In our estimation five-plus-two presents a problem for a number of departments as it would: a) compromise the expected standard of the dissertation within the relevant field of study by enforcing a time-to-degree of five years; b) compromise the extra-dissertation expectations of the department, such as field coverage, emphasis work, foreign language competency, and archival work; c) put undue pressure on faculty to prematurely approve students through the program, given the proposed "checkpoints" in years three and four; d) limit the capacity of departments to accept those students who do not have prior graduate work, or who may be inclined to change fields or add areas of expertise, and who may have lower test scores for whatever reasons—including English fluency—but propose interesting projects.
As it stands, five-plus-two tiers students within the School, making discretionary fellowship funds disproportionately available to those students within programs that have adopted the funding model. Under five-plus-two, previously competitive Dean's Fellowships are awarded to support the fellowship expense of five-plus-two students. At the same time, the availability of Summer Dissertation Fellowships has fallen to a record low of four as of this year. Five-plus-two therefore prioritizes and privileges a certain type of student and a certain type of project, devaluing the time and resources required to produce competitive research. It is not clear that students who obtain Assistant Adjunct positions in their final years will have the time or departmental relation to facilitate thorough research, especially while being on the job market. It is a model that strongly internalizes a time-to-degree logic that privileges students who appear to be safe bets—including those with the extra-institutional resources—while negatively impacting those students who may experience extra-institutional limitations on their time, including those who support, or who may start families.
SOH administration and those on the Reconstitution Committee expressed concern over adjunct labor but have as yet no program to address adjunctification. "Five-plus-two" is a model of adjunctification, not one that addresses it. Research and teaching, previously done by graduate students within departments, is under this program to be done by stand-alone adjunct-laborers. Further, the AAP position, unlike full-time lecturers, is capped at two years, meaning that there is no access to even the promise of job-security through unionization. Five-plus-two increases adjunct labor, while assuming that adjunct labor doesn't already exist. Currently Hum Core is taught by a combination of graduate students and, often, recently graduated lecturers who support themselves while on the job market. By forcing Hum Core to absorb incoming five-plus-two students in the future, those who currently teach Hum Core and Composition--often graduate students or UCI graduates with greater experience--would be displaced.
Thus it is a question of priority, not a question of resources. There have never been more composition sections and there have never been fewer SOH grads. It is our contention that the UCI School of Humanities and its administration should seek to support its graduate students in the completion of competitive research, with sufficient training in their field(s). It is widely recognized within the school that work which is critical, research-focused, interdisciplinary, and requiring language skills takes six to seven years. This is especially the case for less privileged entering students. The School should seek to pursue either funding packages that cover this duration, and/or post-doctoral research positions after graduation. Forcing students to graduate prematurely and then employing them on short-term AAP contracts with an increased teaching load may save money. However, such a funding model devalues carefully advised student research and, as a result, success on the job market. The School should seek to make more courses available for research-qualified students to teach, increasing not only the breadth and depth of undergraduate education, but also preparing graduate students for teaching in their future fields of expertise. The School as a whole suffers from a downward pressure on the number of its graduate students, and an increased, albeit externally produced, emphasis on speed of completion over quality of work.