A Review of The Chronicle of Higher Education

by Mark J. Drozdowski and P.D. Lesko

The Chronicle of Higher Education

49 issues per year, Subscription rate: $75 per year; six month subscription $40.50, 1255 Twenty-Third Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037

I’VE OFTEN HEARD that admitting one’s vice is the first step
toward recovery, so here goes: I’m a higher education junkie.
Quite naturally I scan the mainstream media for articles on
colleges and universities, but unfortunately it carries precious
little; what passes for in-depth coverage is often sadly superficial.
Not to worry, though, because each week my mailbox offers
up The Chronicle of Higher Education–a vade mecum for addicts like me.

As an avid reader of more than 15 years, I’ve become intimately
familiar with, and fond of, the paper’s format. Wasn’t it my surprise, then, when it arrived sporting new looks and new packaging. Blasphemy! But is it any better?

It’s still a tabloid, but it now comes in three pieces polybagged.
The main section contains news about faculty research, governance,
federal policy, student affairs, athletics, fundraising, technology
and distance learning. Another section lists academic and
administrative jobs throughout academe.

A third section, named the Chronicle Review, represents the biggest change to date. With the Review, editors have broken out essays, letters to the editor and artistic expressions. The paper carries more opinion pieces, though there’s no noticeable
ideological shift. Each piece presents a clear point of view, offers straightforward language mostly devoid of jargon (apart from the occasional “deconstructionist” and “postmodern” references),
and overuses hyphens to avoid ambiguity (I would be a “higher-education scholar,” thus keeping me from a more lofty perch). The essays contain no accompanying tables, charts, graphs or footnotes.
These are pure essays absent the “profspeak” that poisons
many academic journals. For lovers of language and proponents
of prose, the Review serves up weighty issues examined with
logic and grace, with nary a regression analysis in sight.

So–why the changes?

“Readers told us they couldn’t manage the volume of paper,” says editor Scott Jaschik, so he and his colleagues took two years to revamp the publication. The results, he said, have been a hit.

As the self-proclaimed “…academic world’s number one source
of news and information,” the Chronicle boasts 94,000 paid subscribers (35 percent of whom are college faculty, and under two percent of whom are part-time faculty). Information made available to potential advertisers states that the newspaper
reaches more than half a million people. A recent survey conducted
by the newspaper suggests that for each subscriber there are
5.4 additional readers who view passed-along copies. Pass-along
readership numbers, however, are often obtained from small
sample populations.

Other numbers provide a slightly different perspective. Over
the past twelve months, Chronicle paid readership has
dropped 1.2 percent. In addition, during that same time, paid
faculty readership has dropped from 42,969 to 33,029. The
revamp may not have been such a resounding “hit” after all.
Perhaps to combat a shrinking readership, the paper has correspondingly beefed up its award-winning on-line offerings, particularly within its “Career Network” section. Much of what was restricted to subscribers now is free.

Job listings, once password protected, are accessible to everyone. On a recent visit to the site, approximately 70 percent of the total jobs posted were for faculty/research openings. They’re posted daily and remain on-line for 30 days. Surfers can search jobs by keyword (a more comprehensive search engine is available to subscribers). Previously, jobs were posted weekly from the print version and available exclusively to subscribers for one week.

According to Kathlene Collins, “Career Network” associate publisher, this new strategy reflects changes the Internet has brought to recruiting.

“We’ve responded to market necessities,” she admits, noting pressure applied by Web sites such as HigherEdJobs.com.

For adjuncts, these revisions may pay clear dividends. Institutions
can now opt to place ads only on-line and avoid print altogether,
saving thousands in the process. As a result, says Collins, colleges are posting a wider range of jobs, including many more part-time positions across a range of disciplines. However, a recent search of 2,700 jobs listed in the database resulted in less than a dozen part-time position listings. There were slightly more listings for full-time temporary faculty.

Various other aspects of the “Career Network” hold allure for adjuncts. You can find articles on finishing your dissertation, hiring trends, personal finance, publishing, balancing family responsibilities, and interviewing. You can follow links to books for academic job seekers. You can read how others explore
options in “Beyond the Ivory Tower.” You can follow the odyssey
of Jill Carroll, an adjunct lecturer (and recently contracted
columnist) in Texas who writes a monthly piece titled “The
Adjunct Track.” (Carroll wrote a provocative essay in which she espouses a new attitude for adjuncts, suggesting they become aggressive entrepreneurs packaging and selling their services.) And you can ask the “C.V. Doctor” to evaluate your vita or pose a career question to “Ms. Mentor.”

Perhaps the best counsel comes from “First Person” essays written by a range of academics, many of whom are first-year tenure trackers or part-timers. Topics have included “Phone Interviews are Like Phone Sex, Only They’re Less Invigorating,” “From Barrel Washer to Assistant Professor,” “Don’t Bother Me, I’m Just Visiting,” and “Just Call Me Dr. Temp Slave.” One author reflects on his 235 rejection letters collected during a four-year job hunt. The tone here, of course, is far less formal, offering a liberal sprinkling of self-deprecating humor.

Taken in toto, these articles supply job-hunters with an unmatched wealth of information and advice. Yes, “First Person” columns sometimes contain random thoughts with little universal appeal, while others offer what some might consider common sense (“collect syllabi from the department to see how other instructors organize their courses”). Most pieces concerning adjuncts acknowledge the usual kvetching–poor pay, low status, uncertainty of employment, lack of office space and other amenities–but are almost uniformly positive. In one example, the author tells “Why I Like Being a Contract Faculty Member,” arguing that she has job security, academic freedom, autonomy, and can “write and read and produce what I choose.”

This heightened focus on adjunct issues is no accident.

“We consider adjuncts an important audience,” Collins said.
“And we are more valuable to that community than we were three
months ago.” Editor Jaschik echoes the sentiment. “We’ve offered
more coverage of adjunct issues lately, and we plan to continue,”
he said. “It reflects academic job market changes we take
very seriously.”

What remains to be seen is whether or not the paper will
publish more hard-hitting, investigative pieces. It’s difficult,
of course, to investigate the business and employment practices
of your advertisers and non-faculty subscribers. However,
to date the newspaper’s “coverage of adjunct issues,” has
focused primarily on profiles, opinion pieces and soft news.
So is the Chronicle better? I’d say yes, especially on-line. More relevant? Absolutely, again, especially on-line. On the other hand, with only one or two short editorial pieces per issue devoted to adjunct faculty issues, the publication’s reporting is not as hard-hitting or comprehensive as it could be, or as it should be.

“Build it and they will come,” or so goes the enigmatic line
from the film “Field of Dreams.” What will the staff of the
Chronicle build? That remains to be seen. What Adjunct
Advocate readers should do is clear: bookmark the page
www.chronicle.com. Should you pay $75.00 for a subscription? Not yet. Let’s see what the staff at The Chronicle of Higher Education
builds over the course of these next twelve months.