Beyond Contingency: A Pedagogical Effectiveness Framework for Part-time Faculty Integration in Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18572916Keywords:
Part-time faculty, contingent faculty, pedagogical effectiveness, higher education, Metro Manila, faculty development, academic labor, educational equityAbstract
This study examines the integration of part-time faculty within higher education institutions across Metro Manila and the National Capital Region (NCR) of the Philippines. Despite constituting a significant portion of the academic workforce, contingent faculty often operate within institutional frameworks that fail to optimize their pedagogical potential. Through a mixed-methods approach involving surveys (n=215) and semi-structured interviews (n=28) with part-time instructors across twelve higher education institutions, this research identifies key structural barriers to effective integration while proposing a comprehensive Pedagogical Effectiveness Framework that reconceptualizes contingent faculty engagement. The findings reveal substantial disparities in professional development opportunities, institutional support mechanisms, and pedagogical autonomy afforded to part-time faculty compared to their full-time counterparts. Analysis demonstrates that these disparities significantly impact teaching effectiveness, student outcomes, and faculty job satisfaction. The proposed framework addresses these challenges through a three-dimensional model encompassing institutional policy reform, pedagogical capacity building, and community of practice development. This research contributes to the scholarly discourse on higher education workforce dynamics by challenging traditional contingency models, particularly within the unique socioeconomic and educational context of Metro Manila. The Pedagogical Effectiveness Framework offers actionable strategies for educational leaders and policymakers to enhance instructional quality while creating more equitable academic environments. Recommendations include structural reforms to departmental integration practices, targeted professional development initiatives, and mechanisms.
References
Balocon, O. H. (2026). Teaching and learning focused faculty promotion in Philippine state universities using the Teaching
Excellence Framework. The International Review of Multidisciplinary Research. 1 (1), 8-17.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18255403
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
https://psychology.ukzn.ac.za/?mdocs-file=1176
Commission on Higher Education. (2023). Higher education indicators in the Philippines: 2022-2023.
https://ro11.ched.gov.ph/3d-flip-book/statistical-bulletin-for-2022-2023/
Dela Cruz, M. (2020). Contingent faculty in Philippine higher education: Examining challenges and opportunities. Philippine
Journal of Education, 99(2), 78–96.
Fernandez, A. (2022). The invisible academic workforce: Part-time faculty experiences in Metro Manila universities. Asian Journal
of Higher Education, 12(3), 215–233.
Figlio, D. N., Schapiro, M. O., & Soter, K. B. (2015). Are tenure track professors better teachers? Review of Economics and
Statistics, 97(4), 715–724. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19406
Johnson, R., Stewart, C., & Bach, D. (2019). The Faculty Workplace Climate Survey: Development and validation. Journal of
Faculty Development, 33(2), 45–61. (No DOI found; related surveys at
Kezar, A. (2013). Examining non-tenure track faculty perceptions of how departmental policies and practices shape their
performance and ability to create student learning at four-year institutions. Research in Higher Education, 54(5), 571–
598. https://prowriting.web.illinois.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Examining-Non-Tenure-Track-Faculty
Kezar, A., & Maxey, D. (2016). The current context for faculty work in higher education. In P. G. Altbach, M. J. Finkelstein, & E.
C. Schuster (Eds.), The faculty factor: Reassessing the American academy in a turbulent era (pp. 13–34). Johns Hopkins
University Press. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/016146811411601007
Santos, J., & Ramos, L. (2022). Faculty development programs in the Philippines: Inclusion and exclusion patterns. Southeast
Asian Journal of Educational Research, 15(1), 45–67.
https://vipublisher.com/index.php/vij/article/download/241/228/517
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ330821
Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., & Eddy, P. L. (2019). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past,
understanding the present. Jossey-Bass. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tl.20048
Tushman, M. L., & Scanlan, T. J. (1981). Boundary spanning individuals: Their role in information transfer and their antecedents.
Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 289–305. https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=2819
Villanueva, J. (2021). Academic precarity and institutional policies: Navigating part-time teaching in Philippine universities. Higher
Education Quarterly, 75(2), 189–205.
Waltman, J., Bergom, I., Hollenshead, C., Miller, J., & August, L. (2012). Factors contributing to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction
among non-tenure-track faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 83(3), 411–434. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ986538
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
