
doi: 10.1111/teth.12509
AbstractThe world of the modern academy relies heavily upon contingent faculty in the teaching and training of students. Theological studies readily evidences this practice in innumerable ways. While the contingent faculty member is intrinsic to the mission of many modern schools, this piece ponders whether or not a trade‐off exists in the quality of learning contingent faculty can offer in comparison to residential or tenure track faculty members? The piece explores the constraints that many contingent faculty face in the world of theological education and asks the academy at large if such limits are something it really feels comfortable with. Ultimately, the piece voices a view that the modern academy must come to grips with its utilization of contingent faculty both for the sake of those faculty members, but more‐so for the sake of its students. See companion essays published in this issue of the journal by Hoon J. Lee, Bradley Burroughs, Kyle Schenkewitz, and Charles Harrell.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
