next »

[Interviewee]

I am having an interview at an UK university in a month. I understand there are many differences at interview between US and UK, including social with all other candidates. What other questions will come up during the interview? What should I expect at the interview?

[expat]

Did they give you a list of essential and desirable criteria for the job?

[Interviewee]

I received a job description when I first applied for the position. Other than that, I have no idea what to expect at the interview.

[expat]

In Northern Ireland it's all about essentials and desirables because of equal opportunity legislation.

In the rest of the UK, I would guess that you will get a series of questions on what you can contribute in terms of teaching and research. The RAE (www.rae.ac.uk) is a HUGE issue here and I would strongly suggest that you learn as much as possible about it before you come. If this is a "research active" group, they will want to know what you can contribute for the 2008 RAE. The biggies are your 4 best publications from 2001, your research "esteem", and your research grants.

In the UK, the big funders are Research Councils and the AHRB; the latter is the Arts and Humanities Research Board. Again, I suggest you do your homework; obvious questions are in the area of how do you expect to fund your research.

In NI, each candidate is asked the same questions although follow-ups are allowed. If this is true in Britain, then you may be asked very UK specific questions (since they can't make allowances for your background) and hence you will need to be very prepared.

As an example, I have an overseas colleague at the moment who filling out an application. He doesn't know what an "honours" degree is although it's required for the post (job) to which he's applying. Get on the web and start learning would be my advice.

Don't despair, however. I first came here to interview for a postdoc, got the job, and am now teaching (and researching) in a permanent post. We may be "two countries separated by a common language" but you can muddle through. (BTW, I love it here in NI!)

Good luck!

[Expat in UK]

I'm an American and I've been teaching here in the UK since 1998....

The biggest difference I've seen in interviews here in the UK.. (besides the totally WEIRD fact that you do indeed meet all the other job candidates)... is that they are less interested in whether or not you will 'fit in' with their department and more interested in whether or not you fufill the specific job requirements.

Don't expect them to make assumptions about anything based on your CV... make sure that you  tell them specifically how you meet the listed criteria.

Teaching over here is different... and words and terminology is different. But I've found that if you're honest and admit that you don't know what they mean about something, because of phrasing or terms, the British will rephrase the question. I remember during my interview one question asked me (after I'd been given the 'tour') was... 'What do you think of our kit?'

I just looked blank and said 'what?'... again the question was asked using the word 'kit'. It took several tries before I realized that I was being asked what I thought of the lab/computing facilities.

If you get the job, be prepared for mind boggling amounts of paperwork... double and triple marking of student work. Endless meetings that don't seem to get anything done. I really want to give ALL Brits a copy of Robert's Rules of Order.... *laugh*

I do find that students here work harder than in the US (for the most part)... but they don't have a wider view of the world because they have been focusing in ever increasingly narrow options since they were 13.

All in all... I've enjoyed working in the UK... and the experience has been good for me career wise. I've gotten great support... and have moved up the academic ranks at the same speed as my colleagues in the US.

Good luck

[working in the UK]

Dear Interviewee,

the interviewing style is completely different from that in the US. In particular, you will probably only meet with the committee, not with the rest of the department.

The questions depend a lot on the committee, on the kind of institution, and the position. For something low level, the committee will go through a list of prepared questions. For readerhips and chairs, you can expect more personalized and in depth questions; also, informal conversations and previous contacts will play a more important role. There will also be more flexibility: if you can't go on the date of the interview they may be willing to reschedule (although the whole committee has to be there, and this may be hard to arrange).

In most places you can expect questions on your research and on the papers you have written: the issue here is the RAE, which has been discussed elsewhere in these forums. Funding history is also important, particularly for senior positions: they won't be expecting much for a lecturer post, but in any case make sure you stress any grants, or any other competitive source of funding, that you have obtained in the past. Research money is not so easy to come by, and the ability to obtain it is highly prized. Also, any "evidence of esteem" (prizes, indications that your papers have had international impact, invited addresses in important conferences, and so on) is very relevant.

Also, make sure you carefully review the job description and are prepared to describe your qualifications for each of the requirements.

There might also be some questions that would be bizzarre, if not illegal, in the US: for example, I was asked, "If we offer you this chair, will you take it?". I answered "probably, but not for sure", and still got it.

Good luck.

[expat]

Every interview panel I've been on in the past 5 years has ended with "If we offer you this job, will you take it?"

Again, I don't know if this is true in Britain but we have to fill in a scoresheet for each applicant with categories like "qualifications, job related achievements, professional experience, interpersonal skills" and so on. For each category we have to indicate whether the candidate "doesn't meet spec, meets spec, exceeds spec, or greatly exceeds spec". The trick is that if you don't meet the specification in any category you cannot be hired! Hence if the spec calls for a "first class honours degree" and you don't have the equivalent you're not appointable.

If you've made it to interview then the belief is that you do meet spec (or you wouldn't have been shortlisted). But if they ask you directly be sure to be able to say why your qualification/experience/etc.. is whatever it needs to be. In my opinion, potentially very good applicants from overseas can get tripped up because bog standard credentials here simply don't translate to other countries.

Good luck and please let us know how it goes.

[Interviewee]

I felt much better after reading your experience. I cannot reveal details of the interview plan, but I was told that the interview would last for two days with each candidate getting 1 hour with the committee. I have no idea what else to do after that 1 hour meeting, socialize with other candidates and compare our notes?

If the committee works 7 hours a day, then there will be approximately 14 candidates to be interviewed, which does not look like a SHORT list to me. This is very different from US, where one has scheduled meeting with almost every member of the department.

I certainly will try to figure out more about RAE. Thanks.

[former editor]

Last year I was kicking around the idea of relocating to the UK, and was short-listed at a top 10 Uni if England.  The schedule broke down like this, spread out over two days: 1 hour interview with the committee, 20 minute research presentation, 1 hour campus/city tour (plus additional if requested, like, if I wanted to see the Tate Modern, for example, which I thought was a nice touch), 1 formal dinner with the committee AND the other 2 candidates. And, yes, there was also the 'if we offer this position, will you take it question.' (I said I'd have to think about it; my heart really wasn't in it, though. The person who was hired is a colleague of mine and much better suited to what the department was looking for.)

Compared to the non-stop, run-you-ragged schedule we drag candidates on at R1, it was a nice, leisurely pace.  Like others have said, the committee may ask outright bizarre questions (to what we may be used to here in the US, that is), and ask for specifics as to how you fit the criteria listed on the job description/responsibilities, etc. information you were provided with.

Good luck!

PS, Another colleague of mine, who was interviewed at a UK Uni s/he was VERY MUCH interested in working at, answered the "will you accept?" question affirmatively, saying how much s/he enjoyed the campus, town, etc.  The committee said something humourous to the effect of, "well, good, you're hired, then" and officially offered her/him the post on the spot, which s/he accepted.  Not sure if this is common at all, but it might be a bit unnerving if you're not prepared to REALLY take the post if it is offered to you on the spot.

[European in UK]

I'm a European in the UK and I've been in a situation that I was offered the job about 30 minutes after the interview. I wasn't aware at the time that I could ask for time to think about the offer, so I accepted it and had to decline later on. You are definitely entitled to ask for time, but this will probably be quite short (a few days rather than a few weeks), because the committee will be eager to inform other candidates, or keep other appointable candidates on board. This is also the time to negotiate your salary and starting date, by mentioning, for example, that financial consequences are an important consideration and whether you can be appointed at a higher point on the salary scale. Similar to the US, the salary offered is usually a starting point for negotiation.

Another thing to keep in mind for those who are just a few years into their post-PhD career is that many of the better universities now ignore the Lecturer A salary scale and appoint starting lecturers on the first point of the lecturer B scale (see the higher education union website http://www.aut.org.uk for more information on salary scales). It is hard to find out which universities do this (except for Oxbridge, who use a completely different scale), but you might know people who are familiar with departmental and university policies.


[%sig%]

[Interviewee]

Thank you all for the wonderful comments.

So  salary is negotiable. Is there a startup package?
How do most graduate students at UK pay for their eduation? Do they rely on research assistantship from the faculty?

I am in science, so money is important.

[expat]

I'm in science as well. I was here as a post-doc first so my situation is a bit different.  My guess is that you might get a modest start-up of a few grand but are unlikely to get more.

Students are funded either internally, we have "Vice Chancellor fellowships" or externally through Research Councils. These can be "tied studentships" where you write a research grant that has a studentship as part of it. I think in Britain the good universities also get a certain number of RC funded studentships that are divided within the department; the funding model is different in Northern Ireland.

By the way, they are "post-grads" here, not "graduate students"

[European in UK]

I'm getting £1500 as start-up money (social sciences), which is quite similar to what I had at my previous university. There is less "guaranteed" university research money than where I come from, but there are external funding opportunities.

I can imagine that when you negotiate your salary you can also negotiate further start-up and research money.

[%sig%]