next »

[blarg07]

I know this may be a dumb question, but when printing out cover letters for academic job applications, is it appropriate/normal to use the letterhead of the university you are currently completing your PhD at or should I just use standard paper? Thanks

[seniorscholar]

This one always draws hot contention, so it may differ by field and by school. In English, 95% of cover letters  come on university letterhead, and the ones that don't are either from people currently out of the academic world (such as creative writers who think their two published poems will land them a change from their McJob to teaching in our MFA program) or from graduate programs we've never heard of. Also, we always supply our letterhead to grad students (and even visiting assistant professors) who are on the job market, as well as telling them to use the university's mail for heavy packets when people ask for lots of extra stuff. The best people to ask, however, are (1) your supervisor (2) someone recently heading a search committee in your department [what are they used to seeing, in your field] and (3) the department's graduate secretary.

[sirkdn]

This is a "hot button" issue on these fora....  some will claim that if you use letterhead you will end up in the wastebasket.... Others say: "of course, use the letterhead"

... I think it doesn't really matter....  

(let the flame war begin!)

[michigander]

The answer to this question really is field specific.  Definitely talk to your advisor and those people at your institution who make hiring decisions for the kind of job you'll be applying for.  In my experience, unlike a previous poster in English, a cover letter on institutional letterhead would usually result in automatic rejection as unprofessional.

[conjugate]

The answer to this question really is field specific.  Definitely talk to your advisor and those people at your institution who make hiring decisions for the kind of job you'll be applying for.  In my experience, unlike a previous poster in English, a cover letter on institutional letterhead would usually result in automatic rejection as unprofessional.

I'd certainly never reject an application for the kind of letterhead (or non-letterhead) that the cover letter came on, so you're right that it's field-specific.  I'm in Math, and we almost always go straight to the letters of recommendation, summary of research goals, and teaching statement, and figure all the letters say some variation on "I'm applying for the job."  But, come to think of it, I believe I always sent my cover letters on fancy non-letterhead paper.

[smurlein]

I am in English, too.  When I first went on the market right out of grad school, I used my school's letterhead.  (It was recommended.)  I got a tt job.  I went out on the market last year and didn't use my current university's letterhead, and I got two offers (out of seven applications), so I don't think it matters either way.

[helpful]

Just ask yourself the questions:

What advantage would you get from using university letterhead?

What disadvantage would you get from not using it?

Weigh the difference between the two responses and decide whether you want to risk rejection.

I would say the default would be NOT to use letterhead. After all, your CV indicates you studied at a particular university and did a degree there; and maybe even worked there. My first thought if I received something on letterhead is that the letterhead was "borrowed" to impress me, and I wouldn't be impressed. On the contrary...

[trabb]

This is one of about six or seven thousand things that you cannot now or ever know the answer to when it comes to the academic job search.  If you use letterhead, some committees may deem you unethical and discard your application.  If you do not, other committees may, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me, decide that your application is of less worth than those of individuals who do use letterhead.

My advice:  first, ask others in your discipline what is most commonly done.  Then come to a decision that you can live with.  If you feel it's unethical to use your current university's letterhead, then don't use it.  If you feel OK with it, then go for it, keeping in mind of course that there are applications for many jobs - none of which you want and many of which you may end up applying for if your PhD is in English or Philosophy -  that ask you that nasty trick question about whether you've ever taken anything, even a pen or a sheet of letterhead, from a previous employer.  If you're not sure, ask the administrative assistant if it's appropriate.

Once you decide, don't worry any more about it (if possible).  I can almost guarantee you that no committee ever told an applicant that she was denied an interview because she used/didn't use letterhead.  Of course, it will also provide an easy way to avoid dealing with the trauma of the rejections that inevitably accompany the job search.  As you open up the form rejection letters that will be mailed sometime next July, you can tell yourself that your rejection had nothing to do with your qualifications - instead, the evil SOBs rejected you, the most qualified candidate, because of your decision to use letterhead!

Above all, blarg07, please know that my poor attempts at humor here are not intended to make light of your question but to help me (and maybe one or two others) laugh in the face of the completely arbitrary monster that is the academic job search.

woohoo, 3 stars!

[expatinuk]

I never used my employers letterhead. Instead I bought some very nice paper and printed my CV and my cover letter on the nice paper. With cheap laser printers most of us use at home a nice personal letterhead can be 'designed'.

I've served on lots of search committees and I can't honestly ever think of a time when I even thought about the letterhead used for the cover letter. Instead, as someone else on these boards mentioned, it's what's said in the cover letter that gets an application moved into the 'look further at this' pile.

[abuflletcher]

I put letterhead in the same category as business cards.  Yes, it's pretty but I don't really have any use for it.  I'm not a corporation. 

But I should also add that my "cover letter" is not just a COVER letter, that is, just something to serve as a pretty bow on my application package.  My "letter of application" is about three pages long and is clearly intended to be a brief synopsis of all the rest of the stuff for those too busy to look at the other materials.

Letterhead (insitutional or otherwise) is, to me, a pretention. 

[blarg07]

Ok thanks for your replies everyone. I decided to go without the letterhead. It seems a senseless risk for little return.

abufletcher - your cover letter is 3 pages long?  I was under the impression that committees don't want more than a page or so. Though this may be area-specific (I'm in psychology"

[darksidenewbie]

I have to agree with many on this forum regarding the use/nonuse of letterhead:  how can you use institutional resources to leave that institution?  How can you look professional if you don't?  Yes, it's a crapshoot.

After having been on the market for the past year (and successfully making the leap from faculty to admin -- hence the username), I'd like to toss in more items for thought.  Sorry, blarg07, but I must:

1)  In the past year, I've submitted all my letters as electronic attachments, as required by the institutions to which I applied.  I could have secured institutional letterhead (electronic or scanned), but it seemed both unnecessary and a potential problem.  What if I submitted a letter to an institution that couldn't open my fancy letterhead because of tech issues?

2) What's the purpose of the cover letter?  It's to sell yourself, plain and simple.  My cover letter, like abufletcher's, was multiple pages.  However, it was written specifically for each position for which I applied (four in all this past year, in wildly differing institutions).  I played up what I've done professionally that, although apparent in my vita, may not look like the job for which I was applying.  For example, one admin job required applicants to have experience working with unions and trade organizations.  I had no direct experience, BUT I had been training preservice teachers in a heavily unionized state for eight years -- a similar experience that had to be explained in my letter.  As Duke and Duke said so aptly in "Trading Places" -- "Get in there and sell, sell, sell!"

Blarg07, don't make the mistake of thinking that your vita will explain your life.  Years ago, that may have been the case; I'm not so sure, with the variety of experiences and expectations available, that all vita are equal anymore.  Follow the "ask around" advice posted here repeatedly, and especially tap into those who have found tt jobs in your chosen area.  (Do the professional orgs in psychology have any sort of doctoral student support group?  I was in English, we had one, and it proved to be invaluable as I began my own search.)

Finally, best of luck.  Searches are fickle creatures, and you can never be fully sure of why you were not on any short list.  Sometimes, you can't ever be fully sure why you were ON a short list, either!

[john_proctor]

I like the "do the math" answer below by helpful.  Think it over and see if there's any real advantage.

My take: if someone is looking to move from one program where they are a vap, adjunct, grad assistant, etc. to a tt job, I think it's perfectly reasonable to use letter head.  If you're relocating because your department is being eliminated, ditto.

In both cases, I would assume that the present institution is working diligently to help you find permanent employment and is willing to use their resources to support you (I'd also assume you had asked and been given permission and that the relevant supervisor was in on your desire to move and supportive).

If you're just looking to "trade up," I think that's a different story.

[historyphd]

If anyone rejects an application for using or not using letterhead they should be booted out of academia.  This is just one example of the endless silly nonsense that goes on in academia, like not short listing the best candidates because someone thinks they're too good for the institution!  Or not considering an applicant because of a belief they won’t want to move to a certain area, thus the candidate should lie about the virtues of the institution!  Is there institutional ego?

I've applied to jobs using both letterhead and non-letterhead and have been successful in both cases.

[hikingprof]

This indeed sounds like a field-specific issue. I've always used letterhead, got my current job using letterhead from where I was adjuncting, and received several recent interviews using letterhead from my current institution. Check with people in your field.