Institutions of higher education play a major role in teaching undergraduate students. Historically, most courses have been taught by tenure-track (TT) faculty who may also be responsible for research or scholarly activities. However, a recent shift from "teaching-intensive" TT faculty to "teaching-only" contingent faculty off the tenure track has highlighted the importance of understanding the experiences of contingent faculty. While there have been an increasing number of studies examining the experiences of part-time contingent faculty, few studies have directly surveyed the increasing number of full-time, non-tenure-track (NTT) teaching faculty in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to capture their experiences, nor are we aware of any study that has examined the roles of NTT teaching faculty within one discipline to examine any potential disciplinary differences that may arise across STEM fields. Here, we focus on the experiences of full-time, non-tenure-track faculty in biology whose primary responsibility is teaching. We conducted a random stratified sampling of institutions using the Carnegie classifications to identify potential full-time NTT teaching faculty at over 10% of all institutions in the United States. Our results from surveying these faculty found both positive and negative themes, including (i) NTT teaching faculty being less diverse than the STEM professoriate at large; (ii) NTT teaching faculty reporting mixed feelings on institutional support, identifying a range of opportunities to better support NTT teaching faculty; (iii) NTT teaching faculty often having limited participation in voting for department and institutional matters and reporting mixed feelings of belonging and value; and (iv) NTT teaching faculty having high amounts of autonomy over their teaching but still struggling in key areas. We end with specific implications and recommendations for our field to better support NTT teaching faculty in biology.
Read full abstract