next »

[wutan]

I sure hope noone ever writes a Bowdlerized description of me in this thread (or one like it).

[yellowtractor]

I sure hope noone ever writes a Bowdlerized description of me in this thread (or one like it).

Us?   Bowdlerize?

[hollow_man]

The difference between grinnellns' comment and the rest is very, very striking to this reader.

But perhaps gns' department is just much better than the others at picking which candidates to invite?

[mended_drum]

The difference between grinnellns' comment and the rest is very, very striking to this reader.

But perhaps gns' department is just much better than the others at picking which candidates to invite?

Of course, we could just be easily impressed. I am in a field in which there are, for better or worse, far more qualified candidates than there are jobs.

[donstefano]

Better tactic--make a point of saying that you want to stay over so you can stick to your morning writing schedule. Talk about how much you looking forward to working on your current manuscript before your flight home. This makes you look productive, and therefore a good fit for our department. What you actually do with that time is none of our business, in my opinion.

A candidate saying this would make our SC roll over the floor laughing. We don't like hypocrites.

[wutan]

Us?   Bowdlerize?

Point well taken.  I sure hope no one ever writes about me in a thread like this, period.

[dundee]

Yellowtractor's ninth point, about calling an administrative assistant a secretary, seems like an incredibly harsh reason for nixing a candidate. Whether or not the person in question likes to be called an "administrative assistant" or a "secretary" depends on campus culture. Candidates can't be expected to know the campus culture in such detail in advance. My MIL has the title of "administrative assistant," but likes to be called "secretary" and expects everyone in her workplace to do the same. Dismissing a candidate from contention because they used the word "secretary" us just downright petty.

[ursula]

Why Candidate *X* did not get our job last year:
-bad, boring, disorganized job talk, that went far overtime, and caused us to annoy the people who had the room booked after us
-acted bored during the group interview
-wasn't interested in performing service
-wasn't interested in talking to the faculty members not in his subfieldd
-generally acted like the job was his to accept or not, and we were all there just going through the motions before offering it to him
-was part of a faction before even getting there, since he was a good friend of one of our colleagues who really, really likes having a camp

[mended_drum]

Actually, our dean's administrative assistant claims that she's the only staff member on campus who has the qualifications to be called a "secretary"; she clearly considers those qualifications important and rare.  I don't know what they are because, frankly, I fear her.  So does the rest of the faculty.  And the dean.  We're pretty sure she could have us disappeared if she really wanted to. 

[pink_]

Yellowtractor's ninth point, about calling an administrative assistant a secretary, seems like an incredibly harsh reason for nixing a candidate. Whether or not the person in question likes to be called an "administrative assistant" or a "secretary" depends on campus culture. Candidates can't be expected to know the campus culture in such detail in advance. My MIL has the title of "administrative assistant," but likes to be called "secretary" and expects everyone in her workplace to do the same. Dismissing a candidate from contention because they used the word "secretary" us just downright petty.

Yeah, the point is that candidates need to treat the department staff with respect.  Treating them badly (and this goes for both full-time staff and student workers) is one of the fastest ways out of town.

[phdbliss]

4. We know someone at your current university who is not on your reference list. They gave us the "real scoop" on you, and it was not positive. Or maybe we just happened to know the one person on the faculty who didn't like you. Too bad for you.

This doesn't seem fair - what if the "real scoop" isn't really the "real scoop" - maybe the candidate and this non-reference had a falling out back in 1999 and the non-reference is holding a grudge. Same with the one faculty member. Why base your assessment of the candidate on one bad report from someone adjacent to the candidate as opposed to three good reference letters from people closer to the candidate?

Besides - there are very few people who get along beautifully with everyone in a department and/or on campus.

[zhimbo]

Yellowtractor's ninth point, about calling an administrative assistant a secretary, seems like an incredibly harsh reason for nixing a candidate.

I didn't think that was the point, or at least that was secondary. It was the third-person use of the (wrong) title in the very presence of the person. If two students are in my office, and they start talking about "the teacher" to each other (meaning me), I'm going to be a little perturbed.

[zhimbo]

Not a member of a SC, but as a former grad student who has taken candidates to lunch:

While at lunch with students, don't say mean things about an eccentric but well-loved member of the faculty. The students aren't sworn to secrecy.

I believe the  bumper sticker says "Mean People Suck".  Words of wisdom.

[trabb]

4. We know someone at your current university who is not on your reference list. They gave us the "real scoop" on you, and it was not positive. Or maybe we just happened to know the one person on the faculty who didn't like you. Too bad for you.

This doesn't seem fair - what if the "real scoop" isn't really the "real scoop" - maybe the candidate and this non-reference had a falling out back in 1999 and the non-reference is holding a grudge. Same with the one faculty member. Why base your assessment of the candidate on one bad report from someone adjacent to the candidate as opposed to three good reference letters from people closer to the candidate?

If I had been holding a grudge against a colleague since 1999, I would say whatever the hell I have to to get the person out of my school.  "Oh him? He's certainly the best teacher here, and I just can't say enough about his research." (*aside to self: And he will most certainly steal your favorite red pen right off your desk, just like he did to me nearly a decade ago!*)

[august_leo]

Not on a SC, but from what I witnessed in grad school:

1. When at lunch with students, candidate yelled at/criticized a grad student for asking a question candidate lead them to ask but later claimed was inappropriate (in this case, candidate talked on and on about other interviews, naive grad student asked "where are you interviewing?")

2. Candidate failed to answer a question about their analyzes. Faculty member in the audience repeated the question. Candidate still failed to answer it. Faculty member the audience pointed out "it was a yes or no question." Candidate still failed.

(1 and 2 were the same person. I've recently discovered via Google that hu is at a school that had a search last year (different year) that I thought was not worth working at and didn't apply to myself.)