The growing reliance on adjunct faculty in
higher education has transformed instructional practices and raised critical
questions about evaluation and reappointment. Although adjuncts constitute over
half of the U.S. college teaching workforce, evaluation processes remain
inconsistent. This study examines how two historically Black colleges and
universities (HBCUs) in Mississippi evaluate and reappoint adjunct faculty,
focusing on decision-making models and institutional practices. It explores the
use of multiple evaluation measures—such as student evaluations, peer
observations, teaching portfolios, and administrative reviews—and critiques the
limitations of relying solely on student feedback. Findings from the literature
reveal a lack of standardized evaluation criteria, resulting in uneven
accountability and limited faculty development. The study argues for
systematic, multi-source evaluation approaches that promote fairness, enhance
instructional quality, and align with institutional goals, emphasizing the need
for data-driven strategies to strengthen adjunct faculty assessment at HBCUs
and across higher.
