Abstract
This chapter explores the shared responsibility of engagement between online adjunct faculty and their institutions of employment. Since institutions employ a large number of adjunct faculty, it is reasonable to place the responsibility of the institution to initiate activities which draw in and engage online adjunct faculty. On the other hand, online adjunct faculty also bear the responsiblity of reaching out and engaging with their employing institution. However, this can be a challenge because faculty feel disconnected due to geographical separation from both their institution and their students. Regardless of the obstacles or argument, the is the responsibility of both the institution and the adjunct faculty to foster engagement.
TopIntroduction
Mrs. Jones was full of excitement as she started her first position as a middle school math teacher. She dedicated hours to lesson planning and volunteered for additional school duties. During her first years of employment, Mrs. Jones began noticing a trend among teachers. Whether due to professional or personal demands, some teachers struggled to connect and engage with students, colleagues, and parents. Limited time existed for anything outside the job description. These same teachers grumbled that school leadership did little to promote engagement and appreciation. Still, other teachers maintained a high level of enthusiasm toward their job, colleagues, and school leadership.
Mrs. Jones made an intentional decision to take on the responsibility of engagement. As a teacher, lifelong learner, and leader, she initiated connections and volunteered for events and projects that developed the culture and community at the school. As she connected with teachers, Mrs. Jones found that her colleagues were often disconnected due to outside factors like family stress, struggling relationships, or personal challenges. Family and life situations bled into and impacted teacher engagement.
During one of the professional development sessions (PD), Mrs. Jones presented an opposing viewpoints activity. Participants were asked to create arguments for and against one of the following statements:
As the PD activity progressed, participants concluded that engagement is the responsibility of the teacher, learner, and leadership. They determined that engagement cannot be one-sided or sustained by an individual. Next, Mrs. Jones and other teachers organized an intentional plan, advocating for ways to connect, support, and engage in meaningful ways. Within a few months, teachers felt more engaged and were eager to connect with their colleagues. They created realistic, authentic, and collaborative engagement opportunities that fit busy schedules. By the second year, teachers were holding themselves accountable, proposing innovative programs to increase engagement in the school community. Teachers also volunteered to lead programs as they explored solutions to school challenges.
Mrs. Jones was then hired by a local university to teach online classes as an adjunct instructor. She accepted the position, seeing it as an opportunity to give back to teacher candidates. However, Mrs. Jones noticed similar grumblings as in the K-12 environment. Adjunct instructors struggled to engage and connect with online learners. Furthermore, adjunct instructors felt disconnected from the university due to limited (or no) connections between full-time and adjunct faculty. Mrs. Jones noticed that the dynamics of higher education differed from the K-12 environment. First, adults make up the student population in higher education. Second, the learners must engage in an online classroom. Third, the instructors must engage in an online classroom and the university. Mrs. Jones thought back to K-12 PD session, wondering: Who bears the responsibility of engagement between OAF and their institution of higher education? Whose responsibility is it anyway?
TopBackground
Research identifies the essential role of OAF within institutions of higher education. Institutions typically employ OAF to teach online course offerings. The boom of online courses demanded an increase in online instructors. To meet this demand, institutions turned to employing part-time OAF (Danaei, 2019). These employees are essential to student development, success, remediation, and retention. Danaei considered the impact of OAF on students in remedial and development courses and found that when OAF lack an institutional-provided philosophy or emphasis of the class(es) they teach, they may “under-prepare their students for college-level courses” (p. 23). In a nutshell, OAF must have a thorough understanding of institutional philosophy and uphold an institution’s core values and beliefs in order to fulfill the essential function of supporting new students. When OAF are engaged with their institution, students benefit.
Key Terms in this Chapter
Pedagogical Caring/Pedagogy of Kindness: Teaching with the intentionality of caring for students as they shared their experiences within a course. Relationships and family-life balance are emphasized as a part of the learning process and a student-center approach is followed.
Professional Development (PD): Learning activities that seek to develop an instructor in developing skills as an instructor. These activities may include development in the areas of pedagogy, technical skills, work-life balance, or any other opportunity that impacts the instructor’s ability to perform with expertise in the teaching profession.
Engager: A person who is skilled in knowing how to engage others across the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical domains.
Sense of Community: A feeling one holds when they feel they belong to a group. This belonging may come from a shared purpose or vision, a feeling of worth or appreciation, or possess a level of commitment to a group or organization.
Unified Faculty Approach: Regardless of classification, approaching all faculty at an institution as fulfilling the same role. For example, instead of labeling faculty as part-time, adjunct, online- fulltime, or traditional, all faculty are considered faculty and include in and invited to the same institutional opportunities.
Social Presence: In a digital environment, this is a concept of being able to represent oneself as a physical, real, live person to digital learners. Personality and image are a major component of this, and instructors can create social presence by posting informal pictures of hobbies, family, and other personal anecdotes to connect students with the person of the instructor rather than the functional role of the instructor.
Cognitive Presence: In a digital environment, this is a concept of being able to engage the learning in thought and critical thinking. Cognitive presence may be fostered with an instructor’s use of knowledge, shared experiences, probing questions, and providing meaningful information that adds to the discussion or course.
Professional Engagement: The practice of interacting and committing to an institution and the actions it takes to successfully fulfill the institutional expectations. To engage professionally, one must seek out and interact with stakeholders, other faculty, and leadership in the institution. This may also include seeking information about an institution to stay current on the changes and initiatives within an organization such as accreditation visits, initiatives, or research projects.
Teaching Presence: In a digital environment, this is the art and science of marrying cognitive presence with social presence in order to deliver content to students in a meaningful way.