Should universities prioritize tenure-track positions over adjunct contracts?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should universities prioritize tenure-track positions over adjunct contracts?". Your opponent's style: AI

In my opinion, university should prioritize nontenured faculties. They could have more free time to devote themselves to teaching

You've just revealed the fatal flaw in your argument. Adjuncts don't have more free time, they have *less*. Most teach at multiple institutions to cobble together survival wages, leaving zero time for anything but grading and prep. Meanwhile, tenure-track faculty actually have job security that enables deep course design and mentorship. Your premise inverts reality. The question isn't whether adjuncts are cheaper, it's whether precarity produces better teaching. It demonstrably doesn't. Why would instability devoted to survival suddenly yield superior pedagogy compared to security devoted to excellence?

full-time professors usually take research in priority than their teaching. Moreover, they have more administrative duty, supervise students, and other duty. Therefore, they could not have more free time than adjunct professors in this respect

You're conflating "free time" with "teaching focus"—different things entirely. Tenure-track faculty choose where to allocate effort because they have autonomy; adjuncts have no choice but to hustle for survival. A tenured professor can deliberately prioritize teaching if they want. An adjunct juggling three schools cannot. You're also ignoring that research, mentorship, and administration aren't distractions from teaching, they're *part of excellent teaching*. Adjuncts typically teach in isolation with no labs, no grants, no student researchers. You're celebrating constraint as virtue. Why should universities hire people forced into mediocrity rather than those empowered to excel at multiple dimensions simultaneously?