next »

[egilson]

I am considering applying for a JRF position in the humanities at a Cambridge college (only slightly more seriously than I'm considering flapping my arms and flying to the moon, but still). I am almost certain right now that I won't have the financial resources to live there for the term of the fellowship. Still, the college does say that fellows can earn £2000 - 4000 per year "by undertaking teaching within the College," which would edge things toward the possible.

From what I've read, colleges understandably don't want fellows whose research will bog down under their teaching responsibilities, which means that my years of juggling research and teaching as a graduate student in the U.S. might be advantageous if presented correctly. However, I don't have direct experience with or much knowledge about teaching and learning at Cambridge other than what I've gleaned here. I am guessing that these teaching opportunities are likely be first and second year lectures in general topics - is that correct? If I decide that I can afford to apply, I want to be able to specifically (and honestly) tout my experience writing and delivering X number of lectures a week of subjects Y and Z while continuing to accomplish a research agenda that includes A, B, C etc.

One last question: am I correct in assuming that eighty minutes daily on a bus between Royston to Cambridge might make me want to die?

[babbinacara]

"Teaching for the college" will mean "supervisions" or "tutorials" for undergraduates. You provide an essay Q and reading list, the students write short essays over about a week, you make comments on the essays and also lead them in discussion in small groups (1-4 at a time, for an hour at a time). It is not lecturing but more like seminar teaching, with a twist of paper grading. [At least, it's essays in humanities & social sciences; if you're in science or math, it's more like problem sets.] This teaching is linked to specific courses (and exams) the students would be taking within your subject, for which they would also attend university (not college) lectures.  Depending on how popular your subject is, you could have 10 hours a week college teaching (English, history, chemistry) or one or fewer (Estonian Basketweaving). You would be paid per head per hour; you can teach for more than one college.
Check out the undergraduate courses ("papers") in your subject in the relevant university department (and check related departments) for topics.

But a JRF is all about the R, not the T (there isn't even a T in there!). The committee will not care about your juggling of research and teaching, admirable though it is, and the application form will not have enough space/words that you should waste even one telling them about teaching. They want research--it's a Research Fellowship. Sell your research, sell that you can do it in three years with a result (book, articles) and that you need to do it in Cambridge. Don't bring in the teaching other than a *brief* mention that you would be happy to offer college teaching in Estonian Basketweaving or whatever, in your cover letter.

Is it so badly paid? Is there no college housing on offer? Why are you contemplating Royston (which is better reached, perhaps, by train than bus)?

[egilson]

I certainly had that wrong. Thanks! And, yes, I would spend no more than a sentence discussing possible teaching service, but I want no sentence to be wasted if I do apply.

Royston was simply one of the places with rentals within my price range that I found on various rental sites, and Google Maps does a good job of listing public transport. Either college housing or a yearly housing allowance is offered with the fellowship, but I am planning based on the most expensive possibility. The fellowship stipend is likely sufficient for someone who is single and has minimal debt, neither of which describes me.

[johnsem]

OP: your posting shows a fundamental lacking of understanding of what a JRF entails. The whole idea of a JRF is so you get free food and lodging for 2-4 years to do your own research. It's always always better to opt for college accommodation unless you have a family because the place offered is almost certaintly superior in terms of location and quality than what the allowance will pay for. Besides, free accommodation is tax free for Oxbridge colleges but not housing allowances. Also you don't have to pay for council tax, Internet, and house keeping included. Anyway all this is moot. JRFs are beauty contests cum lottery, you are better off doing a proper postdoc or directly applying for a lectureship.

[drspouse]

Richer Oxbridge colleges also have "married accommodation" if you are not single (I think you could squeeze a small baby or two in, but probably not hulking teens).

Google Maps says it does a good job of travel planning but it does not - it told me it would take 12 hours to get to Newcastle whereas in fact it is 2 1/2. I am not sure it has any train data.

[wegie]

Depending on the college the "married accommodation" will probably be enough for one baby. I wouldn't like to try squeezing in any more in any of the married flats I've seen.

Google Maps does underground and buses, but not trains. So it doesn't know that Royston - Cambridge is a 20 minute rail trip.

[theblondeassassin]

egilson, PM me if you want.

At MyUniversity, JRFs may occasionally contribute a few lectures to a series, or in some cases an entire (but narrowly focused) set, but as noted above the majority of teaching would be around tutorials/supervisions (they would be "within the College" rather than with the Department / University). Doing some teaching does help with your applications for your next post, and it's usually fun and not too much work.

I would completely disagree with johnsem about the quality of JRFs as opposed to other types of post. Our main problem is keeping ours for the full three years -- they keep getting hired away by very good universities in Europe and the States in better positions than post-docs do, and with more of a career boost than a lectureship at not as good universities. YMMV.

(It is true that the career development posts with defined teaching responsibilities and research responsibilities are even better, since they are equivalent to fixed-term lecturerships but with lighter loads, but they are much more limited in number and confined mostly to subjects with teaching shortages.)

Availability of good housing depends very much on the College. Some are better equipped than others, and may have advantageous rents on flats with >2BR or even houses; others have a very poor housing stock.

[babbinacara]

OP: your posting shows a fundamental lacking of understanding of what a JRF entails. The whole idea of a JRF is so you get free food and lodging for 2-4 years to do your own research. It's always always better to opt for college accommodation unless you have a family because the place offered is almost certaintly superior in terms of location and quality than what the allowance will pay for. Besides, free accommodation is tax free for Oxbridge colleges but not housing allowances. Also you don't have to pay for council tax, Internet, and house keeping included. Anyway all this is moot. JRFs are beauty contests cum lottery, you are better off doing a proper postdoc or directly applying for a lectureship.

Now you have it wrong, or are stating it wrong. The whole idea of a JRF is to do research for 2-4 years, to have a well-defined exciting research project that can be started and finished in that time, for which it is useful or essential that you be in Cambridge/ the UK, which is of interest to other fellows in the college, and which will produce tangible results, usually publications, that will launch or revitalise your career and will have your name on them but also acknowledge the financial support and intellectual climate of the college. For that, you receive a salary (small) and also get free food and housing. You should not apply for a JRF for the free food.

In humanities and social sciences, a JRF *is* a "proper post-doc". Most JRF scholars have or develop strong associations with a relevant university department and have mentors and do collaborative work there. This is also one of the basic ideas of a JRF, well before the food thing. JRFs are intended to assist in launching academic careers. There are vanishingly few lectureships to apply for, anyway, and unsuccessful candidates for those must also view them as "beauty contests cum lotteries".

[johnsem]

@babbinacara I'm highlighting the free food/lodging as part of the overall package from a subsistence point of view and saying that it'll be foolish to not make full use of the privileges associated with the post.

@theblondeassassin I'm not doubting the quality of people appointed to the JRFs but if you are a science academic it'll be better for you to be doing postdoc with a good PI at a solid lab (which is what I mean by *proper* postdoc, I have no doubt that for the humanities and some social sciences JRF is indeed not only proper but also highly prestigious). One can, most certainly, work concurrently with a lab (in fact its mandatory as part of a JRF for scientists) during the JRF but I think that for the amount of time/effort spent applying for the JRF versus the chance and selection criteria, one is better off applying for just the postdoc.

I think there is an unhealthy fascination with a JRF in some quarters owing to the perceived prestige of the position. Me and many of my fellow Oxbridge PhD graduates all had the experience of being nudged by our supervisors to apply for JRFs (even unpaid ones!) and we end up applying in a bid to appease them. Yet in our department, at least 3 of us got full-time, long-term lectureships/assistant professorships at research-intensive universities in the UK and elsewhere straight after getting our PhDs while the 2 seniors with JRFs are still college lecturers after 4 years.