Monday, September 1, 2008

Fly The Friendly Skies!

Please post updates, comments, and questions related to "fly-outs" and other such things related to campus visits.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

pretty please, when posting call-back updates on the wiki, make a descriptive note in the comment box.

Anonymous said...

The Classical archaeology searches below have contacted finalists and rejected the non-finalists:

- University of California Berkeley (4 finalists invited)

- New York University Classics / Art history position for Roman art/arch

temple update said...

Temple has informed finalists (only two) by email, and sent rejection emails. (Alas I am not one of the finalists.)

Anonymous said...

Two finalists? That's awfully risky, no?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps they don't have the $ to fly out more people?

Anonymous said...

Or maybe one of their current VAPs is the inside candidate, and this is a charade search. It would be interesting to see how this one shakes out.

Anonymous said...

Can't figure out exactly who this insider might be, but Temple's website looks like it's channeling the APA's. Now if I only still had my Windows 95 and Netscape browser, the early 90s timewarp would be complete.

Anonymous said...

Can't figure out exactly who this insider might be, but Temple's website looks like it's channeling the APA's.

The answer (as I think you know) is right under the "New" section on the APA main page.

Leave it to the APA to put the architect of the most archaic departmental website in charge of the whole discipline's website.

Anonymous said...

Temple is not a charade search.

Anonymous said...

The Temple folks have been open with their candidates that there is an internal candidate. But "internal" is not the same as "inside." It isn't a sham. They need someone who can fill their needs and who will stay put.

Anonymous said...

Yes, let's please be careful with our terms! "Inside" candidates are very different from "internal" candidates. We've been through this, settled it, and need to resist jumping to wrong conclusions.

I am not interviewing with Temple, nor do I know anybody there, but I don't want to see yet another department have to defend itself against empty charges again. If you want to make such claims, then have the guts to sign your name at the bottom of your comment.

Anonymous said...

Methinks the lady doth protest too much!

Signed,
Shakespeare

Anonymous said...

The internal candidate was referred to as "he" in the interview. I haven't gone and looked to guess who it might be.

Anonymous said...

Dear Shakespear,

anon 9:27 here (who made a comment in defense of Temple). I neither applied to the job nor interviewed though a number of my friends did. But, I did speak with a Temple faculty member or two and they all said the same thing. Anyone who knows anything about Temple's recent hiring history will know that they really, really are serious about finding the best fit and it may not be the internal person.

Just because someone doesn't get an interview, please don't start assuming its a fixed search.

Anonymous said...

But they must be feeling pretty good about him/her to bring in only one additional candidate - dare I say a "spare?" Surely one would bring in another external candidate or two if one is serious about looking for the "best fit?"

Anonymous said...

Someone's doing the math wrong: one internal but not inside candidate at Temple, plus two people being brought in, normal number of finalists, and a long history of running searches with great integrity and fairness.

Sloppy use of evidence and excessive haste to jump to conclusions: you all must be great historians, philologists, and archaeologists.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Temple said in post-APA rejection letter that they had TWO finalists. So IF the internal candidate made it to that stage (and we do not actually have any confirmation of that!), he is one of two finalists total, and that is rather unusual. Most places invite at least 3, but 4 is more common for a research institution.

Anonymous said...

So the guy who criticized other people for being sloppy was being sloppy, and has no inside information.

Anonymous said...

(and we do not actually have any confirmation of that!)

I think this is key. The internal person may not even be a finalist. You all just assume that he is.

Anonymous said...

It's not unheard of for an institution to bring people in in drips (I know of at least one last year). If these two candidates suck I'll bet you they bring in someone else (unless the rest of their applicant pool consisted solely of syphilitic convicted felons - a type we all spotted at the Marriott lounge). After all, as I've said on FV before, even rejected candidates very occasionally (don't get your hopes up) get a reprieve. Having said that, it's more than likely that at least one of these two candidates is just fine and will happily accept the job. The boringness of my post is, I'm afraid, an index of its rightness. There's no story here.

Anonymous said...

Well, if the people they bring in are drips, how can they not suck!

Tiger Tree said...

OK, OK, OK!!

I admit it.

I WAS the pock-marked ex-con hitting on all of the Princeton and Stanford grad-students at the Marriott bar. Give me a break, though. At least I scored a Temple interview (but only after a clutch and quick performance in the Loew's elevator....)!

Anonymous said...

Pock marked ex-con, you display your vast ignorance of 'the system.' We Princeton and Stanford students were living it up in an undisclosed location, far from the rabble at the Marriott.

Anonymous said...

Hah! You were hitting on all the grad students PRETENDING to be from Princeton and Stanford.

Tiger Tree said...

Pock marked ex-con, you display your vast ignorance of 'the system.' We Princeton and Stanford students were living it up in an undisclosed location, far from the rabble at the Marriott.

You were working the Loew's elevators too?

Anonymous said...

To the person who got a phone call inviting you to U-Miami in Coral Gables:

Latinist or Hellenist?

(My guess is the former.)

Anonymous said...

Off topic, but is "U-Miami, Coral Gables" the same Miami famous for their football exploits? The U? If so, I find it perplexing that Coral Gables is oontinually inserted. It's like saying Harvard U, Cambridge or Vanderbilt U, Nashville. Is there another U Miami? Is this an unnecessary attempt, in my opinion, to differentiate it from Miami University of Ohio?

Anonymous said...

Re. Miami

1) In my experience every time I've referred to the program simply as "Miami", I've been asked, "In Ohio?" Fair enough, given that UM-CC has only one tenured faculty member and is the "youngest Classics department in the nation." Miami U in Ohio, on the other hand, may not have the 'Canes, but they do have a substantial Classics Department and recently hired an ancient historian in the History Department.

2) Why does the wiki have it listed once when they have two jobs available? Or am I mistaken?

Anonymous said...

I find the two-jobs listings on the wiki confusing. For instance, UT-Austin has two generalist jobs. But other schools have two distinct jobs (Wilfrid Laurier, Gettysburg). Presumably the updates for the twin jobs apply to BOTH jobs? (I just added the rejection email listed for the first UT-Austin job to the second job.) Either people should update BOTH of a twin job or we should list twin jobs as one, like:

UT-Austin (2 jobs) T-T Generalist

Anonymous said...

Classics peeps: I am not a classicist, so I don't have the Little Red Oxford books to look up a code word.
BUT I wanted to tell you all about a job ad, for a classicist, that went up today
http://www.jobs.ac.uk/jobs/BN894/Temporary_Lecturing_Assistant/
I am a sharing person! Best of luck, folks.

Anonymous said...

That link got broken. Here is the full link (over two lines, past it together)

http://www.jobs.ac.uk/jobs/
BN894/Temporary_Lecturing_Assistant/

Mercedez said...

buy viagra
viagra online
generic viagra

Elliott Broidy said...

Great post