Academic outsourcing

Journal of Physical Therapy Education,  Spring 2000  by Miller, David J

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

As an academic faculty member, I read and was inspired by a guest editorial1in these pages several years ago, which I keep posted in my office. In that guest editorial, Dr Stith describes the need for balance in meeting the "demands of our role" in an academic setting. More recently, I have observed a practice that has the potential to create an imbalance in our work, a practice I describe as academic outsourcing.

Outsourcing occurs when a company acquires goods or services from an outside source, rather than producing the goods or providing the services "in-house." For example, General Motors (GM) would be outsourcing if they obtained a component for one of their minivans from a non-GM manufacturer. This practice has been hailed as a means of improving cost-efficiency by management and allowing a company to remain competitive, although lamented as a potential cause of job insecurity by workers.

I believe the term can also be used in the physical therapy academic community to describe the practice of having adjunct faculty deliver the "goods." Adjunct faculty work as guest lecturers, are laboratory instructors and laboratory examiners, and serve as course coordinators. Does this practice have a place in the delivery of a physical therapy curriculum? The quick response is "yes." One can immediately identify several positive outcomes. Often the adjunct faculty are practicing physical therapists. Students have their interest piqued when an instructor is a practicing therapist, grounded in the day-to-day experiences of clinical care. The profession and the adjunct faculty member may benefit because it provides a mechanism of transition between the clinic and the classroom. Clinicians can use an academic adjunct opportunity to try out teaching before making a career change. This facilitation of movement into academic positions may reduce the oft-cited physical therapist faculty shortage.

For the institution, the advantages of using adjunct faculty are tangible. At our institution, adjunct faculty are paid less than one fourth the salary of a full-time faculty member to teach the same three-credit course. Because adjunct faculty are typically provided only with symbolic benefits, not costly ones, the savings for the institution are even more dramatic. Adjunct faculty often receive no fixed office space, no support staff no resources for research (space, equipment, time, funding), and no real commitment to faculty development opportunities. Thus, the academic institution, like the outsourcing firm, gains by reducing or eliminating a variety of expenses associated with the final product. Adjunct faculty are a real bargain.

I believe a realistic assessment of costs is needed. Adjunct faculty often are not included in activities that full-time faculty perform to keep the department and college running such as work on committees and task forces and academic and professional advising. Full-time faculty may also be expected, either formally or informally, to provide assistance to adjunct faculty related to academic management. This can include advice about grading, writing examinations, classroom teaching and management techniques, and possibly even covering office hours and unexpected absences. As a result, a decision to increase the use of adjunct faculty has the potential in a very real way increase the day-to-day obligations of the full-time faculty. As a small, but concrete, hypothetical example, if 250 physical therapist students need a physical therapy faculty advisor, and there are 10 full-time faculty members, then each faculty member would work with 25 advisees. But if 5 faculty members (full-time equivalents) are adjunct faculty with no advising responsibilities, then each of the remaining full-time faculty members would advise 50 students. Similar examples could be made for admissions, recruiting, and many other academic responsibilities.

I therefore urge caution in the mass application of adjunct instructors, ifthe primary objective is cost savings. Extensive use of adjunct faculty may actually produce a net reduction in the efficiency of the full-time, or core, faculty. The supportive roles full-time faculty play in this scenario are seldom elucidated in a work plan and can create a reduction in the teaching, research, or administrative responsibilities and/or clinical practice of the individual full-time faculty member. This practice can also contribute to the stress and loss of equilibrium Dr Stith so eloquently described. The potential reduction in the productivity of the full-time faculty is not likely to be viewed with enthusiasm by the involved faculty members or enhance their ability to merit tenure and promotion. This is true even though the department or institution may overall be seen as efficient (least costly) by the large-scale use of this practice.

My considerations for the optimal use of adjunct faculty in a physical therapy curriculum

I. Be honest about the motivations, benefits, and costs associated with the use of adjunct faculty in a department. Consider providing reimbursement to adjunct faculty when they are encouraged or needed to participate in department functions, especially if this work is outside of their contractual responsibilities.