okay, I will go where angels fear to tread: the @emersoncollege syllabus controversy.
So, a brief thread. 1/n

The course was on the schedule for Emerson College for this fall, but whoever was supposed to teach it is now apparently unable to do so, for whatever reason. How do I know this? The job ad that was posted to find an adjunct to teach this single class. https://web.archive.org/web/20200901002807/https://jobs.world.edu/jobs/affiliated-part-time-faculty-queer-dreams-politics-culture-and-difference/ 2/n

Note the date the job ad was posted: August 11 2020. This is for an upper-division course scheduled to start on August 31 (today), to be taught on some high-flex-hybrid-blended schedule including a combo of f2f and online. 3/n

As we know, Boston is practically paved with colleges and universities and absolutely lousy with PhDs in every conceivable discipline. No idea what the applicant pool was, but this was clearly an urgent/accelerated temporary hire. 4/n

The adjunct who got the job is a critical theorist who does creative writing, and who has been an assistant professor at a couple of colleges (including Emerson). That past experience with the school may have been a factor: easier onboarding/orientation in a hurry. 5/n

I have no idea what an adjunct at Emerson makes for one class. I have no idea what (if any) other classes this guy is teaching, or where, or what his situation is. And in a way this guy's specific situation is immaterial to the problem being discussed in these threads. 6/n

Here's the thing: in ANY dispute about college curriculum, from the Stanford canon wars to this current brouhaha, there is ALWAYS a tertium quid that is usually ignored. There's the professor w/ academic freedom etc, the student w/ expectations for inclusion/representation...7/n

...and then there is the is the third thing, the university as a site of labor, for both students and professors. See Evan Watkins, *Work Time: English Departments and the Circulation of Cultural Value* (Stanford Press, 1980). 8/n

Academic freedom is important. Representation and inclusion are important. A critical stance toward the very project of pedagogy is important, especially as the demands of capital shape the lives of both profs and students. But... 9/n

There is no way to adjudicate the complaints of this student versus the response of this professor without taking a deep dive into the role of the college as a site of labor and of the production of capital. In a world of credientials, "cultural capital" carries a $$ value. 10/n

So before piling on the student or piling on the professor or deciding which one of them is "right," get a good grasp on @EmersonCollege's role in helping to create and sustain this situation, where they are encouraging f2f instruction for the ($$$) "college experience," but...

have parceled out the instruction of this boutique elective class to a temporary part-time worker without ever bothering to explain to their students (I'm QUITE sure) the difference between adjuncts and professors.

What I hope this student will ask (or someone will): 1) why are we f2f at all during a pandemic; does @EmersonCollege just want my money? 2) why did the department leave this course listed when the prof who designed it couldn't teach it, when tuition/residency is so $$$?

Here's one answer to that latter question, perhaps: enrollment numbers. A class that students were already registered for or already planning to sign up for helps the relevant department(s) hit their enrollment hours targets. (And it may be the only 400 level elective available.)

Anyway, pitting professors against students, students against professors, in another episode of the culture wars: cancel culture edition, is a carnival barker's trick. Keep your eye on the ball: it's not the syllabus, it's not the student. It's the MONEY. / end