= Premium Content

  • Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

The Community-College Job Search

September 8, 2011, 10:00 am

By Rob Jenkins

With the fall hiring season nearly upon us, I thought it might be a good time to reprise some of the advice I offered last spring, during an interview with Matthew Dembicki, online editor for The Community College Times. With Matthew’s kind permission, here is an excerpt from that interview:

Question: What are some common mistakes made by applicants seeking to work at a community college?

Answer: The biggest mistake academic job hunters make is failing to recognize the difference between applying at a two-year school and applying at a research university. They tend to take a “one size fits all” approach to the job search—writing one cover letter, for instance, which they send with only minor modifications (or none at all) to every school where they’re applying.

The problem is that a letter to a four-year school should focus heavily on the applicant’s research agenda, while a letter to a community college should focus primarily on teaching. When members of a community-college search committee read a letter that talks mostly about the applicant’s research, they assume that the person either doesn’t understand the nature—specifically, the teaching mission—of community colleges or else is applying at a two-year school only as a fall-back position—or both. Community colleges are rarely interested in hiring someone like that.

Other mistakes include applicants neglecting to do their homework—researching the specific institution and community colleges in general—before walking into the interview room; focusing too much on their dissertations and not enough on their teaching during the interview; preparing a teaching demo that is more presentation than demonstration—more an overview of what the applicant would do, rather than a brief sample of his or her actual teaching; and failing to ask intelligent questions at the end of the interview, which actually goes back to the issue of doing one’s homework.

Question: Since community colleges have moved into the national spotlight, has interest in working at community colleges grown?

Answer: Interest in working at community colleges has certainly grown in recent years, but I’m not sure how much of that has to do with the national spotlight. My sense is that it has a lot more to do with the economy in general and with the tight academic job market in particular.

One of the messages of my book, and something I really emphasize when I speak to groups of graduate students, is that job seekers are shortchanging themselves if they overlook the community-college market. In a typical issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education, for instance, about 35-40 percent of the faculty positions advertised are at two-year schools. That’s a huge segment of the job market, and one that job hunters would be ill-advised to ignore.

Some of them still do, either because they don’t know much about community colleges or because they’ve been conditioned by their advisers to think that teaching at a community college is beneath them. But I think that, over all, the word is starting to get out that there are still jobs available at community colleges and that they’re great places to work.

Question: Are you seeing any trends in terms of applicants or who colleges look to hire?

Answer: One definite trend is that we’re seeing more and more Ph.D.’s applying at two-year schools. This, of course, also has to do with the tight academic job market.

Some two-year schools are trying to take advantage of this situation and actively recruit Ph.D.’s, either in pursuit of some elusive notion of “prestige” or because of what I regard as a mistaken belief that someone with a doctorate is automatically a better teacher than someone with “just a master’s.” But very few community colleges have gone so far as to require a doctorate, and most are still very open to hiring M.A.’s with excellent teaching credentials.

In fact, I’d say that an M.A. who can demonstrate that he or she is an excellent teacher stands a good chance of being hired over a Ph.D. who can’t demonstrate that—or who makes the mistake I mentioned above of not tailoring his or her application to the two-year school.

Another trend has to do with technology. Increasingly, the applicants I’m seeing are extremely adept at using all sorts of new technologies, to the point where I’m sometimes, quite frankly, a little intimidated, in much the same way as I’m intimidated by my teenage son’s mastery of all things computer-related.

In the long run, I think this bodes well for our colleges, because these new-age faculty members can relate well to today’s students, and they can also teach the rest of us how to incorporate some of these technologies into our classrooms. Two-year colleges these days certainly look for people who are well versed in the latest technologies, who know how to deliver course content through a variety of methods, and who aren’t intimidated by social networking, smart devices, and other technological trends.

This entry was posted in Faculty Hiring, The Two-Year Track. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • lodovic1953

    This is true, however, community colleges, like universities, don’t provide teacher training for their faculty. For example, I taught Psychology  at a community college for 18 years (full-time faculty), and felt that I was an excellent college professor, until I went to public school teaching. There I was trained in teaching dynamic and essential skills. As a result,  I am a much better teacher, but, I find it difficult to find a full-time job. Presently, I have been working for Keiser University as a adjunct Psy.Professor for one year, and I don’t know what the future holds. I would like to make this my last job.

  • laker

    Matthew’s initial comments are spot on. The searches I have been on had some elegantly educated applicants who tipped their hand about their agenda with over written letters about a “passion for James Joyce” or another literary figure from their own graduate work. They might as well have written “give me this job so I can work on my book”. Adjuncts who had been with us were able to channel their passion for teaching and interaction with students into well written letters and c.v.’s that demonstrated an understanding of us and what we were about. Yes, we often hire our adjuncts into full-time tenure track positions, and they have been outstanding.

  • translog

    I was rather unfortunate in not continuing with a research agenda in the university when I demonstrated amply that I had a hard nose for applied research in logistics and supply chain management. But sharing innovative ideas in a conferences did not help either either because of the changes introduced in the university for AACSB process.

    AACSB provides internationally recognized, specialized accreditation for business and accounting programs at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral level. The AACSB Accreditation Standards challenge post-secondary educators to pursue excellence and continuous improvement throughout their business programs. AACSB Accreditation is known, worldwide, as the longest standing, most recognized form of specialized/professional accreditation an institution and its business programs can earn.
     
    With conditions becoming difficult to obtain one , those who know it all simply wasted resources of the institution in oil-rich states like Kuwait by creating a conflict between those who can teach professionally and those who do research..Such academic managers seek affiliations, new programs and people with credentials yet to be proved.

  • adrake

    I have received the impression, from faculty at a local community college and my advisors at an R1 university, that applicants for a full-time position at a community college do not stand a chance without some sort of community college experience.  I have a great deal of teaching experience at universities, and I relish the opportunity to work in a college environment that focuses on teaching.  Should I apply for full-time positions at community colleges this year anyway?  Or is it necessary to become an adjunct first and get my foot in the door before hoping for any full-time work? 

  • robjenkins

    Most CC’s do look for significant teaching experience, perhaps as much as two or three years full-time or the equivalent as an adjunct (10 courses = one year). Experience at a CC is always a plus but usually not a requirement. To put it another way, lack of CC experience shouldn’t disqualify you, but it may make you less competitive than other applicants who have it. If you aren’t able to get a full-time job right away, teaching as an adjunct is certainly a good way to get your foot in the door at a particular college while continuing to add experience to your CV. You might want to go back and read a couple of my columns, one from several years ago (http://chronicle.com/search/?search_siteId=5&contextId=&action=rem&searchQueryString=rob+jenkins+a+foot+in+the+door) and the other more recent: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Advice-Nobody-Likes/126454/.

    Best of luck in your search.

    Rob

  • yellow1

    I think it depends on the community college. Many, like mine, with a huge technical side, require “teacher” training. Many of our faculty have a background in industry/field and little teaching or training experience. They have the academic credential for accreditation, the industry cred and experience to help with job placement/meeting students halfway, but they have never even created a syllabus. They need instruction that employee management is not the same as classroom management. Finally, they have little experience using technology in an academic environment.

    I’ve been fortunate enough to work for multiple 2 year schools that require these types of trainings and staff development for all full time instructors and open these same trainings (sometimes even for pay) to all adjuncts.

    Relative to obtaining a faculty position, those who have taught have a huge leg up on those who have not. In core curriculum areas, faculty are hired at 2 year schools explicitly to TEACH first. All else is second. Any serious candidate needs to make sure his/her long term goals put teaching the subject for which s/he is applying front and center.

  • 22089391

    Lodovic1953 & adrake-Both of you demonstrate exactly what Rob is trying to say. Every community college is different and you need to research the COMMUNITY that the college is located in as well as the college. For example, the community college that I teach at has a Center for Teaching and Learning that is totally focused on training us to be great teachers. We have a Faculty Support Center for faculty who are new to technology or want to upgrade skills. If this is your passion, apply to schools with these resources. They are usually  bragged about on the college’s website. 

    As to who has a chance or does not have a chance to be selected by a community college, 3 of my sons have graduated from R1s and I have learned that R1s are clueless about community colleges so anything advisors say about them should be ignored (unless they have an Associates from one). Community college faculty are also suspect as many community college faculty have never served on a selection committee and really  do not know how selection decisions are made. The rumors about how selections are made at my college are always far from the facts.

    Like Rob, I have served on more searches that I even want to remember in multiple disciplines and we are just as likely to select a candidate with little teaching experience anywhere (i.e. CC, teaching college or R1) as we are to select someone with a long list of teaching creds, IF their teaching demo and interview shows us that they know and love their discipline, want others to love it and make us excited to work with them. We can teach the skills of a good teacher, but the love of your discipline and teaching it has to be there first.

    So, love what you do, be dedicated to teaching others to love what you do (sometimes in spite of themselves) and research the community college to which you are interested in applying and make sure they have all the support services in which you are interested. You will stand as much chance as being selected as anyone, but not if you do not apply!!!!! We need you! APPLY!!!!!

  • kate3392

    In reference to community college vs. university:  I have sat on several faculty hiring committees in the past couple years, and while you are correct about the teaching mission of the community college, we DO want someone that knows how to do research and has demonstrated this previously.  With all the talk about assessment and ‘data driven’ decision-making, we have to have people to help with this. .About technology:  Sad that committees are intimidated by tech prowess.  The future lies with those who don’t just use technology, but know how to use it to effectively accomplish the teaching mission of the cc.  We don’t hire anyone now who does not have online teaching skills.

  • esnider

    Five years ago I was a senior faculty at a large state university.  I was recruited by a small liberal arts college (I hadn’t been on the job market) for a senior level faculty position, with all sorts of promises and pleas.  I decided to apply, interviewed, like the prospect, and took the job.  Less than three years later I was made a budget cut (save more money cutting my position than that of a new asst prof).  So I was a senior professor looking for employment when there were almost no positions for senior faculty in my area of teaching and research specialty.  A couple of months into my job search (what they say is true: searching for full-time employment is a full-time job) and pretty discouraged by the prospects, my sister said “have you considered community colleges?”  I hadn’t.  I started.  One challenge is that they often don’t put job notices in professional (discipline specific) venues.  You may have to look at the individual colleges’ HR websites. [Hint for job seekers: do an internet search for a specific state's community colleges.  For example: Illinois Community Colleges.  Most states have community college associations, where you can find links to each community college in the state.  From there, go to each college and to that college's HR site.  Yes it is tedious.  Such is the life of a job seeker.  Get used to it.]  I had been chair of the department for half a dozen years at the large state university.  So I looked on the HR sites for academic administration positions.  I found lots of positions to which I applied.  I got a meaningful and rewarding position chairing a large department (16 FT and 100 PT faculty, 280 sections of courses per semester teaching 7500 students per semester) in a large community college.  When I got my Ph.D. twenty-six years ago and landed a tenure track job in a department with a graduate program, I never imagined a community college would be in my future.  Would I rather still be teaching in a good quality liberal arts college?  Probably.  Am I pleased with the position I currently have?  Very much so.  It is meaningful and rewarding work.

  • BullHubbard

    I have been teaching continuously as an adjunct for 12 years without an interruption (until last year when summer sections had become unavailable to part-timers because of reduced funding).  In that time I have applied to so many CA community colleges I have lost count, and I have not been granted ONE interview.  I have worked and re-worked my cover letter to death, according to the style recommended in the Chronicle . . . and nada.  My peer evaluations have been positive, as have my “student evaluations of teaching effectiveness,” so I am at a loss.  In fact, I have given up applying and have adjusted to living with two PT teaching jobs per term.

  • kgodwin

    At my institution, a lack of community college experience will certainly make you less competitive.  

    This goes back to the idea that you’re applying to community colleges as a fall-back position.  We don’t want to be your stepping stone.  When we hire on a tenure-track, we’re making a lifetime commitment to you.  We expect you to make one back.  

    We also don’t want to be treated like we – or our students – are inferior.  Without a doubt, community colleges are a different kind of institution.  When we’ve got a dozen good applicants with community college experience, why take the chance that you’re going to look down your nose at us?  It’s expensive to fly you out for an interview, etc.

    That being said, we won’t disqualify you for not having community college experience.  

  • tcolb01

    In reply to BullHubbard, please refer to my response to Isaac Sweeny’s “On Hiring:  Adjunct Emergency Fund,” the Chronicle’s Community Colleges, 8/9/11 (if you can locate it).  In summary, it took me 14 years of dedicated community college work to go from adjunct to tenure.  Then, 2 years later, I was appointed Dean.  Why?  Some good luck, yes, but  I stayed out of the politics and, most importantly, I was patient, very patient.  Since retiring 10 years ago, I have followed the plight of adjunct faculty very closely.  I guarantee to you and everyone else that the situation will not change; it will no doubt get “worse.”  Those that are fortunate enough to land a permanent position are the ones that remain patient and don’t ruffle any feathers.  On the other hand, I know of many adjunct faculty who have remained in that position for 20 years, or more (piecing together jobs), and never really had any desire to become full-time, with its own inherent problems.  If I can offer you any advise, it would be to not be so anxious.  Just relax and continue to be a good teacher and colleague.  However, please don’t give up applying.  You don’t need to keep re-working your cover letter; I’m sure it’s just fine.  You’ll eventually get what you want.     

  • pianiste

    1. Gary Williams’s cruddy graduation rate for his *undergraduate* players isn’t comparable to the cruddy job-getting rate of Ph.Ds. One concerns undergraduates who, mostly, are on “scholarships” for something unrelated to undergraduate higher education, and the other concerns advanced graduate students who, if they’re on “scholarship” or fellowships, are on them for reasons directly relevant to what they’re studying. (Why is it necessary to point this out?)

    2a. I’ll grant that “degrees ARE irrelevant to big-time professional sports.” They’re also irrelevant to big-time collegiate de facto Triple-A level professional sports. Otherwise, colleges wouldn’t be in bed with the pro leagues (especially concerning one-and-done basketball players such as John Wall from Kentucky or Derrick Rose from Memphis) on encouraging talented players to “come out early” (i.e., leave college without a degree in order to play in the NBA or NFL).

    2b. And the reason degrees are irrelevant to both major-league professional sports and Triple-A-level college professional sports is that…ready?…big-time Triple-A-level college professional sports are irrelevant to the academic reason-for-being of a university.

    3. Define success in any terms one wants, from Phi Beta Kappa to Phi Slamma Jamma (they lost in the championship game, though, didn’t they?). But there’s no good reason why Phi Slamma Jammas have to exist on college campuses. Or, if they do, let them be separate, licensed businesses, like company-sponsored pro sports teams in Europe, paying to use the schools’ names, and the players school employees.

    4. Academic outcomes for B.A. holders and Ph.D. holders are problems indeed. But they’re problems that are relevant to a university. The academic outcomes for big-time college revenue sports players aren’t. Solution? Get rid of big-time college revenue sports, as per the last sentence of (3), above, or in doing away with that great oxymoron, “athletic scholarships,” and cleaving as close to a D-III model as possible.

  • trudie
  • steve_a

    I agree that “sports has it’s own varieties of success” but UMD’s dismal graduation rate is not due to having 80% of its players leaving early for the NBA.  At UNC-Chapel Hill, ~75% of the basketball players graduate.  Somebody with more free time than I have can compile the numbers to find out for sure, but I surmise that UMD did NOT have 3-4 players leaving early for the NBA for every one from UNC.

  • professorvelo

    Steve,

    Indeed. My comment was a little precipitous and ill conceived. I suppose what I mean to say is that we are reaching a point where it’s difficult to maintain the fiction that there is anything  collegiate about collegiate athletics (perhaps more specifically those in which there is a viable professional career possible). with even high school players being celebrated and their choice of a ‘college’ being televised as though it were a pro contract, it has become clear that this is a huge business with only a tangential relationship to the colleges and universities that support them (or, are supported by them as the case increasingly is). In light of this, the naming of the court and it’s lack of connection to academic achievement, seems honest at least.

  • steve_a

    I do agree with the point you are trying to make.  I think it is more complex than “is there a potential of a viable professional career for athletes?”  There are many former college players in earning large incomes in professional baseball & ice hockey and a few in tennis but these sports also have viable, healthy minor league systems, which provide an alternative to going to college. Thus, the student athletes in these sports may be more committed to the student part of their equation because they chose to be students. There is no viable minor league for basketball and football. I also strongly believe that what happens in athletics starts at the top of the university hierarchy and is also dependent on the university culture.  Colleges such as Notre Dame and Duke graduate >97% of their athletes because it is important to these colleges to do so.  UN-Chapel Hill graduates 87%.  Nobody claims that Duke or UNC cannot be competitive in basketball or that Notre Dame is not competitive in football.

  • electronicmuse

    At the end of the day, this is a question that might reasonably be asked: “how many of those kids who “fail” to graduate from collegiate sports programs, and subsequently go on to menial jobs, would simply have gone to those exact same menial jobs straight from high school, had they not been given the opportunity to at least give it their shot by playing collegiate sports?”

    Think about where these athletes are coming from, and have a little imagination as to what their prospects in life are coming out of high school. How can SOME college experience for them be a bad thing, whether they get a degree, or not?

    All I can say about your view is: “what a terrible world.”

  • pianiste

    I see. We shouldn’t ask college students who play D-I revenue sports to be, well, college students. Instead we should just regard college for them as a way station on the way to the menial jobs they’re going to get anyway, with the justification that what they do carries a longshot chance at some big money in the pros. All I can say about this view is, “What a cynical world.”

    “Some college experience”:  Separate dorms and eating facilties, gut courses and easy majors, entourages of trainers and tutors, “scholarship” loss if injured and/or cut, playing for bogus compensation (“a free education”) especially if they don’t graduate, etc., etc.

    There is a solution:

    Just have colleges bear the same relation to their big-time, de facto professional (albeit now with woefully underpaid players) “revenue sports” teams as some European companies do the the basketball teams they sponsor. Make the players employees of the universities, and license the sports businesses (university name, nickname, facilities) as semi-autonomous franchises (which most big-time athletic departments already are, anyway). Make the SEC, Big Ten, PAC 12, etc., under-26 leagues, pay the players modest salaries with the perq that they can take classes at their own paces as long as they maintain GPAs sufficient to graduate, with perhaps a cap on the number of years in which they can matriculate.

    The argument that having de facto pros playing instead of “college students” will diminish enthusiasm, ticket sales, TV revenue, etc., won’t stand up. Put it this way: Hardly anybody, even in the tailgate crowd, actually believes that the players on, say Alabama’s football team or UConn’s men’s basketball team, are majorly “normal” college students save for their athletic participation, and fans still go nuts over them. Taking one more step toward reality won’t faze them–or CBS, NBC, Fox, ESPN or the regional cable networks. The money will still pour in, and couch potatoes everywhere will still have their fill of spectactor sports.

  • rod2312

    Sometimes, as Chen has done, people have to simply leave.

  • rod2312

    I’m referring to this country.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037