COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	@make (letterhead,Phone"497-4430",Who"John McCarthy",Logo Old, Department CSD)
C00007 ENDMK
C⊗;
@make (letterhead,Phone"497-4430",Who"John McCarthy",Logo Old, Department CSD)
@style(indent 8)
@blankspace(8 lines)
@begin(address)
Prof. J. H. Merryman
Committee on the Adjunct Professoriate
c/o the Academic Secretary, 
Building 178, Room 105
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305
@end(address)
@greeting(Dear Professor Merryman:)
@begin(body)
	Concerning the Adjunct Professoriate, I have several comments
relative to its use in the Computer Science Department.

	It seems to me that the title serves to entirely disjoint
purposes.  In the language departments, the position is occupied
by people who are entirely supported by Stanford and devote their
entire efforts to the teaching program.  In our department (and in
engineering too, I think), the position is occupied by people who
are entirely supported by research grants and contracts
and who put their entire efforts into research.  Logical tidiness
would suggest two different titles, but there is no real need for
tidiness per se.

	We have used the position for people who have become the leaders in
certain areas of important research but who don't play an important
teaching role.  Also they are supported by soft money, although in
both cases the funding has been stable for something like fifteen
years.  Stanford might not continue work in the area if the government
support were discontinued because of its high ccst.  The position is
sometimes rather specialized and the person has grown into the role
he plays.
In both of our cases, the person becoming an adjunct professor was
effectively a promotion rather than a search for someone to fill
a definite slot.  Having the person become the Principal Investigator
in name of a project for which he had long been the Principal Investigator
in fact was a key motivation for the promotion.  The nominal Principal
Investigator's interests had changed and serving as a nominal supervisor
became increasingly irksome.

	In one case, an honest advertisement would have
had to say, "Wanted: someone to fill the position created and occupied
by Dr. B better than he does.  Apply to him for an accurate description
of the position".

	The present system of ranks and criteria for occupying the
rank seem pretty good.  Any possible mitigation of the
evil of "affirmative action" would be helpful.  Arbitrary restrictions
on the number of adjunct professors are undesirable.  I have become
convinced that it is desirable to maintain the restrictions on
being a Principal Investigator.
@newpage

	Sorry about the rambling nature of this letter, but I don't
have time to revise it.
@end(body)
Sincerely,




John McCarthy
Professor of Computer Science