So in the Tenured Radical blog that someone posted earlier, she states that three conference interviews is the watershed point when someone will almost certainly land a tenure track job. Is this the case with classics as well?
I don't know what field the tenured radical is in, but that's not the case at all in ours. I've had ten APA interviews in one year and didn't land a single position; I know people with fifteen plus interviews who similarly got nothing.
More interviews doesn't equate to a better shot at getting a job. It's like lottery tickets: buying twenty doesn't improve your odds, it just means you have twenty shots at fifty million to one odds. Five interviews? Five shots at two hundred to one odds, not a one in forty chance.
Besides, you only need one job, and one job can come from one interview.
TR is an American Historian. Yes, landing more interviews does not increases your chances for a particular job, but it suggests that there is something attractive about you. So even though it only gives you more rolls of the dice, so to speak, there is something to be said about being wanted. That said, your application (and letters) has the potential to oversell you, I'm afraid. So some people with a dozen interviews fizzle when the action gets real, hence the need for APA interviews and campus visits. So the number of interviews is an indicator, but a potentially false or inaccurate one.
I once had an APA interview with Carleton University. At the end of it they asked me if I had any questions for them. I then asked them what Northfield, MN was like and whether they had much interaction with the classics faculty and students at St. Olaf College. There was a very long silence, and some uncomfortable coughing. Nobody said anything but suddenly the chair simply got up and thanked me, wished me luck, and ushered me into the hall. End of interview. I was unaware that I had just completely sunk my chances. I left thinking they were rude, and told a friend about their strange behavior at the end. She fell over laughing, and explained why I was an idiot. I didn't get a campus invite!
I have a friend with degree in hand who has at least four interviews and is a bona fide classical archaeologist (with a solid background in ancient history). I won't divulge the person's speciality, as it would problably give them away, but it's a bit surprising (in a good way that gives one hope for the future of the discipline).
Anon. 12:59, your friend is doing quite well as 4+ jobs would be a coup in a good year for an archaeologist, never mind the !#@$ we're in now. S/he is running neck and neck with philologists this year, which is all the more remarkable since there are less than a dozen material culture jobs out there.
"There must be shy historians out there as there's a relative bounty of jobs for them judging by the listings."
I don't know if they're shy as much as infrequent FV visitors. I know at least one friend who has a number of interviews but they're more in the AHA world.
there are less than a dozen material culture jobs out there.
It's worse than that. Many of these jobs are temporary museum jobs, post-docs, and VAPs. In terms of TT jobs, I think there is one Greek archaeology position, several Roman archaeology ones, and a couple material-culturish generalist positions (which clarchs don't usually do well on). So depending on whether you're on the Roman or Greek side, there are *maybe* five TT positions that you have a realistic chance at snagging. Good luck with that. I'm just waiting for the post-APA listings.
Seriously, an archaeologists bagging four APA interviews is like a philologist getting forty.
Put me down as a historian with zero interviews. I think the historians on multiple shortlists are those who received degrees in history programs and/or have taught in one.
What's up with all the (x2) and (x3) after interview notifications? Do we really need to track that not just one person is being interviewed, but in fact multiple? Or is this just a way for people to share their excitement on the wiki if others have beat them to the punch?
What's up with all the (x2) and (x3) after interview notifications? Do we really need to track that not just one person is being interviewed, but in fact multiple? Or is this just a way for people to share their excitement on the wiki if others have beat them to the punch?
I had thought that it was a collaborative attempt at figuring out how many people were being interviewed for a position. Not that you'd get a very accurate figure that way, of course.
I think the OP meant someone who received a degree in classical archaeology vs. a generalist who attended a summer session in Athens or Rome and is now deemed qualified by most departments to run an archaeology program.
It's a bit of guess, but a likely one based on the vitriol spewed on here in recent years.
Don't respond to the douchiness people. It's likely the same moron who thinks you're a sucker if you show any collegiality to your peers. Think of him as our village idiot. It's what happens when you get 20 interviews and land no jobs when people see through you.
"More interviews doesn't equate to a better shot at getting a job. It's like lottery tickets: buying twenty doesn't improve your odds, it just means you have twenty shots at fifty million to one odds. Five interviews? Five shots at two hundred to one odds, not a one in forty chance."
Not really a math major, are you? If you buy 20 (different) lottery tickets and the odds on each are fifty million to one odd, then the odds are 2.5 million to one that one of them will be a winner.
Jobs are not quite like that, because they are not random, but if you get three interviews your chances of getting a job are better than when you have one. Unless they ask you a math question.
!@#$ showoff archaeologist. So what if you know something practical unlike the rest of us. We still smell better and have the jobs (relatively speaking). Don't you have a keg party to crash?
Ditto that, especially if you're the one with several interviews. You know the system in broken when an archaeologist is getting more interviews than a true classicist.
Well that explains why I'm not getting any interviews: I'm neither a "bona fide" ClArch, nor a "true classicist". Thank you for setting it straight for me.
I'd be more sympathetic to the job woes of clarchs if mine didn't object to any hint s/he might help with an elementary language course every now and then.
I'd be more sympathetic to the job woes of clarchs if mine didn't object to any hint s/he might help with an elementary language course every now and then.
Never mind the fact that almost every clarch I know is WILLING and ABLE to teach elementary languages (can't say the same thing about philologists teaching outside of their speciality), how does it make sense that someone who's had years of training in archaeology teach small language classes (even if they're willing)? Making them teach word origins, myth, civ, etc. I can totally understand. These are larger courses and clarchs can add their own particular twist to them. I know you view languages as the sacred cow of classics, but it doesn't mean that there's a dearth of good teachers. For every person that can teach material culture courses properly, there are scores of underemployed classicists that can teach the languages quite well. How is that a good allocation of resources? Yes, clarchs have been largely good sports over the years, but how is this more than a path to consolidation with a language department? When a department severely undervalues civ courses/majors (read: second-class, non-language courses for second-class majors) it does so at its peril. If you don't have the time to teach elementary languages despite outnumbering clarchs 5:1, give a recent Ph.D. a job. There are loads available and they are almost always an excellent language instructors.
Are you "willing and able" to teach BOTH ancient languages?
If you aren't, then quit bitching, or go convince an Anthro program to hire you.
The way this philologist (who has to teach a bunch of big lecture courses on top of two languages, btw) sees it is that Clarchs have much lower publishing requirements, they refuse to teach two languages, they moan and groan about teaching even one, and then they top it all off with complaints about the job market! Help carry the load a little more and maybe Classics wouldn't be hemorrhaging FTEs.
If you precious, GIS-savvy, snowflakes can't find jobs, blame nothing other than your rotten appraisal of our field's hiring terrain.
LOL! Classics is dying because clarchs won't teach both languages. This is the best post ever on here! Classics should die with such rampant myopia. Or maybe it should live for having such entertaining clowns. "But wait Dean Smith, you haven't seen my milk out the nose trick yet!" LMAO
Anon 9:21, that's the thing. Classics needs a paradigm shift and it's been left up to the deans to do it since the people holding the keys in the discipline don't know better to do it on their terms. Why are clarchs teaching languages? Because that's how their postition is validated by the rest of the department.
What, you want a FTE to go to someone who will teach all the plebeian courses? We can get any stiff to do that. It obviously doesn't take any training or intelligence. Oh, the person will teach Latin? Let's do it! We're so inclusive! [lots of patting selves on back]
So when that's a clarch's rsaison d'être (at least in the eyes of the department), you can see why they're pissed if s/he doesn't "shoulder the load." This isn't an argument you will win until the paradigm changes. Good luck with that because those in charge are obviously going down with the ship. Get off if you can. It's the one good piece of advice from that previous post.
"If you aren't, then quit bitching, or go convince an Anthro program to hire you."
Guess what, that's exactly what the philologists said to the archaeologists at the University of Arizona. Now the latter are in a top 3 department while the former have fled to other universities (if they could) or are toiling away in the language program. If you want to see your future, check out the U of A.
Wow. Double wow. I didn't know that's what went down in Arizona. Why hasn't this spread through the classics grapevine more? I can understand why the various parties want to keep this quiet (especially on the philology side), but I would have expected some rumblings to reach the general community.
We really are the sick man of the humanities. We should stop disparaging the humanities by saying our problem is a humanities problem. History programs will bounce back largely intact. I can't help but feel that classics will be fundamentally crippled after this recession.
Are you "willing and able" to teach BOTH ancient languages?
I'm "willing and able" to do whatever it takes to get a job, you miserable SOB. But, since I've had to spend my time mastering an entirely different discipline (aka: archaeology), actually, two (art history, because, really what's the difference to 90% of you non-clarchs out there?), maybe you don't want me teaching a subject that I've only spent 15% of my efforts on during the course of my career. Maybe the "philologists" should cover their own specialties and I'll cover my own. But then again, I wouldn't want you to lower yourself to teaching elementary language courses to pathetic students who aren't as pretentious and intelligent as you are.
I WISH an anthro department would hire me, but most classicists have poisoned the well so much that Clarchs are pretty much despised by our fellow archs out there. Thanks guys!
Before everyone gets carried away with the u of a story please get the inside scoop It explains the situation much better than the mere fact of the disciplinary split I don't feel comfortable divulging here...
Yeah, in addition to teaching languages, the archaeologists disliked the departmental rule that required proskynesis on their part whenever encountering a philologist.
Oh 10:30am clarch, yes, I do expect you to teach a section of elementary Latin when you're in a department of 4 and we 3 philologists taught an intro arch course for years outside our specialty at our SLAC, and then, after we hired you, in a lucky year we had enough students in elementary Latin to justify an extra section and asked you to help with the higher than expected enrollment. And you (i.e., your counterpart) whined and whined about the injustice of asking you to handle a section of elementary Latin.
How, exactly, is mastering classical archaeology equivalent to mastering "an entirely different discipline?" Couldn't ancient philosophers make a similar claim? Couldn't ancient historians make a similar claim? Couldn't anybody doing interdisciplinary work in any number of things make a similar claim? This isn't meant to be a hostile question, but I would like to see some justification for the assertion.
I think one of the reasons that classical archaeologists have had trouble finding work in Anthropology and/or Archaeology departments (Arizona a notable exception) is because they aren't considered bona fide archaeologists by those trained in such disciplines. As far as whether that is fair or not, I have no opinion.
To the previous poster, I'm happy that your department carried a material culture course in the absence of an archaeologist in your department. And I'm sorry that you have had such a contentious relationship with your current clarch. For the record, I *personally* am willing to take up language courses when needed, but I can completely understand why a clarch would be resistant when there are 3 of you and one of him/her. Let's try to be reasonable here. Material culture, history, society, etc. is so underrepresented in most departments even though it's at the core of what classics should be. And if you were as disparaging towards said Clarch colleague as you were towards me, then I can doubly understand the polemics.
It's about mutual respect and collegiality people. Like Jack Shephard said, if we can't live together, we're gonna die alone!
Whatever the specifics may be at the U of A, I don't recall any of the archaeologists hitting the job market; their present accomodations seem to suit them just fine. The bottom line is that we all have much to lose if we don't stop this runaway train. I'll even go as far as to say that we, the philologists, have the most to lose. There are departments out there, whom I will not name, that are doing a great job adapting with a truly interdisciplinary and diverse faculty/program. They should be commended. Hopefully more follow suit. Pax.
Give me a break, anon. 10:45. This is NOT how the situation plays out at 99% of the departments out there. i.e. the valiant, jilted philologists holding down the MC fort while the obstinate clarch publishes little and scoffs at teaching Latin 1. This is so ludicrous and a caricature of reality that it's barely worth commenting on.
To Anon 10:50, thanks for the non-hostile approach! Let me try to justify this for you. In my grad program (which shall remain nameless, for obvious reasons), I had to spend most of my time taking language courses, teaching language courses and studying for language exams (equally as difficult as for philology track students). Yet, as a Clarch I should have been learning about pottery analysis techniques, working with artifacts in a lab, taking GIS courses in the Anthro department, working on field projects, you know, learning how to be an "archaeologist". Instead, I had professors who encouraged me to stay put during the summers to teach languages and study for language-based exams. The result is I'm a "generalist" who no great claim to being a "real" archaeologist. I enjoy the languages, yes, and I understood that they were the route to making myself marketable in classics, but really, now I'm a sub-par philologist, sub-par historian and a sub-par archaeologist. Meanwhile philology track students got to focus 100% on being philologists, and they have the advantage when it comes to the job market. Since I'm not walking into a department with a field project under my belt, and the best I can do is make a claim to pick up the material culture and elementary language courses that others refuse to teach, where am I left? There are "bona fide" archaeologists coming out of the UK that are light years ahead of us in terms of methodology, theory and field experience, and they are the ones getting the Clarch jobs. Why? If you ask me, it's because I was forced to divide my time being a fill-in philologist instead of a "bona fide" clarch.
That's unconscionable of a clarch program and/or advisor to do that to you. Was your advisor an archaeologist? Unlike some posters on here, I think it's fine for an archaeologist to have advance knowledge of one language (and hopefully elementary knowledge of the other). There really is too much cost and too little gain from a research and teaching standpoint to expect an archaeologist to have mastery of both. There are plenty of courses that can be developed by an archaeologist to expect them to be more than an occassional teacher of Latin or Greek. A faculty member well versed in all things archaeology/anthropology also stands a better chance of networking with the social sciences, something very few of the remaining faculty can likely do.
Since archaeology departments aren't coming into existence any time soon in the US, this is why the archaeology of the Mediterranean needs to be removed from classics (sorry philologists). Subpar philologists/archaeologists, that's what you're asking for with the present system. There will be some growing pains until anthropologists become convinced that clarchs are well-versed in the four fields, but it can be done. Look at the Near Eastern archaeologists. I belive most come out of and later teach in anthro departments at this point. It's the future of classical archaeology. NE people had no choice since there were very few departments to begin with. There are plenty of classics departments in comparison, but it's obviously not working for most.
But, since I've had to spend my time mastering an entirely different discipline
Cry me a river. I've had to spend my time masturbating to commit to my discipline. Send me to the trenches and super freaks and you can have the library.
I WISH an anthro department would hire me, but most classicists have poisoned the well so much that Clarchs are pretty much despised by our fellow archs out there.
I am not sure what this means. Mean girl philologists have been whispering to other archaeologists that classical archaeologists aren't real archaeologists, and these slanders have been believed? Or tyrannical philologists have been forbidding classical archaeologists from practicing a kind of archaeology recognized as serious by the broader archaeological community?
>Or tyrannical philologists have been forbidding classical archaeologists from practicing a kind of archaeology recognized as serious by the broader archaeological community?
In a word, yes. I'm not the original poster, but here's what I suppose s/he meant. Imagine a parallel universe in which there were a ton of classical archaeology departments and almost no classics departments. In such a world, the archy departments might wish to hire a token "language" person. Rather than hiring them on the basis of their training and capabilities in dealing with ancient literature, which the archaeologists are ill-equipped to assess, a variety of extrinsic factors, including their willingness to teach other department offerings that the current faculty do not want to teach, are used to hire them. Would this model likely result in the hiring of the most talented and theoretically informed philologists positioned for acceptance among other humanists who study literature? The result for archaeologists is that there is a big difference between what classics departments call an archaeologist and what someone who has actually trained in archaeology calls an archaeologist. Some of the major figures in American excavations have no training in the broader discipline of archaeology, and little or no experience outside of the big dig they started working on while a student. Why would anthropologists consider a field that so blithely ignores their disciplinary training relevant to them?
I'm not sure what masturbation has to do with anything related to this discussion. But Anon 1:00, the fact is that Clarchs are looked down upon by many an Anthro arch out there (I know, because I've had to look for work in the private arch. sector in the US because I need money). They think all we do is dig up temples, look at statues and pretty things, and have a superiority complex because we know latin and greek. Of course this isn't true, and there are plenty of progressive thinking Clarchs doing some innovative research out there. But as long as we are asking our students to dedicate 75% of their efforts towards translating Archilocus, many Clarch grad students are being done a disservice. If we want to stop looking like glorified art historians (no offense intended to actual art historians, I quite like their work), we need to reform the current "system".
"Imagine a parallel universe in which there were a ton of classical archaeology departments and almost no classics departments."
I won't out any programs, but we don't need to imagine very hard. If you research some new universities that have money pouring into them (look in the Middle East and Asia), they often have an archaeology or art history/archaeology department with nary a sign of classics. In this scenario, there is often a token lecturer (often British) who's nothing more than a Greek/Latin instructor. It's what happens when the nations that are now waxing have little nostalgia for the classics as presently construed.
Full disclosure: I must admit as an art historian that this curious turn of events exacts a morbid satisfaction from me, but what did you expect, Lacedaemonians, from your treatment of your helots?
So we're doomed. Are there any clarchs who are welcomed by anthropologists as a colleague while having the requisite skills to teach well in classics? Homegrown clarchs seem to lack the former while the European bred ones the latter.
Can anyone verify the Cincinnati post on the Wiki? It seems odd not to have a date or contact medium (email/phone) and to have only one person reporting the interview for two open positions and many positions boasting x2, x3 for notifications.
Boston University (Latin tenure-track) search process real classy. First, one receives an email rejection followed by another email requesting rejected candidate fill out survey for "statistical purposes." Well, sure, why not?
Classical archaeologists are trained in classical archaeology by classical archaeologists in classical archaeology programs. There is your explanation for the nature of classical archaeology. Blaming classical philology for what anthropology thinks about classical archaeology is ludicrous.
Also, the language griping is silly. It goes without saying that anthropologists will not want to be illiterate in the languages of the societies they study. Classics just has the bad luck of 1). actually having loads of preserved texts and 2). finding texts written in those languages in the actual archaeological record.
Why is it ludicrous? Most Classics departments are dominated by classical philologists (take our anonymous friend who griped yesterday about their archaeologist refusing to teach latin even though there are 3 philologists and 1 Clarch in the faculty). Therefore the current system demands that Clarchs have to be proficient to teach BOTH languages at ALL levels to be marketable. Thus they spend a disproportionate amount of time reading texts that are, quite frankly, irrelevant to the concerns of dirt archaeologists.
Yes, a basic knowledge of the languages is important for an archaeologist of a historical period, but you don't need to be versed in Statius and Quintilian to read an inscription. That's the point of archaeology: it's non-textual evidence for the past!
I'm sorry, but I've never understood how a scholar of the material culture of antiquity can afford anything less than the very best possible background in Latin and Greek.
Just to stick another oar in, from a student POV it is frustrating to be an archaeology student and have scanty options when it comes to classes because the archaeologists are teaching other subjects or large, lower-level classes.
Here we go again. Okay, I'll bite. Though I'm sure I'll regret it.
Actually, most anthropological archaeologists don't have to learn their target languages the way we do. (Nor do they have to be able to read German and French.) And if they are prehistorians, there are no texts to read at all. They also don't have to be able to claim they can teach advanced [insert language of choice] and possibly also intro or intermediate [insert second language of choice] to get a job. (They do often have be able to teach biological anthropology or cultural anthropology though.)
In my opinion, though, our knowledge of the languages and texts is one of the strengths of Classical archaeology, and I am sad to see archaeology drifting away from the languages, and archaeologists and text-focused Classicists also drifting away from each other. (And, yes, as Classics Departments disappear, this is the effect.)
Anthropology departments tend to teach archaeology as a part of the greater history of mankind, where the focus is on a bigger picture than any one culture or civilization, and I think the loss for Classics and our understanding of western civilization would be great if all of Classical archaeology got folded into anthropology departments. (That doesn't mean that I think we shouldn't learn about anthropological approaches, just that we shouldn't be subsumed into anthropology or even departments of archaeology.) Especially since it seems clear to me that if you separate archaeology and history from the languages, the languages will fade even further away.
(And, of course, anthropology has its own set of issues, with its four fields constantly in a state of tension-- and making exactly the same sorts of arguments that we are making here about Classics. AAA's recent decision to drop the word 'science' from its description of anthropology is the latest shot in that battle.)
To those who claim that archaeologists should be able to teach both Greek and Latin at all levels: cut us some slack! You don't have to teach an advanced seminar on Etruscan art, one on religion and society in the Bronze Age Aegean, *and* a survey of the art and archaeology of the Roman provinces. No one should have to cover 100% of *someone else's* field. (And why would you want us to anyway? Don't you want a job too??!)
I'm sorry, but I've never understood how a scholar of the material culture of antiquity can afford anything less than the very best possible background in Latin and Greek.
It's called the Loeb. Apparently they're not just for Greek and Latin scholars any more ;)
This has nothing to do with complaining about the rifts in our field(s?), but can anyone enlighten me as to when the Placement Service might be expected to notify candidates of their APA interview schedule? Also, has anyone ever heard from the Placement Service before (or in place of) the actual interviewing department/committee? In other words, if the school hasn't contacted me yet, is there any chance that the Placement Service might still set up an interview?
A few years ago I found out about three interviews only after I'd arrived at the APA, when R handed me the slips. I had come to the APA expecting only one interview. Chin up!
To those of you who found out about interviews only once you got to the APA: had other people been notified beforehand? In other words, should I still be hoping to get an interview at places that appear to have contacted people, according to the wiki?
If you *know* other people have been offered an interview by a place it is unlikely that you will be notified for one at the APA. There is no reason for a school to contact some people directly, but not all. In general, wikijections are pretty reliable.
What *could* happen is that the dept. decides its initial APA interviewees bombed and they will then ask a few people to interview at the conference last minute. I've never actually seen this happen, but have heard, through my third cousin's second wife's best friend's brother-in-law, that it does.
"If you *know* other people have been offered an interview by a place it is unlikely that you will be notified for one at the APA. There is no reason for a school to contact some people directly, but not all. In general, wikijections are pretty reliable."
Yes, but you are overlooking the fact that a school might decide 3/4 of its interview list right away, then add some names later. It seems to be a fact this year that there are jobs from which some people have interviews, some people have been rejected by email, and some people have not heard anything. People from the third group could still be rejected, or might nab an interview.
You seem to refer to the Cincinnati rejection email reported on the wiki; can anyone who has received that email speak up on this board? I haven't heard a thing.
As for "at the APA" interview notifications, it still happens, because some schools don't get their requests in early enough. It is now very RARE.
That said, I rec'd notification for an interview, which I was previously unaware, last year when Renie sent her "final" email with all your interviews.
Ok, so we're going to delay the entire job list (yet again) for one ad? Here's an idea, send us what you have now, and then again tomorrow. Oh wait, silly me, we don't want the APA to have to pay for double the amount of email stamps!
Seriously - hello, Adam Blistein and the powers-that-be at the APA: the Placement Service NEEDS SOME REFORM! And badly. When will you all ever pay attention? Oh, wait - us classicists are all hurtling to the brink of oblivion, so why waste any effort on being proactive?
I've come to believe Blistein and the rest of the APA leadership will NEVER do anything to reform the Placement Service. There's just no evidence they believe there's anything wrong, or, if they do, that they care.
I know for a fact that members of the Placement Committee have tried to get changes made to the Placement Service procedures, to no avail. I don't know who has the power to force changes - or should I say, the fortitude to force them. I hear from my colleagues in Modern Language and Philosophy that things are done differently in their professional associations.
In the age of the wiki (even the leaking ones), the idea of being focused on a single, omnibus email list per month is really, really inane. Truly. The APA is not only technologically stuck in some increasingly distant past, but it is also hung up on some sandbar someplace when it comes to thinking about information, and the ways to effectively share it.
Somebody needs to break into R's kitchen, steal the job ads, post them to the board, and then mail them back. Any Penn grad students out there looking to help out?
Great blog by an ex-Classicist (Texas PhD, Vandy prof). She proves that it is indeed possible to escape. Check her out. Especially good advice on how to guard your time and not get sucked into the system. We need to hear more voices like hers.
On the "worst professor ever"... well, her self-assessment is right. She was hopelessly unsuited to academia. At the moment, though, I see a lot of people on these blogs who are losing heart- showing this woman as an example of it being possible to "get out" is just the latest. For all those people, it is worth asking yourself whether you are trying to reject the academy before it rejects you. Not all of us are pining to "get out". Some of us deeply love this profession and feel very lucky that we spend our days working with Romans/Greeks/other dead people. It is tough right now, but for those truly suited to this job and this world, thoughts of getting out should wait until the end of the season, IMHO.
Please check the Job Announcements section of this wiki for a second position at Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA. Sorry again for the late posting, but the position was just approved.
Frankly, I think most people with souls are woefully unsuited for the business of academia. I've never met smarmier, more unctuous people in my life who love holding power over people. And these are the success stories! That said, I love the doddering old guy down the hall you can chat with for hours, but these guys aren't going to be around much longer.
There is a huge gulf between academic vocation and academic business, and I think most people who aren't disposed to in-fighting, dept politics, etc. are utterly and woefully gobsmacked when they realize this is what they have been working toward. I don't care how much you love teaching/research, you land in a bad job (are there good ones???), they will find ways to ruin your day. If you can't find little islands of solace, you are going to be miserable. So I don't buy the whole notion of preemptive rejection -- as if classics were the head of the cheer squad that would never date us warty geeks. I think, rather, reading/hearing some of the real world horror stories (or living them) and realizing that you have worked so hard to gain so little encourages people to put their creative energies elsewhere. There have been lots of people who have had successful lives working outside universities, and probably find more creative freedom there.
So for those of you who aren't getting the job you want at the uni you want, and exhausted with trying -- be of good cheer and open to other possibilities.
Frankly, I think most people with souls are woefully unsuited for the business of academia. I've never met smarmier, more unctuous people in my life who love holding power over people.
As opposed to the world of business, of course. I don't know your particular situation, but this is the kind of deluded thing that I hear from the mouths of people who've not had much experience with the workplace outside academia. If you haven't, at least go watch "Office Space" or the UK "Office" TV series. They'll give you a good sense of the dignity and humanity of the modern cubicle farm, and the gentle and loving direction provided by middle management.
you land in a bad job (are there good ones???)
Actually, yeah, there are. And there are bad ones. I'm sincerely sorry that it sounds like you're in a bad one. I hope that changes.
So for those of you who aren't getting the job you want at the uni you want, and exhausted with trying -- be of good cheer and open to other possibilities.
Sure, I think that's good advice. Nobody should feel doomed to the academy.
I was wondering if I could propose a new poll for the wiki. I would be interested in knowing more about the pool of applicants who are getting interviews. Clearly, based upon the number of people with multiple interviews, there is a select group of candidates that search committees find desirable.
I'd be interested in knowing the breakdown of people with interviews (ABD, recent PhD, VAP, adjunct/unaffiliated PhD, etc.). I'd also like to know how many of those with interviews are coming from "elite" grad programs. This is a somewhat subjective characterization, I realize, but those of us from decidedly non-elite programs are certainly aware of it.
As the APA/AIA looms and I find myself with not a single interview, I would like to chalk it up to my ABD status and non-elite background. Then again, I'm not without accolades either. I suppose I would just like to know if there is hope, or when its time to start considering other opportunities. I love this field, but at a certain point, life has to begin for real. Knowing that there are others out there like me with opportunities might be some consolation.
If it helps, and probably won't: Phd (2010) Latin; non-elite university; 3 decent publications; university teaching experience outside classics (2 years) = this year: 1 phone interview with non-APA interviewing school, and job offer with non-US humanities program. So surviving, but not in the field.
I feel your pain, Frustratus, and I've been wondering the same things. It sounds like you and I are in almost the same position.
My answers:
I am an ABD philologist at mid-level school (not elite, but fairly reputable). No publications, but some conference presentations, and decent teaching experience. I have one interview, which I believe I got because I happen to be an exceptionally good fit for this particular position.
Frustratus: in my experience there is a difference in candidate selection between tenure track and non-tenure track positions. For one-year replacement positions, for example, my department selects candidates on the basis of their experience teaching the kind of classes we need to have taught for that year. We tend to favor PhD in hand over ABD, and although we are interested in candidates' research, teaching ability and experience are most important. For tenure track jobs, we interview a wider array of candidates since we want to hire someone who can make a variety of contributions to our program, and whom we hope will be a productive teacher-scholar and a good fit for us.
My question is when do visiting gigs start to count against you more than for you?
I'm now four years beyond degree, a few nibbles for T-T positions, a few publications, loads of conference presentations, and many classes taught at four different schools. But it seems like each year I have fewer and fewer interviews. I told myself I'd give it five years and then give up, so the clock is running out. I honestly don't understand why a dept. would pass over someone with degree in hand and with proven teaching competence in favor of an ABD (no offense to ABDs, I was one once too!) with very little teaching experience! Anybody else out there like me?
There are a couple of multi-year VAPs this year, which made me curious if the assumption with multi-year contracts is that you will stay off the market during that period, or if it is acceptable to apply for TT jobs.
I'm an ABD with only one interview (for a tt position) through the Placement Service and two more (also for tt positions) that were posted through other job boards. I have no pedigree, but my PhD is through a good program at an OK institution. I have no idea why anyone would interview me, when there are so many PhDs on the market. But I'm not about to complain about it, either!
In offering our two multi-year positions at Bucknell, we are certainly not expecting our eventual hires to stay off the job market during their time here. That would not be fair. However, we are hoping that these positions are attractive to job candidates, given that there is potential within the positions to have a longer term somewhere and more stability. Also, in our case (see the 3-year ad), one of these positions has been promised to be converted to a tenure-track position within the next three years. That means that whoever is working here at the time has a chance to prove their interest and capability before the conversion, so that they have a chance at getting interviewed for the new tenure-track line.
I do not wish to 'out' myself here, but I feel your pain, almost to the letter. Elite pedigree + elite postings + experience + many publications seems to be adding up to albatross in my case, and places prefer the untested. go figure.
Pardon the comparison here, but think of SCs as patrons at a "Gentleman's Club." Do you think they want the haggard, cynical veteran who knows all the moves, or the fresh-faced young thing with blushing innocence and great potential?
ABDs, you better work it while you got it, 'cause those stilettos only get more uncomfortable as time passes. Trust me.
Five years is fast approaching the past-due date for a PhD who hasn't landed a tenure track position. Sad, wrong, and short-sighted, but there it is.
A friend of mine pulled vaps for many years (over 5) and landed a TT. He is pretty sure that finally having a book was what locked it down. So it seems like, in one instance, years of well-used vaps can pay off.
ABDs, you better work it while you got it, 'cause those stilettos only get more uncomfortable as time passes. Trust me.
This is the first time I've ever heard someone say it is advantageous to be ABD. I know a number of institutions, including my own, that are not even considering ABDs. In the first place, everyone says "I'm graduating in June! I swear!" and less than half actually will. In the second place, many people will have a rough first year teaching, and schools like to know that you already got your rough year out of the way somewhere else. And finally, with more qualified candidates than there are jobs, you can afford to be picky.
I'll admit, I've extended my ABD status by a year in order to stay "young and fresh-faced" in the eyes of search committees (among other reasons, including, well, not finishing my diss), when the job search proved fruitless. But really, this ABD thing is NOT helping me (so far, no interviews). I keep thinking, if only I had defended. But the real question is, what happens if next year I have a PhD, but not even a VAP. Am I SOL?
Remember this is a game, but one with fairly hard to discern rules ... we are all flinging ourselves into the jaws of Fate - some will get chewed up, others will make it through.
PS - Dear Bucknell, please hire me! I'm really impressed with your honest, straight-shooting and friendly presence of these boards. Sounds like a progressive and supportive place to work!!
Dear Bucknell: I agree with previous. You are awesome. Thanks for your transparency and excellent communication. I would love to be your colleague. I just posted a kudos to you on the wiki.
Don't despair if you have had several VAP positions but no t-t hire yet. I was on the market for years in the mid to late 1990s, going from VAP to VAP. I gained a lot of valuable teaching experience and got to know some excellent colleagues along the way. It was frustrating, scarring, and financially disastrous, too, but in the end I did land a t-t job and am now tenured and on a hiring committee this year. It is a personal decision for all regarding how long to stick it out, but keep in mind that one-year positions will come along in the spring, too.
I don't think you can overlook some of the quirky things that might land you a job either. My supervisor is positive that he once landed a job because of something as seemingly irrelevant as doing undergrad student teaching in South America.
I do have a noob question though: is there a difference between vaps and adjuncting to an sc?
Honestly, if there is anything that three years on the market has taught me, it's that the whole process is a *complete* and *utter* crap shoot. Some schools relentlessly pursue ABD jailbait, while others turn up their noses to anything less than six years out. Some schools look for pedigree, while often state schools won't touch ivy grads with a bargepole for fear of making an inadvertent statement about the quality of state-school education. Step up and roll the dice. There is no secret formula, no trend that can be uncovered, no combination that is the holy grail.
while often state schools won't touch ivy grads with a bargepole for fear of making an inadvertent statement about the quality of state-school education.
Huh. Been at state schools and hired, and there have been candidates from Ivies that I wouldn't touch (among many that I would have been happy to have as colleagues), but that's a reason that never motivated any part of my decisions, and I can say I never heard it voiced by anyone on a committee or in a wider departmental hire meeting. And I've heard some doozies in my time.
Not denying that there is a great deal of variability in the hiring process, merely giving one person's perspective on one matter of detail.
Best of luck to all of you who are on the market in this incredibly tough environment.
There is no formula but there are trends so it's not a total crapshoot. Look at the teaching loads listed in the wiki. They're not just an indicator of how much teaching you will do, but a glimpse at the nuts and bolts of a program. The higher the teaching load, the less chance that teaching inexperience will be overlooked. Those who've been VAPing for years, take heart. These programs with teaching as their bread and butter will look at you, but here is where the crapshoot comes in. Sometimes, it comes down to how similar your teaching repertoire is to their teacherless classes. The process takes time since there are only so many openings, but your chances generally get better the more classes you have under your belt. In my experience, very few committees will pick someone just because they're fewer years out.
Look at the reputation of the school and department. This is somewhat directly proportional to the teaching load, but not exactly. The better the reputation (and don't underestimate an "up and coming" program with aspirations), the more likely they'll go for the "jailbait" candidate with pedigree.
Finally, one has to consider what speciality is involved. In particular, it's rare to find an ABD archaeologist that will hold the "jailbait" allure. Many have very little teaching experience from spending so much time in the field and it does take time to develop a research agenda. I would say the timeline for an archaeologist is 3-5 years delayed compared to a philologist.
There's nothing so reliable as a poll in which respondents remain anonymous, yet here goes: is anybody here female?
I don't want to know who you are, just whether you're out there. And all you snarky gender-bending tinkety-tinking Spartacus-ego-sum folks can just pipe down for a moment, eh. Polish your Melian Dialogues for five minutes.
Yes, women do indeed check the blog and wiki. We are trying to find jobs too, you know.
Damn right you are. But, if the Internet has taught me anything, now that that's been made explicit everyone should now prepare for 1). marriage proposals 2). pictures of guys' junk and 3). marriage proposals with pictures of guys' junk.
Does the NO on the wiki for the two U. Cinc. jobs refer to a rejection email (NO job for you) or the fact that you haven't heard anything (NO news either way)?
Does the NO on the wiki for the two U. Cinc. jobs refer to a rejection email (NO job for you) or the fact that you haven't heard anything (NO news either way)?
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
I find that interesting, too. I wonder what kind of school you're at and what position you are advertising for. There are certainly trends in which gender is attracted to which type of field/job.
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
Since most departments tilt male and need to correct that problem by means of new hires, these numbers (if representative) suggest it is a great year to be female. It will be interesting to see the APA hiring announcements in the summer in order to see whether my intuition is correct.
I'm a female candidate on the market this year. In my (philology) program, attrition has hit the female grad students more than the male ones in cohorts that were never gender-equal to begin with. Add to that the fact that the women seem less willing/able than the men to take the VAP in the middle of nowhere, and the result is that less than 20% of my school’s candidates/alumni on the market are female.
In a slightly related post - anyone have strong feelings on wearing wedding rings to interviews?
Why have women been hit harder by attrition within your graduate program? Is it lack of female faculty mentors? Unwillingness (justified!) to put with the BS? A better understanding of what awaits on the other end of the degree? More pressure by partners to follow them?
In my own cohort, which is unbalanced in favor of the distaff side (unlike most in my program), the only "drop outs" have been men. No idea why.
I normally refrain from posting anything other than known facts, but some of the Cincy rumors flying around strike me as probably wrong, so I'm going to chime in with my perhaps better informed rumors.
My evidence: the posted ad, which you can all read; various bits of insider information
Point #1) There is only one search committee. The ad says "Search Committee" (singular) and SC Chair K. Gutzwiller (one person). There is no stated goal (in the ad) of hiring one Hellenist and one Latinist. In fact, the ad specifies that you must be able to teach both at all levels. My assessment of the ad is reinforced by my insider info.
Point #2) Insider info: the committee plans/planned to look at all the aps and choose the best candidates, then do the normal number of interviews (12? 15?) at the APA. Two final hires will come from group. One committee does not have the time or need to do 30 interviews. The best 15 are the best 15.
Point #3) Major insider info: the committee definitely met and drew up a short list last Thursday (i.e., 8 days ago), the second to last day of the term. Judging from the wiki, it looks like it took the committee a few days to actually send out notifications. I don't know why- to my knowledge, they didn't meet again. Cincinnati is currently on winter break; little to no official business is scheduled during the break.
Point #4) I think the wiki counter is asking the wrong question. So far, we only know of one person who received a flat-out rejection. We should be asking for more information about that person, rather than more information about the people who haven't heard anything. The Cincy ad stated clearly that you must have defended the dissertation by time of application. Was the rejected person ABD? Lots of schools send out some rejections to the lot that they know they will never hire (in Cincy's case, this will include ABDs), but then keep a "wait list" in limbo, telling them nothing, in case they have to offer them a last minute interview.
Can't really name a systemic cause for the attrition. Since I know all of the individuals involved, it seems like each case has its own, particular factors - but when taken as a survey of over half a decade, one starts to get the feeling that those individual answers don't really cut it.
As a philology gal, it looks like the situation is different in clarch, where the gender spread seems more even (or perhaps slightly tilted towards female). But not being in the field myself, it is hard to tell. Even when the APA released stats back in 2004, I don't think they divided them into sub-discipline, but maybe there are some charts somewhere of which I'm unaware.
But hey! Things could be worse - I could be in philosophy!
Yes, if you're female, it generally helps your candidacy. Along with gay men, it's what passes as diversity in our discipline. The only thing that could make it better is if you're British. If your dissertation happens to cover a hot topic, you've got the trifecta and probably loads of APA interviews.
I guess it is safe to say that if you haven't received an invitation to interview at the APA you can assume you haven't made the first cut, and your chances at advancing further in that competition are vanishingly small. Fair enough.
I do wish, however, as somebody in what you so accurately call "limbo", that Cincy would have sent out a quick email to those of us in limbo telling us that we are there. Not getting ANY info really sucks, and I think it is inconsiderate of the hiring committee to leave so many of us hanging. It would have taken them about 10 minutes to compile our emails, send out the message, and be done with it. Everybody wins and they look less stupid.
Oh, how I will do things differently when I am on a hiring committee!
ps - My word verification is "poupen" as in "I feel like Cincy is poupen all over me right now."
"Not getting ANY info really sucks, and I think it is inconsiderate of the hiring committee to leave so many of us hanging."
Yes, it sucks, but in my experience (have been on one search committee) many of these things are dictated by the university's legal eagles. We were pained, at times, not to be able to be more transparent, but the information we were able to disseminate to candidates was dictated by various offices within the university.
As a female who has made it to the end of grad school, having watched a bunch of people drop out, I can say that mentorship (by both male and female faculty members) and a strong cohort of fellow grad students (with lots of females) has certainly helped me finish.
In my program, women slightly outnumber men; attrition affects men and women equally; and men and women are equally likely to take a 1-year VAP in the middle of nowhere. My colleagues who are unwilling to do so usually have a spouse with a solid career and well-paying job: they and are not willing to drop one solid career/paycheck in favor of one temporary job with no employment options for the spouse.
The people I know who are most willing to take VAPs anywhere are single people (men and women). They have no limitations on where they can/will go. And, contrary to the belief of some SLACs in small towns, all the Classics PhDs I know choose their job on the basis of the job, not the dating scene.
"Add to that the fact that the women seem less willing/able than the men to take the VAP in the middle of nowhere, and the result is that less than 20% of my school’s candidates/alumni on the market are female."
Our job is indeed a VAP position in the Midwest, so perhaps that explains it, although when I was on the market for several years in the mid-1990s, as a single woman, I certainly applied for, and got, VAP jobs in worse places. I certainly understand if people with families don't want to take temporary jobs, but it seems foolish for single individuals to be so choosy about where to apply in such bad economic times . . .
I once turned down a VAP at an institution in the middle of nowhere because of considerations for my significant other's career (among other reasons). And yes, it was my only job offer that year. I don't feel crazy, but I was certainly treated as though I were. Sorry, but I'm not willing to do your slave-wage dead-end job and be separated from my spouse for yet another year. It's as simple as that. At least try to respect other people's life decisions.
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
I agree largely with @December 17, 2010 11:57 AM. The search committee person who bemoans the candidate pool and belittles candidates' decision-making should have a more attractive job, and then will get more attractive candidates. "Bad economic times" are not the best rationale for re-locating oneself (and one's family, potentially) to out-of-the-way places.
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
Thanks for proving my point! First of all, you don't know all the details (and I won't divulge them here to protect my anonymity), so you're the one being arrogant. Second, when I say "middle of nowhere", that's exactly what I mean. Someplace with no culture, no economy, no attraction and hours from another place that has those things. Quality of life is important to me, and I would never drag my family to such a place for my own selfish reasons. I want this career, but not at the cost of being miserable.
I hope that not all candidates think that all VAP positions carry slave wages. The position at my university pays decently - at least for a single person, you could live well on it, and you get good health benefits. Of course people want jobs in places that offer a certain quality of life. But if you only want to work in places like New York City, Chicago, or San Francisco, and restrict yourself to applying for tenure-track jobs in those locations, you shouldn't then bemoan your unemployed status. And the Midwest may not be a cultural hotbed, but it is a great place to raise a family, if you are interested in doing that.
Well let's see, it's the worst market for classics possibly ever, and people are still complaining about how search committees aren't making their jobs attractive enough. Most if not all classics sc's have no control over salary, and as for location (as if they could change that), I agree with 12:02 Anon: it's just plain arrogant to talk about jobs in the "middle of nowhere." I served on a sc once, and not exactly in a place one could legitimately call the MON, and it was clear some candidates seemed more interested in the local opera scene than the (fuzzy) research agenda we cared about. In this market, if you're not willing to take a job in a state or city you might consider unworthy of your cultural standards, then yes, maybe this isn't the field for you.
I certainly don't mean to imply that *every* VAP is undesirable. Some pay more than others. Some allow time for research while others expect ridiculous teaching loads. And yes, maybe there is little control that departments have over these things, but it doesn't make it right.
Somebody in the Midwest is getting way too personally offended by my comments (who even said it was in the Midwest?). True, there are candidates who will turn their nose upwards towards any place that's not New York or San Francisco. There are also institutions that are literally hundreds of miles from even a moderately interesting city. If you can move there and be happy, fantastic. Some of us, however, have other considerations, other priorities. And when it comes to a one-year, sure, it's not forever, but then again, why drag your family to such a place or suffer separation when there's no guarantee that it will lead you to greener pastures?
My original point was that we should respect the decisions of our candidates. If they decide they don't want your job, why would you be offended? They just saved you from having an unhappy and uncooperative colleague.
My main issue would be, why is it necessarily wrong to be expected to teach a lot in a VAP? You often get a salary that is equivalent to tt-ap. You often get health benefits. You often get what perks a possibly small and poor department can provide because they know you're on the tt market and have research agendas.
As for the midwest, or anywhere not close enough to NYC or wherever...yeah, I'm with the suck it up crowd. Most VAPs who are actually doing their job and trying to get ahead don't really have time to try out all the fabulous cultural opportunities they're missing because they're in North Dakota.
My beef is not with VAP positions in out-of-the-way places (heck, I'd love to move to Wyoming for a year!) but with VAP positions in which the VAP teaches significantly more than the TT faculty. For example, if the TT faculty teaches a 2-2, and the is asked to teach a 3-3, that is exploitation, regardless of the wage (which is often much lower than the TT faculty is making). Tulane, Northwestern, I'm looking at you! Way to take advantage of the desperation of fellow classicists, Homoioi.
I agree that it is bad to ask VAPs to teach significantly higher loads than t-t appointments. However, a slightly higher load is justified by the fact that in most places no one expects VAPs to do any service (departmental, college, university). Service sucks up a *lot* of time at many schools. Heck, I'd rather do less service and teach one more course; I'd feel as if I were wasting less of my time.
It's also called paying your dues. Some might call it hazing, but plenty of people have taught 3-3, 4-4, even more, tenured, untenured, 4-6 preps a semester. So yeah, when people whine they have 3-3 on a visiting contract while the tt's have 3-2 or even 2-2, I'm just not sympathetic.
I once had that beer-bottle shoved up my rectum in order to join the frat, so you should too. The fact that I still have "issues down there" doesn't make it wrong, it just proves my manhood. Grow a pair!
If you have seen on the Wiki that interviews for a school had gone out, and that some rejections had too, but have heard nothing is there a chance you are in limbo for a reason? There is a job I'm quite keen on and I'm wondering how impolitic it might be to send an updated CV their way since they have not rejected me yet. Clearly I'm not on the short list, but perhaps the additional information I could add would help my chances even a little?
Sending along a significantly updated CV (article accepted, book under contract, etc.) is a good idea, but don't mention your limbo status. Just a simple FYI email plus CV will do it. If they want to interview you, they'll contact you. If not, pestering them won't help you.
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
My response: You are an A*S*S*H*O*L*E*! "Arrogant?" And, yes, it is "all about life choices" and they are not all like yours. So, if this strikes you as arrogant, you are simply an ass, and it is people like you that give our field a bad name.
Back in the 1980s, when I was an undergraduate talking to my professors about the possibility of graduate school in classics, they all told me that there were few job opportunities and practically no choices about where you lived - if you really wanted to work in the field, you gave up things like being able to choose your city or town. And this has proved the case for me. Everyone has the right to choose how to live life - but consequences follow, and you shouldn't complain about those consequences. Don't get a PhD if you can't deal with the academic job market realities (unless, of course, you are independently wealthy). If you love to teach but still want to pick your place, look into high school teaching. There are more jobs, for one; a colleague in Theology at my university gave up his t-t job in favor of teaching at an elite New England prep school, because they offered him more money for research, housing, and free tuition for his kids.
Amen. I'm Anon 12:02, and I remember getting the same talk. We were told the same thing: make sure you love this field enough that you will be able to handle (with reasonable serenity) working anywhere, for probably not much money, and with no guarantee that you might even get that even after doing the PhD.
If someone told you in a classics BA program or later that you'd have geographic choices, etc., I'm truly sorry. They misled you. But somehow I suspect you weren't told that by anyone in our field.
Just making an observation: it really is all about choices. We've had people comment here that seem resentful of the people who devote themselves entirely to classics at the cost of other aspects of life. Well, welcome to most professional careers. Those willing to do the most often (not always) get rewarded.
And I still think if there's arrogance, it's to be found in those who think that most of the country is nothing more than flyover states.
Yes, those of us that want to live near civilization, have families and a life beyond our research are arrogant. Or we're not dedicated enough to classics. Congratulations to all you classics martyrs out there living an ascetic existence out in the wilds of N. Dakota.
Let's be serious though here. You're telling me there's no difference between life in a major metropolitan area and an economically depressed or isolated college town (I won't say "in the middle of nowhere" because that makes me arrogant, apparently)????
Of course there's a difference. And you have every right to your preference. Some people need cities to feel happy; others are very content in those ND wilds (and they may well be no less cultured, civilized, or whatever than you, maybe even more so, who knows). But if you need to be near your definition of civilization to be happy, maybe classics isn't for you. Because the odds are against getting a job of any kind, and the odds are really against getting it to satisfy your geographic expectation. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but it is.
As a newbie VAP, I can say I've met plenty of those classics martyrs who are totally consumed by classics (both grad school, fellow students and profs, and now as faculty). They're some of the nastiest people around.
It is possible to love being a classics professor, work hard, yet still be a nice person with a happy family life. Sure, my first five years post-PhD were hard and stressful, with a series of VAP positions and separation from my husband, also an academic. But I used the VAPs to gain experience, like everyone else, and some of the people I worked with in those VAPs remain my friends today. (Of course there are others whom I avoid like the plague.) I just kept my eyes on my goal and eventually it all worked out. I'm in a department where we all get along, like, and support each other - an enviable atmosphere, even though we are located in a 'flyover' state. Candidates can often tell in interviews if there is tension among people in departments, a warning sign for sure, and there are also departments notorious for being hellish due to faculty warfare.
Seems to me the biggest downside to the VAP, especially the one-year, is that no sooner are you settled in than you have to start looking for work for the next year. Research time/energy is pretty much halved when job hunting and i can't help wonder if this is how people get trapped on the adjunct track.
Seems to me the biggest downside to the VAP, especially the one-year, is that no sooner are you settled in than you have to start looking for work for the next year. Research time/energy is pretty much halved when job hunting and i can't help wonder if this is how people get trapped on the adjunct track.
Yes, that's right. I did think that was common knowledge, though.
The big disadvantage of VAPs in out of the way places is not that there's no "culture" per se, it's about the potential to meet people who might be friendly and allow you to enjoy some semblance of a life while you're there. The more rural, the more you have to hope/pray your colleagues are friendly and nice. I've done two VAPs in rural towns, and while one was a friendly department, the other lot hated the sight of one another (and by extension, anyone in the department, including me). You ARE going to be lonely, and while you can use that lonely time to further your research, you can't do that 24/7. Add the fact that if you're single, it is difficult to form relationships because you don't know where you'll be in six months. Add that you are facing moving one, two, or even three times more before you will get a permanent job. It's lonely and it's tough, and I am not at all surprised that people either don't want to do it or hope desperately for a city job.
being a serial VAP-per is quick route to total exhaustion: teaching a heavy load + dept. service (in some places, it's true) + research + job search. Dreadful. And it is the way of the future - cheap, expendable 1-year contracts are attractive to the decanal set.
Add that you are facing moving one, two, or even three times more before you will get a permanent job. It's lonely and it's tough, and I am not at all surprised that people either don't want to do it or hope desperately for a city job. December 18, 2010 10:37 AM
This is right on the money. Some VAP situations are very tough and very isolated - and I am not talking strictly about geography. Some places are not welcoming to you and treat you like the hired help - akin to bad treatment of staff and admin folks in some unis. It is tough b/c there is no permanence. If the place sucks, at least you can get out soon, being term-limited. But the whole thing has the vicious cycle feel to it. And yes, one can understand not wanting to be personally, geographically, intellectually isolated for long. ugh.
I have been a VAP for several years now, published, done department service (as it was expected, but had no problem doing it nor questioned it), taught loads, have a solid research agenda, yet am not getting interviews for the T-T. I must be damaged goods...I know it's a crap shoot out there, but it's a tough pill to swallow (the red or blue pill?) when a job adequately to well done does not equate to the appropriate T-T.
Just saying...stating my reality while neither throwing a temper tantrum nor lashing out (though should I?).
Sometimes, you need a bit of luck to have your number called. With a dearth of jobs, it often comes down to a somewhat particular skill or experience you have that is totallly unpredictable. It sucks, but you need to plug away until you stumble upon one of these (if you can hold out long enough). Even with more research productivity, you can rarely improve your chances significantly (though you can hurt them if you don't maintain a certain level of activity). The only other path is to hope that your VAP leads to a permanent job, the dreaded inside candidate. It goes without saying that this path is fraught with difficulties as deans (and chairs) rarely want to buy the cow when they're getting its milk on the cheap.
And don't forget that some institutions may not even tenure assistant professors with otherwise stellar records. Getting a T-T job is a big and difficult hurdle to clear, but it certainly is not the end of tribulations.
And don't forget that some institutions may not even tenure assistant professors with otherwise stellar records. Getting a T-T job is a big and difficult hurdle to clear, but it certainly is not the end of tribulations.
That sounds slightly too terrifying, and people are terrified enough as it is. There aren't many places where people with "stellar" records are refused tenure with any frequency, although a tiny handful of institutions more or less automatically deny promotion.
But no doubt, getting a job isn't the end of your labors. You do actually have to do a good bit of work to get tenure.
In the joyous spirit of the season, and following all these (meaningless) comments on which subfield of losers is the "best," shouldn't the horrible archEologists control all our Classics programs, since they apparently produce more books, words, and things than the "competition"? Maybe all our vitriol against the job search and its horrors should be directed against that minority of unproductive philologists who still control a majority of departments.
Hey Anon 11:04: Lighten up! You're not doing your health any good getting your panties in a wad over some meaningless fun. And I do apologize to the gender studies crowd for my insensitive and sexist insult.
Guess what happens to the graph if you replace 'philology' with 'literature
I'm interested to hear whether people actually call themselves "philologists" any more or whether this is a term preserved mainly by archaeologists. I thought most literary classicists stopped calling themselves philologists thirty or forty years ago, when most of them really weren't philologists any more and had become literary critics.
Sometimes I wish the wiki had never been created. Each day brings more bad news. I give up. Maybe it was better when the bad news came at one fell swoop.
I wish that the Wiki had existed when I was suffering through the job market. I was pretty clueless about how things worked and why things happened as they did, getting wiser through hard knocks rather than advice from veterans. Given that it is a place to vent as well as a place to share useful information, though, it can be really depressing to read. Perhaps limit yourself to checking in on the Wiki only every couple of days, and never when you're feeling most gloomy?
1,431 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1431 Newer› Newest»So in the Tenured Radical blog that someone posted earlier, she states that three conference interviews is the watershed point when someone will almost certainly land a tenure track job. Is this the case with classics as well?
The wiki gives 2-2 as the Wake Forest U teaching load, but the course offerings on the dept webpage imply that it is 3-3. Which is it?
I don't know what field the tenured radical is in, but that's not the case at all in ours. I've had ten APA interviews in one year and didn't land a single position; I know people with fifteen plus interviews who similarly got nothing.
More interviews doesn't equate to a better shot at getting a job. It's like lottery tickets: buying twenty doesn't improve your odds, it just means you have twenty shots at fifty million to one odds. Five interviews? Five shots at two hundred to one odds, not a one in forty chance.
Besides, you only need one job, and one job can come from one interview.
TR is an American Historian. Yes, landing more interviews does not increases your chances for a particular job, but it suggests that there is something attractive about you. So even though it only gives you more rolls of the dice, so to speak, there is something to be said about being wanted. That said, your application (and letters) has the potential to oversell you, I'm afraid. So some people with a dozen interviews fizzle when the action gets real, hence the need for APA interviews and campus visits. So the number of interviews is an indicator, but a potentially false or inaccurate one.
Just seeking a little pre-interview humor. What is the craziest, worst, or fattest flub anyone has ever made or heard of during an interview?
I once had an APA interview with Carleton University. At the end of it they asked me if I had any questions for them. I then asked them what Northfield, MN was like and whether they had much interaction with the classics faculty and students at St. Olaf College. There was a very long silence, and some uncomfortable coughing. Nobody said anything but suddenly the chair simply got up and thanked me, wished me luck, and ushered me into the hall. End of interview. I was unaware that I had just completely sunk my chances. I left thinking they were rude, and told a friend about their strange behavior at the end. She fell over laughing, and explained why I was an idiot. I didn't get a campus invite!
A friend has 3 or so interviews, and (s)he is an ABD in Latin lit.
I have a friend with degree in hand who has at least four interviews and is a bona fide classical archaeologist (with a solid background in ancient history). I won't divulge the person's speciality, as it would problably give them away, but it's a bit surprising (in a good way that gives one hope for the future of the discipline).
So it's a good year for ABD Latinists and classical archaeologists?
There must be shy historians out there as there's a relative bounty of jobs for them judging by the listings.
I wouldn't say it's a good year for archaeologists. My SO and I have zero interviews this year, which makes for a very Merry Christmas.
it is a terrible year for classical archaeology, such that there is hardly a market of which to speak.
Anon. 12:59, your friend is doing quite well as 4+ jobs would be a coup in a good year for an archaeologist, never mind the !#@$ we're in now. S/he is running neck and neck with philologists this year, which is all the more remarkable since there are less than a dozen material culture jobs out there.
"There must be shy historians out there as there's a relative bounty of jobs for them judging by the listings."
I don't know if they're shy as much as infrequent FV visitors. I know at least one friend who has a number of interviews but they're more in the AHA world.
there are less than a dozen material culture jobs out there.
It's worse than that. Many of these jobs are temporary museum jobs, post-docs, and VAPs. In terms of TT jobs, I think there is one Greek archaeology position, several Roman archaeology ones, and a couple material-culturish generalist positions (which clarchs don't usually do well on). So depending on whether you're on the Roman or Greek side, there are *maybe* five TT positions that you have a realistic chance at snagging. Good luck with that. I'm just waiting for the post-APA listings.
Seriously, an archaeologists bagging four APA interviews is like a philologist getting forty.
Put me down as a historian with zero interviews. I think the historians on multiple shortlists are those who received degrees in history programs and/or have taught in one.
Yup, this market is horrible for all.
What's up with all the (x2) and (x3) after interview notifications? Do we really need to track that not just one person is being interviewed, but in fact multiple? Or is this just a way for people to share their excitement on the wiki if others have beat them to the punch?
Looks like someone needs an APA interview notification, scotch, love, or all of the above.
What's up with all the (x2) and (x3) after interview notifications?
I prefer to read it as the number of drinks people had when updating.
What's up with all the (x2) and (x3) after interview notifications? Do we really need to track that not just one person is being interviewed, but in fact multiple? Or is this just a way for people to share their excitement on the wiki if others have beat them to the punch?
I had thought that it was a collaborative attempt at figuring out how many people were being interviewed for a position. Not that you'd get a very accurate figure that way, of course.
So I've managed to get one interview but what's the deal with asking for a writing sample now? To ask more detailed questions at the interview?
"I have a friend with degree in hand who has at least four interviews and is a bona fide classical archaeologist "
Interesting. And do tell, how does one get a Ph.D in Bona Fide Classical Archaeology? Any programs you may recommend?
FYI: Bona fide classical archaeologists have no friends.
I think the OP meant someone who received a degree in classical archaeology vs. a generalist who attended a summer session in Athens or Rome and is now deemed qualified by most departments to run an archaeology program.
It's a bit of guess, but a likely one based on the vitriol spewed on here in recent years.
Don't respond to the douchiness people. It's likely the same moron who thinks you're a sucker if you show any collegiality to your peers. Think of him as our village idiot. It's what happens when you get 20 interviews and land no jobs when people see through you.
"FYI: Bona fide classical archaeologists have no friends."
I thought archaeologists got all the booze and sex? If I had known this in grad school, I would have ditched Catullus in a heartbeat.
"More interviews doesn't equate to a better shot at getting a job. It's like lottery tickets: buying twenty doesn't improve your odds, it just means you have twenty shots at fifty million to one odds. Five interviews? Five shots at two hundred to one odds, not a one in forty chance."
Not really a math major, are you? If you buy 20 (different) lottery tickets and the odds on each are fifty million to one odd, then the odds are 2.5 million to one that one of them will be a winner.
Jobs are not quite like that, because they are not random, but if you get three interviews your chances of getting a job are better than when you have one. Unless they ask you a math question.
!@#$ showoff archaeologist. So what if you know something practical unlike the rest of us. We still smell better and have the jobs (relatively speaking). Don't you have a keg party to crash?
Ditto that, especially if you're the one with several interviews. You know the system in broken when an archaeologist is getting more interviews than a true classicist.
Well that explains why I'm not getting any interviews: I'm neither a "bona fide" ClArch, nor a "true classicist". Thank you for setting it straight for me.
We still smell better
Speak for yourself. I smell awful.
I'd be more sympathetic to the job woes of clarchs if mine didn't object to any hint s/he might help with an elementary language course every now and then.
I'd be more sympathetic to my Latin lecturer if she could point out Spain on a map.
I'd be more sympathetic to the job woes of clarchs if mine didn't object to any hint s/he might help with an elementary language course every now and then.
Never mind the fact that almost every clarch I know is WILLING and ABLE to teach elementary languages (can't say the same thing about philologists teaching outside of their speciality), how does it make sense that someone who's had years of training in archaeology teach small language classes (even if they're willing)? Making them teach word origins, myth, civ, etc. I can totally understand. These are larger courses and clarchs can add their own particular twist to them. I know you view languages as the sacred cow of classics, but it doesn't mean that there's a dearth of good teachers. For every person that can teach material culture courses properly, there are scores of underemployed classicists that can teach the languages quite well. How is that a good allocation of resources? Yes, clarchs have been largely good sports over the years, but how is this more than a path to consolidation with a language department? When a department severely undervalues civ courses/majors (read: second-class, non-language courses for second-class majors) it does so at its peril. If you don't have the time to teach elementary languages despite outnumbering clarchs 5:1, give a recent Ph.D. a job. There are loads available and they are almost always an excellent language instructors.
Somebody pass the popcorn!
Question for all you Clarchs out there:
Are you "willing and able" to teach BOTH ancient languages?
If you aren't, then quit bitching, or go convince an Anthro program to hire you.
The way this philologist (who has to teach a bunch of big lecture courses on top of two languages, btw) sees it is that Clarchs have much lower publishing requirements, they refuse to teach two languages, they moan and groan about teaching even one, and then they top it all off with complaints about the job market! Help carry the load a little more and maybe Classics wouldn't be hemorrhaging FTEs.
If you precious, GIS-savvy, snowflakes can't find jobs, blame nothing other than your rotten appraisal of our field's hiring terrain.
I'd be more sympathetic to this discussion if it weren't a circular firing squad.
LOL! Classics is dying because clarchs won't teach both languages. This is the best post ever on here! Classics should die with such rampant myopia. Or maybe it should live for having such entertaining clowns. "But wait Dean Smith, you haven't seen my milk out the nose trick yet!" LMAO
Anon 9:21, that's the thing. Classics needs a paradigm shift and it's been left up to the deans to do it since the people holding the keys in the discipline don't know better to do it on their terms. Why are clarchs teaching languages? Because that's how their postition is validated by the rest of the department.
What, you want a FTE to go to someone who will teach all the plebeian courses? We can get any stiff to do that. It obviously doesn't take any training or intelligence. Oh, the person will teach Latin? Let's do it! We're so inclusive! [lots of patting selves on back]
So when that's a clarch's rsaison d'être (at least in the eyes of the department), you can see why they're pissed if s/he doesn't "shoulder the load." This isn't an argument you will win until the paradigm changes. Good luck with that because those in charge are obviously going down with the ship. Get off if you can. It's the one good piece of advice from that previous post.
"If you aren't, then quit bitching, or go convince an Anthro program to hire you."
Guess what, that's exactly what the philologists said to the archaeologists at the University of Arizona. Now the latter are in a top 3 department while the former have fled to other universities (if they could) or are toiling away in the language program. If you want to see your future, check out the U of A.
Wow. Double wow. I didn't know that's what went down in Arizona. Why hasn't this spread through the classics grapevine more? I can understand why the various parties want to keep this quiet (especially on the philology side), but I would have expected some rumblings to reach the general community.
We really are the sick man of the humanities. We should stop disparaging the humanities by saying our problem is a humanities problem. History programs will bounce back largely intact. I can't help but feel that classics will be fundamentally crippled after this recession.
Are you "willing and able" to teach BOTH ancient languages?
I'm "willing and able" to do whatever it takes to get a job, you miserable SOB. But, since I've had to spend my time mastering an entirely different discipline (aka: archaeology), actually, two (art history, because, really what's the difference to 90% of you non-clarchs out there?), maybe you don't want me teaching a subject that I've only spent 15% of my efforts on during the course of my career. Maybe the "philologists" should cover their own specialties and I'll cover my own. But then again, I wouldn't want you to lower yourself to teaching elementary language courses to pathetic students who aren't as pretentious and intelligent as you are.
I WISH an anthro department would hire me, but most classicists have poisoned the well so much that Clarchs are pretty much despised by our fellow archs out there. Thanks guys!
Before everyone gets carried away with the u of a story please get the inside scoop
It explains the situation much better than the mere fact of the disciplinary split
I don't feel comfortable divulging here...
mere fact of the disciplinary split
Yeah, in addition to teaching languages, the archaeologists disliked the departmental rule that required proskynesis on their part whenever encountering a philologist.
Oh 10:30am clarch, yes, I do expect you to teach a section of elementary Latin when you're in a department of 4 and we 3 philologists taught an intro arch course for years outside our specialty at our SLAC, and then, after we hired you, in a lucky year we had enough students in elementary Latin to justify an extra section and asked you to help with the higher than expected enrollment. And you (i.e., your counterpart) whined and whined about the injustice of asking you to handle a section of elementary Latin.
How, exactly, is mastering classical archaeology equivalent to mastering "an entirely different discipline?" Couldn't ancient philosophers make a similar claim? Couldn't ancient historians make a similar claim? Couldn't anybody doing interdisciplinary work in any number of things make a similar claim? This isn't meant to be a hostile question, but I would like to see some justification for the assertion.
I think one of the reasons that classical archaeologists have had trouble finding work in Anthropology and/or Archaeology departments (Arizona a notable exception) is because they aren't considered bona fide archaeologists by those trained in such disciplines. As far as whether that is fair or not, I have no opinion.
To the previous poster, I'm happy that your department carried a material culture course in the absence of an archaeologist in your department. And I'm sorry that you have had such a contentious relationship with your current clarch. For the record, I *personally* am willing to take up language courses when needed, but I can completely understand why a clarch would be resistant when there are 3 of you and one of him/her. Let's try to be reasonable here. Material culture, history, society, etc. is so underrepresented in most departments even though it's at the core of what classics should be. And if you were as disparaging towards said Clarch colleague as you were towards me, then I can doubly understand the polemics.
It's about mutual respect and collegiality people. Like Jack Shephard said, if we can't live together, we're gonna die alone!
Whatever the specifics may be at the U of A, I don't recall any of the archaeologists hitting the job market; their present accomodations seem to suit them just fine. The bottom line is that we all have much to lose if we don't stop this runaway train. I'll even go as far as to say that we, the philologists, have the most to lose. There are departments out there, whom I will not name, that are doing a great job adapting with a truly interdisciplinary and diverse faculty/program. They should be commended. Hopefully more follow suit. Pax.
Give me a break, anon. 10:45. This is NOT how the situation plays out at 99% of the departments out there. i.e. the valiant, jilted philologists holding down the MC fort while the obstinate clarch publishes little and scoffs at teaching Latin 1. This is so ludicrous and a caricature of reality that it's barely worth commenting on.
To Anon 10:50, thanks for the non-hostile approach! Let me try to justify this for you. In my grad program (which shall remain nameless, for obvious reasons), I had to spend most of my time taking language courses, teaching language courses and studying for language exams (equally as difficult as for philology track students). Yet, as a Clarch I should have been learning about pottery analysis techniques, working with artifacts in a lab, taking GIS courses in the Anthro department, working on field projects, you know, learning how to be an "archaeologist". Instead, I had professors who encouraged me to stay put during the summers to teach languages and study for language-based exams. The result is I'm a "generalist" who no great claim to being a "real" archaeologist. I enjoy the languages, yes, and I understood that they were the route to making myself marketable in classics, but really, now I'm a sub-par philologist, sub-par historian and a sub-par archaeologist. Meanwhile philology track students got to focus 100% on being philologists, and they have the advantage when it comes to the job market. Since I'm not walking into a department with a field project under my belt, and the best I can do is make a claim to pick up the material culture and elementary language courses that others refuse to teach, where am I left? There are "bona fide" archaeologists coming out of the UK that are light years ahead of us in terms of methodology, theory and field experience, and they are the ones getting the Clarch jobs. Why? If you ask me, it's because I was forced to divide my time being a fill-in philologist instead of a "bona fide" clarch.
That's unconscionable of a clarch program and/or advisor to do that to you. Was your advisor an archaeologist? Unlike some posters on here, I think it's fine for an archaeologist to have advance knowledge of one language (and hopefully elementary knowledge of the other). There really is too much cost and too little gain from a research and teaching standpoint to expect an archaeologist to have mastery of both. There are plenty of courses that can be developed by an archaeologist to expect them to be more than an occassional teacher of Latin or Greek. A faculty member well versed in all things archaeology/anthropology also stands a better chance of networking with the social sciences, something very few of the remaining faculty can likely do.
Since archaeology departments aren't coming into existence any time soon in the US, this is why the archaeology of the Mediterranean needs to be removed from classics (sorry philologists). Subpar philologists/archaeologists, that's what you're asking for with the present system. There will be some growing pains until anthropologists become convinced that clarchs are well-versed in the four fields, but it can be done. Look at the Near Eastern archaeologists. I belive most come out of and later teach in anthro departments at this point. It's the future of classical archaeology. NE people had no choice since there were very few departments to begin with. There are plenty of classics departments in comparison, but it's obviously not working for most.
"Meanwhile philology track students got to focus 100% on being philologists, and they have the advantage when it comes to the job market."
But you get the sex and booze.
Enough with the sex and booze already. If you got out of the library once in a while, you could get laid as well, no booze required.
But, since I've had to spend my time mastering an entirely different discipline
Cry me a river. I've had to spend my time masturbating to commit to my discipline. Send me to the trenches and super freaks and you can have the library.
I WISH an anthro department would hire me, but most classicists have poisoned the well so much that Clarchs are pretty much despised by our fellow archs out there.
I am not sure what this means. Mean girl philologists have been whispering to other archaeologists that classical archaeologists aren't real archaeologists, and these slanders have been believed? Or tyrannical philologists have been forbidding classical archaeologists from practicing a kind of archaeology recognized as serious by the broader archaeological community?
Anon. 12:51, you obviously aren't the master of your domain.
>Or tyrannical philologists have been forbidding classical archaeologists from practicing a kind of archaeology recognized as serious by the broader archaeological community?
In a word, yes. I'm not the original poster, but here's what I suppose s/he meant. Imagine a parallel universe in which there were a ton of classical archaeology departments and almost no classics departments. In such a world, the archy departments might wish to hire a token "language" person. Rather than hiring them on the basis of their training and capabilities in dealing with ancient literature, which the archaeologists are ill-equipped to assess, a variety of extrinsic factors, including their willingness to teach other department offerings that the current faculty do not want to teach, are used to hire them. Would this model likely result in the hiring of the most talented and theoretically informed philologists positioned for acceptance among other humanists who study literature? The result for archaeologists is that there is a big difference between what classics departments call an archaeologist and what someone who has actually trained in archaeology calls an archaeologist. Some of the major figures in American excavations have no training in the broader discipline of archaeology, and little or no experience outside of the big dig they started working on while a student. Why would anthropologists consider a field that so blithely ignores their disciplinary training relevant to them?
I'm not sure what masturbation has to do with anything related to this discussion. But Anon 1:00, the fact is that Clarchs are looked down upon by many an Anthro arch out there (I know, because I've had to look for work in the private arch. sector in the US because I need money). They think all we do is dig up temples, look at statues and pretty things, and have a superiority complex because we know latin and greek. Of course this isn't true, and there are plenty of progressive thinking Clarchs doing some innovative research out there. But as long as we are asking our students to dedicate 75% of their efforts towards translating Archilocus, many Clarch grad students are being done a disservice. If we want to stop looking like glorified art historians (no offense intended to actual art historians, I quite like their work), we need to reform the current "system".
Well, Kramer, it's obvious from your standup act that you're a bigot and unemployed. You should feel at home in classics.
"Imagine a parallel universe in which there were a ton of classical archaeology departments and almost no classics departments."
I won't out any programs, but we don't need to imagine very hard. If you research some new universities that have money pouring into them (look in the Middle East and Asia), they often have an archaeology or art history/archaeology department with nary a sign of classics. In this scenario, there is often a token lecturer (often British) who's nothing more than a Greek/Latin instructor. It's what happens when the nations that are now waxing have little nostalgia for the classics as presently construed.
Full disclosure: I must admit as an art historian that this curious turn of events exacts a morbid satisfaction from me, but what did you expect, Lacedaemonians, from your treatment of your helots?
"They think all we do is dig up temples, look at statues and pretty things, and have a superiority complex because we know latin and greek."
This sounda about right with me.
God, this is better than cable. Pass the popcorn.
So we're doomed. Are there any clarchs who are welcomed by anthropologists as a colleague while having the requisite skills to teach well in classics? Homegrown clarchs seem to lack the former while the European bred ones the latter.
If they exist, they're as rare as hens teeth.
Can anyone verify the Cincinnati post on the Wiki? It seems odd not to have a date or contact medium (email/phone) and to have only one person reporting the interview for two open positions and many positions boasting x2, x3 for notifications.
Boston University (Latin tenure-track) search process real classy. First, one receives an email rejection followed by another email requesting rejected candidate fill out survey for "statistical purposes." Well, sure, why not?
Sounds unfortunate more than unclassy.
Long day of administering exams and I missed all the action. Bleh.
Classical archaeologists are trained in classical archaeology by classical archaeologists in classical archaeology programs. There is your explanation for the nature of classical archaeology. Blaming classical philology for what anthropology thinks about classical archaeology is ludicrous.
Also, the language griping is silly. It goes without saying that anthropologists will not want to be illiterate in the languages of the societies they study. Classics just has the bad luck of 1). actually having loads of preserved texts and 2). finding texts written in those languages in the actual archaeological record.
Why is it ludicrous? Most Classics departments are dominated by classical philologists (take our anonymous friend who griped yesterday about their archaeologist refusing to teach latin even though there are 3 philologists and 1 Clarch in the faculty). Therefore the current system demands that Clarchs have to be proficient to teach BOTH languages at ALL levels to be marketable. Thus they spend a disproportionate amount of time reading texts that are, quite frankly, irrelevant to the concerns of dirt archaeologists.
Yes, a basic knowledge of the languages is important for an archaeologist of a historical period, but you don't need to be versed in Statius and Quintilian to read an inscription. That's the point of archaeology: it's non-textual evidence for the past!
I'm sorry, but I've never understood how a scholar of the material culture of antiquity can afford anything less than the very best possible background in Latin and Greek.
Because archaeology can also concern the 99.9% of classical antiquity that is invisible in the textual record.
Just to stick another oar in, from a student POV it is frustrating to be an archaeology student and have scanty options when it comes to classes because the archaeologists are teaching other subjects or large, lower-level classes.
archaeology can also concern the 99.9% of classical antiquity that is invisible in the textual record.
For the love of god, please don't try that stunt in an interview!
Here we go again. Okay, I'll bite. Though I'm sure I'll regret it.
Actually, most anthropological archaeologists don't have to learn their target languages the way we do. (Nor do they have to be able to read German and French.) And if they are prehistorians, there are no texts to read at all. They also don't have to be able to claim they can teach advanced [insert language of choice] and possibly also intro or intermediate [insert second language of choice] to get a job. (They do often have be able to teach biological anthropology or cultural anthropology though.)
In my opinion, though, our knowledge of the languages and texts is one of the strengths of Classical archaeology, and I am sad to see archaeology drifting away from the languages, and archaeologists and text-focused Classicists also drifting away from each other. (And, yes, as Classics Departments disappear, this is the effect.)
Anthropology departments tend to teach archaeology as a part of the greater history of mankind, where the focus is on a bigger picture than any one culture or civilization, and I think the loss for Classics and our understanding of western civilization would be great if all of Classical archaeology got folded into anthropology departments. (That doesn't mean that I think we shouldn't learn about anthropological approaches, just that we shouldn't be subsumed into anthropology or even departments of archaeology.) Especially since it seems clear to me that if you separate archaeology and history from the languages, the languages will fade even further away.
(And, of course, anthropology has its own set of issues, with its four fields constantly in a state of tension-- and making exactly the same sorts of arguments that we are making here about Classics. AAA's recent decision to drop the word 'science' from its description of anthropology is the latest shot in that battle.)
To those who claim that archaeologists should be able to teach both Greek and Latin at all levels: cut us some slack! You don't have to teach an advanced seminar on Etruscan art, one on religion and society in the Bronze Age Aegean, *and* a survey of the art and archaeology of the Roman provinces. No one should have to cover 100% of *someone else's* field. (And why would you want us to anyway? Don't you want a job too??!)
I'm sorry, but I've never understood how a scholar of the material culture of antiquity can afford anything less than the very best possible background in Latin and Greek.
It's called the Loeb. Apparently they're not just for Greek and Latin scholars any more ;)
Ha, a romantic break-up and 4 rejections, all in one day (vs. 1 interview, last week).
Happy holidays from your friends in Classics!
This has nothing to do with complaining about the rifts in our field(s?), but can anyone enlighten me as to when the Placement Service might be expected to notify candidates of their APA interview schedule? Also, has anyone ever heard from the Placement Service before (or in place of) the actual interviewing department/committee? In other words, if the school hasn't contacted me yet, is there any chance that the Placement Service might still set up an interview?
ha ha ha! The Placement Service - talk about a topic for end-of-the-year tragicomedy!
Last year I was notified about an interview only through the Placement Service email, so keep the hope!
A few years ago I found out about three interviews only after I'd arrived at the APA, when R handed me the slips. I had come to the APA expecting only one interview. Chin up!
I got that beat. I found out about an interview at the APA fifteen minutes after the interview had started.
To those of you who found out about interviews only once you got to the APA: had other people been notified beforehand? In other words, should I still be hoping to get an interview at places that appear to have contacted people, according to the wiki?
If you *know* other people have been offered an interview by a place it is unlikely that you will be notified for one at the APA. There is no reason for a school to contact some people directly, but not all. In general, wikijections are pretty reliable.
What *could* happen is that the dept. decides its initial APA interviewees bombed and they will then ask a few people to interview at the conference last minute. I've never actually seen this happen, but have heard, through my third cousin's second wife's best friend's brother-in-law, that it does.
Dear ever-present and all-knowing Classics Wiki: Why have you forsaken me?
Yes, you can still get an interview, but it's extremely unlikely.
"If you *know* other people have been offered an interview by a place it is unlikely that you will be notified for one at the APA. There is no reason for a school to contact some people directly, but not all. In general, wikijections are pretty reliable."
Yes, but you are overlooking the fact that a school might decide 3/4 of its interview list right away, then add some names later. It seems to be a fact this year that there are jobs from which some people have interviews, some people have been rejected by email, and some people have not heard anything. People from the third group could still be rejected, or might nab an interview.
Dear Seven-Interview Stud,
What sort of Rough Beast are you? Hellenist? ABD? Currently T-T?
Inquiring minds want to know!
You seem to refer to the Cincinnati rejection email reported on the wiki; can anyone who has received that email speak up on this board? I haven't heard a thing.
As for "at the APA" interview notifications, it still happens, because some schools don't get their requests in early enough. It is now very RARE.
That said, I rec'd notification for an interview, which I was previously unaware, last year when Renie sent her "final" email with all your interviews.
I hope that helps.
How exciting are the Dec jobs?
Ok, so we're going to delay the entire job list (yet again) for one ad? Here's an idea, send us what you have now, and then again tomorrow. Oh wait, silly me, we don't want the APA to have to pay for double the amount of email stamps!
Seriously - hello, Adam Blistein and the powers-that-be at the APA: the Placement Service NEEDS SOME REFORM! And badly. When will you all ever pay attention? Oh, wait - us classicists are all hurtling to the brink of oblivion, so why waste any effort on being proactive?
Now, now, it's not as if you've paid for access to the information that the Placement Service provides...
ummmm....yeah.
I've come to believe Blistein and the rest of the APA leadership will NEVER do anything to reform the Placement Service. There's just no evidence they believe there's anything wrong, or, if they do, that they care.
I know for a fact that members of the Placement Committee have tried to get changes made to the Placement Service procedures, to no avail. I don't know who has the power to force changes - or should I say, the fortitude to force them. I hear from my colleagues in Modern Language and Philosophy that things are done differently in their professional associations.
In the age of the wiki (even the leaking ones), the idea of being focused on a single, omnibus email list per month is really, really inane. Truly. The APA is not only technologically stuck in some increasingly distant past, but it is also hung up on some sandbar someplace when it comes to thinking about information, and the ways to effectively share it.
Somebody needs to break into R's kitchen, steal the job ads, post them to the board, and then mail them back. Any Penn grad students out there looking to help out?
I just discovered The Worst Professor Ever.
Great blog by an ex-Classicist (Texas PhD, Vandy prof). She proves that it is indeed possible to escape. Check her out. Especially good advice on how to guard your time and not get sucked into the system. We need to hear more voices like hers.
On the "worst professor ever"... well, her self-assessment is right. She was hopelessly unsuited to academia. At the moment, though, I see a lot of people on these blogs who are losing heart- showing this woman as an example of it being possible to "get out" is just the latest. For all those people, it is worth asking yourself whether you are trying to reject the academy before it rejects you. Not all of us are pining to "get out". Some of us deeply love this profession and feel very lucky that we spend our days working with Romans/Greeks/other dead people. It is tough right now, but for those truly suited to this job and this world, thoughts of getting out should wait until the end of the season, IMHO.
Please check the Job Announcements section of this wiki for a second position at Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA. Sorry again for the late posting, but the position was just approved.
Frankly, I think most people with souls are woefully unsuited for the business of academia. I've never met smarmier, more unctuous people in my life who love holding power over people. And these are the success stories! That said, I love the doddering old guy down the hall you can chat with for hours, but these guys aren't going to be around much longer.
There is a huge gulf between academic vocation and academic business, and I think most people who aren't disposed to in-fighting, dept politics, etc. are utterly and woefully gobsmacked when they realize this is what they have been working toward. I don't care how much you love teaching/research, you land in a bad job (are there good ones???), they will find ways to ruin your day. If you can't find little islands of solace, you are going to be miserable. So I don't buy the whole notion of preemptive rejection -- as if classics were the head of the cheer squad that would never date us warty geeks. I think, rather, reading/hearing some of the real world horror stories (or living them) and realizing that you have worked so hard to gain so little encourages people to put their creative energies elsewhere. There have been lots of people who have had successful lives working outside universities, and probably find more creative freedom there.
So for those of you who aren't getting the job you want at the uni you want, and exhausted with trying -- be of good cheer and open to other possibilities.
Frankly, I think most people with souls are woefully unsuited for the business of academia. I've never met smarmier, more unctuous people in my life who love holding power over people.
As opposed to the world of business, of course. I don't know your particular situation, but this is the kind of deluded thing that I hear from the mouths of people who've not had much experience with the workplace outside academia. If you haven't, at least go watch "Office Space" or the UK "Office" TV series. They'll give you a good sense of the dignity and humanity of the modern cubicle farm, and the gentle and loving direction provided by middle management.
you land in a bad job (are there good ones???)
Actually, yeah, there are. And there are bad ones. I'm sincerely sorry that it sounds like you're in a bad one. I hope that changes.
So for those of you who aren't getting the job you want at the uni you want, and exhausted with trying -- be of good cheer and open to other possibilities.
Sure, I think that's good advice. Nobody should feel doomed to the academy.
I was wondering if I could propose a new poll for the wiki. I would be interested in knowing more about the pool of applicants who are getting interviews. Clearly, based upon the number of people with multiple interviews, there is a select group of candidates that search committees find desirable.
I'd be interested in knowing the breakdown of people with interviews (ABD, recent PhD, VAP, adjunct/unaffiliated PhD, etc.). I'd also like to know how many of those with interviews are coming from "elite" grad programs. This is a somewhat subjective characterization, I realize, but those of us from decidedly non-elite programs are certainly aware of it.
As the APA/AIA looms and I find myself with not a single interview, I would like to chalk it up to my ABD status and non-elite background. Then again, I'm not without accolades either. I suppose I would just like to know if there is hope, or when its time to start considering other opportunities. I love this field, but at a certain point, life has to begin for real. Knowing that there are others out there like me with opportunities might be some consolation.
If it helps, and probably won't: Phd (2010) Latin; non-elite university; 3 decent publications; university teaching experience outside classics (2 years) = this year: 1 phone interview with non-APA interviewing school, and job offer with non-US humanities program. So surviving, but not in the field.
I feel your pain, Frustratus, and I've been wondering the same things. It sounds like you and I are in almost the same position.
My answers:
I am an ABD philologist at mid-level school (not elite, but fairly reputable). No publications, but some conference presentations, and decent teaching experience. I have one interview, which I believe I got because I happen to be an exceptionally good fit for this particular position.
Frustratus: in my experience there is a difference in candidate selection between tenure track and non-tenure track positions. For one-year replacement positions, for example, my department selects candidates on the basis of their experience teaching the kind of classes we need to have taught for that year. We tend to favor PhD in hand over ABD, and although we are interested in candidates' research, teaching ability and experience are most important. For tenure track jobs, we interview a wider array of candidates since we want to hire someone who can make a variety of contributions to our program, and whom we hope will be a productive teacher-scholar and a good fit for us.
I'm not ABD, but I'm also Frustratus (Spartacus)!
My question is when do visiting gigs start to count against you more than for you?
I'm now four years beyond degree, a few nibbles for T-T positions, a few publications, loads of conference presentations, and many classes taught at four different schools. But it seems like each year I have fewer and fewer interviews. I told myself I'd give it five years and then give up, so the clock is running out. I honestly don't understand why a dept. would pass over someone with degree in hand and with proven teaching competence in favor of an ABD (no offense to ABDs, I was one once too!) with very little teaching experience! Anybody else out there like me?
There are a couple of multi-year VAPs this year, which made me curious if the assumption with multi-year contracts is that you will stay off the market during that period, or if it is acceptable to apply for TT jobs.
I'm an ABD with only one interview (for a tt position) through the Placement Service and two more (also for tt positions) that were posted through other job boards. I have no pedigree, but my PhD is through a good program at an OK institution. I have no idea why anyone would interview me, when there are so many PhDs on the market. But I'm not about to complain about it, either!
In offering our two multi-year positions at Bucknell, we are certainly not expecting our eventual hires to stay off the job market during their time here. That would not be fair. However, we are hoping that these positions are attractive to job candidates, given that there is potential within the positions to have a longer term somewhere and more stability. Also, in our case (see the 3-year ad), one of these positions has been promised to be converted to a tenure-track position within the next three years. That means that whoever is working here at the time has a chance to prove their interest and capability before the conversion, so that they have a chance at getting interviewed for the new tenure-track line.
Scone -
I do not wish to 'out' myself here, but I feel your pain, almost to the letter. Elite pedigree + elite postings + experience + many publications seems to be adding up to albatross in my case, and places prefer the untested. go figure.
To "Scone" and others like hir,
Pardon the comparison here, but think of SCs as patrons at a "Gentleman's Club." Do you think they want the haggard, cynical veteran who knows all the moves, or the fresh-faced young thing with blushing innocence and great potential?
ABDs, you better work it while you got it, 'cause those stilettos only get more uncomfortable as time passes. Trust me.
Five years is fast approaching the past-due date for a PhD who hasn't landed a tenure track position. Sad, wrong, and short-sighted, but there it is.
A friend of mine pulled vaps for many years (over 5) and landed a TT. He is pretty sure that finally having a book was what locked it down. So it seems like, in one instance, years of well-used vaps can pay off.
ABDs, you better work it while you got it, 'cause those stilettos only get more uncomfortable as time passes. Trust me.
This is the first time I've ever heard someone say it is advantageous to be ABD. I know a number of institutions, including my own, that are not even considering ABDs. In the first place, everyone says "I'm graduating in June! I swear!" and less than half actually will. In the second place, many people will have a rough first year teaching, and schools like to know that you already got your rough year out of the way somewhere else. And finally, with more qualified candidates than there are jobs, you can afford to be picky.
I'll admit, I've extended my ABD status by a year in order to stay "young and fresh-faced" in the eyes of search committees (among other reasons, including, well, not finishing my diss), when the job search proved fruitless. But really, this ABD thing is NOT helping me (so far, no interviews). I keep thinking, if only I had defended. But the real question is, what happens if next year I have a PhD, but not even a VAP. Am I SOL?
PhD in hand with no posting is a challenge, to be sure. If you scored extra time on the grad school clock, make it count.
Remember this is a game, but one with fairly hard to discern rules ... we are all flinging ourselves into the jaws of Fate - some will get chewed up, others will make it through.
PS - Dear Bucknell, please hire me! I'm really impressed with your honest, straight-shooting and friendly presence of these boards. Sounds like a progressive and supportive place to work!!
Dear Bucknell: I agree with previous. You are awesome. Thanks for your transparency and excellent communication. I would love to be your colleague. I just posted a kudos to you on the wiki.
Don't despair if you have had several VAP positions but no t-t hire yet. I was on the market for years in the mid to late 1990s, going from VAP to VAP. I gained a lot of valuable teaching experience and got to know some excellent colleagues along the way. It was frustrating, scarring, and financially disastrous, too, but in the end I did land a t-t job and am now tenured and on a hiring committee this year. It is a personal decision for all regarding how long to stick it out, but keep in mind that one-year positions will come along in the spring, too.
I don't think you can overlook some of the quirky things that might land you a job either. My supervisor is positive that he once landed a job because of something as seemingly irrelevant as doing undergrad student teaching in South America.
I do have a noob question though: is there a difference between vaps and adjuncting to an sc?
Honestly, if there is anything that three years on the market has taught me, it's that the whole process is a *complete* and *utter* crap shoot. Some schools relentlessly pursue ABD jailbait, while others turn up their noses to anything less than six years out. Some schools look for pedigree, while often state schools won't touch ivy grads with a bargepole for fear of making an inadvertent statement about the quality of state-school education. Step up and roll the dice. There is no secret formula, no trend that can be uncovered, no combination that is the holy grail.
while often state schools won't touch ivy grads with a bargepole for fear of making an inadvertent statement about the quality of state-school education.
Huh. Been at state schools and hired, and there have been candidates from Ivies that I wouldn't touch (among many that I would have been happy to have as colleagues), but that's a reason that never motivated any part of my decisions, and I can say I never heard it voiced by anyone on a committee or in a wider departmental hire meeting. And I've heard some doozies in my time.
Not denying that there is a great deal of variability in the hiring process, merely giving one person's perspective on one matter of detail.
Best of luck to all of you who are on the market in this incredibly tough environment.
There is no formula but there are trends so it's not a total crapshoot. Look at the teaching loads listed in the wiki. They're not just an indicator of how much teaching you will do, but a glimpse at the nuts and bolts of a program. The higher the teaching load, the less chance that teaching inexperience will be overlooked. Those who've been VAPing for years, take heart. These programs with teaching as their bread and butter will look at you, but here is where the crapshoot comes in. Sometimes, it comes down to how similar your teaching repertoire is to their teacherless classes. The process takes time since there are only so many openings, but your chances generally get better the more classes you have under your belt. In my experience, very few committees will pick someone just because they're fewer years out.
Look at the reputation of the school and department. This is somewhat directly proportional to the teaching load, but not exactly. The better the reputation (and don't underestimate an "up and coming" program with aspirations), the more likely they'll go for the "jailbait" candidate with pedigree.
Finally, one has to consider what speciality is involved. In particular, it's rare to find an ABD archaeologist that will hold the "jailbait" allure. Many have very little teaching experience from spending so much time in the field and it does take time to develop a research agenda. I would say the timeline for an archaeologist is 3-5 years delayed compared to a philologist.
There's nothing so reliable as a poll in which respondents remain anonymous, yet here goes: is anybody here female?
I don't want to know who you are, just whether you're out there. And all you snarky gender-bending tinkety-tinking Spartacus-ego-sum folks can just pipe down for a moment, eh. Polish your Melian Dialogues for five minutes.
Yes, and I'm proud to say that I'm not the master of my domain.
Yes, women do indeed check the blog and wiki. We are trying to find jobs too, you know.
Yes, women do indeed check the blog and wiki. We are trying to find jobs too, you know.
Damn right you are. But, if the Internet has taught me anything, now that that's been made explicit everyone should now prepare for 1). marriage proposals 2). pictures of guys' junk and 3). marriage proposals with pictures of guys' junk.
Well, I am a man who wants to be a woman. Does that count? Or, will you exclude me?
Does the NO on the wiki for the two U. Cinc. jobs refer to a rejection email (NO job for you) or the fact that you haven't heard anything (NO news either way)?
Does the NO on the wiki for the two U. Cinc. jobs refer to a rejection email (NO job for you) or the fact that you haven't heard anything (NO news either way)?
It's NO news either way.
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
I find that interesting, too. I wonder what kind of school you're at and what position you are advertising for. There are certainly trends in which gender is attracted to which type of field/job.
poll: I'm female. Was someone actually assuming that there are more men reading this blog than women? Why?
As a member of a search committee this year, for a temporary position, I was struck by the gender split of applicants: 75% were male, 25% female. We wondered about this - was it our job in particular, or are there markedly fewer women on the market this year?
Since most departments tilt male and need to correct that problem by means of new hires, these numbers (if representative) suggest it is a great year to be female. It will be interesting to see the APA hiring announcements in the summer in order to see whether my intuition is correct.
I'm a female candidate on the market this year. In my (philology) program, attrition has hit the female grad students more than the male ones in cohorts that were never gender-equal to begin with. Add to that the fact that the women seem less willing/able than the men to take the VAP in the middle of nowhere, and the result is that less than 20% of my school’s candidates/alumni on the market are female.
In a slightly related post - anyone have strong feelings on wearing wedding rings to interviews?
I second the comment about women trending toward being less willing than men to take any job location whatsoever.
In response to the comment above.
Why have women been hit harder by attrition within your graduate program? Is it lack of female faculty mentors? Unwillingness (justified!) to put with the BS? A better understanding of what awaits on the other end of the degree? More pressure by partners to follow them?
In my own cohort, which is unbalanced in favor of the distaff side (unlike most in my program), the only "drop outs" have been men. No idea why.
Wedding ring:
Take it off until you get an offer, especially if the job is an undesirable location.
In this market you don't want to give a hiring committee any reason for doubt.
I normally refrain from posting anything other than known facts, but some of the Cincy rumors flying around strike me as probably wrong, so I'm going to chime in with my perhaps better informed rumors.
My evidence: the posted ad, which you can all read; various bits of insider information
Point #1) There is only one search committee. The ad says "Search Committee" (singular) and SC Chair K. Gutzwiller (one person). There is no stated goal (in the ad) of hiring one Hellenist and one Latinist. In fact, the ad specifies that you must be able to teach both at all levels. My assessment of the ad is reinforced by my insider info.
Point #2) Insider info: the committee plans/planned to look at all the aps and choose the best candidates, then do the normal number of interviews (12? 15?) at the APA. Two final hires will come from group. One committee does not have the time or need to do 30 interviews. The best 15 are the best 15.
Point #3) Major insider info: the committee definitely met and drew up a short list last Thursday (i.e., 8 days ago), the second to last day of the term. Judging from the wiki, it looks like it took the committee a few days to actually send out notifications. I don't know why- to my knowledge, they didn't meet again. Cincinnati is currently on winter break; little to no official business is scheduled during the break.
Point #4) I think the wiki counter is asking the wrong question. So far, we only know of one person who received a flat-out rejection. We should be asking for more information about that person, rather than more information about the people who haven't heard anything. The Cincy ad stated clearly that you must have defended the dissertation by time of application. Was the rejected person ABD? Lots of schools send out some rejections to the lot that they know they will never hire (in Cincy's case, this will include ABDs), but then keep a "wait list" in limbo, telling them nothing, in case they have to offer them a last minute interview.
@ Anon. 10:19, OP here
Can't really name a systemic cause for the attrition. Since I know all of the individuals involved, it seems like each case has its own, particular factors - but when taken as a survey of over half a decade, one starts to get the feeling that those individual answers don't really cut it.
As a philology gal, it looks like the situation is different in clarch, where the gender spread seems more even (or perhaps slightly tilted towards female). But not being in the field myself, it is hard to tell. Even when the APA released stats back in 2004, I don't think they divided them into sub-discipline, but maybe there are some charts somewhere of which I'm unaware.
But hey! Things could be worse - I could be in philosophy!
Yes, if you're female, it generally helps your candidacy. Along with gay men, it's what passes as diversity in our discipline. The only thing that could make it better is if you're British. If your dissertation happens to cover a hot topic, you've got the trifecta and probably loads of APA interviews.
Thanks, Cincy Insider.
I guess it is safe to say that if you haven't received an invitation to interview at the APA you can assume you haven't made the first cut, and your chances at advancing further in that competition are vanishingly small. Fair enough.
I do wish, however, as somebody in what you so accurately call "limbo", that Cincy would have sent out a quick email to those of us in limbo telling us that we are there. Not getting ANY info really sucks, and I think it is inconsiderate of the hiring committee to leave so many of us hanging. It would have taken them about 10 minutes to compile our emails, send out the message, and be done with it. Everybody wins and they look less stupid.
Oh, how I will do things differently when I am on a hiring committee!
ps - My word verification is "poupen" as in "I feel like Cincy is poupen all over me right now."
for what's it's worth, my past experience in being interviewed by, and communicating with, Cincy was disastrous. very, very disorganized ...
x2
"Not getting ANY info really sucks, and I think it is inconsiderate of the hiring committee to leave so many of us hanging."
Yes, it sucks, but in my experience (have been on one search committee) many of these things are dictated by the university's legal eagles. We were pained, at times, not to be able to be more transparent, but the information we were able to disseminate to candidates was dictated by various offices within the university.
As a female who has made it to the end of grad school, having watched a bunch of people drop out, I can say that mentorship (by both male and female faculty members) and a strong cohort of fellow grad students (with lots of females) has certainly helped me finish.
In my program, women slightly outnumber men; attrition affects men and women equally; and men and women are equally likely to take a 1-year VAP in the middle of nowhere. My colleagues who are unwilling to do so usually have a spouse with a solid career and well-paying job: they and are not willing to drop one solid career/paycheck in favor of one temporary job with no employment options for the spouse.
The people I know who are most willing to take VAPs anywhere are single people (men and women). They have no limitations on where they can/will go. And, contrary to the belief of some SLACs in small towns, all the Classics PhDs I know choose their job on the basis of the job, not the dating scene.
"Add to that the fact that the women seem less willing/able than the men to take the VAP in the middle of nowhere, and the result is that less than 20% of my school’s candidates/alumni on the market are female."
Our job is indeed a VAP position in the Midwest, so perhaps that explains it, although when I was on the market for several years in the mid-1990s, as a single woman, I certainly applied for, and got, VAP jobs in worse places. I certainly understand if people with families don't want to take temporary jobs, but it seems foolish for single individuals to be so choosy about where to apply in such bad economic times . . .
I once turned down a VAP at an institution in the middle of nowhere because of considerations for my significant other's career (among other reasons). And yes, it was my only job offer that year. I don't feel crazy, but I was certainly treated as though I were. Sorry, but I'm not willing to do your slave-wage dead-end job and be separated from my spouse for yet another year. It's as simple as that. At least try to respect other people's life decisions.
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
I agree largely with @December 17, 2010 11:57 AM. The search committee person who bemoans the candidate pool and belittles candidates' decision-making should have a more attractive job, and then will get more attractive candidates. "Bad economic times" are not the best rationale for re-locating oneself (and one's family, potentially) to out-of-the-way places.
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
Thanks for proving my point! First of all, you don't know all the details (and I won't divulge them here to protect my anonymity), so you're the one being arrogant. Second, when I say "middle of nowhere", that's exactly what I mean. Someplace with no culture, no economy, no attraction and hours from another place that has those things. Quality of life is important to me, and I would never drag my family to such a place for my own selfish reasons. I want this career, but not at the cost of being miserable.
I hope that not all candidates think that all VAP positions carry slave wages. The position at my university pays decently - at least for a single person, you could live well on it, and you get good health benefits. Of course people want jobs in places that offer a certain quality of life. But if you only want to work in places like New York City, Chicago, or San Francisco, and restrict yourself to applying for tenure-track jobs in those locations, you shouldn't then bemoan your unemployed status. And the Midwest may not be a cultural hotbed, but it is a great place to raise a family, if you are interested in doing that.
Well let's see, it's the worst market for classics possibly ever, and people are still complaining about how search committees aren't making their jobs attractive enough. Most if not all classics sc's have no control over salary, and as for location (as if they could change that), I agree with 12:02 Anon: it's just plain arrogant to talk about jobs in the "middle of nowhere." I served on a sc once, and not exactly in a place one could legitimately call the MON, and it was clear some candidates seemed more interested in the local opera scene than the (fuzzy) research agenda we cared about. In this market, if you're not willing to take a job in a state or city you might consider unworthy of your cultural standards, then yes, maybe this isn't the field for you.
I certainly don't mean to imply that *every* VAP is undesirable. Some pay more than others. Some allow time for research while others expect ridiculous teaching loads. And yes, maybe there is little control that departments have over these things, but it doesn't make it right.
Somebody in the Midwest is getting way too personally offended by my comments (who even said it was in the Midwest?). True, there are candidates who will turn their nose upwards towards any place that's not New York or San Francisco. There are also institutions that are literally hundreds of miles from even a moderately interesting city. If you can move there and be happy, fantastic. Some of us, however, have other considerations, other priorities. And when it comes to a one-year, sure, it's not forever, but then again, why drag your family to such a place or suffer separation when there's no guarantee that it will lead you to greener pastures?
My original point was that we should respect the decisions of our candidates. If they decide they don't want your job, why would you be offended? They just saved you from having an unhappy and uncooperative colleague.
My main issue would be, why is it necessarily wrong to be expected to teach a lot in a VAP? You often get a salary that is equivalent to tt-ap. You often get health benefits. You often get what perks a possibly small and poor department can provide because they know you're on the tt market and have research agendas.
As for the midwest, or anywhere not close enough to NYC or wherever...yeah, I'm with the suck it up crowd. Most VAPs who are actually doing their job and trying to get ahead don't really have time to try out all the fabulous cultural opportunities they're missing because they're in North Dakota.
My beef is not with VAP positions in out-of-the-way places (heck, I'd love to move to Wyoming for a year!) but with VAP positions in which the VAP teaches significantly more than the TT faculty. For example, if the TT faculty teaches a 2-2, and the is asked to teach a 3-3, that is exploitation, regardless of the wage (which is often much lower than the TT faculty is making). Tulane, Northwestern, I'm looking at you! Way to take advantage of the desperation of fellow classicists, Homoioi.
I agree that it is bad to ask VAPs to teach significantly higher loads than t-t appointments. However, a slightly higher load is justified by the fact that in most places no one expects VAPs to do any service (departmental, college, university). Service sucks up a *lot* of time at many schools. Heck, I'd rather do less service and teach one more course; I'd feel as if I were wasting less of my time.
It's also called paying your dues. Some might call it hazing, but plenty of people have taught 3-3, 4-4, even more, tenured, untenured, 4-6 preps a semester. So yeah, when people whine they have 3-3 on a visiting contract while the tt's have 3-2 or even 2-2, I'm just not sympathetic.
Shorter Anonymous 1:34pm:
I once had that beer-bottle shoved up my rectum in order to join the frat, so you should too. The fact that I still have "issues down there" doesn't make it wrong, it just proves my manhood. Grow a pair!
If you have seen on the Wiki that interviews for a school had gone out, and that some rejections had too, but have heard nothing is there a chance you are in limbo for a reason? There is a job I'm quite keen on and I'm wondering how impolitic it might be to send an updated CV their way since they have not rejected me yet. Clearly I'm not on the short list, but perhaps the additional information I could add would help my chances even a little?
Hopeless,
Sending along a significantly updated CV (article accepted, book under contract, etc.) is a good idea, but don't mention your limbo status. Just a simple FYI email plus CV will do it. If they want to interview you, they'll contact you. If not, pestering them won't help you.
Anon 12:02 states:
Well, that job in the "middle of nowhere" (sorry, but that attitude has always struck me as arrogant) allows you a chance to teach classics and, presumably, spend some time researching and publishing. It's all about choices.
My response: You are an A*S*S*H*O*L*E*! "Arrogant?" And, yes, it is "all about life choices" and they are not all like yours. So, if this strikes you as arrogant, you are simply an ass, and it is people like you that give our field a bad name.
Back in the 1980s, when I was an undergraduate talking to my professors about the possibility of graduate school in classics, they all told me that there were few job opportunities and practically no choices about where you lived - if you really wanted to work in the field, you gave up things like being able to choose your city or town. And this has proved the case for me. Everyone has the right to choose how to live life - but consequences follow, and you shouldn't complain about those consequences. Don't get a PhD if you can't deal with the academic job market realities (unless, of course, you are independently wealthy). If you love to teach but still want to pick your place, look into high school teaching. There are more jobs, for one; a colleague in Theology at my university gave up his t-t job in favor of teaching at an elite New England prep school, because they offered him more money for research, housing, and free tuition for his kids.
Amen. I'm Anon 12:02, and I remember getting the same talk. We were told the same thing: make sure you love this field enough that you will be able to handle (with reasonable serenity) working anywhere, for probably not much money, and with no guarantee that you might even get that even after doing the PhD.
If someone told you in a classics BA program or later that you'd have geographic choices, etc., I'm truly sorry. They misled you. But somehow I suspect you weren't told that by anyone in our field.
@ Anon 4:19...
Yes, of course, that goes without saying, but still does NOT excuse your "arrogant" comment about "life choices".
Just making an observation: it really is all about choices. We've had people comment here that seem resentful of the people who devote themselves entirely to classics at the cost of other aspects of life. Well, welcome to most professional careers. Those willing to do the most often (not always) get rewarded.
And I still think if there's arrogance, it's to be found in those who think that most of the country is nothing more than flyover states.
Yes, those of us that want to live near civilization, have families and a life beyond our research are arrogant. Or we're not dedicated enough to classics. Congratulations to all you classics martyrs out there living an ascetic existence out in the wilds of N. Dakota.
Let's be serious though here. You're telling me there's no difference between life in a major metropolitan area and an economically depressed or isolated college town (I won't say "in the middle of nowhere" because that makes me arrogant, apparently)????
Of course there's a difference. And you have every right to your preference. Some people need cities to feel happy; others are very content in those ND wilds (and they may well be no less cultured, civilized, or whatever than you, maybe even more so, who knows). But if you need to be near your definition of civilization to be happy, maybe classics isn't for you. Because the odds are against getting a job of any kind, and the odds are really against getting it to satisfy your geographic expectation. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but it is.
As a newbie VAP, I can say I've met plenty of those classics martyrs who are totally consumed by classics (both grad school, fellow students and profs, and now as faculty). They're some of the nastiest people around.
It is possible to love being a classics professor, work hard, yet still be a nice person with a happy family life. Sure, my first five years post-PhD were hard and stressful, with a series of VAP positions and separation from my husband, also an academic. But I used the VAPs to gain experience, like everyone else, and some of the people I worked with in those VAPs remain my friends today. (Of course there are others whom I avoid like the plague.) I just kept my eyes on my goal and eventually it all worked out. I'm in a department where we all get along, like, and support each other - an enviable atmosphere, even though we are located in a 'flyover' state. Candidates can often tell in interviews if there is tension among people in departments, a warning sign for sure, and there are also departments notorious for being hellish due to faculty warfare.
The last two anons nailed it.
As a philologist, I found this "conversation" by Professor Stephen Dyson fascinating.
Archaeology and Philology in the Contemporary Classics Department
Seems to me the biggest downside to the VAP, especially the one-year, is that no sooner are you settled in than you have to start looking for work for the next year. Research time/energy is pretty much halved when job hunting and i can't help wonder if this is how people get trapped on the adjunct track.
Seems to me the biggest downside to the VAP, especially the one-year, is that no sooner are you settled in than you have to start looking for work for the next year. Research time/energy is pretty much halved when job hunting and i can't help wonder if this is how people get trapped on the adjunct track.
Yes, that's right. I did think that was common knowledge, though.
I did think that was common knowledge, though.
It's known alright. But often forgotten too.
The big disadvantage of VAPs in out of the way places is not that there's no "culture" per se, it's about the potential to meet people who might be friendly and allow you to enjoy some semblance of a life while you're there. The more rural, the more you have to hope/pray your colleagues are friendly and nice. I've done two VAPs in rural towns, and while one was a friendly department, the other lot hated the sight of one another (and by extension, anyone in the department, including me). You ARE going to be lonely, and while you can use that lonely time to further your research, you can't do that 24/7. Add the fact that if you're single, it is difficult to form relationships because you don't know where you'll be in six months. Add that you are facing moving one, two, or even three times more before you will get a permanent job. It's lonely and it's tough, and I am not at all surprised that people either don't want to do it or hope desperately for a city job.
being a serial VAP-per is quick route to total exhaustion: teaching a heavy load + dept. service (in some places, it's true) + research + job search. Dreadful. And it is the way of the future - cheap, expendable 1-year contracts are attractive to the decanal set.
Add that you are facing moving one, two, or even three times more before you will get a permanent job. It's lonely and it's tough, and I am not at all surprised that people either don't want to do it or hope desperately for a city job.
December 18, 2010 10:37 AM
This is right on the money. Some VAP situations are very tough and very isolated - and I am not talking strictly about geography. Some places are not welcoming to you and treat you like the hired help - akin to bad treatment of staff and admin folks in some unis. It is tough b/c there is no permanence. If the place sucks, at least you can get out soon, being term-limited. But the whole thing has the vicious cycle feel to it. And yes, one can understand not wanting to be personally, geographically, intellectually isolated for long. ugh.
Amen to Anon @10:38.
I have been a VAP for several years now, published, done department service (as it was expected, but had no problem doing it nor questioned it), taught loads, have a solid research agenda, yet am not getting interviews for the T-T. I must be damaged goods...I know it's a crap shoot out there, but it's a tough pill to swallow (the red or blue pill?) when a job adequately to well done does not equate to the appropriate T-T.
Just saying...stating my reality while neither throwing a temper tantrum nor lashing out (though should I?).
Sometimes, you need a bit of luck to have your number called. With a dearth of jobs, it often comes down to a somewhat particular skill or experience you have that is totallly unpredictable. It sucks, but you need to plug away until you stumble upon one of these (if you can hold out long enough). Even with more research productivity, you can rarely improve your chances significantly (though you can hurt them if you don't maintain a certain level of activity). The only other path is to hope that your VAP leads to a permanent job, the dreaded inside candidate. It goes without saying that this path is fraught with difficulties as deans (and chairs) rarely want to buy the cow when they're getting its milk on the cheap.
And don't forget that some institutions may not even tenure assistant professors with otherwise stellar records. Getting a T-T job is a big and difficult hurdle to clear, but it certainly is not the end of tribulations.
And don't forget that some institutions may not even tenure assistant professors with otherwise stellar records. Getting a T-T job is a big and difficult hurdle to clear, but it certainly is not the end of tribulations.
That sounds slightly too terrifying, and people are terrified enough as it is. There aren't many places where people with "stellar" records are refused tenure with any frequency, although a tiny handful of institutions more or less automatically deny promotion.
But no doubt, getting a job isn't the end of your labors. You do actually have to do a good bit of work to get tenure.
What better way than some old fashioned textual analysis as a tool to end the Philology vs. Archaeology debate?
The drunken, over-sexed and filthy set win, by a country mile.
I imagine it would be an outright massacre if you included "archeology" as an alternate spelling.
Oh, Tiger, you know once you've gone archy, you can't go back.
The drunken, over-sexed and filthy set win, by a country mile.
This is outrageous.
When it comes to alcoholism and poor personal grooming, we philologists are second to none.
And what is this "sex" thing you refer to?
Guess what happens to the graph if you replace 'philology' with 'literature'...
If we allow "literature" to replace "philology" then we have to take that move to its logical conclusion:
Words vs. Things
Sorry, the dirty-fingered, inebriated sex fiends still win.
word verification: unmen
"In the world of archaeology, philologists are unmen."
In the joyous spirit of the season, and following all these (meaningless) comments on which subfield of losers is the "best," shouldn't the horrible archEologists control all our Classics programs, since they apparently produce more books, words, and things than the "competition"? Maybe all our vitriol against the job search and its horrors should be directed against that minority of unproductive philologists who still control a majority of departments.
Or maybe this is just more nonsense...
P.S. It is.
Hey Anon 11:04: Lighten up! You're not doing your health any good getting your panties in a wad over some meaningless fun. And I do apologize to the gender studies crowd for my insensitive and sexist insult.
Guess what happens to the graph if you replace 'philology' with 'literature
I'm interested to hear whether people actually call themselves "philologists" any more or whether this is a term preserved mainly by archaeologists. I thought most literary classicists stopped calling themselves philologists thirty or forty years ago, when most of them really weren't philologists any more and had become literary critics.
Anyone have any scoop on UMass-Boston (T-T Latinist) position? Still blank on wiki...
Sometimes I wish the wiki had never been created. Each day brings more bad news. I give up. Maybe it was better when the bad news came at one fell swoop.
I wish that the Wiki had existed when I was suffering through the job market. I was pretty clueless about how things worked and why things happened as they did, getting wiser through hard knocks rather than advice from veterans. Given that it is a place to vent as well as a place to share useful information, though, it can be really depressing to read. Perhaps limit yourself to checking in on the Wiki only every couple of days, and never when you're feeling most gloomy?
Well it's only the 20th. I'm sure the Placement Service has a very good reason why they still haven't posted the December jobs.
Post a Comment