We don't always have time to answer questions from our readers individually, but we do appreciate the perspective and feedback they offer. From time to time, we'll use this space to give brief answers to some of the mail we receive.
We're noticing lots of interest in community colleges. Since they represent the growth area in higher education, we're happy to hear that candidates are interested in them.
Question: I'm working on a second master's degree and have begun to apply for teaching posts at a few community colleges. Having read your advice to Ph.D. candidates interviewing for their first jobs, I wonder, in what ways does the process differ at two-year schools, if at all?
Answer: Community-college searches are usually local rather than national, may involve more civil-service procedures, may give a greater role to human-resources departments, and may involve a shorter campus visit.
The actual interviewing process is not radically different, but community colleges are looking for good teachers who can handle a heavy teaching load. Some jump at the chance to hire a Ph.D., while others concentrate their hiring at the master's level. You may not need to give a presentation on your research, and your research, compared with your teaching, will certainly receive less intense scrutiny than it will at a research university.
Take a look at a recent Chronicle article on how community colleges are hiring faculty members with Ph.D's. It may give you some ideas of what to expect.
An excellent list of community-college URL's is maintained by the Maricopa Community College District. Many community colleges post their faculty openings directly on their Web sites. The URL is http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/cc/
We hear from many people who are frustrated by lapses in feedback from hiring committees. Unfortunately, the situation described below happens very often. If it happens to you, don't take it personally.
Question: I interviewed for a very interesting job a month ago. I drove several hours to meet prospective employers halfway. The interview was extensive (several hours) and I followed up with a thank-you letter and the requested credentials. I've heard nothing since and wonder what the proper thing to do is regarding following up on this.
Answer: Ideally, the interviewers would have told you at the end of the interview when you might expect to hear from them, and, when that time came, you'd have heard from them, even if it was only to tell you that the decision was taking longer than had been expected. However, as often as not, follow-up with candidates is much more haphazard.
After this long, it's absolutely fine for you to contact the head of the search committee, preferably by phone, reaffirm your interest and simply inquire as to the current timetable for decision making.
Sometimes long delays mean nothing at all. Occasionally they mean the job has been offered to someone else, but the department plans to offer it to you if that person declines, and so wants to keep your candidacy active. It's usually best to avoid probing for hints about how likely you are to be offered the job.
If you get another offer and prefer the institution which has you on hold, by all means contact them immediately and let them know you need to make a decision.
If there's one particular concern shared by readers who write to us, it's that of being in some sense "too old" or having "taken too long." Here's an example:
Question: At interviews, how do I deal with the question of "It took nine years for you to complete grad school from start to finish. Why aren't you teaching full-time or haven't you published more?" How do I explain that, for the past four years, I have had to work full time at a strictly non-academic job (as a legal secretary) in order to pay the bills? Yes, this has slowed down my pace in finishing the dissertation, but what else could have I done? Will my "non-commitment" to academia harm me in the interview process (or should I say commitment on my own terms, since I am not an exploited adjunct or underpaid research assistant)?
Answer: Actually, nine years to degree is well within the average time for anthropology (the candidate's field), a particularly time-consuming discipline, so the question you dread may not arise at all.
However, if people ask, just say that you needed to work full time for a while for financial reasons, that you're proud of having organized your time well enough to complete your degree while working, and that you're now looking forward to full-time academic employment. Then return the conversation to a discussion of your strengths and qualifications.
Sometimes readers simply share their experiences. Here is a piece we especially enjoyed:
About 10 years ago I interviewed at a Modern Language Association conference for an English-faculty position at a prestigious private college, call it X College. Of course, the nine-person search committee conducted the interview in a hotel room (most of the men had found chairs of some sort while the women were relegated to sitting on the beds).The interrogation began, and I attempted to respond to all questions as thoughtfully and thoroughly as possible. After each response came the inevitable follow-up question, which I endeavored to answer. The questions were, on the whole, reasonable -- at least until the gentleman sitting behind me began to ask, "And how would you explain that to the faculty who teach at X College?"
While I thought the question to be a bit odd, I rephrased my response and awaited the next question. The chairperson asked his next question. I responded. Then came the follow-up. Immediately following my response came the query, "And how would you explain that to the people at X College?" This pattern persisted throughout the entire interview.
Perhaps those interviewers could claim that they were simply trying to ascertain how well I could "think on my feet." However, when I left the room, I felt as though I had been the butt of a very bad joke. Even now as I reflect upon this experience, I can see no purpose in such questioning -- unless, of course, one intends to humiliate the person being interviewed.
Having had such unpleasant interview experiences, I have frequently empathized with candidates applying for positions in my current department who were subjected to some bizarre behaviors by one of my former colleagues. This colleague always preferred to ask the final question of an interview. She had a favorite. After the candidate had endured the rigorous questioning by no fewer than eight interviewers, my former colleague would ask: "If you could choose to be reincarnated as any animal, what animal would that be?"
Unfortunately, she seemed to base her assessment of a candidate's worth solely on the person's response to this idiosyncratic and, in my estimation, nonsensical question.
When a search committee selects individuals to interview, they are selecting potential colleagues. I will never understand why a committee would invite a person to interview and then proceed during that interview to ask trick questions or questions that are obviously inappropriate. We are all aware of what is and is not appropriate behavior during interviews -- or at least we should be.
I never did receive a job offer from that little private school in the backwoods of New England. But if I had, I would have turned the offer down flat. Following my interview, I knew that I could never trust anyone in that room. And besides -- if I did take that job, I would have to spend so much time explaining things to the faculty that I wouldn't have time for students.
We liked this individual's ability to maintain his perspective and sense of humor. We applaud his efforts to give current candidates a better experience than he had at the disastrous interview he described.
