"I believe that when one of these projects tried to get their hands on attrition data from departments, "privacy" suddenly became a huge concern. The "privacy" of students who had gotten TT jobs is apparently not an issue, since their identities are often listen on department websites, but even sharing the numbers of people who had started and finished grad programs was too sensitive to be shared."
This is such a cop-out. It's not as if the data sans any personal/identifying information couldn't be provided.
While I wonder about Columbia, Stanford, and PSU, I'm more curious about Toronto. Was this failed search for ancient science a do-over for their failed 2015-2016 philosophy search?
servius here: the line we've articulated is more broad than ad hominem attacks: we remove posts that call for critique of the personal characteristics (perceived or otherwise) of *individual scholars* within the field. @ 9.32: Discussions about hiring in a "glutted market" are fair game, but not when they use an individual junior colleague as an exemplum.
Stay nice, people. We are all in the same position: wanting what is not possible right now. Let's not attack every TT taker. God forbid we attack ABDs. It isn't their fault for doing what their advisors say and throwing themselves on the market. If they are successful, let's imagine them as people who are lighting the way....seriously, advice from a three year VAPer, don't get bitter!!! It won't get you the job anyway.
According to PhD's @12:36AM, don't apply for anything because our feelings are too fragile. But in reality, yes, apply, gemstones, apply. What, are you supposed to just inevitably go into decline because the rest of us have? Seriously though, ABD's must apply for everything they can. And most of you aren't successful the first year on the market and are depressed, etc., anyway, so:
We are all the same after a year or two: tender and hopeless and hopeless. Must we have no joy in at least the meeting of our minds.
Does that mean Stanford is on their second or third offer? Do that many people really say no to a program like Stanford? Am I missing a better Latin job out there this year?
so insane cost of living, california, and R1 could be trumped by reasonable cost of living, SLAC, and east coast. makes sense to me, but i am not an elitist anonymous member of the FV commentariat.
Well, none of their finalists are in TT positions (I applaud Stanford for this). Which means that several must have had other offers that seem better for all the reasons listed above. I’d expect Stanford to pick quality finalists and so is it surprising that other schools may have picked them too?
I've been wondering how new hires at Cal and Stanford are making it work, housing wise, particularly if they have a family. Do they live in the central valley or sacramento and commute in?
On the Stanford discussion: undoubtedly this is a fantastic department, and (despite the cost of living) California is a wonderful place to be. But isn't Stanford the kind of place like Yale or Harvard where tenure is usually not given to assistant profs? If I had multiple offers including one from Stanford, this would be a serious consideration. Who wants to go back on the job market in 5 years when things could possibly look even worse than they do now?
If grad students can afford to go to Stanford and Berkeley, new faculty can afford to live there, too. (Do you have any idea what an assistant professor at Stanford makes?)
9:22. Give me a break. Do you really think that living in the Stanford area on a 1st year faculty salary is equivalent to living in Amherst or Williamstown or Swarthmore or New Haven or Cambridge/Somerville on, say, Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, New Haven, Cambridge salaries?
Of course people can manage it. Is it competitive given CoL for those who have other good options? Financially probably not. If you want to be on the East Coast or get tenure or be at a SLAC, personally it's definitely not.
Stanford is a wonderful Junior College, I am assured. But people may decide to go elsewhere based on things like quality of life that may matter less to starry-eyed 21 year olds. At 18, I would have paid full fare for Harvard over a full ride at Oklahoma. Do I think that way now? No fucking way.
9:22 here. I don't think that and didn't say so, and I'm not sure why you're aggressively yelling at me. I was responding to the comment above, asking if new faculty at Stanford have to live in the Central Valley and commute in. My point is that junior faculty at Stanford are paid more than well enough to live in the Bay Area, not that it's the best place to live on a professor's salary or that there's no reason to turn them down.
9:39 here. Sorry! My own frustrations getting in the way of clarity and reading comp. You are 100% right and I was wrong to read more into your statements.
Ancient historian here. I have an upcoming interview for a generalist VAP position in a Classsics Dept.
Can anyone share the kinds of questions that might be asked of a VAP regarding philology ? The job will have the successful candidate teach Latin and Greek. hat I fear is that a douchy SC member might ask some highly specific question about some obscure bit of Greek grammar that .
Method and approach to teaching in the languages at various levels. Do you prefer grammar or translation method/which textbook and why for intro? How do you teach an intermediate reading course which needs to review the reading (and what type of commentary would you use), what is your approach to an advanced language class in terms of what they read (primary and secondary material)?
I cannot imagine someone asking YOU a grammar question, but I can imagine someone saying for the sake of an example "how would you teach X topic in intro Latin to our students."
Love how the two ABD job winners this year got jobs at places with extensive connections/placement histories between their new employers and the schools that awarded them their Ph.Ds. And we wonder why the field is falling into complete disrepair. No swamps will ever be drained...just bigger fish ponds with more water.
It would be a jerk move to ask a question about a specific point of grammar, and not actually helpful for thinking about how you'd be as a teacher. Look up what textbooks they already use (I go to the registrar's website/course catalog and look up the classes, or go to the bookstore and look at the class listing, which often lists books). Chances are, you won't get any say in what textbook to use as a VAP, but you should know why their book is a serviceable one, and reviews are generally helpful for that. They may also ask what kinds of readings you'd assign in a higher level course (what Latin/Greek authors you'd love to teach and why). That should be based not just on your interests, but also be related to their departmental goals and needs. So, not just "Attic orators because I love them" but "Attic orators because they can tell us a lot about social history and things like gender, class, and slavery, which allows students to learn not just the language, but also the social and cultural context" or something like that (probably a bit more than just what I said there). GOOD LUCK!!!
Just looking at the department at Miami, as I prepare my application for their VAP. I notice that of their 7 faculty (incl. VAPs), 4 have PhDs from Harvard, 2 from Berkeley, and 1 from UNC.
Recent Late Antique PhD peoples -- keep on the look-out for a post-doc at FSU to be posted in coming weeks, to begin August 2018.. $50k annually for 2 years in a sunny town / great department. Please apply!
In case anyone is cusious, I just heard from an inside source at Conn College that the SC has not even begun to look through the applications for the 3-yr VAP.
This is discouraging, because it suggests that they will do a rash and hasty job when they finally do begin the process, which really needs to be completed in the next few weeks.
I didn't even bother applying for the T-T job at Princeton, given that my advisor said that the job would go to an applicant with an amazing CV, full of publications, pending book deals, and with years-worth of teaching experience from various top schools as well as perhaps a post-doc or two from an ivy.
I was short-listed for a TT job this year and received a very nice and personalized rejection letter. I was told that, at the end of the day, the other candidate had more publications. I have 5, he has 8.
The school was a large R1, yet not as prestigious as Princeton, of course.
...No SC is the same. The Princeton SC this year really did't care about accomplishments that have been done, but seem to have had their focus on promise and pure hope. There's nothing wrong with that; it's just a different set of criteria than most of us would like to see.
I think that many people want to have a clear reason as to *why* someone else got the job. Counting accomplishments, publications, fellowships, grants, and scholarships is a way that we can easily quantify. No doubt, many are and will be very angered by the Princeton hire, since they're largely a blank slate. But, it might very well be a blank slate that Princeton wanted. And, again, there's nothing wrong with that.
There's no reason to be mad or cruel towards the ABD who got the job at Princeton. She applied like everyone else and beat the odds, which I have to assume must have been quite steep (200+ applicants I'd imagine), so congrats to her!
But, there is a valuable lesson here: there are no rules to any of this.
Well, since no one else has, I guess I'll be the one to point out that after all that b.s. by some of you about how the Case Western Reserve job was going to go to an inside candidate, it didn't. As all of you should remember, there was specific discussion of the person who was expected to get the job, in clear violation of FV's rules -- but that didn't stop some of you from behaving indecently towards a fellow junior scholar. Of course, the arrogant pricks (or prickettes) who wrote those posts will not feel any shame, nor will those people who predicted an inside hire learn from their mistake.
But for those of you with the ability to grow as human beings, learn from this: once again, people claimed that outsiders had no chance at a job, and it was one of us outsiders who got it.
The FSU postdoc, while perhaps providing a decent wage and so on, isn't really a postdoc when it has a 2-2 teaching load. Why not call it a VAP and give the appointee the benefit of a more accurate title for the job market?
If you get the job and want to more accurately represent what you’re doing, just put “Visiting Assistant Professor” on your CV ?
Honest question. Is it really dishonest given that you’re doing a 2:2 and are expected to be deeply involved with Dept business and outreach to, for clarity’s sake of future SCs looking at your CV, say you’re a VAP ?
How else is a SC to know that you’ve had experience doing VAP-like tasks, given that PostDoc implies nose in a book and doing research and *maybe* teaching 1 class for one semester ?
If it’s too misleading to say “VAP” how about saying “PostDoc in xxxx” in one line and “Visiting Instructor of Classics” in another line ?
"The FSU postdoc, while perhaps providing a decent wage and so on, isn't really a postdoc when it has a 2-2 teaching load. Why not call it a VAP and give the appointee the benefit of a more accurate title for the job market?"
I had a three-year postdoc that was 2-2, but one class was the same every semester, and the other was anything I wanted to teach, provided that some minimum number of students would sign up for it. It was a great position. The title made no difference as far as I could tell. Besides, there is no VAP out there with a 2-2 load.
Don't misrepresent job titles on your CV. Ever. It is potential grounds for termination. You can clarify the nature of the position (courses taught, etc.) in your letter, if necessary.
As a recurrent SC member, I have to interject on this. While some applicants do list job duties, it is strongly preferred that you do not. We all know what a TA does. Don't tell us. It strikes the committee as an applicant trying to 'fill up the page' with nonsense. If you feel that your particular institution has its TAs do some duty(ies) that are not common, mention that in your cover letter.
Additionally, it's even more eyebrow raising when a CV lists the job duties of a VAP or Postdoc. The expectation here is that a junior scholar would have reached a certain level of maturity and would be aware that anyone considering them for a job is more than aware of what "VAP" and "Postdoc" entails. Yes, some are more demanding than others, but don't think that whatever it is you may be doing there is anything worthy of extra notation on a CV.
My institution has changed my particular job title twice this year. It went from being "visiting instructor" to "visiting teaching assistant professor" to its final stage of "teaching assistant professor." Though, the University's HR page says that if you are a TAP and teach less than a 3:3 load, you should "place 'Visiting' at the beginning instead." ...This has led to a great deal of confusion, as that statement could mean call yourself a VTAP or a VAP.
...it's boggling how these titles all change and are, in many ways, incompatible between institutions.
"...it's boggling how these titles all change and are, in many ways, incompatible between institutions."
Indeed. Case in point: my graduate program used the title "Teaching Assistant" for both those who helped professors with grading, etc. (an actual TA, in my book) and those who taught full classes on their own. That's a huge difference, in my opinion, and the lack of distinction has frequently carried over into post-PhD job titles as well.
@3/22 10:10: I am the person who originally suggested the CWRU job would be an inside hire, and who originally made fun of that person (not by name, but obviously we all know how to work the internet). I just wanted to say how much I regret that in retrospect—it was a careless, thoughtless, and very inconsiderate thing to do. I have a small group of friendly fellow-sufferers who text each other through the job season, and we’d been using that appellation for this particular person as an inside joke. One of us had also been told (by a friend of a department member) not to apply to the job because it would go to the VAP. I thoughtlessly and unkindly repeated the nickname and the info here without thinking through the consequences, but recent discussions made me realize how messed up that was. If he’s reading, I’d like to extend an anonymous apology, and also my sympathies for not getting the job. I’ve been the VAP who wasn’t hired in the past, and it...just...sucks.
Always put your formal title on your CV, for reasons noted above. If you title is "Shiteating Lecturer" then put that. While terms like VAP, postdoc, adjunct are often used loosely and interchangeably, do not take the risk of getting fired for misrepresenting yourself on your CV.
OP with 5 (not 8) publications here. I highly doubt that Mr. T will stay where he got the TT job. He’ll be out in a year or two to a better place. Was he a finalist for Princeton do you know?
Always nice to see what SC members think about common mistakes many of us make on our CVs. It all makes perfect sense when you say it as you do, but I am a bit afraid of how bare my CV will look when I take that out--which only justifies your point.
What about putting projects in progress on CV? So far I haven't done that, unless they were already submitted for a review, but I noticed people putting things they are just working on right now...
Real advice from SC members or senior faculty or junior faculty who have succeeded is always welcome. FV could actually be useful! We could even collect anonymous pieces of good advice into an 'anonymous job market guide.'
Just my opinion but I would take the VAP. Teaching experience matters too, and for me personally I find it more difficult to write when I just have unstructured free time. That's when I go down rabbit holes and spend 10 hours working on a single footnote. I do much better if I have some fixed amount of time in which I must accomplish X, Y, and Z. But different people have different work habits, and you know yourself best.
As a person who got a job this year (and who is very very grateful), I have to say that I was one step away from having absolutely nothing. People weren't fighting over me. Early VAP season was not panning out as well. I honestly believe there is a little magic to the process, call it luck if you want. Departments are complicated places, and all of the final candidates where I got my TT job were excellent. Why did I get the job? I am sure it has less to do with my awesomeness than I think...
Keep the faith, everyone. You have my promise to pay it forward.
Did anyone else notice the insane hiring at the University of Kent ?
They hired someone for their T-T job who received their PhD from Kent and is a sitting VAP at Kent... That is the most egregious case of incest outside of what Chicago did about 8 years ago.
"I am currently Adjunct Flounder of Classics at Bottomfeeder College, where the department has shown so much confidence as to entrust me with a 1-0 teaching load."
@ 9:20PM, I heard FSU have offered it to 2+ candidates and they've declined in favor of other offers ... perhaps this is related to the post from a few days pack of a postdoc in Late Antique archaeology - search about to be cancelled?
Doesn't UK employment law mean that a VAP has first right of refusal if a permanent post is offered in their area while they are temporary faculty? Kent seems right in line with that, regardless of it being their hire.
Hamilton hired their own VAP last time too (2015 search). I actually applaud this behavior--it is dulcet decorum to hire one's own VAP--but I wish they could just convert without doing a full search and wasting a bunch of time and money (including their own!).
Re. 12:40PM: UK law doesn't stipulate a VAP must be offered a position. The position was advertised and interviews were held. The UK system is far from perfect, but I suspect the person they hired might have numerous things in the works and will be useful for the next REF there. Sadly, that's the bottom line there and while jobs are permanent, the permanency doesn't equate to tenure in North America - whole departments are shut down and people lose their jobs if they are not performing.
The person in question has been at UCLA for this year, and is currently listed as "Adjunct Assistant Professor." So, the position must have been made permanent somehow? Something like this happened in the program where I got my degree; I don't know the situation at UCLA, but at my university it was a conjunction of chance and a great junior scholar coming together.
Okay wait, so three of the finalists at Stanford have been offered TT jobs at varying institutions that we know of? I guess they know how to pick them? Jesus H.
Hell yeah, state schools! Go Washington, UCLA...God, aren't there others? Let's focus on all the obstacles those folks have had to overcome! Don't hate, people. Go State!
Stanford kind of got it right, looking at their "past visits". They seem to have been looking for promise, and other schools seem to have wanted their finalists as well.
There's something I really don't understand. We all think that the years of contingent employment through adjuncting, VAPs, lectureships, etc. is wrong and needs to end.
So, why don't we celebrate every time an ABD gets a tenure track job?
It's understandable that people are bitter when that hasn't happened for them and they've spent years on the market. But we all want things to change so that this (ABDs > TT) is a reality for everyone. Why not celebrate it when it happens? Is it just because it didn't happen for YOU?
The market sucks. We think ideal would be an ABD -> PHD system. But once the ideal is so clearly not the case, issues of fairness arise. It would be great if all could feast, but if that is no longer happening and there are bread lines, why should some get to jump ahead in the line? It is perfectly consistent to believe:
(a) Rationing and bread-lines suck.
and
(b) Given that we get our food through rationing and bread-lines, the authorities should not allow people to jump ahead in the line or avoid the line entirely.
"You hate rationing so much, so why are you mad when special people get to avoid it entirely? It would be best if everyone could avoid it entirely, so it is better that at least a few do now than that no one does."
I am happy for ABDs or ANYONE who gets a TT. Everyone, in an ideal world, with a Classics PhD should have permanent employment.
But just because you've been on the market for years (however much I sympathize with you) does not entitle you to a TT before a promising ABD "just because." They were a better fit than you for whatever reason --personal or professional--reasons that will probably remain unknown to you. But neither the successful candidate nor the SC is obliged to justify their decision to you. Nor should they compromise the department's primary wants and needs to be "fair" to you.
@ 12:19 PM: The academic job market is nothing like a bread line (indeed, no job market is, at least not one I can think of). Are you really advocating for a system whereby we all get in line and are assigned jobs in the order in which we graduated? Like a conveyor belt in a factory, regardless of the specifics of your qualifications or particulars of your training? That's not how the world works. This isn’t even unique to academia. I think everyone who reads this site is sympathetic to the struggles of those on the market, but I agree with the people saying that we should be celebrating when things work out this way. If you found out that you were 200th in line, so you'd have to wait until 200 TT jobs were created before you could even be considered for permanent employment, would you think that was fair? What if a job for which you were a perfect fit came up? Should the "authorities” (??) allow you to “jump ahead in line,” or must the SC hire the candidate who is a perfectly fine person and scholar (maybe!) but not who they want just because he or she has clocked a few extra months on the market? Do those extra months correlate directly to the suitability of their research interests relative to what the department is looking for? Does the fact that they have taught four courses more mean that they are a better teacher? It seems that situation-specific circumstances would start to factor in, right? Kind of how it's working now. I hope you can see that such a rigid hiring model is neither practical nor desirable.
FSU seems to use postdocs to replace TT people who are on longer leaves or teaching reduced loads. Their current Greek archaeology postdoc is teaching in place of a tenured faculty member who has taken up a temporary (?) position at the American School. I don't know anything about the Roman archaeology search, but my guess is that the late antiquity postdoc is probably replacing the current late antiquity postdoc that took the TT job at Georgia.
The FSU late antique postdoc exists because there is enough interest among faculty / enrolling students to maintain the position. It is not related to the Roman archaeology TT search.
On the bread line: I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, no obviously there is no “line” and ABD’s who get TT positions haven’t jumped “ahead.” But on the other hand I think it’s fair to point out that it may be a mistake to hire an untested person, and that VAP-ing does give real, valuable experience that is not to be discounted.
Example: I have a friend who won a TT position as an ABD a few years ago. We’re not in the same field, and I was very happy for this guy without feeling that he “beat” me. But a few years down the line I can’t help but notice that he has no articles in peer reviewed journals (just one invited chapter) while I’ve been publishing regularly AND teaching a 4x4 load. I think it’s fair to be frustrated by such anecdotes. I’m still happy for my friend and I hope he’s got a lot in the pipeline so the bill won’t come due when he goes up for tenure in a few years, but I also feel for the other candidates for his position, all of whom were PhD in hand and who must have been pretty pissed to see an ABD walk away with that job.
@1:58pm, just to throw another angle at you, jumping into the conversation midway through: "What if a job for which you were a perfect fit came up" and you applied and didn't even make the long short list, and then they ended up hiring an ABD special unicorn with fewer publications (in reputable journals, not edited collections), less teaching experience (in both languages and in other general and specific areas actually mentioned in the job ad) got the job instead of you? Yeah, you'd have a right to be annoyed and confused and bitter at the whole impersonal system. And yes, maybe the SC should be forced to at the very least read your application.
@12:45pm "They were a better fit than you for whatever reason --personal or professional--reasons that will probably remain unknown to you. But neither the successful candidate nor the SC is obliged to justify their decision to you. Nor should they compromise the department's primary wants and needs to be "fair" to you."
This is a nice "justification" after the fact, but it remains confusing and problematic for all sorts of reasons, and people who haven't been on the market for a few years have no way of really understanding or even anticipating the sort of nonsense that goes on. In some known and documented cases, personal connections and some undefined promise have landed ABD people TT jobs when the market was (and is) thoroughly saturated with PhDs with impressive publications, teaching evidence, and administrative chops. So, yes, we're irrationally expecting that there should be some way to predict how the market will work. How stupid of us, looking to find order in the chaos.
Over a few years on the market it has become increasingly apparent to me that 1) there are no rules, whether official or unspoken (as already discussed quite a lot above); and that 2) holding multiple VAPs is a sign of weakness and inadequacy to many, many of the institutions that think they're prestigious. So those institutions have established a pattern of hiring Shiny New ABD straight out of Fancy Pants Programme (then often not granting that person tenure) and of hiring Reputable Associate Professor out of Top 50 Liberal Arts College through open rank searches, whether open or unadvertised. I have learned that one should not take anything personally that isn't delivered personally by a person, because most of this is just a big impersonal Machine that does all of its "calculations" internally, using formulas that only It knows. Statistically speaking, Fancy Pants Programme ABDs do bat well above their weight, but anyone in any situation can get a job seemingly at random (probably not at a Prestigious Place, but it has happened). If it helps you to vent on here about the Nature of the Thing, I say go for it. And for some of you, yes, it is ok if one person complains about x and another complains that we don't do x often enough. Different people are allowed different perspectives, even wrong ones, no matter how much we wish we could control everyone's everything. Even the entitled people who come on here and insult people who seem to lack the perspective of an entitled person are entitled to their perspective. And I agree, nobody's entitled to a TT or even VAP job, not even Shiny New ABD Person. But we are all (according to the SCS and AIA Placement terms) entitled to an open and fair search process, or maybe I just wish that in my own entitled way. So this seems like a really good place to come and vent about that, or discuss it, or just write things. Where else are people supposed to go? Some reddit subforum?
It sucks out there, people. Congratulations to those who've landed jobs, commiserations to those who haven't, and good luck to our field as it continues to struggle to survive.
@ 3:32. 12:45 here. You're overreading. See my comment in the context of the post to which I was replying (12:19 PM). We weren't talking about unfair searches. Yes, obviously everyone is entitled to their own perspective but that doesn't mean that perspective is sensible. (construing academic jobs as "bread-lines" obviously is not sensible).
Some thoughts as the season starts to come to a close.
1) I think there’s a tendency on this board to underestimate the extent to which search committees are better informed than we are, especially about ABDs. This year I’ve seen a certain amount of mis-information here about the basic facts of CVs I happen to know something about, but that’s not really even the main issue. A dissertation is, as everyone here surely knows, a big deal. There’s a lot of information to be had there, and the general public doesn’t have it, but the SC does. Of course, it won’t tell you everything (see point 2 below). Is this really the advisor’s work? How will this person do without the resources of the kind of program that grants PhDs? But it will tell you a lot, especially when it can serve as a basis for oral discussion.
2) I’m pretty sure no one really believes that jobs should be handed out on the basis of seniority and waiting one’s “turn.” But I suspect many here really do think that they should be (and maybe even that they notionally are) awarded on the basis of achievement. I think this view is fundamentally mistaken. It is essentially retrospective. Hiring is essentially forward-looking. The weightier a candidate’s record, the more *confident* you can be in an assessment, but it doesn’t necessarily improve the candidate’s ranking as such. Think of how basketball players are drafted on talent vs. achievement.
3) That forward-looking orientation can have bad side effects, which have long been correctly identified here. Such evaluation is necessarily subjective, and so potentially vulnerable in a number of ways. It is easier to slip in implicit or even explicit bias along conventional lines of discrimination (gender, race, class). It can also simply be wrong, though the institutional incentive is very much to get it right the first time rather than just trying again six years later. But those problems need to addressed symptomatically. Attempts to create an algorithm that adds up achievement points are like the old joke about looking for lost keys under the lamp post (not where they were dropped “because the light is better.”
4) One more specific point, based on experience with quite a number of searches both as an SC member and as a recommender and conversations with others similarly situated. Connections matter. Connections can get a basically competent candidate a convention interview. Once it a blue moon, connections might get a really solid candidate a campus interview. But no one in modern times has actually gotten at TT job on the strength of connections.
"But no one in modern times has actually gotten at TT job on the strength of connections."
All articulate and elegant prose aside, there is plenty wrong in the comments here. You made be an experience SC member, but you are also an experienced SC member that is part of a failed system trying to rationalize its existence and missteps. Perhaps your hiring process was not corrupt. Perhaps you hired the best candidates. But the system as a whole's track record suggests a very different story.
And I can assure you that there is at least one candidate this year for whom the above quote does not apply, and who got a top TT job based largely on the above (when combined with one additional factor that cannot be spoken about here on the censored world of FV). Perhaps even two. One is welcome to live like an ostrich with one's head in the sand. One is welcome to drink the cool aid, so to speak. But the facts point strongly in the other direction.
9:55, one of the few undeniably valuable aspects of FV is that sometimes more senior people who actually know what they are talking about -- unlike us job-seekers -- come here and share their views. When people like you give jerky responses it makes it less likely that they will want to bother doing so. Everything you wrote could have been phrased better (not to mention with better English grammar!), making the same points.
And as for the subject of your second paragraph, I applied for that job and didn't even get a conference interview, but it looks like a good hire to me.
If someone answers that question then Servius will have to delete it, since WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSING JUNIOR COLLEAGUES HERE. So don't answer it.
I love the conceit of 'junior colleagues.' 'Junior' is a correlative (I believe it is actually a comparative adjective -the Latin philologists will have to chime in with their expertise in morphology) - a senior person could refer to 'my junior colleague(s).' Most of us FV deplorables are not TT, so an ABD who is hired as a TT becomes - upon the hiring - ABOVE us in status. So I agree not attacking ANYONE by name is a fair rule, but let's stop pretending this a matter of 'kicking down' or doing anything but griping about some of the most privileged among us, who also happen to be young and not to have the job stability of someone like Peter Brown (whose demise, and the demise of whose pet field of post-Silver Age Latin, some of us anxiously await).
@9:37 You're wrong. Since (to judge from tone and content) most posters on this forum have graduated, whether or not they are now in visiting or adjunct positions, then an ABD candidate is their junior. Even if an ABD gets a TT position, that person won't become "above" us until the position begins -- July 1 at the earliest, for the most part.
I'm the one who used the term "junior colleague." I am a lecturer on a one-year contract, as I was last year. I did not use the term relative to myself, or to the majority of us on this forum, but simply in reference of the fact that our field is made up of colleagues, and some are junior and some are senior.
The argument that the moment an ABD accepts a tenure-track job he/she is no longer junior is absurd, if for no other reason than that the contract will not begin earlier than July 1. Personally, I consider anyone who is not yet tenured to be junior, so 9:37 is being even more absurdly pedantic.
Okay, enough: I've already spilled far more digital ink than anyone wishing for the demise of Peter Brown or his field is worth.
12:20, so you are saying that you want a forum in which we can discuss anyone in the field by name, while ourselves behaving like cowards and hiding behind the internet's anonymity?!? Somehow, I don't think you -- or anyone else here -- has the guts to go after people under your own names.
An uncensored FV would be pretty rough, but it would at least allow for honest discussion about the field. We might even find out what people really think of all the Orwellian statements put out by the SCS.
Going back to the original discussion, I think the frustration is less about who is "junior" or not, but rather who is inside or outside the field or not. Truth be told, a VAP or adjunct, even if they have publications and teaching experience, is simply not in the field, at least by the perverse standards of the field. That's the frustration of treading water on the margins, and watching ABDs vault past you, becoming full fledged members when you are on the verge of drowning.
This certainly is not the fault of any ABD who gets a really good job and takes it. I went on the market as an ABD (first of many), and I would have taken a position if it had been offered to me.
Going back to the bread lines problem, it might be worth noting the solution the physical sciences have taken. Everyone, no matter how brilliant, is expected to do at least one year as a post-doc (most do 3-4, but even wunderkinder have to do at least one postdoc). Now, there is a downside to this, as the physical sciences exploit their post docs for cheap labor, but at least there is an expectation in the glut of science PhDs that everyone spend at least one year outside their graduate program, building up a real record of accomplishment in the realm of teaching and publication . A similar field wide expectation might benefit the classics and humanities as well.
@ 12:20PM: The "Classics Cheers and Jeers" forum exists for people who want to post without censorship - I can only see one post to it from years ago (there is a link on Classics Wiki page). 12:52PM makes a fair and pertinent point: if an uncensored forum is used posters should not hide behind anonymity if they go naming and/or degrading others.
And for what it's worth in nearly every industry the people who get jobs get them with the help and support of their connections as well as their own talent; to some degree, academia isn't that different, save for there are less jobs and it sucks a hundred times more when someone younger and seemingly less-qualified gets ahead of you.
I heard UMass has a retirement coming up next year, someone who works on Latin prose, but I don't know if they'll be hiring to replace. I assume Toronto and Brown will re-run their cancelled searches?
So far it looks like all of the ABDs getting jobs come from top-10 schools. Is it ever the case that ABD's from state schools land TT jobs? Also, congrats to them all!
Re ABDs The current trend is only top-tier schools (R1s or posh LACs) hire them. This year: Stanford, UCLA, Bard, Princeton; Vanderbilt; last year Michigan, etc.
The basic reason is these schools can take a risk if the promise of the ABD does not pan out. They can fire them without losing the tenure line. This does not mean that they want to fire the ABD, simply that it is a non catastrophe if matters come to that. At most schools, however, it IS a catastrophe if the ABD under-performs (leading to the loss of the line), which is why most places prefer people who are a few years out, who have articles, a book manuscript ready for review (or under contract) and years of teaching experience.
And ABDs only come from top schools. Quite simply, an ABD with few publications and little teaching can't get a job without a lot of hype (n.b., the hype need not be wrong), and to get the hype you need very powerful and influential cheerleaders, hence the hires come from Harvard, Berkeley, Princeton, etc. etc.
To comment on what *may be* in the works for next year:
...It might sound a bit silly, but take a look at where current Asst. Profs have left for greener pastures--though it's no guarantee that they will put out for a T-T job the very next year.
...Though I'm at Duke, I know that UNC will be looking for a new Roman historian soon, given that Richard J.A. Talbert is towards the end of his phased retirement. He was hired as an endowed chair and distinguished professor (ca. 1990), but his particular chair is not confined to the History Dept and is university wide, so it's rather unlikely that the chair will remain in History.
From what I've been told by sitting faculty at UNC, they will make hiring a Roman Historian a top priority. But, they are rather doubtful that they will do a senior hire (they've had a lot of direct distinguished prof hires in the last 5-6 years) but will take on an Assistant Prof. I can 100% guarantee you that what will win over the SC for that job aside from the typical stuff, is someone who is VERY, VERY capable of running the Ancient program there. There are two ancient historians at UNC, one Greek one Roman. To not speak ill of anyone, let me just say that 99.9% of the work falls on Talbert and the Department there does not allow the Greek historian to take on PhD students anymore, at least until he has one that he's taken on get their degree (he's had 5-6 grad students that have all quit while ABD...1 remains in the pipeline).
...SO, Talbert carries the ancient program completely and it hangs on by a thread at the fear of him leaving. So... if anyone here gets an interview for that job in the next year or so, make sure that you are capable of taking the reins and leading the program and be especially be sure to emphasize your drive, motivation, and plan for growing the success of the ancient cohort.
I wonder what Thucydides would say about putting one's hope on promises that might not pan out (especially at a time when the humanities are not at their strongest in the face of tough opposition). Oh, that's right...
So it appears based on the above rumors that the market will continue to lean to the Roman side of things? Unfortunate for those of us on the Greek side who have had several meager years in a row now.
Re: Columbia: So basically the entire faculty KNEW about rumors / incidents and kept quiet for all those years? Would it be an overstatement to say that many of the these faculty who were privy to this information are complicit? I don't know how else to read the situation... but if there is some truth to that, then shame on certain people in that department
UNC held an emergency faculty/grad student meeting after this to, essentially, all agree to never talk about it, so as to not tarnish everyone else's reputation.
..it's a horrible thing, but at 8:06 points out, many are complicit.
8:06 - i should add that it's likely that members of our discipline BEYOND that department knew about these incidents and decided to stay mum. surely the burden falls most heavily on the faculty in the offender's home department but if knowledge about his tendencies were more widespread, then the complicity is more endemic.
@8:01 sorry I wasn't specific enough. I was referring to Greek History/Archaeology (excluding philology) in response to the posts about Roman History positions.
What it is with this field and child pornography!?!
To be fair, I suspect that colleagues at UNC did not know about Daddy-Cruel-UNC's habits. This is the most private of crimes.
I suspect that Columbia's faculty did know about the VERY grad-student molester. This was an interactive crime, over decades. Everyone knew. Hell, I knew through the grapevine years before the NYT article. This is a black mark on the Columbia Department and Faculty.
UNC’s History Dept has a faculty member that twice, I repeat twice, has made very inappropriate advances towards two different female PhD students of his. How did the Dept respond? He’s not allowed to have female TAs in his classes and he’s no longer allowed to take on female PhD students. ...he teaches a 1:1 load and gets ca. $140,000/year. It’s insane.
More than one Daddy Cruel in the field? Make Classics Great Again! Wasn't there a well-known Classicist some years back who openly declared that he was a NAMBLA member?
4,546 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 2401 – 2600 of 4546 Newer› Newest»I'd guess that Stanford and Columbia were competing for the same person.
You'd guess wrongly: I have it on good authority that none of the finalists at Stanford were finalists at Columbia.
One of the finalists at Stanford was also a finalist at Bard... Maybe it's a West/East Coast problem.
Still wondering who got Bard...
"I believe that when one of these projects tried to get their hands on attrition data from departments, "privacy" suddenly became a huge concern. The "privacy" of students who had gotten TT jobs is apparently not an issue, since their identities are often listen on department websites, but even sharing the numbers of people who had started and finished grad programs was too sensitive to be shared."
This is such a cop-out. It's not as if the data sans any personal/identifying information couldn't be provided.
any news about the 1 and 2 year positions at ISAW? When do results come out?
Is this the year the secondary market collapses? It seems like there are way fewer jobs out there than at this point in previous years.
Who got the other Stanford job? The race/ethnicity post looks filled.
What about Columbia?
@11:41 am: that's kind of what I suspect, but maybe it's only me panicking. We will know in a couple of months, I guess...
The secondary market collapse is eating our lunch!
How about those two lecturer jobs at Tennessee? 4/4 loads for $36k a year.
How can anyone afford to stay in this field?
Well, it looks like Princeton provides us with our first ABD winner of the TT season!
Princeton ABD looks like she's worth her salt.
Agreed, even if there's no current CV to be had on the internet.
While I wonder about Columbia, Stanford, and PSU, I'm more curious about Toronto. Was this failed search for ancient science a do-over for their failed 2015-2016 philosophy search?
@ 4:49, seriously? Asshole
4:49 sounds like an Alt-Righter. How dare you, Sir (or Madame)? QVO VSQVE TANDEM....
Thanks, Servius, for removing @4:49pm. How inappropriate.
what was 4:49 all about? ad hominem attack?
servius here: the line we've articulated is more broad than ad hominem attacks: we remove posts that call for critique of the personal characteristics (perceived or otherwise) of *individual scholars* within the field. @ 9.32: Discussions about hiring in a "glutted market" are fair game, but not when they use an individual junior colleague as an exemplum.
Stay nice, people. We are all in the same position: wanting what is not possible right now. Let's not attack every TT taker. God forbid we attack ABDs. It isn't their fault for doing what their advisors say and throwing themselves on the market. If they are successful, let's imagine them as people who are lighting the way....seriously, advice from a three year VAPer, don't get bitter!!! It won't get you the job anyway.
I heard another Stanford offer is out...re: Latin poetry position...
Are ABDs supposed to not apply for jobs...?
According to PhD's @12:36AM, don't apply for anything because our feelings are too fragile. But in reality, yes, apply, gemstones, apply. What, are you supposed to just inevitably go into decline because the rest of us have? Seriously though, ABD's must apply for everything they can. And most of you aren't successful the first year on the market and are depressed, etc., anyway, so:
We are all the same after a year or two: tender and hopeless and hopeless. Must we have no joy in at least the meeting of our minds.
Does anyone know who got Columbia? Been waiting for weeks...
Does that mean Stanford is on their second or third offer? Do that many people really say no to a program like Stanford? Am I missing a better Latin job out there this year?
with cost of living in the area, it might make sense to stay put and negotiate a higher salary/take another TT job.
Not everyone wants to work at an R1. At least one of the candidates also interviewed at a SLAC.
so insane cost of living, california, and R1 could be trumped by reasonable cost of living, SLAC, and east coast. makes sense to me, but i am not an elitist anonymous member of the FV commentariat.
Well, none of their finalists are in TT positions (I applaud Stanford for this). Which means that several must have had other offers that seem better for all the reasons listed above. I’d expect Stanford to pick quality finalists and so is it surprising that other schools may have picked them too?
I've been wondering how new hires at Cal and Stanford are making it work, housing wise, particularly if they have a family. Do they live in the central valley or sacramento and commute in?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/business/economy/san-francisco-commute.html
"Xtreme commuting"
On the Stanford discussion: undoubtedly this is a fantastic department, and (despite the cost of living) California is a wonderful place to be. But isn't Stanford the kind of place like Yale or Harvard where tenure is usually not given to assistant profs? If I had multiple offers including one from Stanford, this would be a serious consideration. Who wants to go back on the job market in 5 years when things could possibly look even worse than they do now?
Stanford is on their second offer.
If grad students can afford to go to Stanford and Berkeley, new faculty can afford to live there, too. (Do you have any idea what an assistant professor at Stanford makes?)
9:22. Give me a break. Do you really think that living in the Stanford area on a 1st year faculty salary is equivalent to living in Amherst or Williamstown or Swarthmore or New Haven or Cambridge/Somerville on, say, Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, New Haven, Cambridge salaries?
Of course people can manage it. Is it competitive given CoL for those who have other good options? Financially probably not. If you want to be on the East Coast or get tenure or be at a SLAC, personally it's definitely not.
Stanford is a wonderful Junior College, I am assured. But people may decide to go elsewhere based on things like quality of life that may matter less to starry-eyed 21 year olds. At 18, I would have paid full fare for Harvard over a full ride at Oklahoma. Do I think that way now? No fucking way.
*Harvard
9:22 here. I don't think that and didn't say so, and I'm not sure why you're aggressively yelling at me. I was responding to the comment above, asking if new faculty at Stanford have to live in the Central Valley and commute in. My point is that junior faculty at Stanford are paid more than well enough to live in the Bay Area, not that it's the best place to live on a professor's salary or that there's no reason to turn them down.
9:39 here. Sorry! My own frustrations getting in the way of clarity and reading comp. You are 100% right and I was wrong to read more into your statements.
Now off to prep for my 3 classes tomorrow.
Cura ut valeas.
Ancient historian here. I have an upcoming interview for a generalist VAP position in a Classsics Dept.
Can anyone share the kinds of questions that might be asked of a VAP regarding philology ? The job will have the successful candidate teach Latin and Greek. hat I fear is that a douchy SC member might ask some highly specific question about some obscure bit of Greek grammar that .
Thanks in advance.
@11:37 they may ask you what textbooks/readers you would use for language courses and why
Method and approach to teaching in the languages at various levels. Do you prefer grammar or translation method/which textbook and why for intro? How do you teach an intermediate reading course which needs to review the reading (and what type of commentary would you use), what is your approach to an advanced language class in terms of what they read (primary and secondary material)?
I cannot imagine someone asking YOU a grammar question, but I can imagine someone saying for the sake of an example "how would you teach X topic in intro Latin to our students."
Love how the two ABD job winners this year got jobs at places with extensive connections/placement histories between their new employers and the schools that awarded them their Ph.Ds. And we wonder why the field is falling into complete disrepair. No swamps will ever be drained...just bigger fish ponds with more water.
It would be a jerk move to ask a question about a specific point of grammar, and not actually helpful for thinking about how you'd be as a teacher. Look up what textbooks they already use (I go to the registrar's website/course catalog and look up the classes, or go to the bookstore and look at the class listing, which often lists books). Chances are, you won't get any say in what textbook to use as a VAP, but you should know why their book is a serviceable one, and reviews are generally helpful for that. They may also ask what kinds of readings you'd assign in a higher level course (what Latin/Greek authors you'd love to teach and why). That should be based not just on your interests, but also be related to their departmental goals and needs. So, not just "Attic orators because I love them" but "Attic orators because they can tell us a lot about social history and things like gender, class, and slavery, which allows students to learn not just the language, but also the social and cultural context" or something like that (probably a bit more than just what I said there). GOOD LUCK!!!
Just looking at the department at Miami, as I prepare my application for their VAP. I notice that of their 7 faculty (incl. VAPs), 4 have PhDs from Harvard, 2 from Berkeley, and 1 from UNC.
^what's your point? none of this is surprising.
@12:41 That's excellent advice - thank you for sharing that.
Recent Late Antique PhD peoples -- keep on the look-out for a post-doc at FSU to be posted in coming weeks, to begin August 2018.. $50k annually for 2 years in a sunny town / great department. Please apply!
In case anyone is cusious, I just heard from an inside source at Conn College that the SC has not even begun to look through the applications for the 3-yr VAP.
This is discouraging, because it suggests that they will do a rash and hasty job when they finally do begin the process, which really needs to be completed in the next few weeks.
:/
^^curious
@2:46,
Funny how you describe Tallahassee has if it’s Hawaii, Miami, or Cabo. ...it’s called Talla-Nasty for a reason. ;)
Tallahassee is actually pretty good, and $50k will go a long way there (unless it's like that horrible 5/5 they had on offer)
I heard that there’s an awesome Sabre store in Tallahassee.
FSU has had a bunch of searches this year, nice to see a department that is actually expanding
I'm not sure if this will get deleted or not, but the T-T Princeton hire is a fucking ABD ?!?
holy shit. you think people were mad and screaming foul when an ABD got the Georgetown VAP... yikes
The Princeton hire goes to show that publications and teaching experience really don't matter as much as we all tend to think.
I'm preemptively saddened to think that some will argue that the hire being an Asian female would have had some role in the hiring. :(
@6:16,
I didn't even bother applying for the T-T job at Princeton, given that my advisor said that the job would go to an applicant with an amazing CV, full of publications, pending book deals, and with years-worth of teaching experience from various top schools as well as perhaps a post-doc or two from an ivy.
...Lesson to learn from this: apply everywhere.
^ don't fool yourself, you wouldn't have gotten the job even if you had applied (same goes for me)
What I can add to all of this is the following:
I was short-listed for a TT job this year and received a very nice and personalized rejection letter. I was told that, at the end of the day, the other candidate had more publications. I have 5, he has 8.
The school was a large R1, yet not as prestigious as Princeton, of course.
...No SC is the same. The Princeton SC this year really did't care about accomplishments that have been done, but seem to have had their focus on promise and pure hope. There's nothing wrong with that; it's just a different set of criteria than most of us would like to see.
I think that many people want to have a clear reason as to *why* someone else got the job. Counting accomplishments, publications, fellowships, grants, and scholarships is a way that we can easily quantify. No doubt, many are and will be very angered by the Princeton hire, since they're largely a blank slate. But, it might very well be a blank slate that Princeton wanted. And, again, there's nothing wrong with that.
There's no reason to be mad or cruel towards the ABD who got the job at Princeton. She applied like everyone else and beat the odds, which I have to assume must have been quite steep (200+ applicants I'd imagine), so congrats to her!
But, there is a valuable lesson here: there are no rules to any of this.
No rules, no jobs.
Think about the great ABD as the Obama candidate, and the experienced VAP as the Hillary candidate.
Well, since no one else has, I guess I'll be the one to point out that after all that b.s. by some of you about how the Case Western Reserve job was going to go to an inside candidate, it didn't. As all of you should remember, there was specific discussion of the person who was expected to get the job, in clear violation of FV's rules -- but that didn't stop some of you from behaving indecently towards a fellow junior scholar. Of course, the arrogant pricks (or prickettes) who wrote those posts will not feel any shame, nor will those people who predicted an inside hire learn from their mistake.
But for those of you with the ability to grow as human beings, learn from this: once again, people claimed that outsiders had no chance at a job, and it was one of us outsiders who got it.
Yeah, the Case Western hire is quite accomplished.
The FSU postdoc, while perhaps providing a decent wage and so on, isn't really a postdoc when it has a 2-2 teaching load. Why not call it a VAP and give the appointee the benefit of a more accurate title for the job market?
@10:29,
If you get the job and want to more accurately represent what you’re doing, just put “Visiting Assistant Professor” on your CV ?
Honest question. Is it really dishonest given that you’re doing a 2:2 and are expected to be deeply involved with Dept business and outreach to, for clarity’s sake of future SCs looking at your CV, say you’re a VAP ?
How else is a SC to know that you’ve had experience doing VAP-like tasks, given that PostDoc implies nose in a book and doing research and *maybe* teaching 1 class for one semester ?
If it’s too misleading to say “VAP” how about saying “PostDoc in xxxx” in one line and “Visiting Instructor of Classics” in another line ?
"The FSU postdoc, while perhaps providing a decent wage and so on, isn't really a postdoc when it has a 2-2 teaching load. Why not call it a VAP and give the appointee the benefit of a more accurate title for the job market?"
I had a three-year postdoc that was 2-2, but one class was the same every semester, and the other was anything I wanted to teach, provided that some minimum number of students would sign up for it. It was a great position. The title made no difference as far as I could tell. Besides, there is no VAP out there with a 2-2 load.
Don't misrepresent job titles on your CV. Ever. It is potential grounds for termination. You can clarify the nature of the position (courses taught, etc.) in your letter, if necessary.
Your CV should have bullet points explaining the primary roles of each position, so you could include the 2-2 there and it would be very clear.
Why, as per the FSU postdoc ad, does Latin Literature = Latin Verse? Doesn't Latin Literature = Latin Literature, i.e. prose and verse?
What's a prose person to do? Prose is underrated!
@ 11:06,
As a recurrent SC member, I have to interject on this. While some applicants do list job duties, it is strongly preferred that you do not. We all know what a TA does. Don't tell us. It strikes the committee as an applicant trying to 'fill up the page' with nonsense. If you feel that your particular institution has its TAs do some duty(ies) that are not common, mention that in your cover letter.
Additionally, it's even more eyebrow raising when a CV lists the job duties of a VAP or Postdoc. The expectation here is that a junior scholar would have reached a certain level of maturity and would be aware that anyone considering them for a job is more than aware of what "VAP" and "Postdoc" entails. Yes, some are more demanding than others, but don't think that whatever it is you may be doing there is anything worthy of extra notation on a CV.
Keep your CV clean, direct, and punchy.
@10:51,
My institution has changed my particular job title twice this year. It went from being "visiting instructor" to "visiting teaching assistant professor" to its final stage of "teaching assistant professor." Though, the University's HR page says that if you are a TAP and teach less than a 3:3 load, you should "place 'Visiting' at the beginning instead." ...This has led to a great deal of confusion, as that statement could mean call yourself a VTAP or a VAP.
...it's boggling how these titles all change and are, in many ways, incompatible between institutions.
@10:43: I am currently a VAP with a 2x2 load and I am also currently shortlisted for another VAP with a 2x2 load. These positions do exist!
"...it's boggling how these titles all change and are, in many ways, incompatible between institutions."
Indeed. Case in point: my graduate program used the title "Teaching Assistant" for both those who helped professors with grading, etc. (an actual TA, in my book) and those who taught full classes on their own. That's a huge difference, in my opinion, and the lack of distinction has frequently carried over into post-PhD job titles as well.
@3/22 10:10: I am the person who originally suggested the CWRU job would be an inside hire, and who originally made fun of that person (not by name, but obviously we all know how to work the internet). I just wanted to say how much I regret that in retrospect—it was a careless, thoughtless, and very inconsiderate thing to do. I have a small group of friendly fellow-sufferers who text each other through the job season, and we’d been using that appellation for this particular person as an inside joke. One of us had also been told (by a friend of a department member) not to apply to the job because it would go to the VAP. I thoughtlessly and unkindly repeated the nickname and the info here without thinking through the consequences, but recent discussions made me realize how messed up that was. If he’s reading, I’d like to extend an anonymous apology, and also my sympathies for not getting the job. I’ve been the VAP who wasn’t hired in the past, and it...just...sucks.
Always put your formal title on your CV, for reasons noted above. If you title is "Shiteating Lecturer" then put that. While terms like VAP, postdoc, adjunct are often used loosely and interchangeably, do not take the risk of getting fired for misrepresenting yourself on your CV.
@7:08, Someone not coming from another t-t position has 8 publications?! I'm going to give up now.
^ Yeah, but were they any good or in good journals tho?
Clearly it doesn't matter if they were any good when 7:08 lost out to the other candidate because they had 3 more publications.
I think I know that person. He is a workhorse.
@1:35,
OP with 5 (not 8) publications here. I highly doubt that Mr. T will stay where he got the TT job. He’ll be out in a year or two to a better place. Was he a finalist for Princeton do you know?
@1:35, I was a finalist too and never even received a rejection letter (which is frankly, pretty rude). When did you get yours?
1:35 here, I wasn't a finalist for that job. I don't know where else he interviewed, but I know he'd been on the market for years.
wow! Thanks 11:32.
Always nice to see what SC members think about common mistakes many of us make on our CVs. It all makes perfect sense when you say it as you do, but I am a bit afraid of how bare my CV will look when I take that out--which only justifies your point.
What about putting projects in progress on CV? So far I haven't done that, unless they were already submitted for a review, but I noticed people putting things they are just working on right now...
Real advice from SC members or senior faculty or junior faculty who have succeeded is always welcome. FV could actually be useful! We could even collect anonymous pieces of good advice into an 'anonymous job market guide.'
would you rather take a prestigious post doc with no teaching or a 2-2 vap (for similar pay?)
in the short term the first seems to me more appealing but i wonder if the second isn't at an advantage when it comes to next season on the market...
Just my opinion but I would take the VAP. Teaching experience matters too, and for me personally I find it more difficult to write when I just have unstructured free time. That's when I go down rabbit holes and spend 10 hours working on a single footnote. I do much better if I have some fixed amount of time in which I must accomplish X, Y, and Z. But different people have different work habits, and you know yourself best.
I would definitely take the prestigious post doc.
It also depends the timeframe. A 2-3 year position is always better than a one year. So a 2-3 VAP is better than a 1 year prestigious post-doc.
Prestige of the institution also matters. A high ranked VAP may set you up for success better than a low ranked postdoc.
As a person who got a job this year (and who is very very grateful), I have to say that I was one step away from having absolutely nothing. People weren't fighting over me. Early VAP season was not panning out as well. I honestly believe there is a little magic to the process, call it luck if you want. Departments are complicated places, and all of the final candidates where I got my TT job were excellent. Why did I get the job? I am sure it has less to do with my awesomeness than I think...
Keep the faith, everyone. You have my promise to pay it forward.
Did anyone else notice the insane hiring at the University of Kent ?
They hired someone for their T-T job who received their PhD from Kent and is a sitting VAP at Kent... That is the most egregious case of incest outside of what Chicago did about 8 years ago.
Yes, Kent should be ASHAMED.
What's going on with the FSU Roman Archaeology job?
"I am currently Adjunct Flounder of Classics at Bottomfeeder College, where the department has shown so much confidence as to entrust me with a 1-0 teaching load."
@ 9:20PM, I heard FSU have offered it to 2+ candidates and they've declined in favor of other offers ... perhaps this is related to the post from a few days pack of a postdoc in Late Antique archaeology - search about to be cancelled?
So... Hamilton hired their VAP?
It's been almost four weeks.
Why no announcement?
Doesn't UK employment law mean that a VAP has first right of refusal if a permanent post is offered in their area while they are temporary faculty? Kent seems right in line with that, regardless of it being their hire.
Hamilton hired their own VAP last time too (2015 search). I actually applaud this behavior--it is dulcet decorum to hire one's own VAP--but I wish they could just convert without doing a full search and wasting a bunch of time and money (including their own!).
Re. 12:40PM: UK law doesn't stipulate a VAP must be offered a position. The position was advertised and interviews were held. The UK system is far from perfect, but I suspect the person they hired might have numerous things in the works and will be useful for the next REF there. Sadly, that's the bottom line there and while jobs are permanent, the permanency doesn't equate to tenure in North America - whole departments are shut down and people lose their jobs if they are not performing.
The post @11:56 about the FSU archaeology job and postdoc is inaccurate.
Well, the magic UCLA job explains the Stanford Latin rejection.
Wait, where did that UCLA Latin job just come from? It was never advertised... as far as I know... what the...
^
The person in question has been at UCLA for this year, and is currently listed as "Adjunct Assistant Professor." So, the position must have been made permanent somehow? Something like this happened in the program where I got my degree; I don't know the situation at UCLA, but at my university it was a conjunction of chance and a great junior scholar coming together.
"Why can't they just promote visitors to the tenure track?"
"Wait, what do you mean they didn't advertise that job?"
@7:54: thank you. This community is so bitter that the various attacks often contradict one another.
What the hell UCLA? Nice job not advertising other TT position!
Yeah Latin rejection was because of UCLA job. The scoop is that 2nd candidate at Stanford will accept...
Okay wait, so three of the finalists at Stanford have been offered TT jobs at varying institutions that we know of? I guess they know how to pick them? Jesus H.
Yeah, Bard Guy, UCLA lady, and whoever of the last two finalists (Harvard and UCLA) accepts at Stanford. Re: Latin TT
UCLA is in play this year?....Didn't the guy get the TT at Illinois? Hearing the UCLA candidate got TT Latin Stanford....Not sure it is true yet...
Hell yeah, state schools! Go Washington, UCLA...God, aren't there others? Let's focus on all the obstacles those folks have had to overcome! Don't hate, people. Go State!
Stanford kind of got it right, looking at their "past visits". They seem to have been looking for promise, and other schools seem to have wanted their finalists as well.
public schools are eating our lunch!
Well, Bravo, the women always lose out.
Seriously, men have no idea what put up with.
Servius here: A reminder to please not post names here-- that's what the wiki is for.
Big ABD hire on the West Coast!
There's something I really don't understand. We all think that the years of contingent employment through adjuncting, VAPs, lectureships, etc. is wrong and needs to end.
So, why don't we celebrate every time an ABD gets a tenure track job?
It's understandable that people are bitter when that hasn't happened for them and they've spent years on the market. But we all want things to change so that this (ABDs > TT) is a reality for everyone. Why not celebrate it when it happens? Is it just because it didn't happen for YOU?
Couple of issues here.
The market sucks. We think ideal would be an ABD -> PHD system. But once the ideal is so clearly not the case, issues of fairness arise. It would be great if all could feast, but if that is no longer happening and there are bread lines, why should some get to jump ahead in the line? It is perfectly consistent to believe:
(a) Rationing and bread-lines suck.
and
(b) Given that we get our food through rationing and bread-lines, the authorities should not allow people to jump ahead in the line or avoid the line entirely.
*ABD -> TT
"You hate rationing so much, so why are you mad when special people get to avoid it entirely? It would be best if everyone could avoid it entirely, so it is better that at least a few do now than that no one does."
I am happy for ABDs or ANYONE who gets a TT. Everyone, in an ideal world, with a Classics PhD should have permanent employment.
But just because you've been on the market for years (however much I sympathize with you) does not entitle you to a TT before a promising ABD "just because." They were a better fit than you for whatever reason --personal or professional--reasons that will probably remain unknown to you. But neither the successful candidate nor the SC is obliged to justify their decision to you. Nor should they compromise the department's primary wants and needs to be "fair" to you.
This one thousand times.
@ 12:19 PM: The academic job market is nothing like a bread line (indeed, no job market is, at least not one I can think of). Are you really advocating for a system whereby we all get in line and are assigned jobs in the order in which we graduated? Like a conveyor belt in a factory, regardless of the specifics of your qualifications or particulars of your training? That's not how the world works. This isn’t even unique to academia. I think everyone who reads this site is sympathetic to the struggles of those on the market, but I agree with the people saying that we should be celebrating when things work out this way. If you found out that you were 200th in line, so you'd have to wait until 200 TT jobs were created before you could even be considered for permanent employment, would you think that was fair? What if a job for which you were a perfect fit came up? Should the "authorities” (??) allow you to “jump ahead in line,” or must the SC hire the candidate who is a perfectly fine person and scholar (maybe!) but not who they want just because he or she has clocked a few extra months on the market? Do those extra months correlate directly to the suitability of their research interests relative to what the department is looking for? Does the fact that they have taught four courses more mean that they are a better teacher? It seems that situation-specific circumstances would start to factor in, right? Kind of how it's working now. I hope you can see that such a rigid hiring model is neither practical nor desirable.
FSU seems to use postdocs to replace TT people who are on longer leaves or teaching reduced loads. Their current Greek archaeology postdoc is teaching in place of a tenured faculty member who has taken up a temporary (?) position at the American School. I don't know anything about the Roman archaeology search, but my guess is that the late antiquity postdoc is probably replacing the current late antiquity postdoc that took the TT job at Georgia.
@2:36 I think that is correct. The postdoc that came up seems like part of a regular cycle and not at all related to the TT Roman Archaeology search.
The FSU late antique postdoc exists because there is enough interest among faculty / enrolling students to maintain the position. It is not related to the Roman archaeology TT search.
On the bread line: I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, no obviously there is no “line” and ABD’s who get TT positions haven’t jumped “ahead.” But on the other hand I think it’s fair to point out that it may be a mistake to hire an untested person, and that VAP-ing does give real, valuable experience that is not to be discounted.
Example: I have a friend who won a TT position as an ABD a few years ago. We’re not in the same field, and I was very happy for this guy without feeling that he “beat” me. But a few years down the line I can’t help but notice that he has no articles in peer reviewed journals (just one invited chapter) while I’ve been publishing regularly AND teaching a 4x4 load. I think it’s fair to be frustrated by such anecdotes. I’m still happy for my friend and I hope he’s got a lot in the pipeline so the bill won’t come due when he goes up for tenure in a few years, but I also feel for the other candidates for his position, all of whom were PhD in hand and who must have been pretty pissed to see an ABD walk away with that job.
@1:58pm, just to throw another angle at you, jumping into the conversation midway through: "What if a job for which you were a perfect fit came up" and you applied and didn't even make the long short list, and then they ended up hiring an ABD special unicorn with fewer publications (in reputable journals, not edited collections), less teaching experience (in both languages and in other general and specific areas actually mentioned in the job ad) got the job instead of you? Yeah, you'd have a right to be annoyed and confused and bitter at the whole impersonal system. And yes, maybe the SC should be forced to at the very least read your application.
@12:45pm "They were a better fit than you for whatever reason --personal or professional--reasons that will probably remain unknown to you. But neither the successful candidate nor the SC is obliged to justify their decision to you. Nor should they compromise the department's primary wants and needs to be "fair" to you."
This is a nice "justification" after the fact, but it remains confusing and problematic for all sorts of reasons, and people who haven't been on the market for a few years have no way of really understanding or even anticipating the sort of nonsense that goes on. In some known and documented cases, personal connections and some undefined promise have landed ABD people TT jobs when the market was (and is) thoroughly saturated with PhDs with impressive publications, teaching evidence, and administrative chops. So, yes, we're irrationally expecting that there should be some way to predict how the market will work. How stupid of us, looking to find order in the chaos.
Over a few years on the market it has become increasingly apparent to me that 1) there are no rules, whether official or unspoken (as already discussed quite a lot above); and that 2) holding multiple VAPs is a sign of weakness and inadequacy to many, many of the institutions that think they're prestigious. So those institutions have established a pattern of hiring Shiny New ABD straight out of Fancy Pants Programme (then often not granting that person tenure) and of hiring Reputable Associate Professor out of Top 50 Liberal Arts College through open rank searches, whether open or unadvertised. I have learned that one should not take anything personally that isn't delivered personally by a person, because most of this is just a big impersonal Machine that does all of its "calculations" internally, using formulas that only It knows. Statistically speaking, Fancy Pants Programme ABDs do bat well above their weight, but anyone in any situation can get a job seemingly at random (probably not at a Prestigious Place, but it has happened). If it helps you to vent on here about the Nature of the Thing, I say go for it. And for some of you, yes, it is ok if one person complains about x and another complains that we don't do x often enough. Different people are allowed different perspectives, even wrong ones, no matter how much we wish we could control everyone's everything. Even the entitled people who come on here and insult people who seem to lack the perspective of an entitled person are entitled to their perspective. And I agree, nobody's entitled to a TT or even VAP job, not even Shiny New ABD Person. But we are all (according to the SCS and AIA Placement terms) entitled to an open and fair search process, or maybe I just wish that in my own entitled way. So this seems like a really good place to come and vent about that, or discuss it, or just write things. Where else are people supposed to go? Some reddit subforum?
It sucks out there, people. Congratulations to those who've landed jobs, commiserations to those who haven't, and good luck to our field as it continues to struggle to survive.
@ 3:32. 12:45 here. You're overreading. See my comment in the context of the post to which I was replying (12:19 PM). We weren't talking about unfair searches.
Yes, obviously everyone is entitled to their own perspective but that doesn't mean that perspective is sensible. (construing academic jobs as "bread-lines" obviously is not sensible).
The secular theodicy is wonderful!
Some thoughts as the season starts to come to a close.
1) I think there’s a tendency on this board to underestimate the extent to which search committees are better informed than we are, especially about ABDs. This year I’ve seen a certain amount of mis-information here about the basic facts of CVs I happen to know something about, but that’s not really even the main issue. A dissertation is, as everyone here surely knows, a big deal. There’s a lot of information to be had there, and the general public doesn’t have it, but the SC does. Of course, it won’t tell you everything (see point 2 below). Is this really the advisor’s work? How will this person do without the resources of the kind of program that grants PhDs? But it will tell you a lot, especially when it can serve as a basis for oral discussion.
2) I’m pretty sure no one really believes that jobs should be handed out on the basis of seniority and waiting one’s “turn.” But I suspect many here really do think that they should be (and maybe even that they notionally are) awarded on the basis of achievement. I think this view is fundamentally mistaken. It is essentially retrospective. Hiring is essentially forward-looking. The weightier a candidate’s record, the more *confident* you can be in an assessment, but it doesn’t necessarily improve the candidate’s ranking as such. Think of how basketball players are drafted on talent vs. achievement.
3) That forward-looking orientation can have bad side effects, which have long been correctly identified here. Such evaluation is necessarily subjective, and so potentially vulnerable in a number of ways. It is easier to slip in implicit or even explicit bias along conventional lines of discrimination (gender, race, class). It can also simply be wrong, though the institutional incentive is very much to get it right the first time rather than just trying again six years later. But those problems need to addressed symptomatically. Attempts to create an algorithm that adds up achievement points are like the old joke about looking for lost keys under the lamp post (not where they were dropped “because the light is better.”
4) One more specific point, based on experience with quite a number of searches both as an SC member and as a recommender and conversations with others similarly situated. Connections matter. Connections can get a basically competent candidate a convention interview. Once it a blue moon, connections might get a really solid candidate a campus interview. But no one in modern times has actually gotten at TT job on the strength of connections.
"But no one in modern times has actually gotten at TT job on the strength of connections."
All articulate and elegant prose aside, there is plenty wrong in the comments here. You made be an experience SC member, but you are also an experienced SC member that is part of a failed system trying to rationalize its existence and missteps. Perhaps your hiring process was not corrupt. Perhaps you hired the best candidates. But the system as a whole's track record suggests a very different story.
And I can assure you that there is at least one candidate this year for whom the above quote does not apply, and who got a top TT job based largely on the above (when combined with one additional factor that cannot be spoken about here on the censored world of FV). Perhaps even two. One is welcome to live like an ostrich with one's head in the sand. One is welcome to drink the cool aid, so to speak. But the facts point strongly in the other direction.
LOL FV-ers are mainlining Koolaid.
The real is rational and the rational is real!
"when combined with one additional factor that cannot be spoken about here on the censored world of FV"
If you have a problem with non-white women in positions of power just say so.
@9:55pm
Infowars much?
I believe the above comment was simply meant to highlight that connections and other factors matter, and we're foolish to pretend otherwise.
Can you imagine an uncensored FV? It would be in equal parts disturbing and informative....
9:55, one of the few undeniably valuable aspects of FV is that sometimes more senior people who actually know what they are talking about -- unlike us job-seekers -- come here and share their views. When people like you give jerky responses it makes it less likely that they will want to bother doing so. Everything you wrote could have been phrased better (not to mention with better English grammar!), making the same points.
And as for the subject of your second paragraph, I applied for that job and didn't even get a conference interview, but it looks like a good hire to me.
I must be out of the loop. What position does he allude to in the second paragraph?
It could be any of several.
If someone answers that question then Servius will have to delete it, since WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSING JUNIOR COLLEAGUES HERE. So don't answer it.
another ABD offered a TT - congratulation!
I love the conceit of 'junior colleagues.' 'Junior' is a correlative (I believe it is actually a comparative adjective -the Latin philologists will have to chime in with their expertise in morphology) - a senior person could refer to 'my junior colleague(s).' Most of us FV deplorables are not TT, so an ABD who is hired as a TT becomes - upon the hiring - ABOVE us in status. So I agree not attacking ANYONE by name is a fair rule, but let's stop pretending this a matter of 'kicking down' or doing anything but griping about some of the most privileged among us, who also happen to be young and not to have the job stability of someone like Peter Brown (whose demise, and the demise of whose pet field of post-Silver Age Latin, some of us anxiously await).
@9:37 You're wrong. Since (to judge from tone and content) most posters on this forum have graduated, whether or not they are now in visiting or adjunct positions, then an ABD candidate is their junior. Even if an ABD gets a TT position, that person won't become "above" us until the position begins -- July 1 at the earliest, for the most part.
So yeah, it is still kicking down.
@9.37, the term "Junior" in this context is also not purely correlative- it is an accepted term in academia for early-career scholars...
So what big schools are we still wondering about?
ISAW
Chicago
USC
The idea that in any power dynamic or privilege sense a TT hire at a fancy place is not above most of us is incredible.
I'm the one who used the term "junior colleague." I am a lecturer on a one-year contract, as I was last year. I did not use the term relative to myself, or to the majority of us on this forum, but simply in reference of the fact that our field is made up of colleagues, and some are junior and some are senior.
The argument that the moment an ABD accepts a tenure-track job he/she is no longer junior is absurd, if for no other reason than that the contract will not begin earlier than July 1. Personally, I consider anyone who is not yet tenured to be junior, so 9:37 is being even more absurdly pedantic.
Okay, enough: I've already spilled far more digital ink than anyone wishing for the demise of Peter Brown or his field is worth.
Someone should create an uncensored FV
We could all use it and tell Servius to go fuck himself
Aw, it really is like Lord of the Flies in here!
12:20, so you are saying that you want a forum in which we can discuss anyone in the field by name, while ourselves behaving like cowards and hiding behind the internet's anonymity?!? Somehow, I don't think you -- or anyone else here -- has the guts to go after people under your own names.
An uncensored FV would be pretty rough, but it would at least allow for honest discussion about the field. We might even find out what people really think of all the Orwellian statements put out by the SCS.
Going back to the original discussion, I think the frustration is less about who is "junior" or not, but rather who is inside or outside the field or not. Truth be told, a VAP or adjunct, even if they have publications and teaching experience, is simply not in the field, at least by the perverse standards of the field. That's the frustration of treading water on the margins, and watching ABDs vault past you, becoming full fledged members when you are on the verge of drowning.
This certainly is not the fault of any ABD who gets a really good job and takes it. I went on the market as an ABD (first of many), and I would have taken a position if it had been offered to me.
Going back to the bread lines problem, it might be worth noting the solution the physical sciences have taken. Everyone, no matter how brilliant, is expected to do at least one year as a post-doc (most do 3-4, but even wunderkinder have to do at least one postdoc). Now, there is a downside to this, as the physical sciences exploit their post docs for cheap labor, but at least there is an expectation in the glut of science PhDs that everyone spend at least one year outside their graduate program, building up a real record of accomplishment in the realm of teaching and publication . A similar field wide expectation might benefit the classics and humanities as well.
@ 12:20PM: The "Classics Cheers and Jeers" forum exists for people who want to post without censorship - I can only see one post to it from years ago (there is a link on Classics Wiki page). 12:52PM makes a fair and pertinent point: if an uncensored forum is used posters should not hide behind anonymity if they go naming and/or degrading others.
And for what it's worth in nearly every industry the people who get jobs get them with the help and support of their connections as well as their own talent; to some degree, academia isn't that different, save for there are less jobs and it sucks a hundred times more when someone younger and seemingly less-qualified gets ahead of you.
Waitwait... STANFORD hired ABD?
Three of the five finalists at Stanford, counting both jobs, were ABD.
Three of six*
The character's name is "Seven of Nine."
...I'll show myself out.
Looking to next year: Anyone know already what big jobs will be in the offing?
I heard UMass has a retirement coming up next year, someone who works on Latin prose, but I don't know if they'll be hiring to replace. I assume Toronto and Brown will re-run their cancelled searches?
So far it looks like all of the ABDs getting jobs come from top-10 schools. Is it ever the case that ABD's from state schools land TT jobs? Also, congrats to them all!
Rumor has it Stanford hired two ABDs.
wow! any details as to the latin verse hire?
I know an ABD who almost got a TT job this year but was passed over for a Brahmin.
So on ABDs.
Re ABDs The current trend is only top-tier schools (R1s or posh LACs) hire them. This year: Stanford, UCLA, Bard, Princeton; Vanderbilt; last year Michigan, etc.
The basic reason is these schools can take a risk if the promise of the ABD does not pan out. They can fire them without losing the tenure line. This does not mean that they want to fire the ABD, simply that it is a non catastrophe if matters come to that. At most schools, however, it IS a catastrophe if the ABD under-performs (leading to the loss of the line), which is why most places prefer people who are a few years out, who have articles, a book manuscript ready for review (or under contract) and years of teaching experience.
And ABDs only come from top schools. Quite simply, an ABD with few publications and little teaching can't get a job without a lot of hype (n.b., the hype need not be wrong), and to get the hype you need very powerful and influential cheerleaders, hence the hires come from Harvard, Berkeley, Princeton, etc. etc.
Anyone got the deetz on who got the McMaster job???
To comment on what *may be* in the works for next year:
...It might sound a bit silly, but take a look at where current Asst. Profs have left for greener pastures--though it's no guarantee that they will put out for a T-T job the very next year.
...Though I'm at Duke, I know that UNC will be looking for a new Roman historian soon, given that Richard J.A. Talbert is towards the end of his phased retirement. He was hired as an endowed chair and distinguished professor (ca. 1990), but his particular chair is not confined to the History Dept and is university wide, so it's rather unlikely that the chair will remain in History.
From what I've been told by sitting faculty at UNC, they will make hiring a Roman Historian a top priority. But, they are rather doubtful that they will do a senior hire (they've had a lot of direct distinguished prof hires in the last 5-6 years) but will take on an Assistant Prof. I can 100% guarantee you that what will win over the SC for that job aside from the typical stuff, is someone who is VERY, VERY capable of running the Ancient program there. There are two ancient historians at UNC, one Greek one Roman. To not speak ill of anyone, let me just say that 99.9% of the work falls on Talbert and the Department there does not allow the Greek historian to take on PhD students anymore, at least until he has one that he's taken on get their degree (he's had 5-6 grad students that have all quit while ABD...1 remains in the pipeline).
...SO, Talbert carries the ancient program completely and it hangs on by a thread at the fear of him leaving. So... if anyone here gets an interview for that job in the next year or so, make sure that you are capable of taking the reins and leading the program and be especially be sure to emphasize your drive, motivation, and plan for growing the success of the ancient cohort.
UCLA hired an ABD?
I wonder what Thucydides would say about putting one's hope on promises that might not pan out (especially at a time when the humanities are not at their strongest in the face of tough opposition). Oh, that's right...
ΑΘ.
ἐλπὶς δὲ κινδύνῳ παραμύθιον οὖσα τοὺς μὲν ἀπὸ περιουσίας χρωμένους αὐτῇ, κἂν βλάψῃ, οὐ καθεῖλεν: τοῖς δ᾽ ἐς ἅπαν τὸ ὑπάρχον ἀναρριπτοῦσι（δάπανος γὰρ φύσει）ἅμα τε γιγνώσκεται σφαλέντων καὶ ἐν ὅτῳ ἔτι φυλάξεταί τις αὐτὴν γνωρισθεῖσαν οὐκ ἐλλείπει. ὃ ὑμεῖς ἀσθενεῖς τε καὶ ἐπὶ ῥοπῆς μιᾶς ὄντες μὴ βούλεσθε παθεῖν μηδὲ ὁμοιωθῆναι τοῖς πολλοῖς, οἷς παρὸν ἀνθρωπείως ἔτι σῴζεσθαι, ἐπειδὰν πιεζομένους αὐτοὺς ἐπιλίπωσιν αἱ φανεραὶ ἐλπίδες, ἐπὶ τὰς ἀφανεῖς καθίστανται μαντικήν τε καὶ χρησμοὺς καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα μετ᾽ ἐλπίδων λυμαίνεται.
So it appears based on the above rumors that the market will continue to lean to the Roman side of things? Unfortunate for those of us on the Greek side who have had several meager years in a row now.
Word is that Columbia will be hiring at the junior level for a Roman historian.... for obvious reasons.
LOL perhaps a Cincinnati grad?
Some jokes were not meant to be made. Give the people at those institutions a break.
Am I missing something ? Why is it obvious that Columbia will be hiring a Roman historian ?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/nyregion/columbia-professor-sexual-harassment.html
Maybe because of this?
@ 7:34pm: google the phrase "columbia historian sexual harassment". Should be the first result.
"Unfortunate for those of us on the Greek side who have had several meager years in a row now."
2015/2016 and 2016/2017 had an unprecedented number of Greek jobs, whereas there were basically no Latin lit jobs at all. Check the stats!
Well, this happened at UNC:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/education/article139177388.html
Re: Columbia: So basically the entire faculty KNEW about rumors / incidents and kept quiet for all those years? Would it be an overstatement to say that many of the these faculty who were privy to this information are complicit? I don't know how else to read the situation... but if there is some truth to that, then shame on certain people in that department
UNC held an emergency faculty/grad student meeting after this to, essentially, all agree to never talk about it, so as to not tarnish everyone else's reputation.
..it's a horrible thing, but at 8:06 points out, many are complicit.
8:06 - i should add that it's likely that members of our discipline BEYOND that department knew about these incidents and decided to stay mum. surely the burden falls most heavily on the faculty in the offender's home department but if knowledge about his tendencies were more widespread, then the complicity is more endemic.
@8:01 sorry I wasn't specific enough. I was referring to Greek History/Archaeology (excluding philology) in response to the posts about Roman History positions.
What it is with this field and child pornography!?!
To be fair, I suspect that colleagues at UNC did not know about Daddy-Cruel-UNC's habits. This is the most private of crimes.
I suspect that Columbia's faculty did know about the VERY grad-student molester. This was an interactive crime, over decades. Everyone knew. Hell, I knew through the grapevine years before the NYT article. This is a black mark on the Columbia Department and Faculty.
UNC’s History Dept has a faculty member that twice, I repeat twice, has made very inappropriate advances towards two different female PhD students of his. How did the Dept respond? He’s not allowed to have female TAs in his classes and he’s no longer allowed to take on female PhD students. ...he teaches a 1:1 load and gets ca. $140,000/year. It’s insane.
I bet he no longer has the privilege of serving of DGS, either.
The person Columbia extended an offer to is not ABD.
Also, for whatever little it is worth, Columbia abuser was in History not Classics (though that matters little in grad affairs).
More than one Daddy Cruel in the field? Make Classics Great Again! Wasn't there a well-known Classicist some years back who openly declared that he was a NAMBLA member?
Also, anybody remember Andrew R. Dyck? Another one who like 'em very young.
MCGA!
Post a Comment