PSA Facilitates the Work of Professors

Though I long for serious critical dialogue on PSA, I have yet to receive it. So, in proper academic form, as a philosopher, I must independently generate criticisms. Here is one potential criticism of my alternative model for HE: PSA cannot facilitate the full spectrum of work performed by professors. 

False. In fact, it can do so better than the traditional HEI model or the emerging tech-models (e.g., MOOCs). Moreover, PSA can provide greater control over and better compensation for this work, while it opens the doors to as many individuals as want to be professors.

Readers might recall in 2012 there was a tempest over an article in the Washington Post, entitled, “Do college professors work hard enough?” The author, David C Levy, argued that they don’t. Or nearly a year later in Forbes magazine, the article by, Susan Adams, which reported that professors have the least stressful of occupations. This inaccurate impression of professors as over-paid, stress-free, slackers is a persistent one – perpetuated by those who should know better.

What professors do can be subsumed under four broad centers of service to: 1) Students; 2) Disciplines; 3) Institutions; and 4) Communities. Beyond teaching and research, professors also perform the following: [Item coloring to be explained momentarily.]

Student-Centered Work

1.  Updating a course to include new research findings

2.  Preparing lectures for classes
3.  Preparing syllabi for classes
4.  Preparing labs for classes 
5.  Grading class assignments
6.  Preparing exams 
7.  Giving make-up exams
8.  Grading exams 
9.  Calculating and changing grades

10. Developing new classes
11. Integrating new learning into classes 
12. Helping students with subject matter in person, by e-mail, or LMSs
13. Developing a class website to further student involvement in a course
14. Working with colleagues to modify the curriculum to keep up with changes in the discipline
15. Advising students about their choice of major or mentoring graduate students
16. Coaching students who want to go beyond the required coursework in a class
17. Counseling students about personal problems, learning difficulties, or life choices
18. Writing letters of recommendation for graduate programs, jobs, or internships
19. Keeping in touch with alumni to assist with employment searches or career changes
20. Reading student research papers, undergraduate honors theses, or doctoral dissertations
21. Directing or serving on masters and doctoral committees
22. Participating in PhD oral comprehensive exams
23. Participating in graduate student defenses
24. Supervising and evaluating graduate student teaching
25. Establishing a foreign study program or supervising students overseas
26. Sponsoring a student literary journal or overseeing a club
27. Evaluating teaching by colleagues
27. Leading field trips
28. Attending department colloquia

Discipline/Profession-Centered Work

30. Serving on a committee interviewing candidates for a new faculty position
31. Serving on committees to write polices for academic programs, student scholarships, financial aid
32. Participating in a professional association to advance standards and research in the field
33. Giving a scholarly presentation at a disciplinary society meeting
34. Editing a professional journal to help disseminate new knowledge in the field
35. Reviewing articles and books submitted to publishers and advising about whether to publish
36. Writing grant proposals for submission to funding agencies
37. Serving on review committees of funding agencies

 38. Monitoring grant spending obtained from funding agencies 
 39. Writing papers for publication in academic journals 
 40. Serving on committees and in elected positions of scholarly societies
 41. Maintaining laboratories for faculty and student research 
 42. Presenting research at meetings of scholarly societies to promote the University
 43. Giving presentations at other institutions of higher education
 44. Evaluating a colleague's work for promotion or tenure
 45. Participating in a departmental self-study
 46. Reviewing a potential library resource and advising on acquisitions
 47. Attending conferences related to field of expertise
 48. Participating in professional development training
 49. Writing a recommendation for a colleague for a fellowship or award
 50. Reading scholarly journals to keep abreast of new developments
 51. Maintaining an effective collegiate network

Institution/Department-Centered Work

52. Participating in department meetings

53. Serving on department committees
54. Participating in department retreats
55. Serving in administrative positions
56. Participating in or hosting faculty searches
57. Serving in Faculty Senate
58. Serving in University Council

59. Serving on university committees
60. Participating in university convocations
61. Applying for a grant for the department, or helping to raise money for the university
62. Writing reports related to departmental and institutional initiatives
63. Responding to information requests from administrators
64. Participating in commencement exercises

Community-Centered Work

 65. Giving a presentation to a business or school group, often at no expense to the group
 66. Providing professional advice to local, state, or national government
 67. Providing professional advice to associations, businesses, or community groups
 68. Answering phone calls from citizens and offering professional expertise
 69. Helping to keep the public informed about issues by talking to the media
 70. Serving on the boards of local, state, or national groups

[NOTE: BLACK = core service; RED = eliminated service; GREEN = elective or sporadic service]

PSA can provide superior facilitation of this work. Let’s see how.

Where students are concerned, much of the work that is additive to actual teaching remains. However, under the control of work provided by PSA, some of it is elective. For instance, 20-25 address distinctions among categories of students (i.e., (under)graduate). As an professor in the PSA model, I have the professional prerogative to limit my private practice to those students whom I am interested in and qualified to service: (inter)national, (under)graduate, or some other mix of parameters.

So, suppose I want to teach only regional undergraduate students. Then I would not have to devote labour to graduate supervision and exams (20-23) or international programs (25). Or, with respect to item 24, I might not employ a TA or GA in the operation of my professional academic practice and so eliminate time devoted to their supervision and development. Or I might elect for a TA and (for instance) 2-9 would be shared by myself and the TA whom I have been careful to select and develop - since their effective contribution is vital to the success of my professional academic practice in its core services.

But no matter the final constitution of my practice, the conditions of work are controlled by me. As we shall see, this includes control over more than just the students to whom I elect to provide core services.

Notice that all institution/department-centered work is eliminated (52-64). PSA does not require HEIs. It is not necessarily hostile to them – in fact, it can save and improve them (new link 23/08/20) - but they are not required. However, it is also important to notice that as a professional model, to a certain degree, there is a melding of discipline/profession-centered and institution/department-centered services.

To be a licensed member in good standing of a profession, practitioners are obliged to participate in various aspects of the administration and development of their profession under the protection and direction of its legislated professional society. With this in mind, look at some of the eliminated and elective services in 30-46 and 52-64.

The items under discipline/profession-centered service find translation in professional societies of medicine, law, engineering, accounting and so on. Take law as our example.

The State Bar of California or the American Bar Association have numerous committees that are responsible for membership requirements, law school curriculum, bar exam administration, student scholarships, public education and professional development programs, disciplinary hearings, government advisory boards, self-study initiatives, journal editing and publishing, conference organization, and much more akin to the elective items 30-41.

The other work performed by professors as employees of HEIs is eliminated, as is all work associated with maintenance and development of colleges and universities under the traditional HEI model (items 52-64) - with perhaps the exception of 45 and 46, where self-study of departments is replaced by self-study of the profession or fields within it and where a professional society of academics elects to build and maintain a virtual library.

This is because the institutions of the current HE model are made redundant by a professional society (of academics), which is designed as a substitute institution. Not an institution like a college or university of the current HE system, but more like the original notion of these terms (link added 23/08/20), and notably an institution (professional society) that in important ways functions in practice and legal status like that of HEIs.

As a professional society, the ABA (roughly) has a national staff of 4,000, a national operating budget around $225 million and approximately 400,000 members. Both the ABA and its members provide valued service to members and millions of clients per year. Like the legal profession, the administration and development of the professional society of academics is distributed across 10’s or 100’s of thousands of members. This means that the onus is widely distributed and so the burden substantially reduced, when compared to similar responsibilities found in HEIs.

It is impossible for the current HEI model to provide service within these ABA parameters. In fact, there are insufficient professors providing their valuable work (link added 23/08/20), which is in stark contrast to the current state of the legal profession. Oh, to have the troubles of too many practicing professors for the market – which is not the same as too many professors for the jobs available at HEIs, which fail to meet market demand.

And what’s more, the work of professors can be provided under PSA for around 25-50% of the cost of the HEI model, while as many professors as required by demand all earn excess of the $75,000/annum median quoted by the US Bureau of Labour Statistics or the $79,000/annum average across all ranks reported by the AAUP. For financial analysis see: US, Canada, Australia (links added 23/08/20).

Finally, community-centered work (65-70) is coded green because such work leaves plenty of room for delineation and dedication. That is, community service is expected in the current HEI model and required by PSA, but how it manifests itself is an open question. Nevertheless, by vesting total control of (HE) work in the hands of professors there is reason to think that more community service of greater variety is possible.

Especially with the rise in unionization, it is not uncommon for HEI employers to stipulate that their professor employees divide labour roughly along these lines - 40% teaching, 40% research and 20% community service, in a formula that can allow little variance. This reportedly results in a 50 to 60-hour work week, since the division fails to properly account for the long list of additive work itemized above. In contrast, by avoiding its increasing importance in HEI ranking systems, PSA would have no requirement for research and publication. Further, combined with the numerous other electives provided by PSA such as student selection, fee structure, and practice overhead costs, professional professors are free to adjust their work to include more community service. 

At 50 to 60 hours per week – the new normal in many occupations – professors commonly report being very satisfied with their work. So, in the end, even it if such a workload remained, PSA would still be a superior model because it increases the number of better compensated professors in the system, each obliged to perform community service.

But, it might be argued, not all the work of professors can be facilitated under PSA, such as that done in university research hospitals or experimental particle physics. I think PSA can facilitate all the work, but even if it were so restricted, the 50-75% reduction in total cost of all other professor work across the system would allow government to better fund these resource-intense activities. A win-win situation.

Another criticism in this context is that, even if PSA did reduce the work of professors employed by HEIs, it would introduce work not normally associated with faculty positions. For instance, the work of founding and operating an independent academic practice would involve HR for support staff, the scheduling of classes, budgeting, accounting, and other operational tasks.

The first thing to say is that one look at the list of work performed by institution employed professors reveals a set of skills and knowledge that are highly transferable to the operation of a professional academic practice. This is precisely the argument made by those groups within and without HEIs that offer advice and service to PhDs who seek work outside of academia.

Secondly, setting aside the overlap and widened distribution of work already identified, any work that remains as unique to professional practice is budgeted for in PSA, including: a TA that works 20 hours per week, office assistance, accounting services, janitorial services, office space, and the like.

The real question is not, “Could professors perform the work required for an independent academic practice?” The answer to that is, yes. Rather, the question is, “Would they prefer PSA professional self-employment to the current model of HEI employment?”

In partial answer to this question, I will close out this post by briefly comparing PSA’s facilitation of the work of professors with two HEI attempts at facilitation: MOOCs and adjunctification.

Unlike the MOOC tech response, PSA can improve student access to HE without eliminating face-to-face education (link added 23/08/20), which offers important benefits not easily reproducible in online formats. This is not to say that technology is not of use to professors and students, only that it should be used to improve face-to-face education, not replace it. To maintain the merits of face-to-face education found in HEIs, PSA (along with appropriate use of technology) is the superior facilitator. Instead, as things stand now, MOOCs strike me as a desperate response to access and cost concerns.

On that note, student access is only one half of the HE equation. Professors also need access. If the list above accurately represents the valued work of professors, then technological facilitators such as MOOCs are only likely to reduce the amount of such service, by reducing the number of professors.

So, on some measure, this technology might increase student access, but at what cost? How does it affect quality and quantity of education, scholarship, publication, research, and community service?

PSA improves both student and professor access to HE, without the actual and potential drawbacks associated with MOOC technology.

It is also worth noting, that not only are MOOCs a direct challenge to the occupation of professor, they also jeopardize administrative, management and support staff positions within HEIs.

Admittedly, PSA does the same for the latter, but no where near on the scale threatened by MOOCs. In contrast, under PSA the increased number of professors in private professional academic practice will require an array of support staff, if not management services such as HR, advertising, accounting, marketing and student recruitment.

Finally, as with MOOCs, the increasing use of adjunct labour reduces the full scope of professor work being done in the system. The quality and quantity of professor work adjuncts perform is metered by their working conditions, which are widely recognized as under-compensated and under-supported.

Also like MOOCs, the use of adjuncts is a desperate cost-saving measure in the current climate. As a viable alternative model, PSA can convert qualified adjuncts to professors that are properly compensated and facilitated in their contribution to the full spectrum of work performed by professors.

As always, I invite critical dialogue on the PSA proposal.