Not to press the clothes issue but is there a difference between what to wear in (supposedly laidback) California versus say the Ivies? Could suits be a negative in the West coast?
Also, about how long does it take to start hearing from schools after their deadline?
suits are perfectly fine here in california. i would think the same at other west coast and laid-back places. (there's probably less dress code variation between the east and west coasts in academic settings than in hi-tech settings.)
I got a job in CA last year, and during a casual moment on my interview I joked with a prof that I was looking forward to getting out of my suit, and she said, "yeah, but you gotta wear it for these things."
Ultimately, what you wear to the interview probably explains less than 2% of the variance in job offers, so let's not blow this out of proportion. That said, if you've made it to an interview, you're roughly in a three- or four-way tie, so little things can make a difference. And I can guarantee you that at least one (and probably all) of your competitors will be wearing a suit, so why look like the candidate who doesn't appear to care as much?
Wearing a suit will indicate I don't "care as much?'" Come on. I think one's application, CV, and job history indicates how serious one is. If my peers want to choose you instead of me because you're wearing a suit and I'm not, then I accept that. I am who I am and that's not a suit person. That position served me well on the market in the past and I'm sticking with it.
Where are all those rebels I sat around the seminar table with? We seem to be able to cast a critical eye on the system from the outside, but once given the opportunity to get inside -- conservatism is the game plan.
I don't think anyone is going to say, "well, this candidate didn't wear a suit to the interview, so let's go with the other one." But I have heard of situations where overly casual dress was used as ammunition in a debate about whether the candidate was sufficiently professional and serious. And obviously there are a lot of subconscious biases at work here as well.
I haven't seen any job ads for rebels lately, but then, it's not my field. If wearing a suit is such an ordeal then by all means be that business-casual revolutionary.
as people who should know a bit about presentation of self, i'd say there are some valid reasons to dress professionally. just because we know that people communicate through props and that wearing a suit doesn't *really* say anything about your intellect, that doesn't mean those processes aren't real and guiding interaction.
that being said, i would encourage anyone who applied for the kent state job to show up wearing jeans and flip-flops ;)
I can think of a benefit. If a member of the search committee sees your application early and also happens to like it, the committee member can start talking up the application, and can also become identified with that application or otherwise form an attachment to it. This is just a minor tendency, I think, and can be overcome by other factors, but it's more than nothing.
I think there is benefit. I talked with a prof. from a major R1 with a late deadline and he emailed me afterwards urging me to send it in ASAP.
My advisor also said that when app.'s come in, then when he talks to prof's from said schools he can tell them to pull my file.
I have heard prof's from my school talking up some fo the eraly app's that came in. I don't see any drawbacks unless you hastily put t together or wind up getting some new publication or award after you sent it in.
Having served on a search committee at a top 3 school, I can say that at that school, no one looked at the applications until the deadline had passed. People started reading files pretty much immediately after the deadline, but getting an application early or on the day of the deadline itself didn't really matter.
From my experience on the market a 2 years ago, the search chair sometimes takes a glance at incoming applications before the deadline. When a rec letter from a friend catches his or her eye, the chair may follow up with an email to the applicant. I suspect the point is make certain the applicant sends a complete application and to signal that the department will give them a thorough read because there's a good fit. A couple departments did that after receiving my rec letters last time on the market. This all happened before the deadlines, and these were R1s...for what it's worth.
If they are seriously interested, they'll contact you.
I ran into that problem in the past. The department admin assistant sends out letters once faculty members send her a copy. Roughly a 3rd of my top picks didn't get letters on time. Departments who were interested got in touch. The ones who didn't -- either weren't interested or were put off that I didn't get them there on time. I got a job though.
my letters were late too for some jobs. i assume that hiring committees understand that we have very little control over when the letters go out. we ask, but it is up to them when they get around to it.
in our department, someone on the admin staff keeps a copy of everyone's letters so once that person has them, we can have them sent out to anyone without having to wait. but the initial request...mostly out of our control.
1.) I ended up getting a job at a "top" school last year and two of my letters were late - one of them a month late.
2.) Wear a suit. The only reason not to is if you look so uncomfortable in one that it hinders your interactions. But unless that's the case, wear one. It marks you as someone who is taking the process seriously and recognizes that you are transitioning from grad student to "professional sociologist".
How about invited review articles in books (I don't mean book reviews)? How are they evaluated relative to sole-authored, co-authored publications in peer-reviewed journals.
Are there book series/encyclopedias that are particularly prestigious for grad students to be published in?
11:08, handbooks are important. Others will depend on the subdiscipline. The big question is "how important is the text to the discipline?" If no one uses the book, then the publication doesn't count for much. That's why handbooks are important; they are "the" book of the subfield.
Peer review always trumps other venues, including "invited review essays," encyclopedia entries, or book chapters. My advisor (R1) tells me I should never have a piece as a book chapter unless it has already been an article and then is invited.
And, sucks for the rest of us, but some candidates even have book contracts for their dissertation. So a chapter in a book, which is not peer reviewed, starts to look unimpressive to an R1. of course, all this does not matter the same to all schools and I am referring to places like Wisconsin or Berkeley.
For R1s, the job talk is required but not the teaching demo. At teaching intensive universities, the formal talk tends to be a teaching demo.
But what about the highly selective liberal arts institutions, which seem to equally stress research and teaching? I'm talking about places such as Dartmouth and Bowdoin. Do they require both the job talk and teaching demo or just the teaching demo?
a few schools may ask for both. it's rare, but for my interview at a small uni where research and teaching are equally important, i did both. the teaching demo is geared towards students, and the research demo is really geared towards faculty (although it might be in a methods class). if you are asked to do a research talk during an undergraduate course, you'll need to rethink how you present material. while this might really be for faculty, the students should get something out of it. be sure to ask for syllabi for any classes you visit. that'll help you with the presentations. if both faculty and students are engaged, you've really scored big time.
I've had two campus interviews in the past, and for both, I had to do both job talk and teaching demo. One was a SLAC and one was a private selective university with a master's program (both schools with 3-3 loads if that gives you an idea).
It's my personal position that schools should have to choose one or the other because doing both turns a candidate to jelly, and most schools are basing their hiring more on one than the other...
Of all the teaching demos I've seen, the biggest mistake is that candidates don't offer any content. You do want get students involved and interested, but make sure you give them some material to work with. Most of the time you don't get to assign them reading, but you can start with some lecture info on a topic and then design discussion questions that will give them the opportunity to apply that information.
This is my first time on the job market, so I'm not sure how to compare this year's job prospects with previous years. I did, however, look at the job ads last year with great frequency, and it seems to me that compared to last year's ads, there simply aren't as many job openings this year. Anyone else also observe this trend?
It is my first time on the market as well but I get the impression that there are as many if not more openings this year, although this may be field specific.
Pretty much all the big schools that hired last year are also hiring this year. Are you referring to SLAC? As usual, lot of criminology jobs and lots of demography/quant jobs
i am a candidate from a top-5 school, but not an especially competitive candidate (ie: no top journal pubs). i also have family circumstances that limit where i am willing to take a job. my partner is unlikely to find work in her field outside of an urban area. i have been offered a good post-doc, good both salary-wise and in terms of research opportunities with people in my sub-field. realistically, i think that if i receive any job offers this year they will be from my back-up back-up schools. but...who really knows until it happens? i could get an offer from my first choice.
so if you were me, would you take the post-doc or hold out that one of your first-choice schools might make an offer?
My view is that taking a job at a school is a commitment - both to the school and their students. in this sense, your heart has to be in it 100%. if it's not, go for the postdoc, get some stellar pubs and go back on the market in a year or two and find a school that makes you happy longterm.
dear 7:47 it sounds like you don't really know your options yet. especially if/what other job offer you may get and what it would include. it is nice to have a post-doc in your back pocket whilst looking for faculty positions (which can be incredibly arbitrary). in addition to meeting your geographic priorities, a question to ask yourself should you get a job offer (or more) is whether you can accomplish more towards becoming an independent scholar (and thus a stronger candidate) by taking the post-doc or the faculty job? in concurrence with 1:24, post-docs can be great investments that pay off nicely for the long-haul.
dear 1:00 sheer volume and "open" seraches notwithstanding, it is indeed the number of schools posting positions in your subfield that matters most. my list is roughly the same size as last year.
Re: post doc vs. third choice, I am with the others. Go with the post-doc. Nearly every faculty person I have talked to on search committees says that a post-doc gives an applicant an advantage in the job market. Plus, its only a two year commitment vs. 7.
I have a question about recommendation letters. How important are they, compared to publications? How much and often are search committee members persuaded by the letters saying my student will be very productive in the near future even though he/she doesn't have publications come out yet?
I think it's very hard on the market these days for someone without any pubs--no matter what their letters say. There are so many advanced assistants applying for the same jobs, that it's hard for an ABD to compete without a few.
My understanding is in line with the post above. It seems tht there can be some halo effect from a superstar adviser if the letter is through the roof. for example, if your chair is William Julius Wilson and he says you are one of the greatest students he worked with... You get the point. But assuming the adviser is a bit more run of the mill like the rest of us, I think it is necessary but not sufficient to have an outstanding letter from her or him.
I've applied to some schools that ask for names and contact information for references rather than letters with the initial application materials. Any thoughts on how those kinds of searches work? Do they contact references after making a 'long list' and then make a short list? Is the process generally longer for such schools?
I applied to one place like that, and one of my letter-writers read the list of placed I had applied and assumed she had forgotten a letter so she sent them one. I am really hoping that isn't going to look bad.
A big thing is articles...specifically many places are interested in dissertation chapters. It a way to gauge quality and chances of actually being done before next year.
Why is this surprising? Many of the top schools regulalarly hire ABD's. I had friends who landed jobs at three tope schools last year who didn't finish util right before they started.
I am at an R1, and my advisor told me not to worry about trying to defend before I apply. Especially if you have articles and chapters to back it up, this is no problem.
my experience on the market two years ago was that top R1 schools wanted to see drafts of chapters from those on the short-list. of course, these were just drafts (and they knew this), but they wanted to see something in print. if a candidate has nothing written at this point (ie, not even solid prospectus), a committee might worry he/she may not be done before next year. it is in everyone's best interest that new hires be done with their degree before starting a job.
Not exactly. They really mean ABD considered. The catch is that ABD needs to become PhD before next Fall term begins. Asking for dissertation chapter drafts is one way to access whether arriving with "degree in hand" is likely. If we are realistic about things, completing a dissertation takes roughly two years. If someone is on the market without something written (not even review chapters or a developed methods chapter), are they likely to be completely done in 10 months or so? The other issue is that taking a job before you actually have your degree complicates loads of things. For example, when does your tenure clock begin? What will your starting pay be? What happens to your contract if your dissertation committee slows your progress? Does the new department wait, or do you lose your job?
I just received a confirmation letter from Suffolk addressed to "Heather" -- ironically, my correct name is in the address header above... and there is really no way to confuse my name with "Heather"
so, Heather, if you're reading, you'll be happy to know that Suffolk is in receipt of your application!
3:55 - Thanks - I understood that part of it. I was just surprised because I would think that in a market so glutted, ABDs wouldn't have much of a shot.
Actually, it's not necessarily true that PhD in hand folks do better on the market than ABD's. With a very scientific N=1 I found that I had 5 offers as an ABD and 1 when I went on the market with a PhD a year later (and yes I applied to roughly the same amount of jobs).
Yes, obviously, if it's the rule rather than the exception to fly out ABDs. (I'm the "Wow" earlier.) I don't understand why schools would want to even look at ABDs when there are so many applicants with degree in hand, and why they say "ABD considered" when people here seem to be suggesting that it may be closer to "ABD preferred."
Completely, utterly confused. I was told over and over again (by colleagues, not SCs) last year that the problem was that I was ABD. This does not seem to be the case if schools just ask the ABDs for proof that they'll be finished in time before they fly them out.
Sadly, 12:16, I think confusion is a completely appropriate response to this absolutely bizarre process. All I can say, is don't try to second guess and just accept the randomness of the process. Every department uses its own logic. And often it feels to any given candidate that the institutional logic of a certain department specifically excludes him or her.
This is a good time to look around and study how your non academic friends get jobs and how easy it is for them to change jobs to remind yourself of how absolutely abnormal and odd academia is. In other words, remind yourself that the process is wacky and that *you* are not the problem.
10:23, can I ask if you had letters from members of the dept you were leaving? From experience on search committees, I know they can look "oddly" at those who are leaving one dept to go on the market but do not have letters of support from folks there. It raises a redflag of sorts -- even if it is totally undeserved. but you know how people are. What's worse is when people do not disclose to their current dept they are going on the market. If you were going to invest time and resources into a new hire, do you want someone who could leave abruptly? That's the logic I've seen in action. The sad part is that many times the people leaving a dept are not the problem; it's the people who remain there that drive others way. The problem, though, is that these people aren't the ones trying to find work.
What is the attitude towards letters of recommendation written by non-sociologists? i have a cross-disciplinary fellowship and most of the senior faculty i work closely with are not in sociology. however, they are the people with whom i have published (in soc journals). Is it true that a non-soc letter is a total waste? What is my choice is between a great letter from a non-soc professor and an average letter from a soc professor?
6:07 - there's probably a difference if you are applying for an open position or a position advertised for a specific subfield. If your co-authors are well known and respected within your subfield (i.e. economists within demography) it might work for you.
6:07: I considered having people from different departments write letters for me. If these are people that are best able to discuss your research and publication potential, not to mention your collegiality, then I would use those *great* letters. Of course, it would look odd if you had no soc letters. Also, inter-disciplinary stuff is pretty big at most schools, so it can be a nice selling point, especially if the work ends up in soc journals (versus whatever field you're collaborating with).
Hi everyone. I casually read both the Sociology and Political Science job blogs, and I wanted to commend everyone on the level of civility here. It's nice to see an arena where anonymity does not automatically equal people acting like jerks.
I'm not sure if this has been covered in the past but... A question about searching the asa job bank. My usual course of action each day (I really mean every other hour) is to look for newly posted positions using the 'Search by Date Posted' criteria. I then plug in a to date that is the last time I checked and a from date that is today's date. I've been worrying a bit recently that I may somehow miss jobs doing it this way. For instance, I checked for jobs several times on Mon (the 1st) and there were none, however several showed up on Tues with a 10/1 posting date. I realize that this is b/c the school listed 10/2 as the 'Date Available', but still, being somewhat paranoid, I worry about missing something. So, I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this, or a better understanding than I of how the system works. Is the posting date the day they enter the job into the bank? Does someone at ASA screen these things before they go out? Should I be searching by 'Date Available' or by another means? I'd appreciate any input.
To 9:56: I noticed that glitch. Because the stakes are high (my career is at stake!), I did it the onerous way, just to be sure. I always select "all active jobs" and then scroll and scroll. Over time you get quicker at it.
Is anyone else finding it nearly impossible to be productive while waiting to hear news about your applications? I'm too distracted by my curiosity and anxiety to focus on my work. I can imagine people having the opposite reaction, but how common is that?
This question has been posted on the Chronicle, but I'll post it here, specific to the sociology jobs:
Why is it that certain schools (I'm talking Cal State Fullerton and Michigan State in particular) seem to have multiple openings for sociology? Should we read anything into it--say, indication that of faculty attrition/instability at those institutions or is it a sign that the departments are expanding?
5:25 - Thanks for the compliment. Yeah, we sociologists are nice. People came over last year to complain about the poli-sci wiki. Must be pretty cutthroat over there. Fascinating...just disciplinary/structural differences, I wonder? Or is something else at at play - gender, class? ;)
9:56 - I've noticed the same. I change the date only every few days, just to be sure. For example, though today's the 3rd, I'm still searching as of 9/30, even though I checked 20 minutes ago. Tomorrow I'll search as of 10/1. And so on...
I use control F (find) and type in the day's date (e.g., 10/03), and then go up or down the page finding new ads. This method captures either the posting date or the available date.
Yeah, we sociologists are nice. People came over last year to complain about the poli-sci wiki. Must be pretty cutthroat over there. Fascinating...just disciplinary/structural differences, I wonder? Or is something else at at play - gender, class? ;)
I'm in Political Science, and I think there are differences between the two fields, some of which are apparent on these blogs. But my main view is that sociologists are interested in the nuances of of inequality and "should" be more sensitive people in general. While Political Scientists are more focused on hard generalities. Perhaps there are also more women in sociology.
But what would your argument be about class differences?
RE: "TOP 25" -the rankings listed earlier are the US News rankings. Here are the same rankings up to number 64, from (long url on 2 lines): www.southwestern.edu/ academic/depts/socanthro/GradSchool.html.
1. University of Wisconsin – Madison 2. University of California – Berkeley 3. University of Michigan – Ann Arbor 4. University of Chicago --University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill 6. Princeton University (NJ) --Stanford University (CA) 8. Harvard University (MA) --University of California – Los Angeles 10. University of Pennsylvania 11. Columbia University (NY) --Indiana University – Bloomington --Northwestern University (IL) 14 Cornell University (NY) --Duke University (NC) --University of Texas – Austin 17. Pennsylvania State University – University Park --University of Arizona --University of Washington 20. Ohio State University --Yale University (CT) 22. Johns Hopkins University (MD) --New York University --University of Minnesota – Twin Cities 25. SUNY – Albany --University of Maryland – College Park 27. Brown University (RI) --University of California – Irvine 29. University of California – Davis --University of California – Santa Barbara 31. CUNY Graduate School and University Center --Rutgers State University – New Brunswick (NJ) --Vanderbilt University (TN) 34. University of California – San Diego --University of Illinois – Urbana – Champaign --University of Iowa --University of Massachusetts – Amherst 38. Emory University (GA) --SUNY – Stony Brook --University of Virginia --Washington State University 42 Florida State University --Michigan State University --University of California – Riverside --University of Southern California 46. North Carolina State University --University of Florida --University of Illinois – Chicago 49 Boston College --Brandeis University (MA) --New School University (NY) --Texas A&M University – College Station --University of Notre Dame (IN) --University of Pittsburgh 55. University of Colorado – Boulder --University of Georgia --University of Oregon 58 Arizona State University --Iowa State University --Purdue University – West Lafayette (IN) --University of California – San Francisco --University of California – Santa Cruz --University of Connecticut --University of Kansas
Hi everyone, I have a question for all those *star* or close-to-star candidates out there. Those of you who have a shot at a top-20 or have lots of good pubs. As I read over all the discussion of multiple sole authored pubs I am just amazed. What I'm wondering is when/how exactly you fit in time for all these pubs. For example, what year are you in your program? How much help did you get in the form of co-authored pieces with faculty earlier on in your career? At my top-25 school the faculty virtually never publish with grads so I'm wondering if this is typical. Any info of this kind would be really helpful for those of us how have been working hard just completing the requirements for the degree, teaching, etc.
I would also like to add a question for those stars. Were you ever required to teach as part of your assistantship? Were you funded through all of your graduate career or did you have to get a job to make ends meet? How many courses have you taught?
7:12 - I'm not a star (but I aspire to be!). I've managed to have at least 1-2 papers accepted to a journal (not the big 3) every year since I began grad school. At no point did I ever write a class paper without treating it as though I intended to publish it (or at least use it to explore topics that I would later expand on) and I've presented papers (not round tables) at conferences every year since the second year of grad school. It takes work, I don't get enough sleep, but it gives me a little bit more hope. In full disclosure, I'm not on the job market this year (but will be next year), and can say that this blog has been *extremely* illuminating about what I need to do over the next year in order to be in a better position.
You should not assume we had assistantships at all! (I am not saying I am a star but I fit published criterion)
I did not, I am not at a top 20 school, and I adjuncted for 4 years. Yet I wrote 3 sole authored papers in top 10 journals, including an ASR/AJS. I don't have a simple answer. I would say my main thing is just not being afraid to write, and figuring out lit. reviews and etc. after i had written up a good piece of data. I was not afraid of rejections either, I piled them up before anyone bit. but I learned how the game is played through this. And I always wrote my diss. chapters as articles first.
I had no ao-authored papers- they don't count for much unless you are first author. And this is my 5th year.
Some of those questions for the "stars" are probably going to invoke some defensiveness at best.
I think it's compelling to think of some stereotypical person with rich parents, a full ride, no teaching obligations, lots of funding, perfect GREs, etc, etc. Does that person *really* exist? My thought is No.
The "star" at my university (and yes, there is one) works really hard - a lot harder than I even pretend to work. Hu takes a lot of abuse from hus advisors (ie. in exchange for mentorship and networking, hu does secretarial work, errands, lawn care (!!), and whatever else). Hu always has something going: for instance, Hu has a fellowship now but is already writing two other grants for next year. There's no resting on the laurels or even stopping to enjoy successes. Just work.
I think the big difference between Hu and me is that Hu has never thought of grad school as a life style. Grad school is a job.
Hu also has TAed, RAed, waited tables, had grants, etc...
The star at my department works very hard. S/he will probably get many job offers. I see this person in the department working every single day, all day long. Of course these people don't have to teach, because they are the people who get fellowships. Why? For the same reasons they get good jobs! Because they make this the one and only priority in their lives.
I agree that the "questions to stars" comments sound more than a little hostile.
But if actual advice if what those posters want, here's mine. Write every course paper for publication. Send every paper you write to a conference and then revise it for a journal. When it gets rejected, revise and send it somewhere else. Do this is often as you need to.
Have meetings with any faculty member whose work interests you. Approach them with a collaborative project idea and ask them to work with you. If they say no, ask someone else. If every faculty in your department rejects you (highly unlikely), ask other students.
Get your own funding. Apply for every fellowship you can possibly find. Have your adviser and others read and help with your applications. Apply for RA jobs through other departments if you do not have fellowship finding.
Treat graduate school like a job. Go to your office every morning and work until dinner time. Work for another couple of hours before you go to sleep. If you're too tired then, try getting extra work hours in first thing in the morning. Do not socialize during the week.
Sounds like no fun? Maybe so. But nobody said you can have it all. We all make choices about what our life priorities are. I don't criticize my fellow students who go out with their friends in the evenings or who spend their days like they did in college.
Hi all, I'm the one who asked the original question about the star candidates (7:12). I truly did not intend for it to be hostile, admittedly I was a bit worried about that when I wrote it but was a little too tired to really discern if it seemed too aggressive. I have a good bit of admiration for those people in my dept and on the blog who have accomplished so much during their grad career. I agree with what someone said that it is about priorities, and while I have absolutely treated it as a job, working 9-10 hr days and weekends, I cannot claim that it has always been my TOP priority. I feel okay about that, but I guess I just want to better understand what it takes to fit all those pubs in. I think it helps the rest of us to get a handle on where we fit in the process and maybe provides some info to those who are not on the market about what they should be doing over the next year or two. So I hope anyone else who has something to add will do so. I hope this clears up my intentions, I certainly do not want to add tension to what is really a great group of bloggers.
Thank you 6:29 for spelling out what it takes to make it through grad school looking like a star! Yes, it's a choice one makes to work 60 hours a week at this job. So is that what the "star" litmus test looks for, that ambition and perseverence that would be refelcted by many pus and other quantifiable achievements? Let's remember that one would have to continue doing this through tenure. I also wonder: do any of these (real or perceived) stars out there have kids? And if not, what does this say about the feminit critique of gendered natures of professions such as others?
Change of subject from someone who thinks that 6:29's advice sounds like hell on earth:
Where are all the schools of which no one's ever heard? Don't they need sociologists? Do smaller schools post later in the year? If this keeps up I'm not even going to end up applying to enough places this year to get a job. Where are all of the ads from those tiny, low-to-mid-tier liberal arts schools that I know are scattered throughout the US?
I never hoped to get one of these high-falutin live-and-breathe-your-research jobs. They seem like the normal objective on these blogs, though, which surprises me. Do people like me get their jobs through a different process? (And on a related note: I know there are other "people like me" on faculties at small no-name schools...but am I the last of that dying breed?)
Thanks for humoring this unabashed, unashamed underachiever!
I am not a Star - I'm more of a starlit (some sole-pubs, lots of grants, good school, etc). I have a child. It's really tough. I work at night after child is asleep and I rely on part-time paid childcare (which is where a lot of those grants go).
When I made my decision to have a child, I read the ASA's article about ideal times to have children in academic careers. Since I'm still a grad student, I knew that I'd have to have the support of my advisers (specifically their support in terms of RAs, co-authored pubs, and networking). I showed them the ASA research and discussed my plans for having a child and a career. They (all white men) made a deliberate commitment to give me the (extra) attention that I'd need in order to achieve my goals.
That's what it's taken to be both a mother and a starlit.
There's also the Higher Education Recruitment Consortium, which has separate websites for different regions, it's good for searching for jobs in small places more locally (you can google herc and your favorite region and you'll find it).
I'm hardly a "star" but I am at a top school and I have several children. I do work a lot, before my kids wake up and after they go to sleep and as much as I can all day when they're in school.
I would also point you to Indeed.com. Someone mentioned it on the blog last year...it's a metasearch engine of all sorts of places where jobs (academic and nonacademic) are listed. Sometimes the results are utterly useless, but it's already turned up one job for me that I didn't know was out there.
Thanks for bringing up the child issue! I'm a Dad of a baby and have primary childcare during the week. I get up every morning between 6-6:30am (and at night when our baby is up!) and go to sleep at 11:30pm. Most of grant money goes to paid childcare and I work crazily during this time (and when baby's asleep) to get my pubs out. It has meant zero social life and very little sleep. I do think it's worth it though, but it has involved a lot of life sacrifices.
I have two kids, and more than five pubs (some sole authored in top journals). For me, it's not about working 60 hours or more a week, it's about focus. When I'm working, I am actually working (not checking my email twenty times, surfing the web, taking coffee breaks with the guy in the office next to mine, etc.).
I recently learned that current assistant professors are applying for some of the jobs I'm applying to as well (I'm a graduate student). Any ideas about how an ABD might be compared to someone who's been teaching/publishing for a couple of years? Obviously, their CV will contain more "stuff," but do committees usually look beyond that?
Sure, committees take into account that issue. It is a simple logic: if three years have passed since an assistant professor defended her dissertation, they will divide the total number of publications by three. Plus, they would not hire the person unless they have a strong belief that the person will eventually get tenure. Therefore, assistant professors on the market are actually penalized by their experience. They cannot hide behind the "potentials" and the "name values" of their advisors anymore. I think it is a fair game. Yes, I am an assistant professor on this market.
So I'm curious, if you don't mind me asking, why assistant profs are looking for other jobs? I'm only now embarking on this anxiety-filled journey and I'm wondering why I'd want to put myself through it again. Do you have a sense how common it is? I'm asking because I'll admit that I'm fairly naive about this whole process and I'm wondering if I'm overlooking some common strategy or something.
Assistant profs go back on the market because (1) they want to work and live in a better environment (higher salary, better colleagues and graduate students to work with, better reputation and prestige, better places to raise their kids, etc.) (2) they want to use an outside offer to improve their current contracts(salary, tenure, etc.). Some departments and deans explicitly ask their juniors to bring an outside offer if they want to raise their salary significantly. (3) they were asked to leave by their departments after bad informal or formal reviews. They usually find their second jobs at less prestigious schools.
I don't have data, but many assistant profs choose to or are forced to relocate because of one of above reasons. In sum, getting a job is not the end of the story: you'd better think that you will be continuously on the job market until you eventually get tenure. Yes. it is stressful, but that is how things go in academy...
Well, people often don't end up where they'd like to be. Maybe you end up teaching 3/3. Maybe your colleagues, who seemed so charming during the interview process, are in fact snakes. Maybe you are 2,000 miles from your family. Maybe you have always lived in Manhattan and can't handle living anywhere else. Maybe you really are 'underplaced,' and schools contact you to see if you'd consider applying elsewhere.
There are lots of reasons. And I can tell you that in our search last year and this year, somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of our applicants were assistant profs or adjuncts somewhere else.
I do think the above poster is correct that the standards are higher for assistant profs applying--they definitely have to show progress over the time they've been out. However, I'd much rather bet on a 'proven' scholar/teacher than an ABD, in most circumstances. FWIW.
I may be vastly overgeneralizing here from my own experience. I'm an asst prof with a 3-3 load, looking to move laterally, but to a different geographic area. I think asst. profs are disadvantaged in R1 searches, and advantaged in R2 and below.
For R1s, they expect Asst Profs to have been publishing big time since they graduated, which can be harder in your first couple of years when you're teaching a full load with new preps for the first time. (I had much more time to work on my research when I was a grad student and was only TAing or teaching one class.) Good thing I'm not looking to move to an R1.
For lower-tier schools that are not looking for research powerhouses, asst. profs may have the advantage. I don't have to talk about how I would teach something or make up fake syllabi, because I've already done it several times. I've got teaching evaluations from several semesters with a full load. I've shown that I can still publish while I'm teaching three courses. And I'm guaranteed to be finished by my start date, since I defended three years ago. At the ASAs, I was a little surprised, because interviewers seemed very excited that I had degree in hand, and a few years under my belt.
My advisor also mentioned that not only am I competing with other ABD's for Assistant Professor positions, but also with untenured Assistant Profs who wish to move for various reasons.
Another assist prof on the market...I'm looking to move from one region to another and hopefully find a lower cost of living. I was probably over zealous last go round because I took the first offer I had, only to get 3 or 4 requests for interviews later that same week I accepted the job.
What's great about this time around is I now know more of the important issues to ask about...and I can actually negotiate since I don't risk starving if I don't find another job.
I totally agree with the others that assist profs are disadvantaged in the R1 market. Also, it is incredibly difficult to move vertically in our market, so unless you're already at a top school and have been publishing your bum off, you will struggle on the market.
If you are an assist prof who is looking for a teaching position at SLAC or R2 (more of a horizontal move in the market), you probably will be at an advantage so long as you are somewhat productive. That's where I am, and so far I have gotten a few nibbles.
I am a grad. student at an R1 and in thinking back over everyone we have hired since I have been here (5 years), we have not hired anyone straight from grad school. We have hired assistant profs with strong publication records who were approaching the tenure mark at a good-but-below-us institution. We have hired a few post-docs who had top-3 journal publications. We did one spousal hire, and a smattering of distinguished professor hires where we recruited them away from somewhere else.
So I can't say whether we are representative at all or not, but assistant professors seem to be at an advantage here IF they have published in top journals. Post-docs with similar publication records, however, seem to get selected over assistant professors. Again, this is just one institution...
I just want to thank everyone who has posted advice and tips so far. I sort of went on the market this year in the sense that I did some ASA interviews and sent out a handful of applications. Thanks to some of the comments here, I have realized that I am not ready this year. However, I feel that the advice I have read here has helped me prepare for next year so much better than my adviser ever has! So here's just a general thanks to the sociology job market community for being such a supportive and helpful bunch!
One thing I am curious about is salary. I am at a public institution and I have looked up the faculty salaries for all the professors in my department. They range from low-50's to nearly 200K a year. I'm wondering what is reasonable to ask for at an R1? What about an R2 or a SLAC? How are annual raises decided? Is this different for public and private schools? What about people who are hired with dual affiliations, like someone who has a joint appointment or someone who is a fellow at a university research center?
I am realizing that I have learned a lot about how to apply for jobs and how to handle interviews, but I know nothing at all about salary negotiation.
Check out the salary ranges at the ASA postings. They are a good starting point and are pretty honest, from what I've seen. I'd expect a top R1 to start at $55 to 65 depending on how strongly they want you and the leverage you have to negotiate. I'd expect a SLAC or R2 to start out a bit lower at $45 to 55. Interestingly, some CC actually start out at comparable salaries, but do not have all the pressures of SLACS.
When you are in negotiations, keep in mind schools are more likely to give you "one time" start up costs, moving costs and signing bonuses (which you'll need because you'll not get paid for several weeks after starting!) rather than salary increases. Be sure to consider those when you can't seem to get the salary up much. These "extras" can really help you start up your research program. Also, see if you can drop a course your first year.
At my school, salary increases are simply cost of living increases. Don't expect too many big increases until you get tenure.
Have a look at the Chronicle's average faculty salaries, too. For instance, here's the data for California universities with doctoral programs: http://chronicle.com/stats/aaup/aaupresults.php
Wow! Some of those salaries for Asst Profs in California seem really high relative to what people are saying here! Is that during the first year, you think? Or an average of all those still in the asst prof rank?
Most of those high CA salaries are from UCs- so keep in mind that many UCs have Medical and Law schools. Profs in professional schools make a lot more and thus, will tend to pull up the average salary for an asst prof (or associate or full).
Also keep in mind that CA has an obscenely high cost of living. The median price for a 2 bedroom home in San Diego, several parts of LA (esp Santa Monica and the Ocean Cities near UC Irvine), San Fran, and Santa Barbara hovers around $875,000-1,000,000.
*teaching reduction (try to get only 1 course in your first semester; ask if you can teach the same thing again in the spring). *as much start-up $$ as you can justify (create a detailed budget showing why you need the cash) *moving costs (get estimates if it will help your case) *Summer Salary!! Try to get at least 1/9 for your first few summers. You will probably be paid over 12 months that 9-month salary; Summer salary gives you an extra 1/9 (or 2/9, if you are lucky) in the summer that is like a 'bonus.' That is how we finally bought a house. *Much easier to increase the offered salary if you have other offers *Expect more movement on the one-time costs, as the above poster points out, than on salary (but it doesn't hurt to ask for more). Summer salary is good in this regard, since they don't have to keep paying it, just at first.
Re: Salary, this is so school-dependent. I have heard of a starting salary (for a real superstar) at an R1 of $82K. But that is obscene. Expect mid-high 60s to low 70s at at R1; I'd guess mid-50s to mid-60s elsewhere.
Following up on the posting from October 7, 2007 6:37 PM...
I am also at an R1 (top 25), and my school has hired 8 new profs since I have been there (about 7 years). Out of those 8, 3 had post-docs, 2 were assistant profs at other colleges (one was hired on an associate line), and 3 came straight out of grad school. Two of those 3 looked really good on paper (finished their Phd in five years, good publication record, came from top-10 ranked graduate schools). The other one came from a top-5, had no pubs, but did have some grants and fellowships and a smattering of awards.
I think the bottom line is that post-docs put you at an advantage on the market at the top ranked R1s. If you did not do a post-doc, you have to have come from a top-10 graduate school and have publications. If no publications, you need to have come from a top-5 graduate school, have gotten grants, have some pubs in the pipeline, and have won awards.
If a search committee member in a different but interrelated/interdisciplinary department contacted you to invite you to apply for a tenure-track position, would you?
Me: devil's advocate. Only if you actually feel strong ties with the other field and can see yourself teaching in an that department for a long time. Gender is one of my specialties, but I wouldn't apply for a women's studies position. 1) Because I don't really enjoy teaching "women's studies" other than the soc part of it, 2)I worry about vague tenure requirements that sometimes exist in interdisciplinary depts and 3)I think a dept full of sociologists would be better support/mentoring for me in publishing. I think lots of people could enjoy (or even prefer) being in an interdisciplinary setting, but it's not automatic. And it could be hard to find a job in a sociology dept after that if you change your mind.
no harm in applying if you'd seriously consider the job. apply and see what happens. who knows, could be perfect for you. applying and not getting the job, or turning down the offer, is ALWAYS better than not knowing what could've been possible. that's my take.
Someone advised me to consider these types of jobs only if there is a possibility of affiliating with the sociology department on that campus. Then, if I decide I want to go back to Soc, it's listed on my CV (and hopefully some or all of the pubs will be in soc journals as well).
I've been thinking over the pros and cons of my c.v. relative to others on the market. I have two questions/concerns: 1) Does anyone know whether private universities/colleges tend to 'look down' on candidates who attended large state universities (I'm not talking about Berkeley here) for undergrad? I've heard in the past from professors that these private institutions favor candidates who have had the 'private/small school experience'. 2) Ceteris paribus, how much of a detriment is it on the market to have attended the same institution for undergrad and grad school? I'd appreciate any impressions or experience that others have had. Thanks.
7:16, I don't know the answer, but it seems like there are ways in your cover letter to describe how your experience at a large state university gave you a sympahtetic orientation towards small colleges. I attended a large state university (20,000+ students) that advertised its honors program (~500 students) as a "small school experience with all the resources of a large university". Or perhaps your undergraduate department had a particularly cozy atmosphere that has given you a good model for professor-student interactions? (Or maybe it even served as an example of what not to do and convinced you that a small college was really where you should have been all along?)
For those of you who have received requests for more materials, if they've asked for dissertation chapters, had you already submitted a chapter in your application? Are they actually asking for a second or third chapter? Or are they asking for a first chapter because you originally submitted other pubs or something else?
7:16, you also want to really emphasize how much you love to teach. SLACs just want to be sure that you're not applying to use them as back-ups, especially because R1s train students for research jobs.
This is 7:07 here. I originally submitted a chapter and a few articles/article manuscripts. The school is UC-Berkeley. Last year, they asked at least one of their candidates for more chapters too. (I remember last year UCLA required diss chapters. Those are the only two schools I ever remember explicitly asking for diss chapters.) My sense is that it's pretty uncommon for schools to ask for more writing samples, if that's what you're getting at.
Thanks so much for the clarification! I'm just trying to figure out how much to try to polish another chapter at this point or continue with my normal process of working on several chapters at once.
Yeah, at this point all the action is either going to be on the status of searches thread or the interview advice (in a week or two when people actually start preparing ofr interviews.)
Compared to last year, it either seems like thee are more vocal posters this year or more posters.
This was discussed on the blog a few weeks ago. If you scroll up in one of the sections, you should be able to find the discussion on R1s and how they are classified.
Does the search committee contact an applicant's references by references BEFORE deciding on an interview, or do the calls to the references occur after?
What I am really trying to ask is whether the references can "make or break" an applicant's chance for an interview.
I think it would be nice to get a sense of how many people are reading and/or posting on this blog. Is there a way we could do a count by adding a letter or number or something to identify that we are participating? I wonder if there are a bunch of us or only a few. I will start (1)
Not sure if someone else is doing this but... lets get more systematic about tracking this. Someone should go onto the Wiki and insert a spot where people can 'X' for themselves as users of the wiki/blog. I'd suggest a spot for people on the market and a spot for those that are just learning/observing. I'll do it tonight if no one else beats me to it.
I'm 7. not on the market (was last year); just lurking because somehow I miss all the intrigue (I know, it's sick). And sometimes I offer my 'sage advice.'
Hi everyone. I have added a 'participation counter' to the Wiki. Following Karl's suggestion, it allows users to add '1' to the current value for themselves depending on whether they are on the market or are 'other users'. To the 7 of you who already began 'counting' your selves on this thread, could you please add yourself on the Wiki. We don't want to lose track of your participation. Please feel free to make changes to the counter if it seems to be encountering problems. I tried to be as clear as possible.
Hi karl. 5:53 here. I'm a little unclear about why its not best just to be explicit from the start since accuracy is one of things we're striving for here.
Very interesting thread indeed. Academia is such an odd phenomenon. I try to explain the job search process to my fam and non-acad friends, and they get baffled at how I applied to so many jobs and how wording letters can get so nuanced.
Note: I've asked a few profs in my dept about timelines for the process, and some made it clear to me that I may not hear anything until the end of this semester, especially for schools with October deadlines. While the top schools are moving quickly, it's important to keep the market in perspective. (Mind you, this doesn't stop me from wanting to call my top pick and start pleading for information...)
Hi everyone, Can someone please advise me on the general content of a 'statement of faith'? Are they looking for an indication of your own personal religious beliefs or a more academic evaluation of how faith and critical thinking can mesh? My Internet searches for help in this area keep coming up with the actual statements that many schools seem to require that you sign, once hired. Many thanks, in advance!
I'm working on the statement of faith now, and I've been having lots of problems with it to. If you're talking about SPU, I've been looking at their website for ideas of how to tie in my religion with my work. Also take note that their "employment application" explicitly asks about your "relationship with Jesus Christ" so there's no need to repeat that in the statement per se. Hope that helps some, and good luck.
I actually spoke to a professor about this at Pepperdine. What he told me is that they were looking for someone to describe their faith, detail their religious affiliation and how that shapes them.
I'm not sure if it needs to be a formal statement, or if it can be incorporated into the cover letter, I forgot to ask him how long it should be.
What it seemed like to me was they wanted to use that as a means for determining fit, they wouldn't necessarily pass on someone who isn't christian, but it would be unlikely for them to hire one. Given that that is the orientation of the school, it does make some sense, but even though I'm happily catholic, it's a little too discriminatory for me to apply.
Oops, forgot to mention that I think it's totally okay with professors at these universities if you give them a call. It's pretty uncommon and as someone mentioned above, it gives you a small chance to demonstrate your interest in the job...
are there any people here who were on the market or watching it last year? i have noticed from reading last year's blog that a LOT of non-R1 schools seemed to start reviewing in the fall but by january people were still posting asking for the status. i know it takes longer for the second-tier places, but i'm wondering if a given school's timeline from last year can be taken as typical for that school.
my #1 choice hired last year and while they started reviewing apps in september, they did not schedule interviews until january. i'm wondering if i should expect that sort of timeline this year from with.
related: i keep reading that we need to let the top-choice candidates make their choices and then we'll see the field open up more for the "rest of us". when does that usually happen?
If anyone here has been contacted to interview with Colorado College, how did they do it? We screen all of our calls and have had a lot of hangups in the past day. I'm wondering if that's any reason to be hopeful!
The prize for the best "receipt of application" letter goes to Hartwick: As you are aware, we are accepting applications until October 31, at which time our review of the applications and the actual interview process will begin. Our seach is expected to move forward quickly, and you will be notified if any further action/info is required on your part. I appreciate the time that went into the preparation of your application materials. I look forward to reviewing them.
UT-Austin emailed a very similar note several weeks ago, when they were acknowledging receipt of my application. I've deleted it already, but it gave a very detailed timeline (expected period for reviewing applications, interviews in November, etc.). I didn't realize at the time how rare such openness was!
I really appreciate the line that they appreciate how much time it took to prepare your application. That shows a lot of respect on the part of the SC towards their applicants.
I have gotten a lot of letters with detailed timelines, but none that nice.
I'm not sure if it is the case that there are more applicants than jobs. Certainly there are more applicants who want top tier R1 jobs than actual top tier R1 jobs. But taking a look at the wiki and ASA job bank, there are tons of job openings.
As long as you are willing to move and apply widely, I think you will eventually get a job, maybe not at your dream-school or even at your backup dream-school, but you can eventually find a job.
Scanning over the wiki, I count approximately 200 academic job openings at all posted levels. Is that also what you get or am I making some huge error? (I hope I am!)
Based on my department's website, we have about 25 job candidates on the market this year. If we each got one of these posted academic jobs, we'd snag an eighth of what seems to be currently available on the wiki, total. All by ourselves!
The wiki is not up-to-date (there are a lot of smaller schools that are posted on the ASA but not up-dated on the wiki) and many schools like Chicago, Cornell and Penn have multiple openings that are not list individually on the wiki. Plus, there are other options--non-academic options and post-docs.
I agree that the process is not easy but I don't think that the odds are that bad. I think that if your CV looks serious you will eventually find a job.
2:51, I did count the multiple positions when they were described on the wiki (and they often were). ...but if we are talking about non-academic jobs, that's different. It is very rare for a PhD to be unwillingly unemployed. For those open to jobs outside academe, I am quite confident that everything will be okay! I am worried about some of my colleagues who are not at all open to other kinds of jobs.
I like the idea of introducing other 'non-academic' jobs into the discussion fray. Besides market research, social/government research, and ed. administration, what other professional venues do you think are good fits for our sociology degrees? I am increasingly interested in escaping academia!
I have been working outside the academy and am now looking to get back in. Its a fine option, but people should know that non-academic jobs are very different than working in academia. You have much less autonomy and you are essentially doing someone else's research, not your own. In many cases, you are doing someone else's data collection only. Or you aren't doing academic research but program evaluation. Outside of academia, you can expect to be able to stay within your research interests broadly defined (family, crime, health,...) but you won't pick your research questions. The closest you can get in probably at a think tank, and those jobs are harder to get than assistant professor jobs. That being said, my friends with non-academic jobs who are the happiest are methodologists. RThat's been my experience.
With regard to the number of positions available this year, I think we are fooling ourselves if we think that all are "open" searches. In many cases, departments already know who they want for the position, even before the job is posted. Or, they've already decided to hire from top 5 programs (making applications from other schools a complete waste of ink and time).
My own department actively recruits candidates up to one year before a job is announced. They make phone calls to top 5 schools, email potential candidates, and offer to take them for dinner during the ASAs. In one instance they arranged a visit to the campus (with no official job position available). They then convinced to Dean that they need to fill a particular area (that happens to match the candidate they wanted).
To be clear, they do not do this for each and every position, but when they know of someone they want, they do their best to grab her/him. Of course, this has worked against them: in the recent past they have overlooked extremely strong candidates because they had their eyes on a different prize.
I suspect my department is not alone. And I get a feeling of dread everytime I think about it.
So, what are our options? Really. How do we deal with this mess?
Perhaps less calculating but another example of "open" positions not being open: when I was on a search committee, we had advertised as open but internally had agreed that we would eliminate anyone who didn't do x. At the time, it seemed to me a reasonable way of sorting through hundreds of applications. Now, it sees really unfair that we weren't clearer in the posting. As for whether or not we're all going to get jobs; of course not. ABDs do searches for several years and assistant profs are on the market every year until they get tenure. Aside from the fact that not everyone is qualified & the market relied on many intangible qualities, there's also the fact that each year has particularly strong openings in some fields and dearths in others. For example, I was on the market last year and found only 1 job that emphasized my specialty as their top priority. This year there are at least 6. For people who are desperate to find jobs this year, you might have to settle for a VAP advertised in the Spring. As a result, you'll be on the market again next year along with probably 75% of the people on the market right now (many of whom may have also taken jobs but are still looking for a more perfect fit).
Don't forget those of us who take post-docs. We'll be back next year or the year after too. I am doing a post-doc that can be 1 or 2 years depending on my preference. So I did the market this year sort of before taking the post-doc, and will do it next year with the intention of doing it a third time the following year if nothing appeals to me next year.
I fully intend to do this up to three times before taking my first pre-tenure job.
I'm crushed. If you are on the long/short list for the University of Connecticut, please let me know how they informed you (email, letter, phone call). This was my dream job and my heart just sank reading the wiki.
I updated the wiki. But now there are weird lines crossing out half of the entries in the "Schools hiring this year..." Does anyone see this or is there something wrong with my computers?
I got all excited b/c I had not gotten a rejection letter from Stanford and had heard that others had. Got mine in the mailbox today. I feel foolish.
A professor told me a few days ago to not read into things, not take a little piece of information and start fantasizing and drawing up scenarios. A request for an interview is something worth getting excited about. Anything else is not worth thinking about.
Can anyone give any information about this Cornell Human Development job listed on the wiki as having sent rejection letters? I have looked everywhere, but I cannot figure out which job this is.
1) Sociology 2) Policy Analysis 3) Human Development
If Human Development is looking for a sociologist, why isn't is posted on the ASA. 12:28, thank you for posting the info. I am wondering, however, why the search committee choose not to post it on the ASA.
This is just an appeal to SC members reading our blog, since there seem to be a few.
This came up somewhere, but I can't find it now. There is a use in notifying candidates on the long shortlist, beyond hanging onto your top picks. I have heard several people say that, if they get no expression of interest this year, they're done with the academic job market. If you can extend even a half nibble to those who got close, it may serve to strengthen your pool in coming years.
thanks, 4:42. I hear you. I'll mention this to our SC chair. I don't think we've sent the rejection letters yet; I don't see why we couldn't add a note on those who were on our shortlist.
If a job ad states that a Ph.D. in hand is required, does that mean the applicant must have a Ph.D. at the time the application is sent--in other words, no ABDs?
Or can ABDs apply, assuming they will earn the Ph.D. before the starting date?
PhD in hand usually means by start of employment. My understanding is that you have to be done by August. If the SC does not think that will happen, based on your current progress, they will likely not interview you. This is especially true for qualitative dissertations which are known to take longer.
I have heard Columbia is a hellish place for junion faculty.
Calling UNC Chapel Hill hellish is a joke. I'm a grad student there now and it's a great place. Very friendly. There's not a lot of hand-holding, but if you need that, you're in the wrong business anyway...
Indiana University is a pretty fabulous place. Grad students like one another, and faculty seem to like one another. Plus, if you like smallish, liberal, college towns, Bloomington is wonderful.
7:41: But isn't the true for a lot of departments?
It kills me that there are tensions between the quant an qual people. I swear, sometimes I think people go out of their way to create conflict and divisions.
as they say.... the battles are so bitter because the stakes are so low. but really, it is not helpful or fair to characterize departments in this manner. like the perceived qualifications of job candidates, one persons hellish department is another's shangri-la....
i'm sorry, what makes you think you are getting the "real story" on a blog? as we have already seen, one opinion does not define a department. to me this department-bashing looks more like a way of making people feel better about not being invited...
828 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 828 Newer› Newest»Just my opinion:
1. Always wear the nicest clothes you have. Suits are always acceptable.
2. Include everything on your CV that is not padding. A long CV says "I've done a lot of stuff".
3. No one knows why hiring committees do what they do - don't try and guess.
4. Most of us are unemployed grad. students. Try to be nice but overlook the occasional smart-ass comment.
Not to press the clothes issue but is there a difference between what to wear in (supposedly laidback) California versus say the Ivies? Could suits be a negative in the West coast?
Also, about how long does it take to start hearing from schools after their deadline?
suits are perfectly fine here in california. i would think the same at other west coast and laid-back places. (there's probably less dress code variation between the east and west coasts in academic settings than in hi-tech settings.)
I got a job in CA last year, and during a casual moment on my interview I joked with a prof that I was looking forward to getting out of my suit, and she said, "yeah, but you gotta wear it for these things."
Ultimately, what you wear to the interview probably explains less than 2% of the variance in job offers, so let's not blow this out of proportion. That said, if you've made it to an interview, you're roughly in a three- or four-way tie, so little things can make a difference. And I can guarantee you that at least one (and probably all) of your competitors will be wearing a suit, so why look like the candidate who doesn't appear to care as much?
Wearing a suit will indicate I don't "care as much?'" Come on. I think one's application, CV, and job history indicates how serious one is. If my peers want to choose you instead of me because you're wearing a suit and I'm not, then I accept that. I am who I am and that's not a suit person. That position served me well on the market in the past and I'm sticking with it.
Where are all those rebels I sat around the seminar table with? We seem to be able to cast a critical eye on the system from the outside, but once given the opportunity to get inside -- conservatism is the game plan.
I don't think anyone is going to say, "well, this candidate didn't wear a suit to the interview, so let's go with the other one." But I have heard of situations where overly casual dress was used as ammunition in a debate about whether the candidate was sufficiently professional and serious. And obviously there are a lot of subconscious biases at work here as well.
I haven't seen any job ads for rebels lately, but then, it's not my field. If wearing a suit is such an ordeal then by all means be that business-casual revolutionary.
as people who should know a bit about presentation of self, i'd say there are some valid reasons to dress professionally. just because we know that people communicate through props and that wearing a suit doesn't *really* say anything about your intellect, that doesn't mean those processes aren't real and guiding interaction.
that being said, i would encourage anyone who applied for the kent state job to show up wearing jeans and flip-flops ;)
Any benefit/cost associated with sending in an application packet weeks in advance of a deadline?
I can think of a benefit. If a member of the search committee sees your application early and also happens to like it, the committee member can start talking up the application, and can also become identified with that application or otherwise form an attachment to it. This is just a minor tendency, I think, and can be overcome by other factors, but it's more than nothing.
I think there is benefit. I talked with a prof. from a major R1 with a late deadline and he emailed me afterwards urging me to send it in ASAP.
My advisor also said that when app.'s come in, then when he talks to prof's from said schools he can tell them to pull my file.
I have heard prof's from my school talking up some fo the eraly app's that came in. I don't see any drawbacks unless you hastily put t together or wind up getting some new publication or award after you sent it in.
Even if you get a pub or award soon after, you can follow up with a second letter. Giving you another (brief) opportunity to make your case.
but, alas, my horse has left the barn. Nothing more coming out of my pipeline for at least 6 months.
Having served on a search committee at a top 3 school, I can say that at that school, no one looked at the applications until the deadline had passed. People started reading files pretty much immediately after the deadline, but getting an application early or on the day of the deadline itself didn't really matter.
From my experience on the market a 2 years ago, the search chair sometimes takes a glance at incoming applications before the deadline. When a rec letter from a friend catches his or her eye, the chair may follow up with an email to the applicant. I suspect the point is make certain the applicant sends a complete application and to signal that the department will give them a thorough read because there's a good fit. A couple departments did that after receiving my rec letters last time on the market. This all happened before the deadlines, and these were R1s...for what it's worth.
Late letter.
I just found out one of my letter writers will send in his/her letter a week late for about 4 schools.
Past experiences?
Worth worrying about? Did my app get put in the circular file?
If they are seriously interested, they'll contact you.
I ran into that problem in the past. The department admin assistant sends out letters once faculty members send her a copy. Roughly a 3rd of my top picks didn't get letters on time. Departments who were interested got in touch. The ones who didn't -- either weren't interested or were put off that I didn't get them there on time. I got a job though.
my letters were late too for some jobs. i assume that hiring committees understand that we have very little control over when the letters go out. we ask, but it is up to them when they get around to it.
in our department, someone on the admin staff keeps a copy of everyone's letters so once that person has them, we can have them sent out to anyone without having to wait. but the initial request...mostly out of our control.
Two comments:
1.) I ended up getting a job at a "top" school last year and two of my letters were late - one of them a month late.
2.) Wear a suit. The only reason not to is if you look so uncomfortable in one that it hinders your interactions. But unless that's the case, wear one. It marks you as someone who is taking the process seriously and recognizes that you are transitioning from grad student to "professional sociologist".
Re: publications
How about invited review articles in books (I don't mean book reviews)? How are they evaluated relative to sole-authored, co-authored publications in peer-reviewed journals.
Are there book series/encyclopedias that are particularly prestigious for grad students to be published in?
11:08, handbooks are important. Others will depend on the subdiscipline. The big question is "how important is the text to the discipline?" If no one uses the book, then the publication doesn't count for much. That's why handbooks are important; they are "the" book of the subfield.
Peer review always trumps other venues, including "invited review essays," encyclopedia entries, or book chapters. My advisor (R1) tells me I should never have a piece as a book chapter unless it has already been an article and then is invited.
And, sucks for the rest of us, but some candidates even have book contracts for their dissertation. So a chapter in a book, which is not peer reviewed, starts to look unimpressive to an R1. of course, all this does not matter the same to all schools and I am referring to places like Wisconsin or Berkeley.
JOB TALK and/or TEACHING DEMO?
For R1s, the job talk is required but not the teaching demo. At teaching intensive universities, the formal talk tends to be a teaching demo.
But what about the highly selective liberal arts institutions, which seem to equally stress research and teaching? I'm talking about places such as Dartmouth and Bowdoin. Do they require both the job talk and teaching demo or just the teaching demo?
a few schools may ask for both. it's rare, but for my interview at a small uni where research and teaching are equally important, i did both. the teaching demo is geared towards students, and the research demo is really geared towards faculty (although it might be in a methods class). if you are asked to do a research talk during an undergraduate course, you'll need to rethink how you present material. while this might really be for faculty, the students should get something out of it. be sure to ask for syllabi for any classes you visit. that'll help you with the presentations. if both faculty and students are engaged, you've really scored big time.
I've had two campus interviews in the past, and for both, I had to do both job talk and teaching demo. One was a SLAC and one was a private selective university with a master's program (both schools with 3-3 loads if that gives you an idea).
It's my personal position that schools should have to choose one or the other because doing both turns a candidate to jelly, and most schools are basing their hiring more on one than the other...
Of all the teaching demos I've seen, the biggest mistake is that candidates don't offer any content. You do want get students involved and interested, but make sure you give them some material to work with. Most of the time you don't get to assign them reading, but you can start with some lecture info on a topic and then design discussion questions that will give them the opportunity to apply that information.
This is my first time on the job market, so I'm not sure how to compare this year's job prospects with previous years. I did, however, look at the job ads last year with great frequency, and it seems to me that compared to last year's ads, there simply aren't as many job openings this year. Anyone else also observe this trend?
Re: number of openings this year
It is my first time on the market as well but I get the impression that there are as many if not more openings this year, although this may be field specific.
Pretty much all the big schools that hired last year are also hiring this year. Are you referring to SLAC? As usual, lot of criminology jobs and lots of demography/quant jobs
post-doc vs. third-choice school?
i would like to pose a question...
i am a candidate from a top-5 school, but not an especially competitive candidate (ie: no top journal pubs). i also have family circumstances that limit where i am willing to take a job. my partner is unlikely to find work in her field outside of an urban area. i have been offered a good post-doc, good both salary-wise and in terms of research opportunities with people in my sub-field. realistically, i think that if i receive any job offers this year they will be from my back-up back-up schools. but...who really knows until it happens? i could get an offer from my first choice.
so if you were me, would you take the post-doc or hold out that one of your first-choice schools might make an offer?
My view is that taking a job at a school is a commitment - both to the school and their students. in this sense, your heart has to be in it 100%. if it's not, go for the postdoc, get some stellar pubs and go back on the market in a year or two and find a school that makes you happy longterm.
dear 7:47
it sounds like you don't really know your options yet. especially if/what other job offer you may get and what it would include. it is nice to have a post-doc in your back pocket whilst looking for faculty positions (which can be incredibly arbitrary). in addition to meeting your geographic priorities, a question to ask yourself should you get a job offer (or more) is whether you can accomplish more towards becoming an independent scholar (and thus a stronger candidate) by taking the post-doc or the faculty job? in concurrence with 1:24, post-docs can be great investments that pay off nicely for the long-haul.
dear 1:00
sheer volume and "open" seraches notwithstanding, it is indeed the number of schools posting positions in your subfield that matters most. my list is roughly the same size as last year.
Re: post doc vs. third choice, I am with the others. Go with the post-doc. Nearly every faculty person I have talked to on search committees says that a post-doc gives an applicant an advantage in the job market. Plus, its only a two year commitment vs. 7.
I have a question about recommendation letters. How important are they, compared to publications? How much and often are search committee members persuaded by the letters saying my student will be very productive in the near future even though he/she doesn't have publications come out yet?
I think it's very hard on the market these days for someone without any pubs--no matter what their letters say. There are so many advanced assistants applying for the same jobs, that it's hard for an ABD to compete without a few.
My understanding is in line with the post above. It seems tht there can be some halo effect from a superstar adviser if the letter is through the roof. for example, if your chair is William Julius Wilson and he says you are one of the greatest students he worked with... You get the point. But assuming the adviser is a bit more run of the mill like the rest of us, I think it is necessary but not sufficient to have an outstanding letter from her or him.
I've applied to some schools that ask for names and contact information for references rather than letters with the initial application materials. Any thoughts on how those kinds of searches work? Do they contact references after making a 'long list' and then make a short list? Is the process generally longer for such schools?
I applied to one place like that, and one of my letter-writers read the list of placed I had applied and assumed she had forgotten a letter so she sent them one. I am really hoping that isn't going to look bad.
In general, what additional materials do schools ask for? Additional writing samples? Transcripts? Additional references?
Thanks!
A big thing is articles...specifically many places are interested in dissertation chapters. It a way to gauge quality and chances of actually being done before next year.
What?? Really?? That means that these places are asking for materials from ABDs?
Wow.
In my experience, the R1s and R2s almost always flyout ABDs. Its the exception, not the rule. Maybe SLAC are more likely to demand the degree in hand.
sorry, i meant that it is the rule to flyout ADBs not the exception.
Why is this surprising? Many of the top schools regulalarly hire ABD's. I had friends who landed jobs at three tope schools last year who didn't finish util right before they started.
I am at an R1, and my advisor told me not to worry about trying to defend before I apply. Especially if you have articles and chapters to back it up, this is no problem.
my experience on the market two years ago was that top R1 schools wanted to see drafts of chapters from those on the short-list. of course, these were just drafts (and they knew this), but they wanted to see something in print. if a candidate has nothing written at this point (ie, not even solid prospectus), a committee might worry he/she may not be done before next year. it is in everyone's best interest that new hires be done with their degree before starting a job.
So "PhD preferred, but ABD considered" is not quite the truth, then?
Not exactly. They really mean ABD considered. The catch is that ABD needs to become PhD before next Fall term begins. Asking for dissertation chapter drafts is one way to access whether arriving with "degree in hand" is likely. If we are realistic about things, completing a dissertation takes roughly two years. If someone is on the market without something written (not even review chapters or a developed methods chapter), are they likely to be completely done in 10 months or so? The other issue is that taking a job before you actually have your degree complicates loads of things. For example, when does your tenure clock begin? What will your starting pay be? What happens to your contract if your dissertation committee slows your progress? Does the new department wait, or do you lose your job?
who am I really?
I just received a confirmation letter from Suffolk addressed to "Heather" -- ironically, my correct name is in the address header above... and there is really no way to confuse my name with "Heather"
so, Heather, if you're reading, you'll be happy to know that Suffolk is in receipt of your application!
3:55 - Thanks - I understood that part of it. I was just surprised because I would think that in a market so glutted, ABDs wouldn't have much of a shot.
Actually, it's not necessarily true that PhD in hand folks do better on the market than ABD's. With a very scientific N=1 I found that I had 5 offers as an ABD and 1 when I went on the market with a PhD a year later (and yes I applied to roughly the same amount of jobs).
Yes, obviously, if it's the rule rather than the exception to fly out ABDs. (I'm the "Wow" earlier.) I don't understand why schools would want to even look at ABDs when there are so many applicants with degree in hand, and why they say "ABD considered" when people here seem to be suggesting that it may be closer to "ABD preferred."
Completely, utterly confused. I was told over and over again (by colleagues, not SCs) last year that the problem was that I was ABD. This does not seem to be the case if schools just ask the ABDs for proof that they'll be finished in time before they fly them out.
Sadly, 12:16, I think confusion is a completely appropriate response to this absolutely bizarre process. All I can say, is don't try to second guess and just accept the randomness of the process. Every department uses its own logic. And often it feels to any given candidate that the institutional logic of a certain department specifically excludes him or her.
This is a good time to look around and study how your non academic friends get jobs and how easy it is for them to change jobs to remind yourself of how absolutely abnormal and odd academia is. In other words, remind yourself that the process is wacky and that *you* are not the problem.
my friend got an eeo form which has the option for a name and to email it in. should they put their name down?
Yes. It wont impact the search committee decision (i.e., HR and SC folks don't share info for eeoo forms).
10:23, can I ask if you had letters from members of the dept you were leaving? From experience on search committees, I know they can look "oddly" at those who are leaving one dept to go on the market but do not have letters of support from folks there. It raises a redflag of sorts -- even if it is totally undeserved. but you know how people are. What's worse is when people do not disclose to their current dept they are going on the market. If you were going to invest time and resources into a new hire, do you want someone who could leave abruptly? That's the logic I've seen in action. The sad part is that many times the people leaving a dept are not the problem; it's the people who remain there that drive others way. The problem, though, is that these people aren't the ones trying to find work.
Question:
What is the attitude towards letters of recommendation written by non-sociologists? i have a cross-disciplinary fellowship and most of the senior faculty i work closely with are not in sociology. however, they are the people with whom i have published (in soc journals). Is it true that a non-soc letter is a total waste? What is my choice is between a great letter from a non-soc professor and an average letter from a soc professor?
6:07 - there's probably a difference if you are applying for an open position or a position advertised for a specific subfield. If your co-authors are well known and respected within your subfield (i.e. economists within demography) it might work for you.
6:07: I considered having people from different departments write letters for me. If these are people that are best able to discuss your research and publication potential, not to mention your collegiality, then I would use those *great* letters. Of course, it would look odd if you had no soc letters. Also, inter-disciplinary stuff is pretty big at most schools, so it can be a nice selling point, especially if the work ends up in soc journals (versus whatever field you're collaborating with).
Hi everyone. I casually read both the Sociology and Political Science job blogs, and I wanted to commend everyone on the level of civility here. It's nice to see an arena where anonymity does not automatically equal people acting like jerks.
I'm not sure if this has been covered in the past but...
A question about searching the asa job bank. My usual course of action each day (I really mean every other hour) is to look for newly posted positions using the 'Search by Date Posted' criteria. I then plug in a to date that is the last time I checked and a from date that is today's date.
I've been worrying a bit recently that I may somehow miss jobs doing it this way. For instance, I checked for jobs several times on Mon (the 1st) and there were none, however several showed up on Tues with a 10/1 posting date. I realize that this is b/c the school listed 10/2 as the 'Date Available', but still, being somewhat paranoid, I worry about missing something.
So, I'm wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this, or a better understanding than I of how the system works. Is the posting date the day they enter the job into the bank? Does someone at ASA screen these things before they go out? Should I be searching by 'Date Available' or by another means? I'd appreciate any input.
To 9:56: I noticed that glitch. Because the stakes are high (my career is at stake!), I did it the onerous way, just to be sure. I always select "all active jobs" and then scroll and scroll. Over time you get quicker at it.
Is anyone else finding it nearly impossible to be productive while waiting to hear news about your applications? I'm too distracted by my curiosity and anxiety to focus on my work. I can imagine people having the opposite reaction, but how common is that?
This question has been posted on the Chronicle, but I'll post it here, specific to the sociology jobs:
Why is it that certain schools (I'm talking Cal State Fullerton and Michigan State in particular) seem to have multiple openings for sociology? Should we read anything into it--say, indication that of faculty attrition/instability at those institutions or is it a sign that the departments are expanding?
5:25 - Thanks for the compliment. Yeah, we sociologists are nice. People came over last year to complain about the poli-sci wiki. Must be pretty cutthroat over there. Fascinating...just disciplinary/structural differences, I wonder? Or is something else at at play - gender, class? ;)
9:56 - I've noticed the same. I change the date only every few days, just to be sure. For example, though today's the 3rd, I'm still searching as of 9/30, even though I checked 20 minutes ago. Tomorrow I'll search as of 10/1. And so on...
i have the same strategy as 11:39. i've double-checked by doing it the arduous way, as well (e.g. scrolling through all ads), and this hits them all.
I use control F (find) and type in the day's date (e.g., 10/03), and then go up or down the page finding new ads. This method captures either the posting date or the available date.
Yeah, we sociologists are nice. People came over last year to complain about the poli-sci wiki. Must be pretty cutthroat over there. Fascinating...just disciplinary/structural differences, I wonder? Or is something else at at play - gender, class? ;)
I'm in Political Science, and I think there are differences between the two fields, some of which are apparent on these blogs. But my main view is that sociologists are interested in the nuances of of inequality and "should" be more sensitive people in general. While Political Scientists are more focused on hard generalities. Perhaps there are also more women in sociology.
But what would your argument be about class differences?
RE: "TOP 25" -the rankings listed earlier are the US News rankings. Here are the same rankings up to number 64, from (long url on 2 lines): www.southwestern.edu/
academic/depts/socanthro/GradSchool.html.
1. University of Wisconsin – Madison
2. University of California – Berkeley
3. University of Michigan – Ann Arbor
4. University of Chicago
--University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill
6. Princeton University (NJ)
--Stanford University (CA)
8. Harvard University (MA)
--University of California – Los Angeles
10. University of Pennsylvania
11. Columbia University (NY)
--Indiana University – Bloomington
--Northwestern University (IL)
14 Cornell University (NY)
--Duke University (NC)
--University of Texas – Austin
17. Pennsylvania State University – University Park
--University of Arizona
--University of Washington
20. Ohio State University
--Yale University (CT)
22. Johns Hopkins University (MD)
--New York University
--University of Minnesota – Twin Cities
25. SUNY – Albany
--University of Maryland – College Park
27. Brown University (RI)
--University of California – Irvine
29. University of California – Davis
--University of California – Santa Barbara
31. CUNY Graduate School and University Center
--Rutgers State University – New Brunswick (NJ)
--Vanderbilt University (TN)
34. University of California – San Diego
--University of Illinois – Urbana – Champaign
--University of Iowa
--University of Massachusetts – Amherst
38. Emory University (GA)
--SUNY – Stony Brook
--University of Virginia
--Washington State University
42 Florida State University
--Michigan State University
--University of California – Riverside
--University of Southern California
46. North Carolina State University
--University of Florida
--University of Illinois – Chicago
49 Boston College
--Brandeis University (MA)
--New School University (NY)
--Texas A&M University – College Station
--University of Notre Dame (IN)
--University of Pittsburgh
55. University of Colorado – Boulder
--University of Georgia
--University of Oregon
58 Arizona State University
--Iowa State University
--Purdue University – West Lafayette (IN)
--University of California – San Francisco
--University of California – Santa Cruz
--University of Connecticut
--University of Kansas
Hi everyone,
I have a question for all those *star* or close-to-star candidates out there. Those of you who have a shot at a top-20 or have lots of good pubs. As I read over all the discussion of multiple sole authored pubs I am just amazed. What I'm wondering is when/how exactly you fit in time for all these pubs. For example, what year are you in your program? How much help did you get in the form of co-authored pieces with faculty earlier on in your career? At my top-25 school the faculty virtually never publish with grads so I'm wondering if this is typical. Any info of this kind would be really helpful for those of us how have been working hard just completing the requirements for the degree, teaching, etc.
I would also like to add a question for those stars. Were you ever required to teach as part of your assistantship? Were you funded through all of your graduate career or did you have to get a job to make ends meet? How many courses have you taught?
7:12 - I'm not a star (but I aspire to be!). I've managed to have at least 1-2 papers accepted to a journal (not the big 3) every year since I began grad school. At no point did I ever write a class paper without treating it as though I intended to publish it (or at least use it to explore topics that I would later expand on) and I've presented papers (not round tables) at conferences every year since the second year of grad school. It takes work, I don't get enough sleep, but it gives me a little bit more hope. In full disclosure, I'm not on the job market this year (but will be next year), and can say that this blog has been *extremely* illuminating about what I need to do over the next year in order to be in a better position.
Re: "stars"
You should not assume we had assistantships at all! (I am not saying I am a star but I fit published criterion)
I did not, I am not at a top 20 school, and I adjuncted for 4 years. Yet I wrote 3 sole authored papers in top 10 journals, including an ASR/AJS. I don't have a simple answer. I would say my main thing is just not being afraid to write, and figuring out lit. reviews and etc. after i had written up a good piece of data. I was not afraid of rejections either, I piled them up before anyone bit. but I learned how the game is played through this. And I always wrote my diss. chapters as articles first.
I had no ao-authored papers- they don't count for much unless you are first author. And this is my 5th year.
Some of those questions for the "stars" are probably going to invoke some defensiveness at best.
I think it's compelling to think of some stereotypical person with rich parents, a full ride, no teaching obligations, lots of funding, perfect GREs, etc, etc. Does that person *really* exist? My thought is No.
The "star" at my university (and yes, there is one) works really hard - a lot harder than I even pretend to work. Hu takes a lot of abuse from hus advisors (ie. in exchange for mentorship and networking, hu does secretarial work, errands, lawn care (!!), and whatever else). Hu always has something going: for instance, Hu has a fellowship now but is already writing two other grants for next year. There's no resting on the laurels or even stopping to enjoy successes. Just work.
I think the big difference between Hu and me is that Hu has never thought of grad school as a life style. Grad school is a job.
Hu also has TAed, RAed, waited tables, had grants, etc...
The star at my department works very hard. S/he will probably get many job offers. I see this person in the department working every single day, all day long. Of course these people don't have to teach, because they are the people who get fellowships. Why? For the same reasons they get good jobs! Because they make this the one and only priority in their lives.
I agree that the "questions to stars" comments sound more than a little hostile.
But if actual advice if what those posters want, here's mine. Write every course paper for publication. Send every paper you write to a conference and then revise it for a journal. When it gets rejected, revise and send it somewhere else. Do this is often as you need to.
Have meetings with any faculty member whose work interests you. Approach them with a collaborative project idea and ask them to work with you. If they say no, ask someone else. If every faculty in your department rejects you (highly unlikely), ask other students.
Get your own funding. Apply for every fellowship you can possibly find. Have your adviser and others read and help with your applications. Apply for RA jobs through other departments if you do not have fellowship finding.
Treat graduate school like a job. Go to your office every morning and work until dinner time. Work for another couple of hours before you go to sleep. If you're too tired then, try getting extra work hours in first thing in the morning. Do not socialize during the week.
Sounds like no fun? Maybe so. But nobody said you can have it all. We all make choices about what our life priorities are. I don't criticize my fellow students who go out with their friends in the evenings or who spend their days like they did in college.
Hi all, I'm the one who asked the original question about the star candidates (7:12). I truly did not intend for it to be hostile, admittedly I was a bit worried about that when I wrote it but was a little too tired to really discern if it seemed too aggressive. I have a good bit of admiration for those people in my dept and on the blog who have accomplished so much during their grad career. I agree with what someone said that it is about priorities, and while I have absolutely treated it as a job, working 9-10 hr days and weekends, I cannot claim that it has always been my TOP priority. I feel okay about that, but I guess I just want to better understand what it takes to fit all those pubs in. I think it helps the rest of us to get a handle on where we fit in the process and maybe provides some info to those who are not on the market about what they should be doing over the next year or two. So I hope anyone else who has something to add will do so. I hope this clears up my intentions, I certainly do not want to add tension to what is really a great group of bloggers.
Thank you 6:29 for spelling out what it takes to make it through grad school looking like a star! Yes, it's a choice one makes to work 60 hours a week at this job. So is that what the "star" litmus test looks for, that ambition and perseverence that would be refelcted by many pus and other quantifiable achievements? Let's remember that one would have to continue doing this through tenure. I also wonder: do any of these (real or perceived) stars out there have kids? And if not, what does this say about the feminit critique of gendered natures of professions such as others?
Change of subject from someone who thinks that 6:29's advice sounds like hell on earth:
Where are all the schools of which no one's ever heard? Don't they need sociologists? Do smaller schools post later in the year? If this keeps up I'm not even going to end up applying to enough places this year to get a job. Where are all of the ads from those tiny, low-to-mid-tier liberal arts schools that I know are scattered throughout the US?
I never hoped to get one of these high-falutin live-and-breathe-your-research jobs. They seem like the normal objective on these blogs, though, which surprises me. Do people like me get their jobs through a different process? (And on a related note: I know there are other "people like me" on faculties at small no-name schools...but am I the last of that dying breed?)
Thanks for humoring this unabashed, unashamed underachiever!
Is the job market a meritocracy? Probably not. But, maybe being a *star* is about the "little things" after all...
The Mundanity of Excellence: An Ethnographic Report on Stratification and Olympic Swimmers
Daniel F. Chambliss
Sociological Theory, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1989), pp. 70-86
7:34 AM--are you from a west coast R1? HAH! One of our profs assigned us that very piece.
I am not a Star - I'm more of a starlit (some sole-pubs, lots of grants, good school, etc). I have a child. It's really tough. I work at night after child is asleep and I rely on part-time paid childcare (which is where a lot of those grants go).
When I made my decision to have a child, I read the ASA's article about ideal times to have children in academic careers. Since I'm still a grad student, I knew that I'd have to have the support of my advisers (specifically their support in terms of RAs, co-authored pubs, and networking). I showed them the ASA research and discussed my plans for having a child and a career. They (all white men) made a deliberate commitment to give me the (extra) attention that I'd need in order to achieve my goals.
That's what it's taken to be both a mother and a starlit.
Job websites with smaller schools advertising (besides ASA and the Chronicle):
https://www.insidehighered.com
http://www.tedjob.com
There's also the Higher Education Recruitment Consortium, which has separate websites for different regions, it's good for searching for jobs in small places more locally (you can google herc and your favorite region and you'll find it).
Go Star-Mom! Hats off to you, and to me too. I'm another starlit mama.
I'm hardly a "star" but I am at a top school and I have several children. I do work a lot, before my kids wake up and after they go to sleep and as much as I can all day when they're in school.
8:45 am,
I'm Kaiser Söze
I would also point you to Indeed.com. Someone mentioned it on the blog last year...it's a metasearch engine of all sorts of places where jobs (academic and nonacademic) are listed. Sometimes the results are utterly useless, but it's already turned up one job for me that I didn't know was out there.
Thanks for bringing up the child issue! I'm a Dad of a baby and have primary childcare during the week. I get up every morning between 6-6:30am (and at night when our baby is up!) and go to sleep at 11:30pm. Most of grant money goes to paid childcare and I work crazily during this time (and when baby's asleep) to get my pubs out. It has meant zero social life and very little sleep. I do think it's worth it though, but it has involved a lot of life sacrifices.
I have two kids, and more than five pubs (some sole authored in top journals). For me, it's not about working 60 hours or more a week, it's about focus. When I'm working, I am actually working (not checking my email twenty times, surfing the web, taking coffee breaks with the guy in the office next to mine, etc.).
5:54, You hit the point.
I recently learned that current assistant professors are applying for some of the jobs I'm applying to as well (I'm a graduate student). Any ideas about how an ABD might be compared to someone who's been teaching/publishing for a couple of years? Obviously, their CV will contain more "stuff," but do committees usually look beyond that?
Sure, committees take into account that issue. It is a simple logic: if three years have passed since an assistant professor defended her dissertation, they will divide the total number of publications by three. Plus, they would not hire the person unless they have a strong belief that the person will eventually get tenure. Therefore, assistant professors on the market are actually penalized by their experience. They cannot hide behind the "potentials" and the "name values" of their advisors anymore. I think it is a fair game. Yes, I am an assistant professor on this market.
So I'm curious, if you don't mind me asking, why assistant profs are looking for other jobs? I'm only now embarking on this anxiety-filled journey and I'm wondering why I'd want to put myself through it again. Do you have a sense how common it is? I'm asking because I'll admit that I'm fairly naive about this whole process and I'm wondering if I'm overlooking some common strategy or something.
Assistant profs go back on the market because (1) they want to work and live in a better environment (higher salary, better colleagues and graduate students to work with, better reputation and prestige, better places to raise their kids, etc.) (2) they want to use an outside offer to improve their current contracts(salary, tenure, etc.). Some departments and deans explicitly ask their juniors to bring an outside offer if they want to raise their salary significantly.
(3) they were asked to leave by their departments after bad informal or formal reviews. They usually find their second jobs at less prestigious schools.
I don't have data, but many assistant profs choose to or are forced to relocate because of one of above reasons. In sum, getting a job is not the end of the story: you'd better think that you will be continuously on the job market until you eventually get tenure. Yes. it is stressful, but that is how things go in academy...
Well, people often don't end up where they'd like to be. Maybe you end up teaching 3/3. Maybe your colleagues, who seemed so charming during the interview process, are in fact snakes. Maybe you are 2,000 miles from your family. Maybe you have always lived in Manhattan and can't handle living anywhere else. Maybe you really are 'underplaced,' and schools contact you to see if you'd consider applying elsewhere.
There are lots of reasons. And I can tell you that in our search last year and this year, somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of our applicants were assistant profs or adjuncts somewhere else.
I do think the above poster is correct that the standards are higher for assistant profs applying--they definitely have to show progress over the time they've been out. However, I'd much rather bet on a 'proven' scholar/teacher than an ABD, in most circumstances. FWIW.
I may be vastly overgeneralizing here from my own experience. I'm an asst prof with a 3-3 load, looking to move laterally, but to a different geographic area. I think asst. profs are disadvantaged in R1 searches, and advantaged in R2 and below.
For R1s, they expect Asst Profs to have been publishing big time since they graduated, which can be harder in your first couple of years when you're teaching a full load with new preps for the first time. (I had much more time to work on my research when I was a grad student and was only TAing or teaching one class.) Good thing I'm not looking to move to an R1.
For lower-tier schools that are not looking for research powerhouses, asst. profs may have the advantage. I don't have to talk about how I would teach something or make up fake syllabi, because I've already done it several times. I've got teaching evaluations from several semesters with a full load. I've shown that I can still publish while I'm teaching three courses. And I'm guaranteed to be finished by my start date, since I defended three years ago. At the ASAs, I was a little surprised, because interviewers seemed very excited that I had degree in hand, and a few years under my belt.
My advisor also mentioned that not only am I competing with other ABD's for Assistant Professor positions, but also with untenured Assistant Profs who wish to move for various reasons.
I was the person who asked the question about Asst Profs. Thanks so much for the detailed responses and good luck to you all on your searches.
Another assist prof on the market...I'm looking to move from one region to another and hopefully find a lower cost of living. I was probably over zealous last go round because I took the first offer I had, only to get 3 or 4 requests for interviews later that same week I accepted the job.
What's great about this time around is I now know more of the important issues to ask about...and I can actually negotiate since I don't risk starving if I don't find another job.
I totally agree with the others that assist profs are disadvantaged in the R1 market. Also, it is incredibly difficult to move vertically in our market, so unless you're already at a top school and have been publishing your bum off, you will struggle on the market.
If you are an assist prof who is looking for a teaching position at SLAC or R2 (more of a horizontal move in the market), you probably will be at an advantage so long as you are somewhat productive. That's where I am, and so far I have gotten a few nibbles.
Just one person's observation:
I am a grad. student at an R1 and in thinking back over everyone we have hired since I have been here (5 years), we have not hired anyone straight from grad school. We have hired assistant profs with strong publication records who were approaching the tenure mark at a good-but-below-us institution. We have hired a few post-docs who had top-3 journal publications. We did one spousal hire, and a smattering of distinguished professor hires where we recruited them away from somewhere else.
So I can't say whether we are representative at all or not, but assistant professors seem to be at an advantage here IF they have published in top journals. Post-docs with similar publication records, however, seem to get selected over assistant professors. Again, this is just one institution...
I just want to thank everyone who has posted advice and tips so far. I sort of went on the market this year in the sense that I did some ASA interviews and sent out a handful of applications. Thanks to some of the comments here, I have realized that I am not ready this year. However, I feel that the advice I have read here has helped me prepare for next year so much better than my adviser ever has! So here's just a general thanks to the sociology job market community for being such a supportive and helpful bunch!
One thing I am curious about is salary. I am at a public institution and I have looked up the faculty salaries for all the professors in my department. They range from low-50's to nearly 200K a year. I'm wondering what is reasonable to ask for at an R1? What about an R2 or a SLAC? How are annual raises decided? Is this different for public and private schools? What about people who are hired with dual affiliations, like someone who has a joint appointment or someone who is a fellow at a university research center?
I am realizing that I have learned a lot about how to apply for jobs and how to handle interviews, but I know nothing at all about salary negotiation.
Check out the salary ranges at the ASA postings. They are a good starting point and are pretty honest, from what I've seen. I'd expect a top R1 to start at $55 to 65 depending on how strongly they want you and the leverage you have to negotiate. I'd expect a SLAC or R2 to start out a bit lower at $45 to 55. Interestingly, some CC actually start out at comparable salaries, but do not have all the pressures of SLACS.
When you are in negotiations, keep in mind schools are more likely to give you "one time" start up costs, moving costs and signing bonuses (which you'll need because you'll not get paid for several weeks after starting!) rather than salary increases. Be sure to consider those when you can't seem to get the salary up much. These "extras" can really help you start up your research program. Also, see if you can drop a course your first year.
At my school, salary increases are simply cost of living increases. Don't expect too many big increases until you get tenure.
re: salaries.
Have a look at the Chronicle's average faculty salaries, too. For instance, here's the data for California universities with doctoral programs:
http://chronicle.com/stats/aaup/aaupresults.php
Wow! Some of those salaries for Asst Profs in California seem really high relative to what people are saying here! Is that during the first year, you think? Or an average of all those still in the asst prof rank?
Most of those high CA salaries are from UCs- so keep in mind that many UCs have Medical and Law schools. Profs in professional schools make a lot more and thus, will tend to pull up the average salary for an asst prof (or associate or full).
Also keep in mind that CA has an obscenely high cost of living. The median price for a 2 bedroom home in San Diego, several parts of LA (esp Santa Monica and the Ocean Cities near UC Irvine), San Fran, and Santa Barbara hovers around $875,000-1,000,000.
Thanks for the clarification. Doesn't seem so impressive anymore.
Things to Negotiate For (a partial list):
*teaching reduction (try to get only 1 course in your first semester; ask if you can teach the same thing again in the spring).
*as much start-up $$ as you can justify (create a detailed budget showing why you need the cash)
*moving costs (get estimates if it will help your case)
*Summer Salary!! Try to get at least 1/9 for your first few summers. You will probably be paid over 12 months that 9-month salary; Summer salary gives you an extra 1/9 (or 2/9, if you are lucky) in the summer that is like a 'bonus.' That is how we finally bought a house.
*Much easier to increase the offered salary if you have other offers
*Expect more movement on the one-time costs, as the above poster points out, than on salary (but it doesn't hurt to ask for more). Summer salary is good in this regard, since they don't have to keep paying it, just at first.
Re: Salary, this is so school-dependent. I have heard of a starting salary (for a real superstar) at an R1 of $82K. But that is obscene. Expect mid-high 60s to low 70s at at R1; I'd guess mid-50s to mid-60s elsewhere.
Hope this helps.
Following up on the posting from October 7, 2007 6:37 PM...
I am also at an R1 (top 25), and my school has hired 8 new profs since I have been there (about 7 years). Out of those 8, 3 had post-docs, 2 were assistant profs at other colleges (one was hired on an associate line), and 3 came straight out of grad school. Two of those 3 looked really good on paper (finished their Phd in five years, good publication record, came from top-10 ranked graduate schools). The other one came from a top-5, had no pubs, but did have some grants and fellowships and a smattering of awards.
I think the bottom line is that post-docs put you at an advantage on the market at the top ranked R1s. If you did not do a post-doc, you have to have come from a top-10 graduate school and have publications. If no publications, you need to have come from a top-5 graduate school, have gotten grants, have some pubs in the pipeline, and have won awards.
If a search committee member in a different but interrelated/interdisciplinary department contacted you to invite you to apply for a tenure-track position, would you?
In a heartbeat!
of course!!
Me: devil's advocate. Only if you actually feel strong ties with the other field and can see yourself teaching in an that department for a long time. Gender is one of my specialties, but I wouldn't apply for a women's studies position. 1) Because I don't really enjoy teaching "women's studies" other than the soc part of it, 2)I worry about vague tenure requirements that sometimes exist in interdisciplinary depts and 3)I think a dept full of sociologists would be better support/mentoring for me in publishing. I think lots of people could enjoy (or even prefer) being in an interdisciplinary setting, but it's not automatic. And it could be hard to find a job in a sociology dept after that if you change your mind.
no harm in applying if you'd seriously consider the job. apply and see what happens. who knows, could be perfect for you. applying and not getting the job, or turning down the offer, is ALWAYS better than not knowing what could've been possible. that's my take.
Someone advised me to consider these types of jobs only if there is a possibility of affiliating with the sociology department on that campus. Then, if I decide I want to go back to Soc, it's listed on my CV (and hopefully some or all of the pubs will be in soc journals as well).
I've been thinking over the pros and cons of my c.v. relative to others on the market. I have two questions/concerns:
1) Does anyone know whether private universities/colleges tend to 'look down' on candidates who attended large state universities (I'm not talking about Berkeley here) for undergrad? I've heard in the past from professors that these private institutions favor candidates who have had the 'private/small school experience'.
2) Ceteris paribus, how much of a detriment is it on the market to have attended the same institution for undergrad and grad school?
I'd appreciate any impressions or experience that others have had. Thanks.
7:16, I don't know the answer, but it seems like there are ways in your cover letter to describe how your experience at a large state university gave you a sympahtetic orientation towards small colleges. I attended a large state university (20,000+ students) that advertised its honors program (~500 students) as a "small school experience with all the resources of a large university". Or perhaps your undergraduate department had a particularly cozy atmosphere that has given you a good model for professor-student interactions? (Or maybe it even served as an example of what not to do and convinced you that a small college was really where you should have been all along?)
For those of you who have received requests for more materials, if they've asked for dissertation chapters, had you already submitted a chapter in your application? Are they actually asking for a second or third chapter? Or are they asking for a first chapter because you originally submitted other pubs or something else?
I submitted one chapter with my application, and a school asked for more chapters, so I sent a few more chapter drafts.
7:07, do you mind saying which school it was that asked for more chapters from your dissertation?
7:07, had you initially submitted two other writing samples along with the dissertation chapter?
7:16, you also want to really emphasize how much you love to teach. SLACs just want to be sure that you're not applying to use them as back-ups, especially because R1s train students for research jobs.
How many candidates do schools usually bring in for interviews?
I hear no more than 3 and usually just 2 (unless they make offers and none of the candidates accept). Then they will move down their list.
2? I've never seen less than 3.
This is 7:07 here. I originally submitted a chapter and a few articles/article manuscripts. The school is UC-Berkeley. Last year, they asked at least one of their candidates for more chapters too. (I remember last year UCLA required diss chapters. Those are the only two schools I ever remember explicitly asking for diss chapters.) My sense is that it's pretty uncommon for schools to ask for more writing samples, if that's what you're getting at.
Thanks so much for the clarification! I'm just trying to figure out how much to try to polish another chapter at this point or continue with my normal process of working on several chapters at once.
I have heard this consistently about Berkeley (that they ask for more dissertation chapters).
slow day today on the blog
Yeah, at this point all the action is either going to be on the status of searches thread or the interview advice (in a week or two when people actually start preparing ofr interviews.)
Compared to last year, it either seems like thee are more vocal posters this year or more posters.
Re: salaries
R1s and Top 10 .. new asst profs should get 70 at least. We have spent up to 82 when we had to outbid other top depts.
What exactly counts as an R1? Is USC an R1?
In terms of salaries, any ideas about how publics compare to privates across similarly ranked schools?
Anon 6:31...
This was discussed on the blog a few weeks ago. If you scroll up in one of the sections, you should be able to find the discussion on R1s and how they are classified.
...except that, unfortunately, the answer was that there is no clear cut answer.
Does the search committee contact an applicant's references by references BEFORE deciding on an interview, or do the calls to the references occur after?
What I am really trying to ask is whether the references can "make or break" an applicant's chance for an interview.
I dont think schools actually call references. Thats what the letters are for.
I think it would be nice to get a sense of how many people are reading and/or posting on this blog. Is there a way we could do a count by adding a letter or number or something to identify that we are participating? I wonder if there are a bunch of us or only a few. I will start (1)
very clever! (2)
someone posted the criteria that was in use back when the terms R1, R2, etc... were used.
cpl.
I am number 3!
fore!
(5)
Folks should start using pseudonyms.
I'll begin
-Karl
Not sure if someone else is doing this but... lets get more systematic about tracking this. Someone should go onto the Wiki and insert a spot where people can 'X' for themselves as users of the wiki/blog. I'd suggest a spot for people on the market and a spot for those that are just learning/observing. I'll do it tonight if no one else beats me to it.
Maybe something like:
Number of people accessing the wiki: 1
And people could change the number on their own...?
-karl
I'm good with either numbers of pseudonyms. I'll be Six.
I'm 7. not on the market (was last year); just lurking because somehow I miss all the intrigue (I know, it's sick). And sometimes I offer my 'sage advice.'
Hi everyone.
I have added a 'participation counter' to the Wiki. Following Karl's suggestion, it allows users to add '1' to the current value for themselves depending on whether they are on the market or are 'other users'. To the 7 of you who already began 'counting' your selves on this thread, could you please add yourself on the Wiki. We don't want to lose track of your participation. Please feel free to make changes to the counter if it seems to be encountering problems. I tried to be as clear as possible.
Thanks!
I messed around with the wording a bit. We can change it back if folks don't get it.
-karl
Hi karl. 5:53 here. I'm a little unclear about why its not best just to be explicit from the start since accuracy is one of things we're striving for here.
Sure, we can change it back. No problem. I think people "get it," but if others would like more explicit instructions, I think that is fine, too.
-karl
I think it's pretty clear Karl.
Number 3.
Interesting thread.
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,42584.0/topicseen.html
-karl
Very interesting thread indeed. Academia is such an odd phenomenon. I try to explain the job search process to my fam and non-acad friends, and they get baffled at how I applied to so many jobs and how wording letters can get so nuanced.
Note: I've asked a few profs in my dept about timelines for the process, and some made it clear to me that I may not hear anything until the end of this semester, especially for schools with October deadlines. While the top schools are moving quickly, it's important to keep the market in perspective. (Mind you, this doesn't stop me from wanting to call my top pick and start pleading for information...)
Hi everyone,
Can someone please advise me on the general content of a 'statement of faith'? Are they looking for an indication of your own personal religious beliefs or a more academic evaluation of how faith and critical thinking can mesh? My Internet searches for help in this area keep coming up with the actual statements that many schools seem to require that you sign, once hired.
Many thanks, in advance!
I'm working on the statement of faith now, and I've been having lots of problems with it to. If you're talking about SPU, I've been looking at their website for ideas of how to tie in my religion with my work. Also take note that their "employment application" explicitly asks about your "relationship with Jesus Christ" so there's no need to repeat that in the statement per se. Hope that helps some, and good luck.
I actually spoke to a professor about this at Pepperdine. What he told me is that they were looking for someone to describe their faith, detail their religious affiliation and how that shapes them.
I'm not sure if it needs to be a formal statement, or if it can be incorporated into the cover letter, I forgot to ask him how long it should be.
What it seemed like to me was they wanted to use that as a means for determining fit, they wouldn't necessarily pass on someone who isn't christian, but it would be unlikely for them to hire one. Given that that is the orientation of the school, it does make some sense, but even though I'm happily catholic, it's a little too discriminatory for me to apply.
Oops, forgot to mention that I think it's totally okay with professors at these universities if you give them a call. It's pretty uncommon and as someone mentioned above, it gives you a small chance to demonstrate your interest in the job...
Thanks, everyone (I posted the original question about 'Statements of Faith'). I really appreciate all of the insight!
RE: SPU. Make sure you also include the "employment application" and "application insert for faculty". The university requires them.
are there any people here who were on the market or watching it last year? i have noticed from reading last year's blog that a LOT of non-R1 schools seemed to start reviewing in the fall but by january people were still posting asking for the status. i know it takes longer for the second-tier places, but i'm wondering if a given school's timeline from last year can be taken as typical for that school.
my #1 choice hired last year and while they started reviewing apps in september, they did not schedule interviews until january. i'm wondering if i should expect that sort of timeline this year from with.
related: i keep reading that we need to let the top-choice candidates make their choices and then we'll see the field open up more for the "rest of us". when does that usually happen?
-cpl
cpl, as I recall, the field begins to clear from top candidates making their choices around December.
colorado college scheduled interviews? I'm crushed right now.
8.30am - I feel your pain too!
I'm with ya 8:30. :(
If anyone here has been contacted to interview with Colorado College, how did they do it? We screen all of our calls and have had a lot of hangups in the past day. I'm wondering if that's any reason to be hopeful!
IUP has still only contacted one person for a phone interview as far as we know?
The prize for the best "receipt of application" letter goes to Hartwick:
As you are aware, we are accepting applications until October 31, at which time our review of the applications and the actual interview process will begin. Our seach is expected to move forward quickly, and you will be notified if any further action/info is required on your part.
I appreciate the time that went into the preparation of your application materials. I look forward to reviewing them.
That's so nice. ~Benny
That is awesome. All SCs should take note.
UT-Austin emailed a very similar note several weeks ago, when they were acknowledging receipt of my application. I've deleted it already, but it gave a very detailed timeline (expected period for reviewing applications, interviews in November, etc.). I didn't realize at the time how rare such openness was!
I really appreciate the line that they appreciate how much time it took to prepare your application. That shows a lot of respect on the part of the SC towards their applicants.
I have gotten a lot of letters with detailed timelines, but none that nice.
-cpl
Re: more applicants than jobs
I'm not sure if it is the case that there are more applicants than jobs. Certainly there are more applicants who want top tier R1 jobs than actual top tier R1 jobs. But taking a look at the wiki and ASA job bank, there are tons of job openings.
As long as you are willing to move and apply widely, I think you will eventually get a job, maybe not at your dream-school or even at your backup dream-school, but you can eventually find a job.
2:13
Scanning over the wiki, I count approximately 200 academic job openings at all posted levels. Is that also what you get or am I making some huge error? (I hope I am!)
Based on my department's website, we have about 25 job candidates on the market this year. If we each got one of these posted academic jobs, we'd snag an eighth of what seems to be currently available on the wiki, total. All by ourselves!
2:28,
The wiki is not up-to-date (there are a lot of smaller schools that are posted on the ASA but not up-dated on the wiki) and many schools like Chicago, Cornell and Penn have multiple openings that are not list individually on the wiki. Plus, there are other options--non-academic options and post-docs.
I agree that the process is not easy but I don't think that the odds are that bad. I think that if your CV looks serious you will eventually find a job.
2:51,
I did count the multiple positions when they were described on the wiki (and they often were). ...but if we are talking about non-academic jobs, that's different. It is very rare for a PhD to be unwillingly unemployed. For those open to jobs outside academe, I am quite confident that everything will be okay! I am worried about some of my colleagues who are not at all open to other kinds of jobs.
I like the idea of introducing other 'non-academic' jobs into the discussion fray. Besides market research, social/government research, and ed. administration, what other professional venues do you think are good fits for our sociology degrees? I am increasingly interested in escaping academia!
I have been working outside the academy and am now looking to get back in. Its a fine option, but people should know that non-academic jobs are very different than working in academia. You have much less autonomy and you are essentially doing someone else's research, not your own. In many cases, you are doing someone else's data collection only. Or you aren't doing academic research but program evaluation. Outside of academia, you can expect to be able to stay within your research interests broadly defined (family, crime, health,...) but you won't pick your research questions. The closest you can get in probably at a think tank, and those jobs are harder to get than assistant professor jobs. That being said, my friends with non-academic jobs who are the happiest are methodologists. RThat's been my experience.
With regard to the number of positions available this year, I think we are fooling ourselves if we think that all are "open" searches. In many cases, departments already know who they want for the position, even before the job is posted. Or, they've already decided to hire from top 5 programs (making applications from other schools a complete waste of ink and time).
My own department actively recruits candidates up to one year before a job is announced. They make phone calls to top 5 schools, email potential candidates, and offer to take them for dinner during the ASAs. In one instance they arranged a visit to the campus (with no official job position available). They then convinced to Dean that they need to fill a particular area (that happens to match the candidate they wanted).
To be clear, they do not do this for each and every position, but when they know of someone they want, they do their best to grab her/him. Of course, this has worked against them: in the recent past they have overlooked extremely strong candidates because they had their eyes on a different prize.
I suspect my department is not alone. And I get a feeling of dread everytime I think about it.
So, what are our options? Really. How do we deal with this mess?
Perhaps less calculating but another example of "open" positions not being open: when I was on a search committee, we had advertised as open but internally had agreed that we would eliminate anyone who didn't do x. At the time, it seemed to me a reasonable way of sorting through hundreds of applications. Now, it sees really unfair that we weren't clearer in the posting.
As for whether or not we're all going to get jobs; of course not. ABDs do searches for several years and assistant profs are on the market every year until they get tenure.
Aside from the fact that not everyone is qualified & the market relied on many intangible qualities, there's also the fact that each year has particularly strong openings in some fields and dearths in others. For example, I was on the market last year and found only 1 job that emphasized my specialty as their top priority. This year there are at least 6.
For people who are desperate to find jobs this year, you might have to settle for a VAP advertised in the Spring. As a result, you'll be on the market again next year along with probably 75% of the people on the market right now (many of whom may have also taken jobs but are still looking for a more perfect fit).
Don't forget those of us who take post-docs. We'll be back next year or the year after too. I am doing a post-doc that can be 1 or 2 years depending on my preference. So I did the market this year sort of before taking the post-doc, and will do it next year with the intention of doing it a third time the following year if nothing appeals to me next year.
I fully intend to do this up to three times before taking my first pre-tenure job.
I'm crushed. If you are on the long/short list for the University of Connecticut, please let me know how they informed you (email, letter, phone call). This was my dream job and my heart just sank reading the wiki.
I updated the wiki. But now there are weird lines crossing out half of the entries in the "Schools hiring this year..." Does anyone see this or is there something wrong with my computers?
8:24, if it's any consolation,
I've heard from a faculty member that UConn is a miserable place to work.
Yeah, I heard a faculty member describe UConn as "the department from hell."
I got all excited b/c I had not gotten a rejection letter from Stanford and had heard that others had. Got mine in the mailbox today. I feel foolish.
A professor told me a few days ago to not read into things, not take a little piece of information and start fantasizing and drawing up scenarios. A request for an interview is something worth getting excited about. Anything else is not worth thinking about.
Good advice but hard to follow.
Can anyone give any information about this Cornell Human Development job listed on the wiki as having sent rejection letters? I have looked everywhere, but I cannot figure out which job this is.
11:55 -- I'll post the Cornell Human Development job listing in the "New Positions of Interest" section.
Wait, how many openings does Cornell have?
1) Sociology
2) Policy Analysis
3) Human Development
If Human Development is looking for a sociologist, why isn't is posted on the ASA. 12:28, thank you for posting the info. I am wondering, however, why the search committee choose not to post it on the ASA.
2:38, the Human Development position was posted on the ASA Job Bank for awhile. Thats where I saw it.
This is just an appeal to SC members reading our blog, since there seem to be a few.
This came up somewhere, but I can't find it now. There is a use in notifying candidates on the long shortlist, beyond hanging onto your top picks. I have heard several people say that, if they get no expression of interest this year, they're done with the academic job market. If you can extend even a half nibble to those who got close, it may serve to strengthen your pool in coming years.
thanks, 4:42. I hear you. I'll mention this to our SC chair. I don't think we've sent the rejection letters yet; I don't see why we couldn't add a note on those who were on our shortlist.
There were a couple mentions of UConn Sociology as "the department from hell." Why is that? Gigantic egos who bully junior faculty?
What other sociology departments are noted to be hellish? I'm curious.
UT Austin
UNC Chapel Hill - known to be hellish
If a job ad states that a Ph.D. in hand is required, does that mean the applicant must have a Ph.D. at the time the application is sent--in other words, no ABDs?
Or can ABDs apply, assuming they will earn the Ph.D. before the starting date?
PhD in hand usually means by start of employment. My understanding is that you have to be done by August. If the SC does not think that will happen, based on your current progress, they will likely not interview you. This is especially true for qualitative dissertations which are known to take longer.
I have heard Columbia is a hellish place for junion faculty.
Calling UNC Chapel Hill hellish is a joke. I'm a grad student there now and it's a great place. Very friendly. There's not a lot of hand-holding, but if you need that, you're in the wrong business anyway...
Yes, Chapel Hill, for all its faults, isn't so bad. Hey, they let us use a fridge AND a microwave!
However, I'm a grad student. As for junior faculty, I can't say...
Indiana University is a pretty fabulous place. Grad students like one another, and faculty seem to like one another. Plus, if you like smallish, liberal, college towns, Bloomington is wonderful.
Anyone know anything about the culture at University of Kentucky?
At UConn, there is supposedly a lot of latent hostility. I've heard that the qual and quant people don't like one another.
I've also heard that Chicago is miserable.
7:41: But isn't the true for a lot of departments?
It kills me that there are tensions between the quant an qual people. I swear, sometimes I think people go out of their way to create conflict and divisions.
as they say.... the battles are so bitter because the stakes are so low. but really, it is not helpful or fair to characterize departments in this manner. like the perceived qualifications of job candidates, one persons hellish department is another's shangri-la....
i think it's helpful. do you think we'll get the real story when we go on an interview? departments are usually trying their best to court you.
i'm sorry, what makes you think you are getting the "real story" on a blog? as we have already seen, one opinion does not define a department. to me this department-bashing looks more like a way of making people feel better about not being invited...
Post a Comment