The third circle of Shaker’s (2008) model consists of the organizational forces that
impact the experience of NTTF. These forces include the reappointment and promotion process,
salary, workload and program/department and institutional environment. These forces serve as
the contextual piece that work identity. The personal preferences and personal characteristics are
influenced by the contextual elements of the institution and the departments within which these
NTTF work. These organizational forces shape identity by dictating certain values and practices.
They send messages about what it means to be a professional in these environments. And while
(as will be explained) these NTTF had opinions about the university as a whole, their identity
seemed to circle much more around the department or program environment in which they work.
For the most part the NTTF seemed satisfied with the overall university environment and with
the reappointment and promotion process, their salaries and their workloads. However, each of
these elements seemed to vary depending on which program or department the individuals
worked within.
Institutional environment. Since the university as a whole sets the larger context in
which these individuals work, it makes sense to address it first. An important piece to mention
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
115
here is that there is no orientation or shared experience for the NTTF that come to work at this
institution. As a result there appears to be no shared identity among them. As mentioned in the
literature review in chapter two, work and professional identity center around a set of traits,
shared practices, and a socialization process. Since there is no orientation of NTTF offered at the
university, these individuals miss out on a shared socialization process that would be relevant to
the university, and consequently, lack a shared experience. This does not mean there are not
some shared practices, like their roles as teachers, but it does mean that as an institution there is
no centralized effort to have a common entry experience for all NTTF.
While there is no shared orientation when NTTF begin to work at the university, the
majority of the NTTF hold a positive perception of the university and are able to find their value
as being a part of it. One Writing Professor had this to say:
I like the campus and the feel of it, I like the ambition of SU as an institution, what its
goals are, what it’s trying to achieve. I like it on a practical level, like the kind of benefits
you get and access to health care and things like that. I enjoy working here a lot. (P6)
This positive impression is important because if one is happy in their environment they are likely
to invest more and stay longer. For a university, investing in its people and having less turnover
is a positive attribute. Another faculty member described the university as “it’s a place of kind of
can-do people, you know, like let’s go make something happen.” And English Professor
explained his tie to the university in this way:
The family stuff is somewhat true and there’s a prestige that comes with the university so
that, you know, wherever I go this university precedes me, so it opens doors, people take
me seriously when they find out that I work here and the outside world does not—nor do
our students understand these fine points between non-tenure track and tenure-track and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
116
all of that. They understand either you’re apProfessor at this university or you’re not a
Professor at this university. So I don’t find that this sort of minutiae of the reality
specific to the kind of bureaucracy of this university translates to the outside world very
much, you know. (P14)
He takes pride in working at SU and it matters to him as he presents himself to the outside world.
This is critical for his professional identity to be able to associate himself with the place where
he works, he has a positive feeling about it and is more likely invested in the work that he does.
While the majority spoke highly of the university and their experience within it, some found the
opposite to be true. As one person said “this institution is pretty monolithic.” Another English
faculty member reflected on the institution by saying:
It’s a corporate university and the corporate university can function much better when it
has adjuncts because it doesn’t—you hire a couple of generals and hire them 10,000
adjuncts, you know? Your general teaches one course and the adjuncts teach all the rest.
You publicize the general and the adjuncts are walking in tomorrow meeting 30 students.
The general, you know, talks to two and he’s famous. So what—does the university give
a flying hoot about me? (P16 )
For him the university as a whole is not something he values and he articulates that he does not
feel valued by the university by comparing himself to a solider, and that the tenured faculty are
the generals who get all the recognition. In essence he understands his role is vital to the function
of the university but his description makes it clear that he feels second to the role that the tenure
faculty play. In his impression of the university, he feels less valued and as a result has more
negative feelings in identifying as a NTTF at this institution compared to others.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
117
Reappointment and promotion process. Their view of the reappointment and
promotion process greatly mattered to these NTTF. This process allows for career mobility,
increase in salary, and changes in titles. The fact SU has in place a procedure that allows for
NTTF to be promoted and earn more money allows for mobility and advancement for these
individuals. This is critical when thinking about professional and work identity as it demonstrates
that the University has a vested interest in keeping and investing in NTTF.
The importance of the promotion system and its critical role in shaping the NTTF
experience and thus their identity at SU was clearly articulated by the majority of the NTTF. As
one person said “in the last maybe six years, they've given us three year contracts, and a scale
that you can be assistant, associate, and full Professor of teaching” (P3). This new process has
made the NTTF feel more a part of the institution. As a Writing faculty said: “this institution
deciding to value and credit and recognize excellence amongst the non-tenure track with the title,
with money, and the promotion, but also with some travel money, with some grants” (p5). This
promotion process has allowed the NTTF to not only feel valued but feel more included in their
work environment:
I think that there was a different culture before they had these other tracks and that it was
much more of a separation, you know, when you could either be an adjunct lecturer or
you could have a track. So that—a lot of those distinctions have dissolved now. For
instance, a lecturer wasn’t supposed to teach an Arts and Letter course, a lecturer wasn’t
supposed to do this or do that. So there was a lot more distinctions before they actually
instituted the new track system. (P17)
Not only do they feel valued and included some of the NTTF feel that this system creates a
career path “I think it creates a parallel career path, not a job, a career. I have a career here not a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
118
job. And I feel strongly about that and I think anybody hired into full-time NTT has that same
opportunity” (p14). Feeling as if there is a path, a chance to be promoted, and that there are
opportunities creates a positive work environment. The titles also allow NTTF to feel valued:
If you can put like an assistant Professor behind your name or an associate Professor, it’s
much more of a nod from the university. It seems like a symbolic nod, that they really do
respect you as a scholar, rather than continuing on listing you as lecturer for 20
years…So I think, you know, the symbolism of that change is really important. (P17)
This new structure that has been created by the university which has created new titles cannot be
overlooked because as the literature in chapter two explains, a title is part of what makes up a
professional or work identity.
While the title did matter for the participants interviewed for this study, it seemed to vary
for each NTTF. Some felt it was important. As one Chemistry faculty member told me:
I'm not sure if it's just because I've been in an academic setting for so long, but the title is
important to me. I don't force my students to call me Professor, necessarily. I do like
them to refer to me as either doctor or Professor, because -- mostly because I look so
young, so it kind of creates the divide between them, and part of, you know, spending so
much time earning your degree. It's nice to be recognized for it. But I think the title is
more for me, a self-satisfaction and kind of a recognition from the department that I am
doing a good job in my position. (P1).
The title for her matters on a personal level but by taking on a title she is also embracing being
part of a professional group with her fellow NTTF. Like teaching practices, a title is something
these NTTF have in common which is part of a profession. One writing Professor shared this
commonality in this way:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
119
The NTT phrase or “title” is actually the kind of administrative or contractual, like legal
contract designation. We have titles and it’s – for me, it’s assistant Professor teaching.
So that’s the kind of – that’s the, say, social or professional title is assistant Professor
teaching or you know, assistant Professor research or you know, Professor of the practice
of, you know, those are our titles. For some reason, we don’t talk, you know, when we’re
in conversation with others, we don’t say assistant Professor teaching, we say NTT. But
that--it’s a contract status thing, so it’s weird. I mean, yes, it is a kind of—it is a
designation and I think people—you know, if that conversation could get changed, I
would, because I think people are focused on that, that it’s a sort of non-thing that we are.
(P10)
As he explains the titles, he expresses them as a “we” indicating that he is part of a body of
NTTF. The title is not an individual element of identity but part of a larger professional body. It
is interesting how he explains that as a body they have two titles, the professional designation of
assistant Professor of teaching and then a contractual title of NTTF. The word “non” in the
contractual title allows him to find his identity by knowing what he is not. In other words he is
not a tenured faculty member.
By creating a structure for reappointment and promotion as well as granting different
titles to NTTF, SU recognizes that this body of people matters and is working to demonstrate
that value. In the larger institutional context in which these NTTF are working, they have a role
that is valued and recognized and likely to shape a more positive work and professional identity
for these NTTF.
Departments and programs. Equally, if not more important than the environment of the
university, for these NTTF, is the more immediate environment of their department or program.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
120
As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter these nineteen individuals each came form seven
different departments and programs. Similarly to the university, the department or program
context matters because it shapes the working environment in which these individuals work, and
set the background from which their stories were told. The departments and programs varied
from having all NTTF to have a mix of NTTF, tenured and tenure track faculty. In some
departments there were cohorts of NTTF that led to support for all NTTF. The departments and
programs are also where individuals found their physical work space, as well challenges and
support in their roles. The departments and programs also created a space from which NTTF
were able to speak about one of the key aspects of their working world, teaching. Each of the
departments and programs shapes the experience and thus the identity of the NTTF working
within.
Programs. One of the most important observations here is that two of the seven
departments are considered programs and not departments by the university: Both Writing and
Environmental Studies are considered programs and not departments. At SU this unique
classification means that all teaching faculty within the program are all NTTF. This creates a
unique working environment because these NTTF rarely interact with tenure faculty members,
unlike their peers in the other departments across campus. As a result the program environment
appears more collegial and supportive. As one Writing faculty member described:
I do think it makes a difference because I don’t think that you’ve got this kind of divide
or hierarchy. Because if we had tenured people then you might feel like okay, here’s our
tenured people and here’s our [non-tenure people]—I know it’s that way in other
departments so I do think it’s positive that we’re kind of on the same team. (P6)
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
121
He is aware that if there are tenure faculty within a department and NTTF, there can be some
kind of a divide. But in the Writing program since they are all NTTF he describes the
environment as one that is positive and part of the same team. This indicates a reflection of how
he feels working in his program and thus leaves him with a positive identity within this working
context. Since these NTTF do not have to work as closely with tenure or tenure track faculty,
they feel less marginalized and more secure in their roles within their departments. Another
Writing faculty described the work environment this way:
Work environment in the writing program’s great. We’ve got enormous freedom...we had
departmental governance, we had departmental review, we had departmental mentors,
mentoring in the last six, seven years has become a big deal in the university, but we
were already doing that where we were assigning mentors and trading assignments and
having conferences and stuff like that. So here in this little niche, all of that is incredibly
supportive. (P8)
He is aware of the fact that their program might be different referring to it as a “niche” but that
it’s a supportive place with mentoring and that through governance NTTF have a voice. This
support and voice are important pieces of a supportive work environment. When individuals feel
supported they likely have a more positive view of themselves within that environment and thus
feel more secure in their positions.
In contrast to feeling supported through mentorship or fellow NTTF, some individuals
described more of a hierarchy that does exist in their departments. These departments are
different from programs in that they have both NTTF and tenure and tenure track faculty. One
Sociology faculty member reflected:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
122
Well, I think of myself as belonging on the fourth tier. You have the tenured people, then
you have the people who are tenure track, then you have sociology graduate students who
graduated and they may not have found work yet or they’re like looking for a post-doc
and they give them classes, then I’m the last tier. (P7)
Unlike her peers in the Writing program she describes a more divided work environment. She
reflects on how she views the structure of the department and where she sees herself, which is at
the bottom. She went on to say that “I don’t have opportunities here in terms of like
advancement” and while she may feel that way as previously described, as there does exist a
system for advancement, but she is unaware of it. Her fellow NTTF in the department had this to
say about the working environment “I don’t think I’m part of the work environment. I come, do
my thing, and then leave.” By not feeling included and engaged in the department she is simply
left to do her work and leave. Unlike the Writing faculty she feels less attached. As a result the
NTTF in the Sociology department appear to feel less secure in their roles and as a result more
marginalized due to the hierarchy that exists. These elements in a work environment create a
context in which these NTTF are not as secure in their professional and work identity since the
environment in which they work, appears to not value and support them.
Cohorts. While Environmental Studies, Writing and Sociology programs and department
seem to be unique, Anthropology and English seem to offer a different departmental experience
that might shape the identity of these NTTF. Just as in Sociology, the English department does
have a mix of tenured, tenure track and NTTF. But what was interesting to learn was that there
appeared to be “cohorts” of NTTF in both these departments. These groups of NTTF, allow the
individuals in the departments to share information and talk about resources for NTTF on
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
123
campus. For instance one English faculty reflected on this when describing the change in the
structure for NTTF:
And at that time, there were five or six of us who were basically co-equals and I thought
it would be a real problem if some of us got promoted into the new system and some of
us didn’t because it would create some tension that wasn’t already here, it was already—
we were all pretty comfortable with our relationships. So I was very adamant with the
department that we should all do the promotion at the same time, to the same rank. (P14)
Unlike the Sociology department, wherein individuals seem to be more isolated and have no idea
about resources or how to approach the promotion system, this person seemed to be able to lead
his fellow NTTF through the new promotion system. This creates a supportive and collaborative
work environment. Not only is having support from the NTTF important, but so can the support
of the tenured and tenure track faculty. As one of the Anthropology faculty told me:
I’ll say this flat out, having said all of these things, that this department in terms of its
support for all of the non-tenured faculty surprised my cynicism in all sorts of ways. I
mean they step forward as a group, an entire faculty stepped forward as an entire faculty,
which from what I understand, nobody saying anything contrary about any one of us. So
that was extraordinary, I mean, I didn’t—I actually, given my cynicism, didn’t actually
believe that could ever happen. So they did and that’s something and that matters. (P16)
Feeling included and having support, matter as he reflects on his work environment. As a result
he feels valued and appreciated in the environment in which he works. This positive work
context leaves him to reflect positively on his professional and work identity.
Physical space. Physical space is another important element to mention when trying to
understand the work environment for these NTTF. Space is something that is always limited on
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
124
campuses; however, who gets space and who does not, matters because it can often show who
might be valued and who might not be. In both the Writing and Environmental Studies programs,
every NTTF has his or her own office space. This was also true for the Chemistry and Political
Science faculty. The English, Sociology and Anthropology faculty each shared offices with at
least one other NTTF. One of the Sociology faculty said this “I know some people do not like the
whole shared office bit but it doesn’t bother me. I actually like talking to my colleagues because
then you sort of learn from each other” (P7). For her, the sharing was not really bothersome and
it actually allowed her an opportunity to build relationships with fellow NTTF. While very few
of the NTTF reflected on their physical space, it is important because it may show who is valued
and who is not. For a sense of identity, the physical space may not be a critical element but it is a
factor in shaping the context in which these individuals work.
Challenges and opportunities. The department or program is also where NTTF find
challenges and opportunities. How these two factors balance out, can impact one’s work identity.
Sometimes the presence of more challenges rather than opportunities, can create a negative work
environment and negatively impact one’s identity. Whereas if someone has more opportunities
and fewer challenges, the environment may be viewed as more positive and thus the individual is
able to have a more positive identity. As chapter two alludes to, this is important because the
department or program is the context in which these individuals work, and shapes how they view
themselves as professionals.
For many of the NTTF the challenges seemed to be common, like too heavy of a
workload and too little pay. As one faculty member described his workload compared to a tenure
faculty member: “I’d like to make more money. I’d like to teach less classes. If I were in a
tenure track, it might be a 2:2 or a 2:3. Technically, my load is 3:3” (P8). Others even
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
125
commented that pay was too low, and consequently required taking on more work outside of this
full time NTTF job: “I would say the workload is extremely heavy and the pay is not enough to
live on. So it requires—you know, supplementing my income with other work” (P9). A heavy
workload often leaves these NTTF tired and worn thin, which can create negative feelings
toward the work environment and thus leave the individual feeling less content with work. As a
result, the individual is likely to have a negative work identity since they find the environment in
which they work to be a challenge. One Sociology faculty reflected: “And because I’m teaching
so many classes right now, I feel like I don’t have that sense of fulfillment, like I’m—sometimes
I feel like I’m stretching myself too thin” (P12). Being ‘stretched too thin’ was another common
feeling that left NTTF feeling less confident in their roles. Not feeling supported and valued can
leave individuals to have a negative work identity because their context for shaping identity is
not viewed in a positively light. As one Chemistry faculty member reflected:
I think that my resources aren’t always utilized where they should be. I think that like
my area of expertise isn’t always--I’m asked to teach outside of my area of interest and
expertise and it’s reflected in my evaluations for those courses, which is frustrating
because that’s sort of my only means of promotion is by those student evaluations. So
when I’m thrown into something that I’m not—I shouldn’t be doing, it’s not good for the
students or for my own advancement in my career. (P13)
She is expressing something that many NTTF struggle with, and that is being asked to teach
classes that he or she may not be comfortable teaching, but since NTTF carry much of the
teaching load they often must pick up courses that are left without someone to teach them. By
expressing this, she calls attention to how teaching in areas she is not confident in can make her
feel less confident in her role as she alludes to, and students may give her negative feedback.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
126
This matters greatly as NTTF evaluations and promotions are weighed heavily on student
feedback. As a result she feels less confident in her working environment and can find it
challenging.
Other NTTF felt frustrated in their work when they were closed off to certain
opportunities, or lacked resources for things they wanted to do outside of teaching but that
related to their careers. As one writing faculty member shared with me:
I feel frustrated when I feel like kind of opportunities or choices are closed off to me that
others might have, or that, you know, I’m – it’s kind of the things I care about in addition
to teaching, I don’t really have the time or the kind of resources to pursue. (P10)
For him as a NTTF the challenges come when he is closed off to opportunities because of his
status as a NTTF. He would like to do more beyond his teaching but feels frustrated that he does
not have the resources to pursue them. He is alluding to the fact that as a NTTF, compared to
tenure faculty, certain support systems are lacking that do not allow him to have the same
opportunities as other faculty on campus.
Despite the challenges that many of the NTTF faced in their departments and programs,
many described the opportunities they could find. Opportunities matter because just like
challenges, they shape the context in which work happens for these NTTF in their programs and
departments. When NTTF find opportunities in their working environments they often feel
valued, supported and included in the environment in which they work. By providing
opportunities the department or program also signals that the work these NTTF do is valued and
important. These elements again provide the context in which identity is shaped.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
127
The types of opportunities varied but what seemed to matter most were professional
development, the ability to develop and teach new courses, and being asked to teach in other
departments or the University’s general education program. As one Writing faculty shared:
I’ve had lots of opportunities. You’ve got opportunities to take on additional work,
you’ve got opportunities as far as curriculum and assignment design is concerned.
You’ve got lots of opportunities to serve on committees. You’ve got opportunities, I’m
teaching freshman seminar so that’s even outside the writing program. You’ve got
opportunities to do workshops with the Center for Excellence in Teaching. (P6)
These opportunities matter because they allow these individuals to grow as professionals. As the
literature in chapter two describes, part of a professional identity is opportunities to learn new
things and develop more as part of a professional body. The Center for Excellence in Teaching,
at this university, allows NTTF to grow in their teaching abilities, and developing new
curriculum allows NTTF to use their knowledge and be creative in sharing that with students and
this further allows them to feel part of a larger community within their work environment. These
types of connections and options to grow however are not always easily found. As one
Chemistry faculty member explained to me:
So the hard part is finding where these opportunities are, because they're not necessarily
well advertised, so you have to do a lot of digging or attend some meetings that may not
sound very exciting, but someone might mention something, and then you think, oh, I
didn't know that was available. (P1)
She went on to explain that being able to have opportunities allows her to feel more effective in
her work environment:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
128
I think some of the opportunities are to serve on some interesting committees, and those
can also be some of the challenges as well, sorting through how to make effective
changes within the university or within the department, or even within the college. I
think what's nice about these teaching positions, at least in the Chemistry department is
they are fairly flexible. If we have a new idea for a class, the senior faculty welcome our
input. It may take a while to get it on the books and to get it organized, but in my time I
have had several new classes that I've suggested have shown up, and I've been able to
lead those, which has been pretty satisfying also to see kind of your dreams come to
fruition. (P1)
For her having the chance to serve on committees and create new courses allows her to feel
engaged in her work environment, and thus feel more connected and satisfied with her work. She
feels valued by the opportunity to create new courses in her department, and while it may take
time when she does see them come alive, she finds it satisfying and likely has a more positive
professional and work identity.
Role. The role one plays in their department or program is also a critical element of one’s
work identity. The role individuals take on shapes their experience in their work environment,
and thus shapes how they might reflect on their professional and work identity. Role matters
because it can give the NTTF an opportunity to create their identity within their department
instead of having one dictated to them.
One’s role can be how they act or contribute to their working environment or how they
might view him or herself as playing a part in the working environment. One English faculty
compared his role to that of a basketball player stating: “I think of myself as like—what do you
call that in—like the sixth man on the basketball team or something ... I think my job is to be
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
129
very flexible (P14).” For him the NTTF role is to be supportive and flexible. If he is not this, he
alludes that maybe he would be less secure in his role. Being flexible and taking on roles that
others are not willing to, was a common theme among others. One Sociology faculty member
said this:
The reason why I am here now is the Professor that no one wants to work with, there was
a real problem. She’s now no longer allowed to grade her student’s midterms and papers
and all the assignments, so I’m doing that as well. So I’m kind of like not a TA but I’m
her grader. So because of that, I’ve found an odd niche. She can’t be fired because she
has tenure. (P7)
For her, her role became one that someone else did not want to take on and one that she was
willing to take on so that she could be seen as a valuable person in the department. In essence,
for these NTTF taking on different roles allows them to find a place within their work
environments where they can be valued. Often this place was one where NTTF filled a void for
the tenure faculty. As one English faculty member reflected:
I think my role is what I just said, right, is to sort of prepare the beginning students. I
think it’s to pick up the slack of whatever isn’t—there isn’t someone to teach, whatever
class is missing a teacher or whatever in my field, in the fiction field. So you know, if
they add another intro class, they’ll probably throw it at me if nobody else wants it kind
of thing. I guess I feel that it’s mostly to supplement and to—whatever the tenure track
Professors don’t have time or want to do is what I end up doing. (P9)
She finds her role as one that supplements the work of the tenured faculty members. But she
points out the importance in her role as teaching the earlier classes for the major, and preparing
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
130
the students, giving them a solid foundation. Teaching is at the center of their roles and as one
Chemistry faculty member shared:
So my role in the department is supposed to be teaching and that’s my primary role,
which since we are such a big undergraduate institution, we need more support than our
tenured faculty can provide. And so I think it’s a really important role and it also allows
the research faculty to focus on their research and only teach the classes, you know, one
class a year. (P13)
She recognizes that her role is to teach and she is able to find value in that role in the larger
university context, reflecting on the fact that she is teaching faculty within a research university
context. For each of these NTTF, the role they play allows them to find value in their work
environment if that role is one that is valued. As these stories show, each NTTF seeks out a role;
that particular role may be teaching or something else where they know they can be of value. As
the literature in chapter two suggests, feeling valued matters because it allows individuals to feel
more secure and confident in the roles they play, which is particularly important for NTTF.
Teaching. Finally, the department or program also provide an environment where NTTF
could talk about their teaching. The literature in chapter two on professional and work identity,
speaks to how being part of a professional body involves a set of traits and in experiencing
“shared practices and truth” (p.23- see Ch. 2). For the NTTF the context of their department is
often where they found a space they could talk about teaching. The department or program
allowed NTTF to share their practices and frustrations regarding teaching with colleagues, which
is at the core of what they do. In doing so, the NTTF create an almost similar idea of a
professional body sharing teaching experiences.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
131
As one Writing faculty shared “but the reality is the people here value teaching, we talk
about teaching. We don’t hold a lot of faculty meetings, we hold a lot of within the department
mentoring, that kind of thing” (P8). The mentoring he mentions refers to collaborating with his
colleagues regarding how to best teach writing. While the Writing program consist of all NTTF
where teaching is at the core of what they do, others expressed that there was even collaboration
among tenured faculty and NTTF. A Chemistry faculty member told me this:
I think that within our department, teaching is viewed to be something very important and
I think in a lot of institutions, sometimes research faculty don’t take teaching seriously.
At least within the organic division here, I think that all of the organic, tenure-track
faculty are very interested in teaching and interested in, you know, improving our
teaching program constantly, which is nice to see. (P13)
The ability to talk about teaching within their department with other faculty members,
demonstrates that teaching is something that is valued within their work environment. When
teaching is valued, it reinforces their identity as NTTF who, at the core of their work, are
teachers.
The organizational forces, which consist of the reappointment and promotion process,
salary and workload, the university and departmental environment, are the contextual pieces
within which these NTTF form their work identity. These organizational forces shape identity by
dictating certain values and practices, while sending messages about what it means to be a
professional in these environments. These NTTF do not have a shared common experience when
they enter the university, and therefore do not appear to have a shared professional and work
identity. But generally, they hold a positive feeling toward the environment and culture at SU.
The promotion and reappointment process allows them to have mobility, earn more pay and be
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
132
rewarded for their hard work. In addition the process allows them to gain titles, which provide
meaning to their roles. The departments and programs in which they work shape their
socialization and continued experience, and thus impact their professional and work identity.
Each department and program offers different challenges and opportunities where NTTF play
different roles. The more opportunities and less challenges NTTF face, the happier and more
supportive they appear to be. Some departments appear more supportive and collegial with all
NTTF, whereas others have more of a hierarchy with a mix of NTTF, tenured and tenure track
peers. How these elements balance out, shapes the experience and identity for the NTTF in both
positive and negative ways depending on the signals they send.
Academic Conditions
The final piece to Shaker’s model of the NTTF experience, are the academic conditions
in which these individuals work. For Shaker, these conditions include NTTF experience with
tenure v. non-tenure, the disciplinary context in which the NTTF work, and stereotypes and
conceptions of faculty. Traditionally, the faculty professional identity revolves around tenure,
academic freedom, participation in governance, and a tie to a discipline. For these NTTF, these
elements are not things they can relate to. As NTTF they lack participation in faculty
governance, express not having academic freedom and do not relate to tenure. As a result they
lack a tie to the professional identity of the faculty.
For the nineteen NTTF interviewed for this study the academic conditions circled around
a shared appreciation for academia, ideas of what it means to be a Professor, both positive and
negative perceptions of non-tenure-track faculty, and contributing to the academic experience
through their teaching. These academic conditions overlap the personal and contextual elements
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
133
of one’s professional and work identity. These conditions hang over the NTTF experience, and
thus impact their professional and work identity.
Shared culture around academia. A shared appreciation for academia, was central to
their interest in the specific field in which the NTTF studied and taught. Through their interest in
their academic field, NTTF are able to share what is meaningful to them with their students. As
one Sociology faculty stated “I feel like when I teach sociology, I’m creating civil society” (P7).
For her, using her knowledge of an academic subject and sharing that with students, has a
purpose and consequently, this brings her further purpose in her role as an academic. When an
individual has specialized knowledge of a topic they often find a sense of pride and purpose
related to that field of knowledge. An Anthropologist faculty member described the appreciation
in a different way:
It’s my own internal thing but it’s also why I’m an academic. When I started going into
academia, my thought was that one did teaching to sort of pay your way to do your
research and writing. Along the way I discovered I really enjoyed the teaching process.
But still, my main motivation for going into this line of work is the teaching and the
research and you know, continue to build disciplinary knowledge. So I think that that’s
just built-in, a part of scholarship, especially at a research university. (P17)
While he may not be paid to do research as a NTTF because his role primarily focuses on
teaching, research and participating in the disciplinary conversation, nevertheless very much
matters to him. He also demonstrates that the context in which he teaches matters, because he is
at a research university and he feels compelled to be a part of that.
Perceptions of being a Professor. Each of these NTTF, expect for one person, has been
socialized through a PhD program to have a shared understanding of tenure and the profession,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
134
of being a Professor. Being a Professor, includes identifying as part of a professional body that
shares certain traits. Some NTTF identify as not being a Professor or identify as something
different. As one Sociology faculty member shared:
Well, I don’t feel like a faculty member and I don’t know if I’m wrong in thinking that
way, but I guess one of the things I’m struggling right now is, you know, for five years I
was in the PhD program for five years. So five years, you’re learning, training to become
a researcher, you know, a Professor. And right now, I feel like I don’t have that. (P12)
As she shares, she was socialized into becoming a Professor through her PhD program. In this
process she implies she learned that being a Professor meant having tenure or being on a tenure
track, participating in shared governance, adding new knowledge to a discipline and having
academic freedom. But she expresses that as a NTTF she does not identify as a Professor, and
thus does not identify with these elements. She is trying to figure out her new identity by
identifying what she is not. As these NTTF come to find out, their experiences as NTTF do not
relate to the shared concepts of tenure, shared governance and an attachment to a discipline, by
the ways in which they have been socialized to be a part of a profession. As a result, they must
juggle the academic conditions in which they work and try to navigate a new identity.
Similarly to the Sociology faculty member, who expresses she is not a Professor, many of
the NTTF felt and described themselves as “second class” or in some other negative form, when
comparing themselves to their tenured peers. As one Environmental Studies faculty shared:
And we’re considered a lower form of life and – because we’re not doing the kind of
research that tenure-track faculty members do, and yet we still – many of us still do
research, but we’re not in the tenure-track. It’s a caste system and it’s not fair. And we
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
135
get taken advantage of and because there’s a glut of PhDs out there, you know, that’s the
way it is. (P18)
Feeling like a “lower form” and describing a “caste system” makes these NTTF feel devalued.
And these feelings do not arise from the work they do, but because of the attachment of the word
‘non-tenure’ to their names. This identity as to what they are not, or that they are some form of
‘other’ is not an identity that has been externally given to them, but rather one that they perceive
on their own. The changing structure of higher education, is creating a new system of faculty.
Under this system, the NTTF often feel they are part of a lower class, which can then create a
negative atmosphere in terms of their professional and work identity. One English Professor
described his experience as “I think we’re superfluous people. I think that we don’t matter one
way or the other ... Tenure. Then we’re people” (P16). For him the caste system where he sits as
a NTTF makes him not feel like a person. If he had tenure he would feel like a person. A Writing
faculty shared this:
If I was NTT in English, I would probably feel like a second class citizen. You know,
you’ve got your tenure track people and they’re on their own pace of doing things. It’s
just a different experience and plus if you’re the NTT over in English, you know—
because I know some of those people, right, and they just--it’s just a hierarchical thing.
It’s hard to articulate but you know, they’re just on their own thing, they’ve got the
secure jobs, they have more opportunities, they have more power, more political voice.
And if you’re not tenure track, then you don’t. (P6)
For him in the Writing program, he is alluding to the fact that he does not feel like a “second
class citizen” because he is surround by only NTTF. Whereas, for his peers in the English
department, there is a hierarchy among the tenured and non-tenure faculty and that creates
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
136
different work environments. The roles that tenured and non-tenure play are different. With
tenure one has security, opportunities and a voice. In describing this, the participant above
identifies what the NTTF do not have, and how NTTF do not identify with their tenure track
peers simply because the academic conditions of tenure dictate these identities.
Part of being a tenured faculty member consists of having a voice through participation in
university and departmental governance. Having this voice matters greatly because it allows
individuals to have a say in shaping their working environments. An Environmental Studies
faculty shared this:
Every year, we elect faculty members to represent us, essentially. And interestingly
enough, there's only like two spots for NTTs. The rest are all tenure track. But you look
at the makeup of tenure track versus NTTs and that's totally out of balance with what the
faculty body is. And so again, it's sort of [the] institution saying, you're important.
Really, you are. But then not necessarily following through with that, and so you feel
like they may just be saying that and not actually—not always showing you that they
value your contributions. (P2)
While NTTF do get appointed to participate in governance at the University, it is limited and as
she points out, such opportunities send a mixed message. The NTTF make up a majority of the
teaching population, but have the least amount of representation. In fact one Writing faculty even
shared that “they used to have over 30 members but now they’ve whittled us down to about 14
and partly it’s because the committee was doing work that makes the administration
uncomfortable” (P6). He points out that SU maybe feeling threatened or nervous by the growing
number of NTTF and their voice in governance, a role traditionally only open to tenure faculty.
As a result they will limit how large certain NTTF committees can be. This is a reflection of the
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
137
university model consistent with a tenured majority. The academic conditions are changing, as
more NTTF make up a viable presence on campus but their voices are limited on governing
bodies. She sees her value in her role as a NTTF, but questions that role at the same time as she
does not feel NTTF really are adequately represented. The fact the University limits NTTF
representation and committee involvements, sends a signal to the NTTF that they are in fact
“lesser” and this can be demoralizing for their professional and work identity.
Positive perceptions of NTTF. These nineteen NTTF each held different opinions about
their status as NTTF. For some it was positive and for others it was negative. But through
positive perceptions of being a NTTF, individuals were able to see that they still mattered to their
work environment and that they play a contributing role in the success of the department.
While the NTTF may feel at times “lesser” or part of a “second class” they are able to see
that their roles matter. They are different from their tenured peers but their roles as NTTF are just
as valuable. One English Professor said:
I think by the nature of what they do, it is different. It’s not better. That is, they sit on
committees I don’t sit on, I’m not eligible to sit on, I’m not required to sit on. They have
–some of them are more decorated than I am, have—you know, are more—you know,
have received honors and you know, have more sort of opportunity to—outside of the
university than I do. But in terms of the work that gets done in the university, I would
say different and equal. (P9)
She recognizes that the nature of their work is different, but that she does not see her work as less
important. As a result of being able to see their contributions as different yet equal a Political
Science faculty was able to reflect in reference to his tenured peers:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
138
I would say honestly appreciative of the fact that we’re here but we are not them. And
the truth is, we’re not them ... I’ve never had anyone look down on me. But I think we all
sort of know our places within the department. I think people understand there’s a
difference, they know we are not tenured faculty. (P11)
Being able to recognize that their roles are different but equally important helps NTTF to see that
they matter. Their roles (identity) as teachers are important, because they matter to their students
and they play a critical role in the functioning of the department by teaching many of the
undergraduate courses. Given how the academic conditions of tenured and non-tenure can cause
a great divide, the NTTF find value in their specific roles as teaching faculty. Furthermore the
NTTF bring experiences to the classroom that their tenured peers do not. As another Political
Science faculty explained:
They can make a contribution—an academic contribution that I can’t, but I can make an
academic contribution that they can’t. I bring my real world experience in the classroom
and I don’t consider it to be a replacement for academic grounding, but a complement to
it. And so I’m confident that my students get value out of my classes, but it’s probably a
different kind of value than they get from most of their classes. Not better or worse, just
different. (P19)
For him, and many other NTTF, bringing real world practical experience is just as valuable to his
students, as the contributions of academic research. He recognizes that the experiences he is able
to bring, is not necessarily better, just different than what his tenured peers are able to do. Their
role is just as beneficial to the work within the university, as what is done by their tenured peers.
As a result of the academic conditions that may divide tenured and non-tenure, these NTTF are
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
139
able to feel secure and confident in their academic positions because of the different experience
they contribute to the University.
Negative perceptions of NTTF. While the NTTF may be able to see their roles as
important yet different from their tenured peers, they often found negative ways to describe this
role. As mentioned previously some NTTF describe themselves as “the 4
th
tier” or in a more
supporting role as “6
th
man of the basketball team.” Each of these descriptions of NTTF is a
reflection of their value. As one Chemistry Professor explained:
I think that in other departments it may not be as clear, and they see teaching faculty as
possibly a disposable commodity where they can, always replace them with other people
later if they want teaching faculty again. (P1)
In her opinion NTTF across campus are sometimes seen as “disposable commodities”, but not in
her department, which means they can come and go without any security. This means these
individuals are not valued for the critical role they play—unlike tenured faculty who cannot be
disposed of because of the nature of tenure. A writing faculty member described it this way:
I think universities in general, it’s really sad that, you know, there’s this shift from having
full-time tenure track to more of a—not soldiers but just like disposable bodies, right?
Like adjuncts that they can use and then let go and not pay benefits and not be in a way
responsible for us, right, and I just feel like it’s a trap– they told me make sure that you
get a job in three years because after three years, it’s like you can just—the university—
the longer that you are an adjunct, the less chances you’ll have of getting a full-time
tenure-track job. (P12)
Each of these descriptions as “soldiers” or “disposable bodies” are all images and reflections of
how these NTTF view themselves. They are not identities that others have given them. In both
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
140
the individual identity and the work and professional identity literature, identity is a reflection of
one’s self in a given context. Here these NTTF are reflecting on how the academic conditions
(the nature of tenure) impacts their views of themselves.
Teaching. As in each of the other three elements of Shaker’s model, teaching is also part
of the academic conditions. Here, teaching is what allow these faculty to contribute to the
undergraduate academic experience. Although not necessarily attached to an academic
discipline, teaching is what allows these faculty members to share their knowledge of an
academic subject, and to possibly contribute to that discipline in some way. To many of the
NTTF, what matters is not scholarly research that contributes to the field, but to share their
knowledge in the form of teaching. However, to some of the NTTF the discipline still matters.
As one Anthropology faculty member described:
I just really like the research and the writing and I like working with the other disciplines
and I like building disciplinary knowledge, so all of that is a part of being an academic
for me. (P17)
For him being a NTTF is about more than just teaching, but rather about creating and sharing
new knowledge within his discipline. In some respects this shows some attachment to the shared
practices of being a tenured faculty member. While the discipline in which they teach, may not
be how they totally identify, their chosen area of specialization still seems to matter both
personally and professionally for these NTFF. A Writing faculty member shared this:
Well, I'm not a part of a discipline here. I'm a part of the writing program. If that's a
discipline, I don't identify as a writing Professor. My interest is not composition
pedagogy. It just isn't. My discipline is literature and now more broadly, media. And so
that's who I am, and I've started identifying myself that way much more to people. (P5)
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
141
While she is part of the writing faculty, her professional identity is not solely mediated through
composition pedagogy. For her, the discipline that interests her is literature, an area in which she
was trained during her PhD tenure, and what she connects to most.
While the group of NTTF interviewed for this study expressed a shared appreciation of
academic culture, many had very different feelings regarding the academic conditions at SU. For
some, being a Professor was not something they could identify with because they lacked certain
traits that they were socialized to believe they should have: like tenure, shared governance,
academic freedom and a tie to a discipline. As a result they may have found they could not fully
understand what their current identity was, except they knew what it was not, namely a
Professor. For others, the academic conditions surrounding perceptions of being a NTTF seemed
to shape their identity. These individuals hold both positive and negative perceptions of their
NTTF position. For some, they were able to reflect on positive perceptions of NTTF by
explaining the important roles they take on. For others, they reflected on more negative
perceptions of the NTTF role. These perceptions were reflections of the context in which they
work and of themselves; not of the identities that others have given them.
As chapter two explains, for the traditional academic profession, a Professor is socialized
through a PhD program, and taught to share a set of professional and disciplinary traits that
include autonomy, academic freedom, governance and the merit principle. As the academic
conditions within higher education change, thus causing a structural shift in the faculty, the new
faculty majority—the NTTF—do not appear to relate to these concepts. For the NTTF and their
professional identity, academic conditions create a layer to their identity that overlaps the
personal and contextual elements of their identity. These conditions cause them to see
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
142
themselves as different, yet still valuable to their work environments and thus their profession as
NTTF.
Adding to Shaker’s Model
While Shaker’s model can help us to understand the experiences of NTTF, and thus, how
these experiences might shape identity, there are two key components to identity that could be
added to Shaker’s model. These include the importance of relationships and creating a niche.
Neither of these elements were examined by Shaker, but from the data generated by this study,
both appear to be very important to full-time NTTF identity. These could be added to the model
in the personal preferences and organizational forces sections. Relationships are critical because
they are how individuals come to understand themselves and their identity. These important
relationships were with department or program chairs, fellow NTTF colleagues and students.
They allow NTTF to build networks and feel supported in their working environments. Similarly
creating a niche is also important to NTTF work identity. In creating a niche or a unique space
for themselves within their working environment, the NTTF were able to find added value in
their roles. These niches were self-directed and outside of their contractual obligations. In
creating a niche, the NTTF were often recognized for the added value they brought through its
creation. Both of these elements involve the personal and organizational context within which
one works. Individuals must work on a personal basis to create and build relationships and they
must have an internal drive that allows them to be motivated to create a niche. But the
organization in which they work must allow for relationships to develop and support building a
niche. Through these two added elements, individuals seem to find added value in their work
environments and thus tend to have a more positive experience, and consequently, reflect more
positively on their work and professional identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
143
Relationships
Relationships, whether they are with their Chairs, with NTTF colleagues, students or
others individuals, matter to professional and work identity. For NTTF, these kinds of
relationships are more critical to their identity then those with their tenured peers. In the identity
literature from chapter two we learned that identity is seen as relational, in other words, how one
views identity is through different kinds of relationships. Relationships are what brought these
NTTF to their jobs and they are what they turn to for support when their jobs become
challenging. Relationships matter for NTTF because they help them to build networks of
support, find value in their roles, and help them to feel more secure and confident in their
positions.
When it came to their chair, this relationship not only set the tone for the flow of work
within the department but it was also the person the NTTF turned to for support and knowledge
about the promotion process. As mentioned within the organizational forces, the reappointment
and promotion process is critical to the NTTF work identity because it creates career mobility,
provides opportunities for pay and a chance to earn a title. Through their relationships with their
chairs, and chairs knowledge of the structural process, the chair can shape the context in which
NTTF work identity can form. As one of the Environmental studies faculty shared:
I think what I have seen is that you need to have a supportive chair to have those
opportunities, and I'm not sure what you may find, but my feeling is that other NTTs, if
they don't have a supportive chair, they actually won't have some of these opportunities.
So, for example, the chance to move up in terms of ranking, that starts with a
conversation with your department chair, and they have to decide whether or not you
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
144
should go up for a promotion, so if you don't have a chair who is supportive of NTTs or
supportive of what you're doing or how you're doing it You know, you get stuck. (P2)
As she explains, the chair is the individual who helps the NTTF through the promotion process.
He or she is the one that can help open opportunities for the NTTF. If a NTTF does not have a
relationship with their chair, they may miss out on opportunities like being promoted. The
presence of the chair in the department also seemed to matter. As one Chemistry Professor
explained:
Our current chair, if he's in his office and the door is open, he welcomes anybody to just
pop in and mention any concerns that they have, and I've done that several times and not
felt concerned with that. And if there are problems, he's good about finding out the entire
story before he makes any decisions on how it needs to be resolved or consulting people
who are involved and how best to resolve the situation. (P1)
By having an open door and appearing to be willing to listen, the NTTF seem supported by their
chairs. This support makes the NTTF feel more secure in their roles.
In addition to their chairs, NTTF turned to each other. One faculty member in
Anthropology stated: “because we do have our NTT cohort, too, I feel closer to my NTT cohort
(P3).” By using the word “cohort” she implies a support group. She expresses that she feels
closer to them than to her tenured colleagues. When a Writing faculty was asked about his
relationships with fellow NTTF, he shared with me:
My colleague across—kitty-corner from me, he always comes in and chats. You know,
we just kind of goof around and tell jokes. Like he wants different names that he wants
to be—silly names that he’s thinking of calling himself. But also professional
development type stuff too, like he was giving me advice on potential publications that I
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
145
could do in the wake of all this curricular development on Writing 150, so he kind of
pointed me in the direction of this journal and these kinds of articles, stuff like that. You
know, hanging out in an extracurricular kind of way. (P6)
Their NTTF colleagues are who they turn to for additional support, sharing resources, talking
about teaching with, mentoring one another, building networks and getting involved in NTTF
issues outside of their departments. These relationships help the NTTF to feel connected to each
other and their working environments.
Other NTTF spoke of relationships outside of their departments that also mattered.
Access to these kinds of relationships came from working in other departments, serving on
committees, and teaching in the general education program. These relationships matter because
they allow the NTTF to build networks of support across campus. By creating these support
networks individuals often feel more secure and confident in their roles, and thus have a more
positive reflection on their identity. Furthermore, the relationships can help them create unique
niches or open up opportunities that they may not otherwise have found. One Writing faculty
shared “I am friendly with the provost. She is reading my scholarship because she is interested
in the topics, not because I'm applying for a job in the tenure track” (P5). For her the relationship
matters, because she is expressing that her scholarship matters. She was able to build this special
relationship because of her ability to become involved in the faculty council. It created an
opportunity to make connections outside the department. For other NTTF, creating relationships
with Deans opened opportunities to be considered for teaching outside of their departments, and
ahead of the normal schedule for such a teaching request:
I got an email from Dean Frank saying would you, for spring, being willing to do this
course? Spring. It’s November and he’s asking me about spring. And of course I said
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
146
yes, because he asked me to do it. They’re asking me to teach one of those new pilot
courses in general education. (P14)
This offer from a Dean came from a relationship that this NTTF had established and being asked
to do something from the Dean was something he found meaningful. This relationship again
opened up an opportunity that allows this NTTF to feel special or valued for his contribution to
the work environment.
Creating a Niche
For many of the NTTF, their value in their roles came from the special places they were
able to carve out and create as their own. These niches might have been developing a minor,
writing a book, being a specialist in a particular field, creating new courses, or bringing practical
real life experience from former careers to the classroom. Creating a niche matters for a few
reasons. First, it can allow individuals to share their previous professional experiences or
passions in their teaching or in another unique way like creating a minor or a lecture series.
Second, creating a niche allows the NTTF to create a new space or fill a void which can add
value to a program or a department. In creating a niche the NTTF is doing something that is
beyond their contractual agreements, they find a special space in which to be recognized and thus
find added value. In addition, creating a niche allows them to create or shape their identity
without it being dictated to them because they are creating a unique new role.
One of the most common ways NTTF found a niche was through creating a new course.
Often these courses combined the individual’s professional interest or passion and allowed them
to share those interests or passions in a space of their making, with students. As one English
faculty shared:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
147
I created a class that took a number of years to develop and finally get institutionalized,
which just started this year being institutionalized, which is a class called XXX which is
really—as far as I can tell, really the only class in the English department that talks about
a career you could have as an English major other than being an academic, right? That
gives you hands on experience about how to do work that, you know, could actually
translate into a job outside of—once you graduate as an English major, because it’s
editing. So—because I also have worked as an editor in a magazine. So I really love
teaching that class. (P9)
For her, creating the class gave her a sense of pride but also allowed her to share her passion for
being a writer with her students. She takes pride in creating a course, which was not dictated to
her to teach but rather something she created and wanted to share. This unique course that she
created not only gives her a sense of contributing, but the fact that course is institutionalized,
shows that the department values her work and her contribution to the working environment.
One Anthropology Professor explained that by creating a minor and finding other things outside
of teaching he was able to:
I was able to carve a position for myself. I wasn’t like taking somebody’s position who
went away for a year or something like that. So I was able to carve out a position for
myself and that allowed me to network with a lot of different people, so I think I have a
bit more freedom that way. (P17)
For him the opportunity to create a minor and become involved in his working environment
allowed him to create a niche. In a way he took on a leadership role that was not required of him.
This he found important, because he was not replacing someone but creating something that was
new and needed. He took an active role in shaping his identity within his working environment.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
148
Taking an active role seemed to be critical in terms of how these NTTF were able to find
ways to create and build a niche. One Writing faculty member shared this:
So I started looking around, just at different websites, the general catalog and that kind of
stuff and I saw that there’s no class offered on South Asian literature, at the time. This
was in 2009. And you know, I kind of—and there’s no kind of South Asian studies
center, anything. We have a massive South Asian student population and a lot of interest.
So I kind of write a proposal to start a South Asian studies center. I wrote a proposal for
a kind of intro to South Asian literature class. (P 10)
For him, he as actively looking to fill a void knowing that this might be something that would be
appreciated in the work environment. He was interested in finding more to do than just teach. As
he went on to explain, “I am very happy being non-tenure track in this life. What has been a
kind of ongoing process is kind of finding, making this job mine, you know, rather than feeling
like I’m doing--I’ve been just slotted into a slot, right” (P10). For his work and for him to matter
and feel valued, he feels compelled do to more then just teach. By being proactive and finding a
missing element within the university he is able to create a niche.
Sometimes the NTTF were able to find a niche by taking on things others were not. As
one Sociology faculty member shared:
I’m being strategic. I know that if there’s always a problem with her and the dean no
longer wants her to grade, so in a way, I’m sort of creating a space where I am—informal
job security, I’m not quite sure. I don’t know if that will change but I did volunteer. (P7)
By taking on a role that others are not willing to, she sees a way to find some job security. While
this niche may not be as creative or innovative as the others are finding, it is a different way to
find value in her role. Feeling secure is one of many elements that matter in shaping one’s
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
149
professional and work identity. But for others, taking on work that others were not willing to do,
made them realize that they were in fact missing out on finding their niche. As one Chemistry
faculty shared:
I would prefer not to teach so many different courses because I feel like I (sighs)—
sometimes I feel like I’m low on the totem pole and so as a result, I just get thrown
whatever course other people don’t want to teach. I’m the newest lecturer in our
department, so everyone else kind of has their niche and because I teach—I can teach
general chemistry because I teach something higher than it, I often get that. (P13)
For her, taking on work others do not want to do, does take up time and does not allow her time
to find a niche. But she recognizes that this is part of being a NTTF. She mentions being the
newest member of the group, so in that sense she feels she must take on what others will not in
order to keep her job. She alludes to wanting a niche and that others have found one, she has just
not been able to do so yet.
Bringing a unique experience to the classroom was yet another way some NTTF found a
niche. One Political Science faculty member shared how his niche was different from that of a
tenure faculty member:
They can make a contribution in an—they can make an academic contribution that I
can’t, but I can make an academic contribution that they can’t. I bring my real world
experience in the classroom and I don’t consider it to be a replacement for academic
grounding, but a complement to it. And so I’m confident that my students get value out
of my classes, but it’s probably a different kind of value than they get from most of their
classes. Not better or worse, just different. (P19)
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
150
His niche that makes him unique, is he can bring his real world working experience to the
classroom. In chapter two, the literature on NTTF explains that one of the many reasons NTTF
are hired is because of their unique work experience.
These different niches that the NTTF have created are not required by their contracts,
they were simply important things to them that they took time to carve out and create. And while
creating a niche was found to be a positive shaper in one’s work identity, it was not a necessity to
find or create one in order to have a positive sense of self in the work environment. But still
many individuals worked to find or create a niche that was meaningful to them and their career.
These niches included developing new minors, new classes, being a specialist in a particular field
and many other things. It allowed them to create a space in which they feel more valued and to
take on a role in shaping their identity and not having it dictated to them. This is important
because it allow the NTTF to have ownership of the role they create. The process of creating a
niche allows the NTTF to share their professional world experiences and their passions with their
students and the environments in which they work. Through these niches these NTTF find value
and are often recognized for the value their niche adds to the work environment. As a result the
NTTF feel more secure and confident in their working worlds and their identity.
The Professional and Work Identity of FTNTTF
This chapter has provided an overview of my findings from interviewing 19 full-time
NTTF from seven different departments and programs within one research university. An
overview of Shaker’s model has helped us to understand, how the different experiences for these
full-time NTTF might shape their professional and work identify. After interviewing nineteen
full-time NTTF from seven different departments and programs, it appears that what is most
important to these NTTF when reflecting on their experience—and thus what shapes their
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
151
professional and work identity—are the personal elements they bring to their identity as well as
the contextual factors that their department or program brings forth in the working environment.
In addition, this study further brings to light past studies that show NTTF are not a homogenous
group. Their identity appears to be varied and thus NTTF appear to be a heterogeneous group of
individuals. Although varied, it does appear that one key element to their identity as a group, is
their passion for teaching and the relationships they form with their students. Table 2 below
summarizes some of this study’s findings and presents some of the positive and negative shapers
of NTTF identity that will be explained in this section. Next to each element (in italics), is how
the element corresponds to Shaker’s model:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
152
Table 2
Positive and Negative Shapers of Full-Time NTTF Identity
Positive factor that Shape NTTF Identity Negative factor that Shape NTTF Identity
Control in Personal Decisions; Personal
Preferences
Lack of relationships in working
environment; Personal Preferences
Love/Passion for teaching; Personal
Preferences
Unintentional career decision; Personal
Characteristics
Relationships; Personal Preferences
Poor or negative perceptions of institution &
department or Program; Organizational
Forces
Intentional career choices; Personal
Characteristics
Lack of support/resources; Organizational
Forces
Confidence; Personal Characteristics
Negative Perceptions of NTTF; Academic
Conditions
Environment with all NTTF; Organizational
Forces
Giving up on Tenure dream; Academic
Conditions
Cohorts of NTTF; Organizational Forces
Positive Perceptions of Institution &
Department/Program; Organizational forces
Positive Perceptions of NTTF; Academic
Conditions
While the table summarizes what elements both positively and negatively appear to shape
full-time NTTF work identity, the data presented in this chapter appears to indicate that full-time
NTTF do not have a distinct professional and work identity. The Professorate now appears to be
divided due to the changing context of higher education, as explained in chapter two, and
evidenced by the findings from these nineteen individuals. The data would also indicate that
FTNTTF identity does not link to that of tenure, merit, academic freedom, a tie to discipline and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
153
governance. These individuals come into their positions with a shared concept of being an
academic professional—a Professor—who is socialized to believe in tenure, academic freedom,
merit, a tie to a discipline and governance. For the full time NTTF this is not the case. They have
to find a new identity. As a result, the full time NTTF professional and work identity varies
based on personal experience, the point at which they find themselves in their career, and the
environment of their department or program. One of the only things that the full time NTTF
seem to share is their status as NTTF, but even that can vary as some do not even associate
themselves with that status.
There are a few other important summative points to make about full time NTTF
professional and work identity. As was mentioned in the personal characteristics section, at what
point an individual finds themselves in, with regards to their career, matters. This fact points out,
that there are different stages to one’s identify. Identity is a reflection at a given point, and as the
sample of participants demonstrates, each of these full time NTTF are at different points in their
careers and thus have different reflections on who they are and how secure or confident they feel
in their current state. Second, it is important to state, that as mentioned in chapter two,
professional and work identity is an ongoing process. Relevant to the stage in which individuals
are in their careers, identity is constant interpretation and reinterpretation of one’s experiences.
This study has allowed these nineteen individuals to reflect, interpret, and see themselves at a
certain point in their career but this will likely change if they went through the same exercise in a
year or in five to ten years. Many of the NTTF also expressed that they have multiple identities.
For them being a NTTF is not just about being a teacher, it is also about being a writer or
anthropologist or anything else they may choose to take on.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
154
While the conclusion from this overview is that the full-time NTTF appear to not have a
distinct professional and work identity, because the Professorate now appears to be divided due
to the changing context of higher education, as explained in chapter two, and evidenced by the
findings from these nineteen individuals. What appears to be most important to these NTTF
when reflecting on their experience, and thus what shapes their professional and work identity,
appears to be the personal elements they bring to their identity as well as the contextual factors
that their department or program brings forth in their working environment. The person is at
center of their identity, and their work environment of the department or program shapes how
they view themselves and their work. As a result, the individuals makes choices and build
relationships that form how he or she sees their role and work life.
Three NTTF Identities
This chapter has reviewed the findings from 19 interviews of full-time NTTF at one
research university across seven different departments. By using Shaker’s model to help
understand the full-time NTTF experience, various observations were made as to how these
experiences might shape the full-time NTTF professional and work identity. What was found
was that no one prototype exists when describing the full-time NTTF professional and work
identity. Instead, NTTF identity appears to be shaped by a combination of personal elements and
characteristics that arise from their working conditions. And while these elements may differ
among the NTTF, a love of teaching and sharing a passion with students seems to be a uniting
element of NTTF work identity. As a result, the full-time NTTF are a diverse group and appear
to lack a united professional identity unlike their tenured peers. Rather, their personal and work
experiences vary and allow them to create different identities. But these different experiences do
demonstrate shared elements of identity. These elements overlap and help us to see that NTTF
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
155
are a heterogeneous group of individuals. The full-time NTTF interviewed for this study seem to
show that they have less shared elements in common, to form a united professional or work
identity, in the way that their tenured peers are able to. But this does not mean that full-time
NTTF lack a professional or work identity, but rather they find different elements from which to
form that identity. For some NTTF, their work identity revolves around their teaching and they
identify simply as “teachers.” But for others their work identity revolves around something other
than teaching—like a writer or a lawyer who happens to bring that professional experience to
their teaching.
The following three stories are used to demonstrate the lack of a common experience
among the full-time NTTF, and thus demonstrate how the different elements explained in this
chapter appear to shape NTTF work identity in different ways. While each experience is
different, nevertheless there are common elements that shape identity and are shared among the
three individuals. As mentioned, it appears full-time NTTF have less shared elements in common
to form a united professional or work identity, unlike the way that their tenured peers are able to.
These examples are shared to show how parts of Shaker’s model, and other elements found in
this study, shape an individual’s professional and work identity.
The Assistant Professor of Teaching Chemistry
Sarah is an Assistant Professor of Teaching within the Chemistry department at SU. She
has been at SU for over ten years but has only been in a teaching role for just over five years.
Sarah did her PhD at SU and during this time she made the intentional decision to teach:
I realized fairly early on that I liked teaching, and that's how I wanted to focus my career.
And in my fifth year, my research was wrapping up, and they also opened a position
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
156
within the department for non-tenure track teaching faculty, which was new, and a
lecturer position to primarily teach undergrads general chemistry.
For Sarah, she realized that teaching and sharing new knowledge with students was what
personally motivated her. As a result she chose to take on a teaching role over a more traditional
tenure-track, academic, research oriented role. For Sarah the personal preferences she had,
impacted her decision to become a NTTF.
Her relationships, particularly those with students matter to her work. In fact as Sarah
explains the students are why she does the work she does:
I think it's still probably the students and making sure that I'm teaching them well. As
much as I like the promotions and I like the extra responsibilities of doing committee
work, and other things, and enjoy meeting other faculty outside of the department and
even the school, I still got into teaching so that I could help students understand
chemistry, and so that's still what's most important to me and what I like to focus on the
most.
Her students, and the relationships she gains through teaching them, are what motivate her work
and matter more to her then the organizational forces like the promotion process.
For Sarah the organizational forces within which she works, matter greatly. She was the
first NTTF hired in her department. Instead of waiting for someone to show her, or guide her to
resources, she took initiative to learn what resources were available to her. Sarah is able to find
opportunities to grow in her role. She explains some of the opportunities she has found:
We're always offered [opportunities] through the Center for Excellence in Teaching,
[which] offers a lot of opportunities for professional development, and they have
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
157
seminars that are led by outstanding faculty members throughout the university on
different topics. I have attended a few.
Sarah has also found that despite being the first and only NTTF for a while, her department
appeared supportive of her. When she told me about her tenure colleagues she said this:
I have never felt looked down upon because of my position, where some people I know
at either other institutions or even in some departments here have felt that they feel like
second class citizens because of their position as a non-tenure track faculty member. And
it's something that I have not experienced…I feel very comfortable here.
Sarah is comfortable in her environment. The context in which she works, the people she works
with, create a department that support her. She went on to explain that:
I feel valued in the department. I know that a lot of the faculty recognize, like I said, the
importance of not only education, but teaching the larger population classes, even though
many of them are not declared chemistry majors, nor will they be declaring as chemistry
majors, but we have a responsibility to teach some of the core courses for our pre-health
students and some of our engineering students, so they recognized the importance of
those courses as well as the need for the non-tenure teaching faculty who can actually
focus on the students, because their time isn't caught up with actually having to do
research as well.
These organizational forces allow her to feel more secure and confident in her role in the
department, and as a result, more committed to staying in her role as a NTTF. In essence, Sarah’s
work identity is positively impacted by the environment in which she works, and the personal
decisions she has made to become a NTTF.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
158
The Assistant Professor of Writing
John is a younger Professor in the writing program at SU. He has been at the university
for around six years. John came to SU after a failed attempt on the tenure track job market. He
finished his PhD work just as the economy tanked in 2008. John explained to me that “I did my
work in colonial studies, post-colonial studies and French studies, so I was applying mostly for
literature, tenure-track literature jobs. And I did get a couple interviews and you know, those
didn’t really go too far.” As a result he made a personal decision with his wife to limit his job
search and stay in southern California. John’s sister had attended SU and he himself had
completed course work at a nearby campus. So despite varying circumstances he was able to
make an intentional decision combined with some personal reasons to accept a job at SU as a
NTTF.
When coming to SU John found the transition somewhat difficult. He shared this with
me:
So when I got here, it was definitely a struggle in some ways because I was, you know,
trained and professionalized to be a post-colonial scholar, right, kind of—and a literary
theorist and all that kind of stuff and you know, trained to kind of picture myself in that
life. And from, you know, the first few days and weeks of being here, I really felt this,
you know, kind of personal—it was both kind of fear and desire not to become irrelevant
(laughs), right, and not to just be a writing teacher for the rest of my life.
Through his remarks, John expresses the break in identity that I have explained previously in this
study. He reflects on how he was trained as scholar, and that in his new environment as a NTTF,
he felt that identity disappear. By acknowledging his fears, John implies his own internal
struggle with giving up the idea of a tenured position, what he was socialized to take on, for a
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
159
new role that he is not so sure how to grasp. For John the expedience of transition to a NTTF is
one that required a shift in thinking. It was a personal experience for him.
As result of feeling this break in his identity, John began to seek out opportunities to
grow his role beyond just teaching. He took initiative to see where he might be able to add his
specialized knowledge in colonial studies on campus. His own internal personal motivation
drove him to create a proposal for a speaking series. John shared:
I met other faculty through that kind of proposal, discussion process and then my
proposal was about bringing faculty from different departments to talk about empire,
imperialism, you know, from IR, from linguistics, from history and from classics, you
know, so got all these really different interesting people together to say, you know, the
way I talk about it in kind of literary criticism is very different how people talk about it in
history or in poli sci or something, and it’d be just great to hear that conversation happen,
and so that’s what happened. We did—I did kind of three things over the year and that
was wonderful, you know, that really felt like I’m doing my teaching, and teaching’s
going well and then I also get to do—I’m doing something on the side that’s going to
keep other parts of my brain stimulated.
This experience, as John explains, led him to not only create something new (a niche), but it also
allowed him the opportunity to build new relationships with faculty from other departments. He
also implies how the opportunity gave him the chance to do something other then teaching, to
feel more like a scholar. When John came to SU he felt very conflicted in sorting out his new
work identity as a NTTF. But at the same time, he reflects on his teaching since teaching is the
primary role he plays. This experience gave John an opportunity to create something on his own,
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
160
and as mentioned, creating a niche was an element to identity formation, that could be added to
Shaker’s model as part of the organizational forces.
For John, the organizational forces within which he works matter greatly. As a writing
Professor he works within a program that consists of all NTTF. John explained to me “our
program is amazing. I mean, our faculty are so supportive and collegial and just really, really
wonderful people to work with and it’s a wonderful community to be a part of, and that matters
to me as well.” As he states, being supported matters to him, and as a result, he has been able to
be promoted from a lecturer to an Assistant Professor.
He describes his work environment as follows: “[The] writing program is in a different
kind of place, because we amongst ourselves are really supportive of each other and very well
supported by our chair, who’s a great advocate for NTT faculty.” Between his chair and his
colleagues, John has built some rewarding relationships in which he is able to share information
about course design, assignments and other student related concerns.
While John has made certain personal decisions and found support in his organization,
he is in a place where he is trying to figure out more of who he is as a professional. He shared
this:
I don’t want to be a one dimensional person and so there are more kind of aspects of a
professional identity that is just beyond being a teacher or being a scholar, it’s being part
of this university and part of this college. And I feel it’s important to try and contribute
and just do positive things.
As a result John continues to seek understanding as a NTTF and find ways to contribute to the
university community he is a part of. He went on to explain to me how the NTTF caucus was
created, and that for him this was very meaningful because it enabled him to find NTTF beyond
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
161
his department to connect with and learn from. These relationships lead him to find that many
tenured and tenure track peers lack knowledge of what NTTF do or who they are. In essence, his
experience with the caucus and seeking understanding of himself as NTTF, he has become
empowered as NTTF. John explained:
I see myself for this coming year is just trying to, in a very, you know, collegial way,
raise awareness of who we are and that we have shared values, that, you know, NTT and
tenure-track faculty are not, amongst ourselves—or we should not be divided and kind of
feel like we’re opposed to each other, right, or a threat to each other. And I think it’s
much better to see that we together have shared values and you know, shared hopes and
desires for this university and working together to achieve that.
In finding his new role as NTTF, John is still struggling with letting go of his scholarly side. He
explains that the scholarly part of him is fading:
I’m at this phase now where the kind of being that sort of, you know, literary, colonial
studies scholar, it’s kind of going to have to become more of a hobby, you know, it’s not
that much of a personal or a professional [aspect].
He is in a place where he is having to let go of his academic identity that he once held on to, and
embrace more of his teaching identity since that is what is valued and what he is evaluated for
doing. For John giving this up and embracing teaching, while not easy, he still finds great joy in
his teaching:
What makes me feel valued in my work? Students telling me what a difference I made in
their lives, how much they loved the class. I mean, it is students. It’s seeing a student
become a good writer, that’s amazing.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
162
His relationships with his students matter, and these relationships are where he looks to find
value and meaning in his role as NTTF.
John is a NTTF who wanted to become involved and took steps to become involved. He
feels encouraged by his department and chair. And while John’s students give him value, he does
not quite feel secure and confident in his job. He wants to be more then just a teacher and has
found ways to become involved in the larger SU community. John appears to have a positive
work identity, but at the same time there appears to be a layer of fear or uncertainty with being a
NTTF, that he still faces. For him, he struggles with finding balance and accepting his role as
NTTF.
The Associate Professor of Teaching English
Tom is an Associate Professor of Teaching within the English department at SU. He has
worked at SU for seven years. He came to SU after making a personal choice to leave his tenure
track job in the Midwest and relocate to southern California. Tom made this personal decision.
This intentional and very personal decision to give up a tenure position and make a career change
impacted his identity in positive ways. As explained making intentional and personal decisions
can be a positive shaper in identity.
Tom came to SU via a friend who was able to send his resume to a Dean who hired him
to teach part time. Knowing how valuable this connection was, Tom became very active in
seeking out opportunities to seek out ways to build his niche. He describes it:
I came across to the English department with my resume (laughs), with my CV and said
hello, I’m here, I need work. And it turned out that that chair, his term was up and he
was going to be gone for a whole year and we overlap almost exactly in specializations.
So they basically replaced him with me for a year as just a regular teacher. Then that
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
163
year, I went to Gender Studies and said here’s my CV, here’s what I do and do you have
anything? And they did have stuff. And then I talked to Annenberg, so I did a lot of kind
of entrepreneurial looking around.
Tom was internally motivated to build relationships and seek out work. He understood that his
role was one that was not as secure as coming from a tenure-track position. Tom began to
network, build relationships and thus confidently find his way at the university. Demonstrating
that much of his identity at SU was forming around his own personal preferences to take the lead
and build his new role, rather then have it dictated to him or wait for someone to give him a role.
Tom recognized the value in not only building relationships, but also working with his
fellow NTTF to improve their working conditions. Here is how he described taking the lead in
the promotion and reappointment process:
And at that time, there were five or six of us who were basically co-equals and I thought
it would be a real problem if some of us got promoted into the new system and some of
us didn’t because it would create some tension that wasn’t already here, it was already –
we were all pretty comfortable with our relationships. So I was very adamant with the
department that we should all do the promotion at the same time, to the same rank.
He took on a leadership role, was well informed of the policies and used his relationships to help
not only himself, but to help his peers get promoted as well. This process allowed him earn a
title, find value in his contribution to his working environment and advance his career. Each of
these elements are parts of the personal and organizational elements that have been described to
shape identity.
Tom summarizes how the organizational structure at SU makes him feel:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
164
I do not think I am exploited. I wish I made more money, I don’t think I’m underpaid. I
think some of my colleagues are overpaid (laughs) but I think that SU has done great
things for me and has allowed me to do things in LA and elsewhere that I benefit from all
the time.
As a result, he has a positive outlook not only toward being a NTTF but also toward SU. His
hard work, personal and professional motivations along with the institutional structure in which
he is a part of, have allowed him to find a fulfilling and long term position at SU. Furthermore,
he has been able to develop relationships and connections that have boosted his confidence and
security in his position and thus his identity.
Sarah, John and Tom are at different points in their careers at SU. Their stories of identity
help demonstrate what can shape one’s identity. And while their stories are different, they each
seem to experience similar elements (like personal and organizational characteristics) that shape
their identity, as this chapter has uncovered. Their stories are different and shed light on what
this study found, which is, that not everyone has the same experience and thus different factors
will impact one’s identity. Their stories are used to highlight some of the elements of Shaker’s
(2008) model and the importance of relationships and niche building that were found in this
study. Their stories, along with the 16 others interviewed for this study show that while each
experience is different, an individual’s personal and organizational factors appear to have the
largest impact on work identity. As a result, this study demonstrates the variety and
heterogeneity of NTTF professional identity. Despite all the variety that may exist, one common
element attached to each NTTF appeared to be their passion for teaching and their connections
with students.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
165
Conclusion
This chapter has presented the data from 19 interviews of full time NTTF from seven
different departments and programs at SU. Shaker’s (2008) model was used to analyze the
experience of these full-time NTTF. Through her model, NTTF personal preferences, personal
characteristics, organizational forces and the academic conditions that NTTF experience were
used to understand how experience links to identity. Each of these four elements was found to
impact or shape the professional or work identity of full-time NTTF at a research university
across seven departments. In addition the research found that two more elements could be added
to the personal preferences and organization forces of Shaker’s (2008) model. These elements
include: the importance of relationships and building a niche within the work environment.
While no one identity can be named to describe the professional and work identity of NTTF, it
was found that what appears to be most important to these NTTF, when they reflect on their
experiences, and thus what shapes their professional and work identity, appears to be the
personal elements they bring to their identity as well as the contextual factors that their
department or program brings forth in the working environment.
With an understanding of what was found through data collection, this study moves on to
the final chapter in which a summary is presented of the study as a whole and it’s findings, their
implications, and the researcher makes recommendations for future research.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
166
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION, IMPLICATONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
I’m from the South and in the South, we know that if you are a turkey farmer if it rains,
you have to take your turkeys inside because your turkeys are so stupid that when the rain
begins to hit them on the head, they will raise their heads, open their mouths and drown.
Many of the academics here are turkeys and they don’t understand, they don’t have the
business background. They are academics, they understand things that business people
don’t understand, they understand about education but they don’t understand how the
world works. And I had the advantage of having been in law and business, getting
involved in the politics of understanding how to play that game (P8)
This quote from a Writing faculty provides an analogy as to how he has survived as a
NTTF in a tenure track world. In essence, he is saying is that in order to survive and be
successful, he had to be smarter than the academics or the tenured faculty. For him, to be
successful as a NTTF he had use his prior real world knowledge to play the game of politics, and
take the initiative to make his role matter among his tenured peers. While not stating it, he
implies how the structure of higher education has changed with more NTTF with different
professional backgrounds entering higher education, and using their prior knowledge of the
working world to play the politics of higher education with the academic or the tenure faculty.
The quote sets the tone for this chapter as it alludes to the fact that in order to be successful, as
NTTF, one must know how to play the game of politics. This means knowing how to navigate
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
167
one’s work environment which requires taking initiative, building relationships and networks,
and finding or building a niche for oneself.
This chapter presents a summary of this study. After interviewing nineteen full-time non-
tenure-track faculty members, this study attempted to answer the question: How does the
department within which a full time NTTF work shape their work identity at a four-year research
university? Through these interviews, data was collected and presented in chapter four regarding
how the work experience of NTTF and their work environment, shape their work identity both in
positive and negative ways. This chapter seeks to bring together the study by providing a
summary of the key findings, how this study contributes to the current literature on NTTF, the
implications of the findings, suggestions for future research, and a conclusion to the study.
Summary of Findings
This study sought to answer the following question: how does the department within
which a full time NTTF work shape their work identity at a four year research university? After
interviewing nineteen full time NTTF from seven different departments and programs, it appears
that what is most important to these NTTF when reflecting on their experience, and thus what
shapes their professional and work identity, appears to be the personal elements they bring to
their identity and the contextual factors that their department or program bring forth in the
working environment. Through the use of Shaker’s (2008) model on factors that affect the NTTF
experience, the nineteen interviews were analyzed to help try to understand how experience
shapes identity, specifically work identity.
Shaker’s model consists of four key elements: personal preferences, personal
characteristics, organizational forces, and academic conditions. Each of these elements appear to
shape NTTF work identity. The personal and organizational forces have the most impact. This
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
168
finding is key because for tenured or tenure track faculty, their identity is likely more impacted
by the academic conditions than compared to NTTF. While both NTTF and tenure track faculty
may experience a socialization process through their respective PhD programs, for the NTTF
once they enter their teaching roles, the academic conditions become less important and the
personal and the organizational forces they face in the work environment matter more. Whereas
for the tenured or tenure track faculty, the academic conditions are likely still going to have an
impact on their identity as their work focuses around adding new knowledge to an academic
discipline.
Personal preferences of the NTTF interviewed for this study include: how one prioritizes
their personal life, their love of teaching, their commitment to their students, a desire to serve
and an appreciation for academia. This study found that personal preferences serve as a positive
and impactful shaper of one’s identity. When NTTF made personal over professional decisions
they felt they had more control in their work life. Through these decisions NTTF were able to
meld their personal and professional lives together. As the identity research in chapter two
explains, professional identity is often tied to how one brings together their personal and
professional lives. Through their love of teaching and commitment to students, these NTTF are
able to build meaningful relationships, connections, and share a passion for a subject that matters
to them. Each of these personal elements make up who these NTTF are, and consequently appear
to positively shape full time NTTF professional and work identity.
Personal characteristics relate to personal preferences. These characteristics in Shaker’s
model include age, educational degree, and one’s time at their institution. For the nineteen full-
time NTTF in this study, their career path was impacted by certain intentional and unintentional
decisions. For some, becoming a NTTF member was what they planned and for others it was an
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
169
unintentional career move because they happened to know someone or there were no other jobs
available. Each NTTF, expect for one, went through a PhD program, which socialized each
individual to share the identity of a Professor. This identity includes the traits of tenure,
academic freedom, autonomy, shared governance and a tie to one’s discipline. As they entered
their NTTF position each had to break away from this identity and work to form a new identity,
which was, and is often, shaped by their working environment. But where they stand currently
in their current career, and how they describe themselves professionally, appears to also shape
this new identity. Individuals who are further along in their careers are more confident and
secure in their roles and thus more established in their role as NTTF. How they choose to
describe themselves varied from a teacher to writer to anthropologist, but each was a reflection
of him or herself in a certain point in their career. But what was most interesting was that not one
of them chose to describe him or herself as a NTTF.
Organizational forces consist of the reappointment and promotion process, salary,
workload and the environment of both the institution and the department. These forces play a
significant role in shaping NTTF work identity because they provide the contextual factors
within which NTTF work. The overall impression of the university plays a major role in shaping
identity, because it sets the larger context in which these NTTF work. Most of the NTTF had
positive feelings toward SU despite not having a shared experience like an orientation. This
matters because if one has a positive impression of their working environment, they are likely to
invest in it and stay longer. The reappointment and promotion process greatly matter to these
NTTF, because through the established structure at SU individuals are able to find career
mobility, increased salary and earn various titles. Each of these elements related to their working
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
170
environment shape work identity, because they create a structure that allows the institution to
invest in its people and thus make people feel valued.
Even more important than the context of the overall institution, seems to be the role that
the department or program environment plays in shaping the identity for these NTTF. There are
different types of environments at SU—from programs that consist of all NTTF to more
traditional departments that consist of both tenured faculty and NTTF. NTTF in the programs (as
opposed to departments), found the environment more supportive and collegial, which led to a
more positive self reflection in that environment. NTTF in the more split departments (a mix of
tenure and non-tenure faculty), found more hierarchy and could speak to the division they felt
among all faculty within the department. NTTF faced challenges and opportunities within their
departments and programs. More opportunities came from departments and programs that
appeared to be more supportive and welcoming to NTTF. How individuals balanced the
challenges and opportunities within their direct working environment shaped their identity.
Finally the department and program provided a space for NTTF to interact with one another and
discuss their passion for teaching. How each NTTF navigates and balances their working
environment shapes their experience and thus impacts their identity.
The final piece to Shaker’s model consists of the academic conditions which include:
perceptions of tenure and non-tenure, the disciplinary context and stereotypes and conceptions of
the faculty. While the academic conditions were not as prevalent as many of the other elements,
they overlap the personal and contextual elements of one’s professional and work identity. Some
of the NTTF faculty struggled with the idea of being a Professor. NTTF go through a
socialization process in their PhD programs and once they enter their NTTF role, this identity is
lost and they must work to create a new identity. Each of the NTTF in this study expressed both
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
171
negative and positive perceptions of being a NTTF. All of the NTTF expressed some shared
appreciation for being in an academic environment and for being a teacher. Similar to each of the
other elements mentioned in Shaker’s model, how the individual NTTF seemed to balance these
different elements appeared to shape either a positive or negative work identity.
In addition to Shaker’s four elements, this study found two more elements that should be
added to both the personal preferences and the organizational forces. Both relationships and the
ability to create a niche involve the personal and organizational context within which one works.
Individuals must work on a personal basis to create and build relationships and they must have
an internal drive that allows them to be motivated to create a niche. The environment of the
organization in which they work must also present conditions that allow for relationships to
develop and support building a niche. The identity literature in chapter two points out that
identity is relational. How an individual comes to view their identity is through different kinds of
relationships. For these nineteen NTTF the relationships that mattered were those with their
chairs, their peers and with their students. These relationships matter because they help NTTF
build networks that allow them to feel more secure and confident in their roles. Creating a niche
was often how the NTTF were able to create and carve out a space that was their own, and made
them feel valuable. The niches ranged from creating a minor, to being a specialist in a particular
field and creating new courses. These niches were not required by their contracts, but rather,
were a way for the NTTF to create something that was their own, be recognized for this and thus
feel valued in their working environments. Taking time to build relationships and niches allowed
the NTTF to find areas within their working environment that supported them and engaged them
both personally and professionally.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
172
The findings of this study reveal how the professional and work identity of full-time
NTTF may be shaped in both positive and negative ways. Furthermore, the data demonstrates
that these full time NTTF are part of a new professional body which does not identify with the
professional traits of the Professorate including tenure, autonomy, academic freedom, shared
governance and a tie to one’s discipline. What does appear to matter to these full time NTTF
when reflecting on their experience, and thus what shapes their professional and work identity,
are the personal elements they bring to their identity as well as the contextual factors that their
departments or program brings forth in the work environment.
Contributions to the Literature
Through interviewing nineteen full-time NTTF, this study not only gained information
about the NTTF experience but also helps us to understand how that experience might shape
identity. Furthermore this study provides empirical support for Shaker’s (2008) model, while
also finding new elements that could be added to her model. In addition, the study provided a
deeper insight into the NTTF experience in an attempt to understand, if NTTF can relate to the
professional identity of tenured or tenure-track faculty. As the previous section and chapter four
has explained, NTTF do not relate to that identity. While this study attempts to explain what does
make up the NTTF work identity, this study adds to the literature regarding professional identity
and the literature on NTTF. The following section highlights how this study contributes to the
existing literature on professional identity and that of NTTF.
In chapter two I examine various concepts of professional and work identity. Since
teachers are similar to the roles that NTTF play, I examined concepts of the professional identity
of teachers. These concepts include the blending of personal and professional identity (Bejaard et
al., 2004), one’s self image and the role they must play (Volkmann & Anderson, 1998); the
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
173
tension between the self and the structure (Coldron & Smith, 1999); that it can be multifaceted
(Cooper & Olsen, 1996); that it can contain several sub-identities that may either conflict or align
together (Mishler, 1999); and, finally, that individuals can take on different professional
identities depending on their social setting, but that these different identities are related to one
another (Gee & Crawford, 1998). Each of these researchers indicate that professional identity is
not fixed. Rather, as Clarke, Hyde and Drennan (2013) argue, professional identity is shaped by
experience and the roles people play. Professional identity is complicated and influenced by
personal and contextual factors. This study verifies that statement and helps to explain how
different personal and contextual factors shape the professional and work identity of NTTF.
Since identity is not fixed and is influenced by personal and contextual factors, this study
adds to the literature regarding how the environment in which one works shapes their identity.
This study helps to understand how the environment in which one works, or put a different way,
the context in which one works, shapes identity. Specifically this study explored how the
experience within a large research university, but across different types of departments and
programs, might shape identity. By interviewing individuals from several different departments
at one type of university, this study was able to gain insight into how the department or program
in which one works, shapes identity. This adds to the research regarding discipline and
departmental differences, specifically the scholarship of Brecher (1987; 1984) who explains that
each of the disciplines has distinct and unique cultures. This study further provides insight into
Brecher’s work by examining how different factors within a department may shape the
experience for NTTF.
This study sought to look at identity within the changing context of higher education.
Past literature has looked at factors, including: the academic discipline the individual is working
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
174
within, how the individual views him or herself, the socialization process of entering a
profession, and the role that building networks can play influencing identity (Henkel, 2000;
Kogan, 2000; Weidman, 2001; Podolny & Barron, 1997; Sweitzer, 2009; Hansen, 1999). This
literature focuses on the experience of tenure-track and tenured faculty and omits information on
NTTF. This study brings the NTTF voice to the identity literature by examining their unique
experience. While NTTF experience similar factors in their working worlds, their voice and their
stories were missing from the literature.
This study also contributes to the literature regarding the experiences of NTTF, in a few
ways. First this study, through interviewing 19 NTTF about their work experience at one type of
institution helps institutions of similar size and type better understand what it means to a NTTF
member and how their experience within that institution shapes their identity. This adds to the
work of Levin and Shaker (2011) who argue that it is important to help institutions understand
what it means to be a NTTF, as well as their professional identity. This study provides insight to
institutions about the specific experience of NTTF, and what about those experiences shapes
their identity. Secondly, by conducting a qualitative research study and speaking directly to
NTTF, this study provides a voice to articulate to the literature on NTTF that has been lacking in
certain aspects thus far. By bringing the voice of NTTF to the foreground, this research adds to
the literature regarding the NTTF experience and professional and work identity, to show how
that identity differs among different appointment types and departments. In addition this study
specifically adds to the work of Shaker (2008), by not only providing empirical evidence for her
model but in finding two new elements that could be included in her model. These elements
include the importance of relationships and building a niche. In doing so, this study helps to
better define what it means to be a professional in the changing context of higher education. By
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
175
understanding NTTF professional and work identity, hopefully NTTF can feel more empowered
to work toward improving their status within higher education.
Finally, this study adds to previous work done on NTTF that has ties to identity. Gappa
and Leslie (1993) identified types of NTTF, and their study explore the ways in which
individuals relate to, or associate themselves with, various types of identity and processes of
identity formation. Levin and Shaker (2011) in examining NTTF academic identity, agency,
positionality, and self-authoring, found that NTTF experience a hybrid and dualistic identity.
Both of these studies, in combination with the work of Shaker (2008), provided a context for
understanding the NTTF experience. This study adds to those by specifically linking experience
to identity. What this research has revealed, is that each NTTF seemed to have a different
experience and thus no one type of formed identity was found to be static or constant. Rather
different kinds of identities were found. Some NTTF referred to themselves as “teachers” while
others referred to themselves as “scholars” or as “writers.” Each individual chose different
aspects of their experience, either professional or personal, to link to their identity. As a result,
this study demonstrates that NTTF are a heterogeneous group. And while it appears that
individuals take on different identities based on certain elements that arise both personally and
within their working environment, one area in which NTTF appear to be able to share a common
identity is around their teaching and the relationships they build with students. Unlike the
literature on the academic identity of tenure or tenure-track faculty, NTTF seemed to have many
different ways beyond tenure, academic freedom, governance, and a tie to their discipline that
make up their professional and work identity.
By exploring elements of the experience directly from NTTF, this study sought to explain
what might shape NTTF professional and work identity. The work of Hart (2011) looked at the
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
176
experience of 40 NTTF women and found that their experience was fragmented, and as
conditions changed, like a new department chair, or other relationships changed, the work
experience also changed. This study especially adds to Hart’s work by not only examining the
experience of men, but by also showing how the fragmented experience of NTTF impacts and
shapes identity in both positive and negative ways. This study found that certain elements or
factors of one’s working environment can have a positive or negative impact on their
professional and work identity. Furthermore this study demonstrated the importance of
relationships, and the ability to create a niche can enhance the professional (as well as personal)
identity of the NTTF. This adds to Hart’s (2011) work by demonstrating how important
relationships can be as a positive shaper of NTTF professional and work identity.
While this study does not identify one sole identity for NTTF, it does add to the
established research on NTTF and how their experience links to their professional and work
identity. It was found that NTTF do not appear to relate to the identity surrounding the academic
profession of a tenured or tenure track faculty member. Rather NTTF identity is varied and
diverse, influenced by many factors including relationships and the ability to develop one’s own
niche in their working environment. And while it may be difficult to think of NTTF as having
many different identities, a similar aspect or role that their identities seem to share is their
passion for teaching and the relationships they develop with their students. Thus this study
further adds to the literature on teaching identity and that of the experiences of NTTF.
Implications for Practice
This study provides insight into the full time NTTF experience at one research university,
across seven departments, to examine how different departments or the changing context might
shape the work experience, and thus the professional and work identity, of full time NTTF.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
177
Findings from this study indicate that what is most important in shaping full time NTTF
professional and work identity are their own reflections on their personal lives and career
decisions, as well as the contextual factors that their departments or programs bring forth in their
working environment. As a result of this study’s findings, there are several factors that higher
education and institutions of higher education should consider with the growing number of
NTTF on campuses today. Most importantly, institutions and departments can learn from this
study to create environments that positively support NTTF and their professional and work
identity. These two areas appear to have the most impact as they create the context in which
these NTTF not only work, but look to, when reflecting on their professional and work identity.
Implications for Institutions
This research study took place at a large private research university. Research universities
have specific missions, goals, values and cultures. As examined in the literature in chapter two,
research universities are centered around research and producing new knowledge for the
academic world. NTTF do not produce new knowledge. Rather their key role is to teach and
mentor undergraduate students. This study brings to light the value that NTTF contribute to their
institutions. What must be recognized by large research universities like SU is that NTTF are an
asset because they provide and allow for the tenured and tenure track faculty to maintain the
overall mission of a research university, while providing a valuable service to the university that
is often overlooked—namely, teaching. Without the critical teaching role of NTTF, research
universities like SU would not be able to meet their teaching missions. By taking on the majority
of teaching for undergraduates, NTTF allow tenured and tenure track faculty to focus on research
and adding new knowledge to their disciplines. Teaching is a critical role, even within a research
university, to maintain a university in today’s society and the valuable role that NTTF serve must
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
178
be recognized. This study demonstrates what is means to be a NTTF within a research university
and helped us to understand the important role they play.
While the context in which this study took place was at one large private research
university, this research provides an understanding of the full time NTTF experience for other
similar size institutions to consider, and the impact the overall institution can play in shaping
professional and work identity. By fostering the development of all faculty through a
reappointment and promotion process, providing career mobility, increased pay and other
sources of professional development, SU demonstrates a commitment to all faculty. As a result
of investing in not just tenure faculty, this study shows that if an institution creates a structure to
invest in all types of faculty, the institution is likely to have better student outcomes and run
more effectively. This study suggests that the institutional structure and norms seem to be more
supportive of NTTF at SU than their departments or programs. At SU there appears to be some
break between what happens at the institutional and departmental levels. The norms that are
established at the institutional level, which appear to support NTTF, are missing in some of the
departments. Overall SU provides a structure that appears to support NTTF and their career
development, the NTTF appear to be more invested in their work and their commitment to the
institution. As a result SU and its policies toward NTTF, the institution can serve as an example
to other institutions looking to invest in their NTTF. Administrators and campus leaders can also
use this information to help foster the professional development of all of their faculty, which in
turn will allow institutions to meet their goals more effectively. This investment will likely lead
to less turnover and a more supportive environment for NTTF, which, as this study has
demonstrated, impacts full time NTTF identity.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
179
In order to improve the overall NTTF experience, there are a few things that should be
considered at the university wide level. First the university should work to create a more
streamlined universal experience for all NTTF. This might include a systemic orientation that all
entering NTTF have where they are informed of all the resources available to them. Second the
university should establish ways to demonstrate to its faculty (NTTF and tenured/tenure-track)
that teaching and students are valued within the environment. One way they could do this is by
establishing teaching awards that are for both tenured faculty and NTTF. This would signal to
the NTTF that their role, primarily as teachers, matters and is valued and thus positively impact
their work identity. Currently at SU, it appears that much of the NTTF experience is centered
around what happens within the department or program. In essence the university sets the
structure for hiring and reappointment but leaves the orientation, resources and professional
development of NTTF to the departments. As a result, the experience is quite varied for NTTF
and thus no common identity among NTTF can be formed. Institutions should call on
departments to build off of the university orientation, and fully integrate NTTF into their
departmental environments. This would include integrating NTTF into departmental governance,
curriculum planning, providing professional development and mentoring. Furthermore there
should be more accountability from the institution for what may or may not be happening in the
departments. The following paragraph explains the important role the department chair plays in
the experience and thus the identity of NTTF. As a result, institutions should ensure that all
departments and leadership are aware of the policies and resources available for all faculty to
enable professional development for all.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
180
Implications for Departments and Programs
While the overall context of the institutional setting matters, what appears to be more
impactful when reflecting on NTTF and their work identity is the immediate environment of
their department or program. This study examined the experience of nineteen different full-time
NTTF across seven departments and programs. Context serves as an important shaper of identity
as it is the place in which an individual reflects on who they are and the role they play.
Departments and programs at universities vary greatly and this is one area institutions may want
to consider as they think about the professional development of all of their faculty. Department
and program leadership changes over time, and thus the culture and working environment can
change greatly. Despite the these changes the department or program is where NTTF found
supportive and informative chairs, resources, found value in their roles and were rewarded for
the work they did. But this was not the case for all NTTF and thus for many NTTF the locus of
support was through the institutional norms and not the department or program. The number of
NTTF within a department or program also plays a role in shaping the working environment and
thus the identity of NTTF. At SU some of the programs are solely made up of NTTF, whereas
many of the departments or programs are a mix of NTTF and tenure or tenure track faculty. The
more divided departments and programs left the NTTF feeling more insecure in their roles and
more divided among colleagues. When a department or program offered many of these positive
elements, the NTTF reported feeling valued and supported and as a result was more secure and
confident in his or her role (these elements are summarized in Table 2 in chapter 4). When these
elements were lacking, individuals appeared less secure and confident in their role. These
elements matter because they create the context in which identity is shaped. As the identity
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
181
literature suggests, professional and work identity is tied to how an individual reflects on their
experience within a given context.
Since the department or program environment plays a larger role in shaping the
professional and work identity of NTTF, the leadership of the department or program matters
and must be considered. This study showed that NTTF found chairs to be supportive of their
work and roles, but sometimes lacked information on the reappointment and promotion process.
Chairs need knowledge of NTTF including their unique needs and issues. This study found that
if chairs were aware of NTTF resources, NTTF felt supported and found opportunities within
their departments; but that was a mixed experience among NTTF. As a result, chairs need to
have the same information or be educated about NTTF resources that are available, and how the
reappointment and promotion process works so that all NTTF have the same opportunities and
access to resources. If chairs can create affirmative working relationships with NTTF, they can
work together to understand the resources a campus may offer NTTF as well as how to navigate
the reappointment and promotion process. Chairs can also create a supportive and positive
working environment for NTTF by educating tenured and tenure-track faculty about the different
yet equally important roles that NTTF serve in their departments.
While the context of the institution and the department matter, so do opportunities to
foster relationships and to create one’s own niche. Since there is no identifiable universal
experience for full time NTTF at SU, building relationships both within and outside of one’s
department or program mattered greatly. These relationships allow for networking and open
opportunities for professional development. It was often through different kinds of relationships
that NTTF in this study were able to create a niche because they knew someone who could help
them navigate creating a space of their own. These niches, range from creating new courses and
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
182
undergraduate minors to bringing their unique professional expertise to an environment.
Relationships and the ability to create a niche allow NTTF to not only find value but also create
their identity and not have it dictated to them. As suggested earlier in this section, in order to best
facilitate the ability to form different kinds of relationships with NTTF and work to build a
niche, institutions should consider a more universal experience for NTTF like an orientation. An
orientation would be just one of many ways to do this but allowing for other opportunities like
partaking in departmental governance, proving mentoring, and opportunities for professional
development are a few of the possibilities. This allows all NTTF across campus to not only have
a similar experience, meet fellow NTTF, but also receive the same consistent information about
policies and resources available to them. This further enhances the accountability that both
institutions and departments should take when considering the working environment for NTTF.
These elements, just as much as a positive work environment, positively shape NTTF
professional and work identity.
Implications for Graduate School Education
One further implication from this study is thinking about graduate school education.
Since the workforce for higher education is and will continue to change, graduate education must
consider how it is preparing its future workforce. While traditional tenure does not appear to be
going away, it is important for graduate education to consider the experience of NTTF and how
best to prepare future NTTF. When thinking about professional and work identity, a set of
common traits or shared experience through some kind of socialization process matters. While
many NTTF go through a socialization process in their PhD programs thus creating an academic
identity, this identity becomes broken when they enter their NTTF position. As a result,
institutions and departments should consider creating opportunities from an orientation, to
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
183
professional development trainings to other kinds of “mixers”, which allow NTTF to not only
meet other NTTF but to have some kind of shared common experience. This would allow NTTF
to feel part of a larger body of NTTF and thus foster a sense of community, which could create a
less divided identity among NTTF.
As this study overall, and this section specifically have explained, creating and fostering
a positive and supportive work environment for NTTF matters. In doing so, the NTTF
experience is improved and thus likely shapes their professional and work identity in a positive
way. As a result, NTTF are likely to have more commitment to their campuses and more likely
to invest in the community in which they work. This should matter to institutions as they look to
find more efficient and effective ways to run their campuses. With more of an investment and
less turnover in teaching faculty there will likely be better student learning outcomes. The heart
of what NTTF do is teach and the relationships and connections they build with students matter
not only to them but to their students. Furthermore, this study has been a reflection on what
matters to NTTF in their working worlds. The data from the chapter four demonstrates that
NTTF are not just a homogenous group. Their experiences vary and thus what shapes their
professional and work identity will likely vary. But what this study does shed light on, and
should help institutions of higher education consider, is that there are positive ways to shape
NTTF professional and work identity and that these elements should not be ignored.
Future Research
The purpose of this study was to investigate how the working environment for NTTF
shapes their professional and work identity. Specifically this study gathered the experiences of
19 different full-time NTTF from across seven different departments and programs, in an attempt
to understand how their working environments shape their professional identity development. It
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
184
was discovered that what is most important to these NTTF when reflecting on their experience,
and thus what shapes their professional and work identity, is the personal elements they bring to
their identity as well as the contextual factors that their department or program brings forth in
their working environment. However, since limited research currently exists on NTTF there is
still much to be learned about them, the impact of their roles within higher education and how
their work experience shapes their professional and work identity. The following are a several
suggestions for future research.
Higher education leaders and administrators set policies and procedures for campuses.
These individuals greatly impact the working life of NTTF. No research currently exists that
examines their knowledge and perceptions of NTTF. It would be fruitful to study these leaders
and administrators to understand their knowledge and perceptions of NTTF and current policies
that impact NTTF. As the leaders of campuses and the shapers of higher education their
knowledge and understanding greatly impact the livelihood of NTTF. It would be interesting to
know if and how they think about NTTF when considering policy changes and if they recognize
or understand the true value that NTTF can bring to an institution.
The future of graduate education is another area to be studied to help gain an
understanding of NTTF. Graduate education is a time when NTTF are socialized into the
profession of a tenure track faculty member. As examined in this study, when NTTF enter their
teaching roles they do not relate to the traits of a tenure or tenure track Professor that they were
socialized into as a graduate student, and therefore it would be beneficial to understand the role
that graduate educators and programs play. Studies could be designed to understand what
programs know about the realities of NTTF and examine how they are or are not adjusting
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
185
programs to prepare faculty for multiple types of positions. This could possibly help enhance the
transition from graduate school to NTTF roles.
Department chairs play a critical role in the experience of NTTF. Chairs turn over
quickly, as their terms are limited. Department chairs serve as a leader for NTTF, and the person
that NTTF turn to for guidance in the promotion and review process. This study shed some light
on the importance of this relationship. Future studies could be designed to examine departmental
chair’s perceptions and knowledge of NTTF. How do chairs take institutional wide NTTF
policies and apply them within their departments? Why are some chairs more committed to
understanding and working with NTTF than others? Similar to higher education leaders and
administrators, chairs shape the cultures within their departments and can either enhance or
hinder the experience for NTTF therefore it is critical to examine their knowledge and
perceptions of NTTF.
Another area that could be explored includes the professional organizations associated
with the different disciplines. Are there certain disciplines that are acknowledging and serving
NTTF? This study focused on professional and work identity, and professional organizations that
are a place where individuals look to for shared values as a member of that profession. Many of
the faculty interviewed for this study, referenced turning to more teaching focused organizations
over their disciplinary organizations, because they felt they could connect better and found more
resources for NTTF through other types of professional organizations. This could potentially
lead to a divide of the disciplinary societies.
Other areas for future research could focus on building off of what this study was limited
in doing. One area for future research could be to look at the experience of part time NTTF and
compare to see how their experience might be different. There could be other factors related to
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
186
identity in the part time experience that could be beneficial to understand. In the same way that
this study helps institutions design more supportive work environments that foster the positive in
professional and work identity, many campuses are hiring part time or adjunct non-tenure track
faculty. Their voices also matter and are missing from the literature. It would be important to
understand the part time experience because it is likely very different from the full-time NTTF
that this study examined. As a part time faculty member one may not have the time on campus to
develop relationships or build a niche like the full time NTTF in this study. In fact it is likely that
many part-time NTTF are busy being a part of several different environments, as they work to
piece together equivalent full-time teaching role at several different campuses. Understanding
this experience and sharing it would be beneficial.
Another area to consider would be to interview full time NTTF at other types of
institutions and compare to this study. A limitation to this study was that the data was collected
from only one type of institution, a private research university, and as this study has shown, the
context in which one works greatly shapes professional and work identity. In addition, different
types of institutions as explored in chapter two, present different kinds of cultures and may have
different ways of structuring the experience for NTTF. The investigation into these different
contexts would only strengthen our understanding of how the working environment shapes
NTTF professional and work identity.
As this study brought out, relationships matter greatly to NTTF and their professional and
work identity. For some, relationships with tenured or tenure track peers greatly impacted their
experience and thus shaped their identity. Many even expressed that their tenured and tenure
track peers lacked knowledge about what it really means to be a NTTF. A future study could
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
187
interview tenured or tenure track faculty to understand how their knowledge and perceptions of
NTTF might impact the NTTF experience.
In addition to interviewing both part-time NTTF and tenured or tenure track faculty, a
study could investigate more full time NTTF. This study was limited in that I was only able to
interview a few individuals across several different departments and programs. More in depth
interviews within the same departments could be beneficial since a major finding of this study
was that the department or program environment plays a major role in shaping the professional
and work identity of NTTF.
Identity, as this study has shown, is complex, ongoing and evolving phenomenon. As a
result, individuals’ personal and professional identity changes over time as they make different
decisions and encounter different environments. This study was not longitudinal and therefore
only captured these individuals and their experiences at the current moment. Future research
could investigate how NTTF identity changes over the course of their career. Some insight was
provided into this area as the nineteen individuals were all at different points in their careers, so
some observations were made regarding career stage and identity.
Conclusion
This study sought to bring a missing voice to the qualitative research on NTTF. By
asking nineteen full-time NTTF from seven different departments and programs at one
institution, it was hoped to gain an understanding of what might shape their professional and
work identity. Building off of the work of Shaker (2008) and her model of the NTTF experience,
it was found that not only do the personal characteristics, personal preferences, organizational
forces, and academic conditions shape experience and thus the professional and work identity of
NTTF, so do the relationships that they form and the niches they create. But overall what appears
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
188
to be most important for these NTTF, when reflecting on their experience, and thus what shapes
their professional and work identity, appears to be the personal elements they bring to their
identity as well as the contextual factors that their department or program brings forth in their
working environment.
The structure of higher education is changing and as result so is the structure of the
faculty. No longer are tenured or tenure track faculty the majority on campuses. Instead more
and more campuses are hiring both part time and full time NTTF. These new faculty are here to
stay, and as a result, institutions of higher education must work to understand this new body of
professionals and work to support their professional development. Kezar and Sam (2010)
suggest, that if the concerns of part-time or contingent workforce are addressed and if effective
polices are established, organizations will likely have stronger outcomes. Furthermore, Levin,
Shaker, and Wagner (2011) add that if universities value having a body of academic
professionals, then they need to work to foster and develop all professional on campus. This
study has helped to better understand what it means to a professional in the changing context of
higher education and shown that NTTF are not a homogenous group.
As this study has shown, in addition to having to deal with complex working conditions,
these new faculty do not identify with the traditional identity of a tenured or tenure-track faculty
member. This identity consists of concepts such as tenure, academic freedom, a tie to discipline,
participation in governance and the merit principle. Although many NTTF are socialized through
PhD programs and accept this identity when they begin their NTTF position, they eventually
break away from that identity as working NTTF. They must look to their new environments,
both institutional and departmental or program specific, for cues to shape their new identity. One
Writing faculty shared:
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
189
So it's a very strange world, and we are held responsible for the dissolution of tenure, at
least in the minds of some people. Obviously, non-tenure track are not responsible for the
changes that have made universities go towards hiring NTTs, but I'll tell you, in some
ways, maybe tenure is a dead animal, and maybe it should be looked at. I can't believe
I'm saying that, because I've been taught allegiance to tenure. I know when I'm talking
out loud I have to say, of course we must protect the sanctity of tenure, but part of me is
now wondering why. I'm a race horse. Let me run. Give me money. Give me time off.
(P5)
She is not only addressing her personal identity, but also the changes in higher education she is
observing in relation to its changing structure of the faculty. This study has shown that not only
can NTTF, not always relate to the traditional professional identity of tenured or tenure track
faculty, but also that NTTF do not appear to have a distinct professional and work identity. This
information is critical for both NTTF and the institutions that hire them, because if they wish to
retain and maintain strong teaching faculty they must invest in their professional development
and thus work to shape their professional and work identity in positive ways. Furthermore this
study has shown that the working conditions vary among NTTF, and that the different conditions
will impact their professional and work identity. This study has also sought to focus on the
positive shapers of the NTTF working environment which impact identity. This is important
because as Kezar and Sam (2010) emphasize, that in order for NTTF to professionalize there
must be a clear message of respect, hiring must be regularized, systematic inclusion of NTTF
within their environments must happen, and systems should be in place for compensation and
promotion. It is hoped that this study has shed light on how these positive elements within a
work environment can shape the professional and work identity of NTTF. In doing so it is hoped
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
190
that NTTF will begin to feel empowered and work to professionalize their status. In addition it is
important to note that by creating supportive work environment for all faculty, institutions of
higher education will not only run more efficiently and effectively, they will likely have stronger
student learning outcomes.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
191
REFERENCES
American Association of University Professors. 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic
Freedom and Tenure. Retrieved from: http://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-
principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure
American Federation of Teachers. (2005). Reversing the course: The troubled state of academic
staffing and the path forward. Washington DC: American Federation of Teachers.
American Federation of Teachers. (2010). American academic: A national survey of part
time/adjunt faculty. Washington DC: American Federation of Teachers.
Anderson, E. L. (2002). The New Professoriate: Characteristics, Contributions, and
Compensation.
Arnold, J., & Silvester, J. (2005). Work psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the
workplace. Pearson Education
Baldwin, R. G., & Chronister, J.L. (2001). Teaching without tenure: Policies and practices for
new era. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Baldridge, J. V. (1978). Policy Making and Effective Leadership: A National Study of Academic
Management.
Barnett, R., & Di Napoli, R. (2008). Changing identities in higher education: Voicing
perspectives. Psychology Press
Bataille, G. M., & Brown, B. E. (2006). Faculty career paths: Multiple routes to academic
success and satisfaction. Praeger Pub Text
Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher education,
19(2), 151-161.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
192
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories . Buckingham: Society for
Research in Higher Education.
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’
professional identity. Teaching and teacher education, 20(2), 107-128
Benjamin, E. (1998). Variations in the Characteristics of Part-Time Faculty by General Fields of
Instruction and Research. New Directions for Higher Education, 1998(104), 45-59.
Bergquist, W. H., & Pawlak, K. (2008). Engaging the six cultures of the academy: Revised and
expanded edition of the four cultures of the academy. Jossey-Bass
Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of
applied psychology, 57(3), 195-203
Brinbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work. The Cybernetics of academic organization and
leadership. San Fransico. The Jossey-Bass Higher Education Series.
Brint, S. (1996). In an age of experts: The changing role of professionals in politics and public
life. Princeton University Press
Clark, B. R. (Ed.). (1987). The academic profession: National, disciplinary, and institutional
settings. University of California Press
Clarke, M., Hyde, A., & Drennan, J. (2013). Professional Identity in Higher Education. The
Academic Profession in Europe: New Tasks and New Challenges, 7-21.
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1982). Confronting Identity: The Community College Instructor.
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2003). The American community college. Jossey-Bass.
Colbeck, C. L. (2008). Professional identity development theory and doctoral education. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(113), 9-16.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
193
Coldron, J., & Smith, R. (1999). Active location in teachers' construction of their professional
identities. Journal of curriculum studies, 31(6), 711-726.
Conway, P. F. (2001). Anticipatory reflection while learning to teach: From a temporally
truncated to a temporally distributed model of reflection in teacher education. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 17(1), 89-106
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. SAGE Publications, Incorporated
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into
practice, 39(3), 124-130.
Cross, J. G., & Goldenberg, E. N. (2009). Off-track profs: Nontenured teachers in higher
education. MIT Press
Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism.Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol.
16.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). Introduction: The discipline and practice of
qualitative research. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. (4th ed., pp. 1-19).
SAGE Publications, Incorporated
Ehrenberg, R. G. (2005). The changing nature of the faculty and faculty employment practices.
TIAA-CREF Institute Conference “The New Balancing Act in Higher Education” New
York, NY.
Ehrenberg, R. G., & Zhang, L. (2005). Do tenured and tenure-track faculty matter?. Journal of
Human Resources, 40(3), 647-659
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis (Vol. 7). WW Norton & Company.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
194
Feiman-Nemser, S. (8). Floden. RE (1986). The cultures of teaching. Handbook of research on
teaching, 505-526
Finkelstein, M. J. (1984). The American Academic Profession: A Synthesis of Social Scientific
Inquiry Since World War II. Ohio State University Press, 2070 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH
43210
Finkelstein, M.J, Liu. M.., & Schuster, J.H. (2003, November). The career trajectories of current
part-time and full-time faculty: Mobility across employment and appointment statuses.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher
Education, Portland, OR.
Gappa, J. M. (1984). Part-Time Faculty: Higher Education at a Crossroads. ASHE-ERIC Higher
Education Research Report No. 3, 1984
Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher education's
strategic imperative. Jossey-Bass.
Gappa, J. M., & Leslie, D. W. (1993). The Invisible Faculty. Improving the Status of Part-Timers
in Higher Education. Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco,
CA 94104.
Gee, J. P. (2000). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of research in
education, In W.G. Secada (Ed.), Review of research in education, Vol. 25 (pp.99-125).
Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Hall, D. E. (2004). Subjectivity. Routledge.
Handy, C. (1994). The age of unreason. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge
across organization subunits. Administrative science quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
195
Hart, J. (2009). Non-tenure track women faculty: Opening the door. Journal of the Professoriate
Hearn, J.C. & Deupree, M.M. (2013). Here today, gone tomorrow? The increasingly contingent
faculty workforce. Advancing Higher Education, TIAA-CREF Institute. Retrieved from:
http://www1.tiaa-
cref.org/institute/research/advancing_higher_education/contingentfaculty0313.html
Henkel, M. (2000). Academic identities and policy change in higher education. HIGHER
EDUCATION POLICY SERIES-LONDON-JESSICA KINGSLEY PUBLISHERS
LIMITED-, 46.
Holland, D., Lachicotte Jr, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Agency and identity in cultural
worlds.
Hollenshead, C., Waltman, J., August, L., Miller, J., Smith, G., & Bell, A. (2007). Making the
best of both worlds: Findings from a national institution level survey on non-tenure-track
faculty. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Education of Women.
Jacoby, D. (2006). Effects of part-time faculty employment on community college graduation
rates. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(6), 1081-1103
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design:
Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 50(2), 65-77.
Kerby, A. P. (1991). Narrative and the Self. Indiana University Press.
Kezar, A. (2013) Non-tenure track faculty’s social construction of a supportive work
environment. Forthcoming.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
196
Kezar, A., & Sam, C. (2010). Understanding the new majority of non–tenure track faculty in
higher education: Demographics, experiences and plans of action (ASHE Report Series).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Klay, W. E., Brower, R., & Williams, B. (2001). A Community-Oriented Model of Academic
Professionalism. In Metropolitan Universities: An International Forum (Vol. 12, No. 3,
pp. 41-50)
Kogan, M. (2000). Higher education communities and academic identity. Higher Education
Quarterly, 54(3), 207-216
Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. The modern American college,
232-255
Levin, J. S., Kater, S., & Wagoner, R. L. (2006). Community college faculty: At work in the new
economy. Palgrave Macmillan
Levin, J. & Shaker, G. (2011). The hybrid and dualistic identity of full-time nontenure track
faculty. American Behavior Scientist.
Maynard, D. C., & Joseph, T. A. (2008). Are all part-time faculty underemployed? The influence
of faculty status preference on satisfaction and commitment. Higher education, 55(2),
139-154.
McCann, E. (2002). Non-tenure track faculty at USC. Faculty Forum, The Newsletter of the
Academic Senate, 4(1). Retrieved November 21, 2012 from:
http://www.usc.edu/academe/acsen/Documents/Newsletter/0203v4n1/0203v4n1_article05.shtml
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the perspective of a social behaviorist.
University of Chicago, Chicago.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
197
Metzger, W. P. (1973). Academic tenure in America: A historical essay. Faculty tenure: A report
and recommendations by the commission on academic tenure in higher education, 93,
135-36.
Monks, J. (2007). The relative earnings of contingent faculty in higher education. Journal of
Labor Research, 28(3), 487-501
Plummer, K. (1983). Documents of life: An introduction to the problems and literature of a
humanistic method. G. Allen & Unwin
Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and
mobility in the workplace. American sociological review, 673-693.
Outcalt, C. (2002). A profile of the community college Professorate, 1975-2000. Routledge
Falmer.
Ralph, N. B. (1978). Faculty development: A stage conception. Improving College and
University Teaching, 26(1), 61-6
Rhoades, G. (1996). Reorganizing the faculty workforce for flexibility: Part-time professional
labor. Albany: State University of New York Press
Rhoades, G. (1998). Managed professionals: Unionized faculty and restructuring academic labor.
SUNY Press.
Rice, R. E. (1986). The academic profession in transition: Toward a new social fiction. Teaching
Sociology, 12-23.
Rice, R.E. (2004). The future of the American faculty: An interview with Martin J. Finkelstein
and Jack H. Schuster. Change, (36) 2, 26-35.
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. SAGE Publications,
Incorporated
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
198
Ruscio, K. P. (1987). The distinctive scholarship of the selective liberal arts college. The Journal
of Higher Education, 205-22
Schell, E. E., & Stock, P. L. (2001). Moving a Mountain: Transforming the Role of Contingent
Faculty in Composition Studies and Higher Education. National Council of Teachers of
English, 1111 W. Kenyon Road, Urbana, IL
Schuster, J. H., & Finkelstein, M. J. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of
academic work and careers. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Shaker, G. (2008). Off the track| The full-time nontenure-track faculty experience in English
(Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University).
Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state,
and higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Stryker, S. (1968). Identity salience and role performance: The relevance of symbolic interaction
theory for family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 558-564
Sweitzer, V. B. (2009). Towards a theory of doctoral student professional identity development:
A developmental networks approach. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(1), 1-33
Taylor, P. Being an academic today. In Barnett, R., & Di Napoli, R. (2008). Changing identities
in higher education: Voicing perspectives. Psychology Press
Thedwall, K. (2008). Nontenure‐track faculty: Rising numbers, lost opportunities. New
Directions for Higher Education, 2008(143), 11-19.
Tierney, W. G., & Bensimon, E. M. (1996). Promotion and tenure: Community and socialization
in academe. SUNY Press
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
199
Tierney, W. G., & Rhoads, R. A. (1993). Enhancing Promotion, Tenure and Beyond: Faculty
Socialization as a Cultural Process. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 6. ASHE-
ERIC Higher Education Reports, The George Washington University, One Dupont
Circle, Suite 630, Washington, DC 20036-1183.
Tilly, C. (1998). Part-time work: A mobilizing issue. New Politics, 6(4), 19-26.
Tuckman, H. P. (1978). Who is part-time in academe?. AAUP Bulletin, 64(4), 305-315.
Umbach, P. D. (2007). How effective are they? Exploring the impact of contingent faculty on
undergraduate education. The Review of Higher Education, 30(2), 91-123.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), IPEDS Data Feedback Report 2011 for
University of Southern California
Volkmann, M. J., & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Creating professional identity: Dilemmas and
metaphors of a first‐year chemistry teacher. Science Education, 82(3), 293-310.
Ward, K. & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2012). Academic motherhood: How faculty manage work and
family. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Weidman, J. C., Twale, D. J., & Stein, E. L. (2001). Socialization of Graduate and Professional
Students in Higher Education: A Perilous Passage? ASHE-ERIC Higher Education
Report, Volume 28, Number 3. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. Jossey-
Bass, Publishers, Inc., 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1342
Wyles, B. A. (1998). Adjunct faculty in the community college: Realities and challenges. New
directions for higher education, 1998(104), 89-93
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
200
APPENDIX A
RECRUITMENT EMAIL/LETTER
Dear Professor [Insert name],
Hello, I am a Ed.D. candidate in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern
California. I am currently working on my dissertation which focuses on the work identity of
nontenure-track faculty. My qualitative study will collect data from full-time nontenure-track
faculty in different departments and programs across campus.
I am writing now to describe my project and invite you to participate.
My study focuses on the work identity of full-time non-tenure track faculty. I hope to find out
what it’s like to be a full-time nontenure faculty member at Southern University by conducting
interviews with faculty who are lecturers, instructors, clinical faculty, or who have other full-
time nontenure appointments. The results of my study should prove interesting to those in my
discipline and yours, will generate information useful for institutions and departments in terms of
policy creation, planning, and faculty work environments, will be empowering for full-time
nontenure faculty—both participants and as a whole in the disciplines—and will provide insight
into lingering questions about the nature of the nontenure experience.
I am planning to conduct interviews with several types of full-time nontenure track faculty across
SU. The identities of participating individuals and institutions will be disguised with the goal of
determining what is common across the experience for nontenure-track faculty with different
backgrounds and in departments of varied size and emphasis.
Participating in my project should not require much of your time. You and I will complete one
interview approximately one to one and a half hours in length. After that, I will contact you at a
later time to share my transcriptions and ask for clarification if necessary. Finally, I may share
some portion of my analysis and conclusions for your input.
Should you be willing to participate, please reply to this email. Unfortunately, I am not able to
interview everyone who is willing to participate and will have to select a subset of individuals
from those who reply.
The names of participating departments and individuals will be kept confidential during the
research process and in the presentation of the study findings. Participant identities will not be
revealed to other participants or department colleagues. The study has been approved by the
Southern University Institutional Review Board (IRB contact information will be provided to
study participants.)
I would be happy to talk about the project by phone or provide more detail via email. If there is
any other information you would like to help in your decision about participation, please don’t
hesitate to ask.
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
201
Sincerely,
Lilly
Lillian Coye, Doctoral Candidate
Higher Education, Rossier School of Education
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
202
APPENDIX B
FOLLOW UP EMAIL TO PARTICIPANTS AND QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Professor [Insert name],
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I look forward to working with you in the
coming months.
I’ve created a questionnaire to help me get to know you and prepare for our interviews. Please
take five minutes to fill it out as soon as you can.
INSERT SURVEY LINK HERE
After reviewing your questionnaire I will follow up to schedule our interviews.
As a reminder the names of participating departments and individuals will be kept confidential
during the research process and in the presentation of the study findings. Participant identities
will not be revealed to other participants or department colleagues. The study has been approved
by the Southern University Institutional Review Board (IRB contact information will be
provided to study participants.)
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study
and I look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Lilly
Lillian Coye, Doctoral Candidate
Higher Education, Rossier School of Education
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
203
The Work Identity of Full-Time Nontenure-Track Faculty
Your responses to this questionnaire will be used in planning the study and may be used as a part
of the final narrative of the study. Your name will not be associated with your responses in the
final narrative.
1. What is your name?
2. What is your gender?
3. What is your race/ethnicity
4. Please list your postsecondary and graduate degrees, educational training, and year of
attainment/expected completion.
5. Do you only teach at SU?
6. In what department or program is your contract under at SU?
7. What is your title at SU?
8. How long have you worked at SU?
9. How many courses do you teach per semester at SU?
10. Do you use Teaching Assistants (TAs) for any of your courses?
11. Do you have any other support besides a TA for your courses?
12. On average how many students are in your classes?
13. Do you have or have you held an administrative appointment at SU or in your
department?
a. Yes or No (Please indicate one)
If yes, please name the position/positions
14. Please let me know the best way to reach you:
phone:
email:
Thank you!
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
204
APPENDIX C
INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
The Work Identity of Full-Time Nontenure-Track Faculty
Interview Protocol
I’m here to talk with you about the experience of being a nontenure-track faculty member
Topic domain – Career/Individual Work-Life
Lead off question:
*
2
1. Please briefly tell me about your career up to this point and the path to your current position.
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. What made you want to be a faculty member?
b. Please tell me more about your professional background.
c. How satisfied are you with your career so far?
Questions:
*2. Tell me about your job. What is it like?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. How do you feel when you are walking into work on an average day?
b. What are the opportunities and the challenges you face in your current position?
c. In your work-life, what is the most important thing to you?
d. What motivates you in your work?
e. How satisfied are you with your current work?
f. How are your teaching and service responsibilities determined?
g. What opportunities for professional development do you receive? Which do take
advantage of? Are there enough opportunities?
h. Do you think your workload is appropriate?
i. Have your feelings about your job changed in the time you’ve been in this position?
3. Do you feel you feel secure and confident in your role here?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. Do you have freedom to make choices about your work responsibilities now?
*b. Do you think your academic freedom is as protected as those on the tenure-track or
with tenure?
c. How you teach your classes?
d. In your choices about pursuing research or not?
e. In fulfilling your service responsibilities?
2
*Indicates a top question to ask
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
205
*4. How do you feel about working at your institution?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. If you had to say which is more important to you, the discipline X or this institution,
what would you say and why?
b. What do you think about the policies regarding NTTF at your institution?
c. How do you think the policies and practices here might make your experience different
than FTNT at other places?
5. Please take a minute to think about the future of your career.
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. What are your long term career goals?
b. Would you ever consider a tenure-track position?
*c. Do you think you would be considered for one at this institution?
*6. How do you feel teaching is viewed in your department and at your institution?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. So, are you saying that there is a divide?
b. How would you describe the structure, and if appropriate, the hierarchy of specialty
areas in your department/discipline?
c. How does this divide affect your work, if at all?
*7. How would you characterize the work environment in your department? Possible probes, if
not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. In relation to being a NTTF, do you think it is different or similar to the culture of the
institution?
b. How do you think teaching is perceived in the department?
c. To what degree are your ideas and opinions asked for and valued in your department?
d. What impact and influence do you think NTTF faculty have on your department?
8. How would you describe your role in your department?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
a. Do you believe your work is valued by your colleagues and department?
*b. How do you feel your tenured and tenure-track colleagues perceive you?
c. Please describe a recent interaction with a tenured/tenure-track colleague.
d. What is your role at faculty meetings? Tell me what they are like for you.
9.Please tell me about your relationships with other faculty in the department. Possible probes, if
not answered as part of the response to the main question:
*a. How do you feel about your tenure-track and tenured colleagues?
b. Who, if anyone, in the department do you consider your friends?
c. Who, if anyone, do you collaborate with?
d. Who do you talk about your teaching with?
*e. How do you think you are perceived by your colleagues in the department?
WORK IDENTITY OF FULL-TIME-NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY
206
10. Do you feel that the contribution of those on the tenure-track or with tenure is different than
yours?
Possible probes, if not answered as part of the response to the main question:
*a. Do you think you have the same opportunities as other NTTF faculty on your
campus?
b. The same as tenure-track, tenured faculty in your department?
c. How do you feel about that?
d. Do you think they are equitable, given what tenure-track and tenured
colleagues receive?
*11. Is there anything else about your experience in your position that you would like to tell me?
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
In a 2010 report, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) found that full‐time non‐tenure track faculty (NTTF) made up two‐thirds of all faculty appointments in higher education. Specifically, NTTF appointments constituted 800,000 out of the 1.3 million faculty hires (AFT, 2010). The rise in NTTF changes the structure of the faculty in higher education, creating a two‐tired system between tenure and non‐tenure. Few research studies have investigated the impact of this changing structure. ❧ This study sought to understand the professional and work identity of full time NTTF by asking the question: How does the department where a full time NTTF works, shape their work identity at a four year research university? A qualitative study using narrative analysis was used to interview 19 full‐time NTTF at one private research institution across 7 different departments and programs regarding their experience as a NTTF. Genevieve Shaker’s (2008) model regarding the experience of full time NTTF in in a single discipline (English) was used to analyze the data. While all elements of Shaker’s model were found in this study, two additional elements could be added to her model including the importance of relationships and creating or building a niche. ❧ While full‐time NTTF do not have a distinct professional and work identity, this study does shed light on the positive and negative factors that shape full‐time NTTF identity. As a result of this study’s findings, there are factors that higher education and institutions of higher education should consider with the growing number of NTTF on campuses today. Most importantly, institutions and departments can learn from this study to create environments that positively support NTTF and their professional and work identity. These include: valuing the role of teaching that NTTF bring, creating professional development for all faculty, ensuring that chairs are knowledge about NTTF and their needs and policies, and working to create a more common streamlined experience for NTTF across institutions. These areas appear to have the most impact as institutions and departments create the context in which these NTTF not only work, but look to, when reflecting on their professional and work identity.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Supporting non-tenure-track faculty in a physical therapy program: a case study
PDF
Developing effective mentoring programs for non-tenure track faculty
PDF
Participation of full-time, non-tenure-track faculty in school-level goveranance and decision making
PDF
How do non-tenure track faculty interact with Latino and Latina students in gatekeeper math courses at an urban community college?
PDF
Part-time non-tenure track faculty, motivation, and departmental governance: a grounded theory approach
PDF
Part-time and time faculty conceptualizations of academic community: a case study
PDF
Faculty perceptions of barriers: gender and ethnicity differences among tenured and tenure-track faculty in the University of California system
PDF
Reforming Ph.D. programs to address the changing academic labor market
PDF
How the departmental cultures experienced by part-time, non-tenure track faculty affect their ability to meet first-year college student needs
PDF
Globalization, internationalization and the faculty: culture and perception of full-time faculty at a research university
PDF
Experiences in academic governance and decision-making of full-time nontenure track faculty in communications fields
PDF
Whiteness: a narrative analysis on student affairs professionals, race, identity, and multicultural competency
PDF
Underrepresentation of African American faculty in higher education: an improvement model dissertation
PDF
Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university
PDF
Part-time faculty and their sense of belonging
PDF
Evaluating how education faculty spend their time at a private research university
PDF
Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university
PDF
From their perspective: discovering the sources of impact on older women undergraduates' identity development and mapping those experiences
PDF
Full-time distance education faculty perspectives on web accessibility in online instructional content in a California community college context: an evaluation study
PDF
Collaboration across institutional silos: a case study of a postsecondary professional learning community
Asset Metadata
Creator
Coye, Lillian
(author)
Core Title
The work identity of full‐time non‐tenure‐track faculty at a four year research university
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
07/16/2014
Defense Date
04/15/2014
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
full‐time-non‐tenure,non‐tenure‐track faculty,NTTF,OAI-PMH Harvest,work identity
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Kezar, Adrianna J. (
committee chair
), Faris, Shannon (
committee member
), Merriman, Lynette (
committee member
)
Creator Email
lcoye@usc.edu,lillycoye@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-443445
Unique identifier
UC11286940
Identifier
etd-CoyeLillia-2707.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-443445 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-CoyeLillia-2707.pdf
Dmrecord
443445
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Coye, Lillian
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
full‐time-non‐tenure
non‐tenure‐track faculty
NTTF
work identity