<p>My wife is an adjunct prof.
She teaches a course in a subject she has practitioner expertise in.
She has never sat for comprehensive exams in her field or done research in it. she is qualified to teach that course, period.</p>
<p>She has no benefits from the college, of course. Last semester her section was canceled so she didn’t teach (hence didn’t get paid). Obviously her commitment to the institution can only be in kind.</p>
<p>She has no office hours. She is not available to mentor students, help them with research projects, advising, participate in the life of the university in any way whatsoever. She just shows up and teaches that one class. When they let her.</p>
<p>The other section, the one that didn’t get canceled last time, is taught by a full-time, tenure track professor. She knows her stuff in that particular area, but evidently he knows it well enough, and one would imagine he has somewhat more invested in the whole enterprise. He should, anyway. He is not “overflow”.</p>
<p>ucb,
I don’t know how many former CEOs/CFOs,CIOs/CTOs/EVPs of substantial companies (think $250 million and up) are teaching at U Phoenix. Do you? If it’s a high number, I would agree that they can add a lot of value to the average undergraduate. </p>
<p>I guess it goes to what you value: Do you prefer an instructor who might have a strong research rep, but little to no operating experience? Or do you prefer someone who has spent 15-20+ years in the field building and running a complex organization, but has done little to nothing on research? </p>
<p>Obviously, as mony’s post reflects, a major part of the problem with the part-time prof is that the institution gives them very little support. Academia doesn’t value these people even if the students likely would.</p>
<p>"Do you prefer an instructor who might have a strong research rep, but little to no operating experience? Or do you prefer someone who has spent 15-20+ years in the field building and running a complex organization, but has done little to nothing on research? "</p>
<p>wouldnt that depend on the field? I mean it would be different in Business school than in physics. For that matter, at B school it would be different for say Corporate Strategy or even Marketing, than for say Operations Research, or Financial theory.</p>
<p>Even in many of these courses the curriculum is academically/theoretically/ generally based, with breadth or focus beyond the breadth and depth of a typical practitioner.</p>
<p>There are exceptions, but more likely to be manifest at grad level.</p>
<p>In such cases the practitioner can stretch and learn and cover it just as the academic can, but will not be there with office hours, or to take other courses with, etc</p>