The author, who earned a doctorate in middle age, wrote this book—a raw outpouring of true feeling—after serving several years as an adjunct instructor, filled with boundless hope for tenure. Although the author repeatedly emphasizes at the end that going back to the past doesn’t mean it was better, the present situation is a tragedy. The Chinese translator is said to be an overseas study agent with over a decade of experience. Having introduced so many people to study in the US and learning about their subsequent lives, one wonders what kind of change has occurred in the translator’s own mindset.
The extensive descriptions and tangible experiences stand in stark contrast to the very strained analysis; the exploration of the reasons why the American education system reached its current state is superficial. This is not a criticism of the author, but of the translator or editor. The book’s original title is The Adjunct Underclass: How America’s Colleges Betrayed Their Faculty, Their Students, and Their Mission, but for some unknown reason, it was translated into Chinese as “The Death of the Degree: A History of the Demise of American PhDs.”
Adjunct Instructors Also Want to Be Professors
To be sure, the author provides a rich depiction of the approximately 1 million adjunct instructors existing in various American universities and colleges, a perspective often overlooked by the mainstream view. The mainstream narrative focuses primarily on top universities, beautiful campuses, abundant club activities, professors with renowned reputations at home and abroad, and outstanding graduates. However, according to the author’s statistics, about 1 million people work part-time at various schools (mainly community colleges), earning $2,000-$4,000 per course each semester, all while hoping to one day transition to tenure.
In an episode of the American TV show Modern Family, Phil, a top real estate agent in Southern California, teaches a course at a local community college, guiding young people to become real estate agents. But Phil himself is just a graduate of an ordinary university; he merely has rich experience in the real estate business and has achieved career success. How can he just go and teach at a college? There’s an even more serious question: How can a college offer a course on real estate agency?
Unlike the university system in China, after graduating high school in the US, a considerable portion of graduates enters community colleges, which come in two-year and four-year types. These community colleges offer some very “market-oriented” courses. Of course, they also provide opportunities for high-achieving students to transfer, allowing them to convert their community college credits to credits at other universities and enter local state universities. Therefore, from our [Chinese] perspective, community colleges are in some ways like Dazhuan (junior colleges), while local state universities are like ordinary undergraduate institutions. And those globally renowned universities are the ones that appear most in our field of vision and enjoy the most resources.
Initially, the concept of adjunct instructors in universities was envisioned to be like Phil: industry professionals who were successful in their business, had rich experience, and wanted to pass this experience on to young people. Perhaps similar in nature to the “industry mentors” at some universities today. These people didn’t expect the job to bring much economic benefit; it was just some pocket money to supplement family income outside of their main work.
However, as the American education system faces numerous challenges, this position has gradually transformed from “a side-job for industry professionals” to “a ‘full-time’ job for part-timers.”
Many adjunct instructors teach multiple courses at different universities, constantly rushing between different campuses. However, these courses are often introductory general education classes, especially the large lectures (30-40 people) that tenured professors are unwilling to teach. This consumes a massive amount of the adjuncts’ time and energy, including grading.
They choose this way of life and supporting their families for no other reason than misfortune—the misfortune of having obtained a doctorate, and then attempting to become a professor, preferably a tenured one.
The Hierarchy of Contempt Among Teachers
Adjunct instructors are seemingly not considered part of the university education system; they don’t belong to the school. After the curriculum and syllabus are designed, teaching tasks are assigned. When there are too many students, or when a suitable teacher isn’t available, the school will look for adjuncts just like searching for a match on Tinder—seeing a good profile and swiping right.
However, after graduating with a PhD, the path all doctoral graduates hope to take is to accumulate connections through a two-year postdoc, then obtain a tenure-track position, starting as a lecturer or assistant professor. Subsequently, they advance to associate professor through evaluations, and finally, after passing the last review, become a full professor. This position, according to the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure in the US, is a lifelong appointment at most schools. That is to say, as long as one doesn’t commit a crime or do something egregious, one is a professor forever, until retirement. In exchange, the professor is expected to conduct research freely.
Of course, all PhDs hope to become professors one day, but the number of positions is limited, especially tenured ones. A large number of PhDs who graduate from non-prestigious universities and non-flagship programs, if they cannot find the aforementioned promotion path, are likely forced to choose to become adjunct instructors. Once someone becomes an adjunct, they are almost permanently cut off from the lecturer-level positions that lead to a professorship.
This is because, in the eyes of the university, if a person does not become a lecturer (on track) after graduating with a PhD, it means they have strayed from the academic path, and becoming an adjunct is going down the wrong road. Yes, what schools want are people dedicated to academia full-time right after graduation, not people who go out and “mess around for a few years” and then try to come back—especially when so many PhDs from elite universities are still waiting in line.
Therefore, adjunct instructors have never been included in the scope of the “teaching team”; they are merely temporary staff to solve personnel shortages. However, for the students, these teachers—who were supposed to take on the important role of “academic mentors”—are not part of the school at all, and their help is limited only to the classroom.
The School Also Has Its Troubles
As the post-war baby boom ended, the subsequent generation of children rapidly decreased. By the time they graduated high school (after 2010), the number of students entering university also fell sharply. This brought enrollment shortages to thousands of American universities, the exact same dilemma faced in previous years by universities in deeply aging regions like Japan and Taiwan. Top universities still don’t worry about admissions; they have very low acceptance rates and can recruit outstanding high school graduates from all over the country. However, for other ordinary universities and a large number of community colleges, many uncertainties have emerged.
A university might send out 2,000 offers. For a top university, there might be a 75% or even higher probability of students confirming. However, for community colleges facing enrollment shortages, this probability is much lower. They might not even know how many students will enroll until a month before school starts, creating extreme uncertainty in teaching plans. When short-staffed, they have no choice but to hire adjunct instructors to cover courses. Thus, in community colleges, a significant number of courses are taught by adjuncts.
At the same time, to enhance their reputation and image and to participate in fiercer market competition, schools find it more effective to build flashy stadiums or introduce more cutting-edge research equipment. But the funding received by a large number of public schools and community colleges is continually decreasing, making cutting full-time, tenured professors an inevitability.
The tenure track, introduced into the US education system in 1940 as a countermeasure against Nazi control of higher education and academia, emphasizes professors’ research freedom and academic freedom, requiring schools to provide lifelong material security. Once tenure is awarded, one is basically set for life. However, the problems with tenure, the author fails to mention entirely. Throughout the book, the author seems like an abandoned person, casting a resentful, envious, yet helpless gaze toward tenure.
The Commodification of Educational Services
The author skims over the deeper discussion. Similar to most manufacturing jobs, the commodity of university education also needs to be outsourced. However, this service cannot truly be contracted out to Asian countries. Thus, different tiers have formed within the service commodity of university education itself. Different roles—consumer, manufacturer, designer, etc.—are subdivided, and people from different classes move toward different outcomes.
The tenured faculty, as the most creative and influential role, dominates the decisive functions in the education system. Whether professors or department chairs, only tenured people are qualified to participate. They design the direction, content, and features of programs, like Apple in the tech world. For the middle and lower-tier universities in the education system, a large amount of work is undertaken by adjunct instructors. These people are the actual course lecturers, yet they cannot change the program content and can only teach according to a preset syllabus. They are like Foxconn in the tech world. A large number of students, when faced with dazzling specialty stadiums, flashy mascots, and exciting club activities, are like consumers picking out different device specifications. The final product they choose bears the inscription: “Designed by Apple in California, Made in China.”
This is the inevitable result of the education system moving toward specialization. In a fully competitive education market, the key reason why distance education still cannot replace existing universities is that the university’s atmosphere, experience, and social connections are among the most important content. Knowledge itself is no longer scarce enough to be a monopolized product.
Like The Rise and Fall of American Growth, which I finished a few days ago, American universities, after reaching their peak in the 1970s, also face enormous challenges from economic and social structural changes. The elite universities at the top of the food chain attract a great deal of public attention, yet the much larger group of declining universities and downwardly mobile people are ignored.
In China, the birth population has been declining since its peak of 25.5 million in 1987. A quick calculation shows these people are now 38 years old, and most of their children were born before the 2016 figure of 18.83 million. By 2023, the birth population had rapidly fallen to around 9 million. This means that after 2034, China’s universities will also face a rapid decline in student enrollment. By 2040, as long as someone can graduate from high school, it will mean there is definitely a university for them to attend.
At the same time, the number of doctoral graduates in China increased from 55,000 in 2016 to 82,000 in 2022, and it is expected to continue to grow in the coming years as doctoral admissions are also expanding.
For the “Double First-Class” universities, enrollment may not be an issue, but for the large number of junior colleges and ordinary universities, they will also face the same.
As The Death of the Degree reveals, academia is no longer a sanctuary, but a “factory” rife with structural dilemmas. Yet, this does not mean it has lost its value—for those aspiring to answer questions through rigorous training, this educational system still offers irreplaceable tools.
For someone with extensive experience in the industry, embracing change is simply a survival norm. That “pastoral” stability is long gone; in its place, there should be a boundless curiosity for knowledge and the courage to reconstruct meaning amidst uncertainty.