next »

[occhiazzurri]

There is a listing for a one-year VAP position in my department, and there have already been a few calls and e-mails from interested candidates looking for more info.

One special little gem called up the department chair and aggressively demanded to know, "What about the next year?" The ad clearly indicates that it is a one-year VAP. There is no language indicating that there would be a 2nd year or possibility of converting into a t-t. Nothing. One year, then you are done.

It is understandable that a person would be nervous about future prospects, but that is most certainly not the way to get more information or endear yourself to a SC. If the ad says one-year VAP, it is likely just that.

If you want to know, you should inquire politely, preferably in person when you get a phone interview or campus visit.

[watermarkup]

I agree that job candidates should always be polite on the phone, but the job ads for VAP positions should be completely unambiguous about whether a position is renewable or not because that's one of the most important things that the applicant wants to know, and it often makes a difference between deciding to apply or not. Using "1-year position" is not clear enough - is it a 1-year contract that is renewable for up to 3 years, or a 1-year contract whose renewability depends on funding that isn't known yet, or is it truly one-and-done? I know it seems unambiguous to you because you know exactly what you mean, but many ads for positions that end up being renewable will also use "1-year position" language.

So next time, add something like "one-year sabbatical replacement" or "one-year nonrenewable position" and save everyone the hassle. If the applicants are at all uncertain, the best time for them to ask is before the application, so that the applicant doesn't waste time on an application and possibly an interview he or she won't accept, and the SC won't waste time interviewing applicants who won't take the position.

[leobloom]

I've seen this language in ads: one-year sabbatical replacement, renewable up to three years, contingent on performance. Is this potentially a three-year job, or that is just to attract applicants? I mean, I know things cannot be known a year or two in advance, but is that a real chance, or just boilerplate?

[dalekk]

When I apply to a job that says it's one year or a VAP or anything else, I assume it's just for one year unless otherwise stated.  I would never ask about any possibility of more than that until it got to a much later stage in the hiring process.  I don't think there's any point in asking about that before you've even been interviewed.  It seems to me to be about the same as calling up a SC and asking about the salary of a position, because that will determine whether or not you bother to apply. 

[data5112]

When I apply to a job that says it's one year or a VAP or anything else, I assume it's just for one year unless otherwise stated.  I would never ask about any possibility of more than that until it got to a much later stage in the hiring process.  I don't think there's any point in asking about that before you've even been interviewed.  It seems to me to be about the same as calling up a SC and asking about the salary of a position, because that will determine whether or not you bother to apply. 

+1

This issue makes me think of my students who email me to ask if they should know the vocabulary terms for the midterm exam. Of course?!?! Unless otherwise stated, you need to know all of them!

[pb_ft]

I've seen this language in ads: one-year sabbatical replacement, renewable up to three years, contingent on performance. Is this potentially a three-year job, or that is just to attract applicants? I mean, I know things cannot be known a year or two in advance, but is that a real chance, or just boilerplate?

FWIW.  At my institution, that is the case.  The contract comes from the Dean and is renewable each year for three years.  The renewability allows us to part ways if the VAP does not work out.  In addition, if the department need changes (sudden decrease in class enrollment)...  We have not had that happen as we are at 6 VAPs in my STEM department.

[brixton]

I agree that job candidates should always be polite on the phone, but the job ads for VAP positions should be completely unambiguous about whether a position is renewable or not because that's one of the most important things that the applicant wants to know, and it often makes a difference between deciding to apply or not....

Although, if the wisdom of the fora is AFTDJ, it is early to be querying about the future in an initial email to the SC.   Finally,  it is bad form to ask "what about next year" in the first communication or the application.

[ruralguy]

I think I would have just answered the person's question!

We sometimes get so weird about people contacting the SC. But this is a legitimate informational question. If someone asks this, the SC should just answer it.

Of course, it is important that the candidate always be polite.

[quasihumanist]

I think it's very reasonable for a potential applicant to ask what the prospects are for renewing a temporary position.  I'm not sure "what about next year" is the best way of doing so, assuming that's a direct quote.

Certainly I can imagine someone who is currently adjuncting with some ties to his or her current location not wanting to move for a job that will definitely be no longer than one year.  The same might be said for someone who still has another year in their current multi-year temporary appointment.

[polly_mer]

I think it's very reasonable for a potential applicant to ask what the prospects are for renewing a temporary position.  I'm not sure "what about next year" is the best way of doing so, assuming that's a direct quote.

This.  Asking if the position is renewable or potentially renewable makes sense to me, even before applying for those of us who cannot possibly apply for all the positions that are listed (a luxury, I know).  Tone matters, though.

[apgibson]

I agree that job candidates should always be polite on the phone, but the job ads for VAP positions should be completely unambiguous about whether a position is renewable or not because that's one of the most important things that the applicant wants to know, and it often makes a difference between deciding to apply or not. Using "1-year position" is not clear enough - is it a 1-year contract that is renewable for up to 3 years, or a 1-year contract whose renewability depends on funding that isn't known yet, or is it truly one-and-done? I know it seems unambiguous to you because you know exactly what you mean, but many ads for positions that end up being renewable will also use "1-year position" language.

For us, the status of a VAP position is normally _not_ clear ahead of time.  Under rare circumstances, maybe, there might be a case where we _know_ we won't need anyone the next year.  But, even if it's sabbatical replacement, there's probably usually someone who might be applying for sabbatical the year after.  Or, in our current situation, we're hiring VAP while hoping we get permission for a tenure track search.  We might search tenure track next year (we'd almost certainly, but not quite certainly, re-search).  We might hire a VAP for another year (we're less likely to re-search that).  We might have nothing (we hope not!). 

Given all of that, we couldn't put much more in the ad than "1 year VAP".  It would be slightly awkward to field questions from a bunch pre-applicants about the out-year possibilities.  But, we completely expect them e.g. during the phone interview.  So, if you're really not going to apply unless there's some reasonable possibility of a second-year then, I suppose, I'd go ahead and inquire.  Especially if the alternative is "no application".  I don't know how much liberty the SC chair would feel to divulge the various possibilities (which are a bit proprietary, subject to departmental, college, and university politics, funding, and strategy, etc.).

[watermarkup]

Apgibson, I certainly understand the department's position when they just don't know if a position will be renewable, and why they often choose to only mention a one-year position. I've held three VAP positions just like that where the department itself didn't know if my position would be renewable or not. The consequence, however, is that one-and-only-one-year positions and maybe-eventually-renewable positions are both using the same language in the job ads. It's not a big problem; the solution is just to AFTDJ and find out if the position is renewable or not once you've been contacted for an interview or, if you want to save yourself and the SC time, inquiry briefly and politely before applying. I've never contacted the SC about it, but I did once ask the SCC who called me to set up a phone interview if the position would be renewable. It wasn't, and the interview never happened, and both of us were better off for it.

When I apply for VAP positions, I don't need a definite answer from the SC, but there's a world of difference between "Maybe, depending on funding, but we won't know until next January," and "No, not under any circumstances."