|
data5112
|
 |
« on: February 02, 2012, 08:28:09 PM » |
|
So it's obvious that Ph.D. in hand, great publications, external grants, exciting research, raving teaching evals, and strong letters don't mean you'll get a job these days. I'd like to (half-jokingly) enumerate the real qualifications of a strong job candidate in this market. Obviously, this will vary by field, but it could be fun nonetheless. I'll start us off:
Good candidates today have:
1. A TT job already (e.g., in a less desirable location)
2....
3.....
4......
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 02, 2012, 08:29:28 PM by data5112 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
reener06
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2012, 08:34:32 PM » |
|
Yeah, I"m feeling that way today. Did not get the phone interview I was hoping for.
2. A book
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
brixton
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2012, 08:54:21 PM » |
|
3. hairlike a pony
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
new_anth
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2012, 08:57:10 PM » |
|
4. A TT job at a desirable place like Hopkins.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
litdawg
Ambidextrous Humanities Player
Senior member
Posts: 783
God & the CHE fora help those who help themselves.
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2012, 09:18:39 PM » |
|
5. Quick-witted responses to all screwball questions from faculty and students. Each response after a research talk or teaching demonstration must be deeply nuanced so to impress all and sundry of the candidate's sophistication and sensitivity to the multifaceted nature of the question askers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The heart of the wise man is tranquil. Chuang Tzu
|
|
|
|
westcoastgirl
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2012, 09:24:22 PM » |
|
I think it boils down to a coalescence of a bunch of random things like fit, promise, personality, a thunderbolt striking down at the SC meeting, etc. Sometimes B+ places want B+ candidates. And sometimes, departments are incestuous. I was just looking at the department website of a place I'd applied. Everyone has their degree from one of two mediocre state schools. I'm sure they would never touch certain people who are highly pedigreed. I've followed up searched (via wiki) from previous years and I've found this to be true. I was actually told by a provost at one of my interviews that they aren't interested in Ivy League folks as they don't trust them. Fair enough.
I have a friend who is highly published, has a book and a half, two contracts to translate books, and has won an international award. He gets passed over regularly for people with one forthcoming publication. He's not a buffoon when he interviews either. We've learned, though, that those are the breaks of the ballgame.
I'm in a bad situation. I'm from the second best (or first best, by some accounts) program in my field. I'm not able to compete at R1s (significant lack of pubs, etc.). And CCs or average SLAC schools think I'll be gone in a year, which is so far from the truth. I'd love a job at a CC, but they laugh me out of the room. So, I'm stuck in this miserable limbo.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mountainguy (on rejection letter thread):
This sounds very Foucauldian. "You do not apply to search committee; the search committee applies to you!!"
|
|
|
|
westcoastgirl
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2012, 09:26:57 PM » |
|
So it's obvious that Ph.D. in hand, great publications, external grants, exciting research, raving teaching evals, and strong letters don't mean you'll get a job these days. I'd like to (half-jokingly) enumerate the real qualifications of a strong job candidate in this market. Obviously, this will vary by field, but it could be fun nonetheless. I'll start us off:
Good candidates today have:
1. A TT job already (e.g., in a less desirable location)
2....
3.....
4......
I'd argue with this. Some committees look askance at this, fearing that they are only in it for the counter-offer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mountainguy (on rejection letter thread):
This sounds very Foucauldian. "You do not apply to search committee; the search committee applies to you!!"
|
|
|
voxprincipalis
Foxaliciously Cinnamon-Scented (and Most Poetic)
Member-Moderator
Distinguished Senior Member
Posts: 17,445
Has potentially infinite removable wallets
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2012, 09:27:22 PM » |
|
I think it boils down to a coalescence of a bunch of random things like fit, promise, personality, a thunderbolt striking down at the SC meeting, etc. Sometimes B+ places want B+ candidates. And sometimes, departments are incestuous. I was just looking at the department website of a place I'd applied. Everyone has their degree from one of two mediocre state schools. I'm sure they would never touch certain people who are highly pedigreed. I've followed up searched (via wiki) from previous years and I've found this to be true. I was actually told by a provost at one of my interviews that they aren't interested in Ivy League folks as they don't trust them. Fair enough.
I have a friend who is highly published, has a book and a half, two contracts to translate books, and has won an international award. He gets passed over regularly for people with one forthcoming publication. He's not a buffoon when he interviews either. We've learned, though, that those are the breaks of the ballgame.
I'm in a bad situation. I'm from the second best (or first best, by some accounts) program in my field. I'm not able to compete at R1s (significant lack of pubs, etc.). And CCs or average SLAC schools think I'll be gone in a year, which is so far from the truth. I'd love a job at a CC, but they laugh me out of the room. So, I'm stuck in this miserable limbo.
I think you've missed the point of the thread by several miles. VP |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you need me, I'll be hiding under a rock until mid-August. Try not to need me, unless you come bearing Chinese food.
|
|
|
|
westcoastgirl
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2012, 09:32:49 PM » |
|
I think it boils down to a coalescence of a bunch of random things like fit, promise, personality, a thunderbolt striking down at the SC meeting, etc. Sometimes B+ places want B+ candidates. And sometimes, departments are incestuous. I was just looking at the department website of a place I'd applied. Everyone has their degree from one of two mediocre state schools. I'm sure they would never touch certain people who are highly pedigreed. I've followed up searched (via wiki) from previous years and I've found this to be true. I was actually told by a provost at one of my interviews that they aren't interested in Ivy League folks as they don't trust them. Fair enough.
I have a friend who is highly published, has a book and a half, two contracts to translate books, and has won an international award. He gets passed over regularly for people with one forthcoming publication. He's not a buffoon when he interviews either. We've learned, though, that those are the breaks of the ballgame.
I'm in a bad situation. I'm from the second best (or first best, by some accounts) program in my field. I'm not able to compete at R1s (significant lack of pubs, etc.). And CCs or average SLAC schools think I'll be gone in a year, which is so far from the truth. I'd love a job at a CC, but they laugh me out of the room. So, I'm stuck in this miserable limbo.
I think you've missed the point of the thread by several miles. VP Probably. I'm just in self-pity mood. Apologies, all. And I've had a few glasses of wine. Just bemoaning my choice of "career" or lack thereof. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mountainguy (on rejection letter thread):
This sounds very Foucauldian. "You do not apply to search committee; the search committee applies to you!!"
|
|
|
|
glowdart
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2012, 09:37:14 PM » |
|
6. Who was that guy from mythology who could turn everything he touched to gold? Be that guy, but be able to control your power and turn it on and off when needed and be willing to visit the Development Office regularly.
7. Be able to take a rainbow, sprinkle it with dew, and cover it in chocolate. Or, if you'd prefer, be able to wrap it in a sigh, soak it in the sun and make a strawberry-lemon pie.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 02, 2012, 09:38:52 PM by glowdart »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anisogamy
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2012, 09:51:05 PM » |
|
8. A half million in transferable grant funding.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A little compassion is better than kicking people when they are down, regardless of who has suffered more and longer or whose bad job market has the biggest dick.
|
|
|
|
academic_cog
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2012, 09:59:12 PM » |
|
9. A dead body hidden in their closet (or the corollary: the candidate knows where the SCC's bodies are buried).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
alleyoxenfree
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 02, 2012, 10:19:11 PM » |
|
10. A summer home with guest cabin on Lake Como yet somehow convenient to a major research library where most of the search committee could get grants to do research.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bowl_haircut
Junior member
Posts: 50
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 02, 2012, 10:51:25 PM » |
|
11. A well-received, critically-esteemed book on a major press that somehow doesn't upset the Emeritus graybeards who received tenure in 1968 on the strength of a 4-page close reading of a John Cheever short story.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
this_is_my_username
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2012, 10:55:55 PM » |
|
11. A well-received, critically-esteemed book on a major press that somehow doesn't upset the Emeritus graybeards who received tenure in 1968 on the strength of a 4-page close reading of a John Cheever short story.
I spit out my coffee when I read this, and I wasn't drinking any. Well done. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
