As long as there are no names mentioned, I don't see any problem. One could argue that's it's a small world, but isn't your line as arbitrary as the opposing view?
This site is about transparency while remaining within the boundaries of personal decency. Knowing how the market works and how departments operate is a learning experience for all. It can only force the the process to become more civilized, IMHO, especially on the SC end.
The person first offered the position has turned it down and accepted another offer.
Forgive me for musing at the keyboard here.
I have to wonder what the point of this was. Was it the person who has been offered both the Penn job and presumably Mystery Greek History Job X? Was it the Penn SC wanting to let everybody know that their pool rocked so hard that they'd be happy to keep going down the list? Was it some random third party privy to this knowledge?
I mean, I do think Anon 11:40 is right. This is all educational, but I suppose at some level I am curious about how the information provider thought this was appropriate or useful. Am I missing something here?
I don't expect an answer, though of course getting one would be cool.
I'm not the OP, but to me, it's 911, simple as that. If I had applied for the job, which I didn't, I would want to know the latest, whether it's been offered and accepted or whatever. The thing is, we don't know what will happen next. Perhaps Penn will can the search. Maybe they will bring in a couple more candidates from the mythical waitlist. If posting such information devoid of names causes SCs or candidates to throw a little hissy-fit, let them. As people have mentioned numerous times, the top 5 if not the top 10 candidates in any search would probably fill the position superbly; there's that little in long-term performance actually separating the top.
I agree with anon 12:04. Departments are creatures of habit. Searches are usually run by precedent and past behavior is the best predictor for future behavior. IF I ever applied to a particular department, Penn in this case, I wil have a better idea of what to expect once I'm in the middle of the process. Knowledge is power and I also agree with the poster who commented on the civilizing nature of this knowledge.
This really isn't the big deal some of you think it is. It is unimaginable that a candidate would be upset for the world to know that he/she was Penn's #2 choice.
Think of it this way -- did Joe DiMaggio mind that he wasn't Marilyn Monroe's first husband?
Or for SCs out there, did the Yankees suffer for long when their starting 1st baseman who twice led the league in homeruns was replaced by the unproven Lou Gehrig?
I got the job (or maybe that was just a Mayweather left hook?). Thanks for your support - the small things mean a lot. Whatever your situation, I hope some of my luck rubs off.
"...the poster is commenting on the usefulness of this information connoted by the 411 reference - that it's not just idle chatter."
Yes, this is actually tremendously useful to the #2 candidate, who is put in a stronger position by it. They can negotiate more forcefully for a slight raise in pay, travel funds, etc. Searches cost serious bucks and time, so the last thing a school wants to do is lose a candidate they want. Having lost one already, they are going to be even more jittery about losing the second.
So, Number Two, you can use this info to your advantage, just be smart about it!
Per Poldy's suggestion, I just put on my big-kid undies. I do have another can of worms - style question, however, just because I have nothing better to do than speculate while waiting for SOMEONE to offer me a job (I might be waiting until next year, at this point): how often do inside candidates in searches get the job, and does the APA have anything to say about this? Probably best not to name any names/schools in answering this. I'm just curious about the statistics on this issue.
Hmm, of my 2 fly-outs this year, one already went to the inside candidate. Still waiting to hear from the other, but it had an inside candidate as well. Feeling really screwed right about now.
I got a rejection email from Toronto yesterday (very late). It implied that a job had been offered, but not that it had been accepted. So that may be the source of the wiki comment (I didn't make it).
It's frustrating when a job goes to the inside candidate, especially when the search committee has made it seem like they're running an honest search. I won't mention specific school's names, but see elsewhere on this blog for some possibilities. (None of which, I should add, were interested in me.)
I have to confess that my partner is now an inside candidate in a tenure-track job search (in another completely unrelated discipline that involves machines). This gives me a different perspective on the matter. The school s/he is at knows my partner's personality, teaching strengths, research potential, etc., they like what they see, and to hire anyone else is for them at this point is a major gamble. A bird in the hand, you know?
So while it may suck to lose out to that inside candidate, realize that the school probably has a very good reason (or a list of them) to retain the person they already employ and not to risk hiring a wildcard like you (or me). We all know how often new hires (like spring-breakers) go bad.
The rub will be if my partner gets the job and the school offers me nothing.
"I won't mention specific school's names, but see elsewhere on this blog for some possibilities."
Ah, you must be a Greek archaeologist. Not to startup up a mud-sling again, but I heard the same thing about the position in question. If I understood correctly, the chosen one was the first choice for a couple other positions so this should start a chain reaction as mentioned before. The interesting thing is that this person did not even sniff a TT position for over 10 years. It's amazing what one break can do for one's career...
I'm not a Greek archaeologist and I have no idea what poor bloke you're talking about.
But you're correct that there is a cascade effect to one major school deciding to interview or hire you. It assures others of your worth (or successful presentation of such).
The assumption seems to be: if inside candidate gets the job, the search was not honest (however honest it seemed to be) and the candidate is undeserving.
This is illogical. No school would put themselves through the hell of a job search - who _does_ want to spend all day at the APA in a hotel interviewing folks, or entertain 2-5 candidates (whose visits are not inexpensive or un-time-consuming), or spend hours in SC and faculty meetings? - if they didn't have to.
Sometimes (I also have heard 50%, and it bears out my anecdotal experience), the INTERNAL candidate (I stress the difference from "inside") gets the job. If it's in their field, why the heck shouldn't they apply? And why the heck shouldn't they be a viable candidate? And why the heck shouldn't they get the job if the faculty considers them the best choice? Just because they're already there? Gimme a break.
So you didn't get the job. It sucks. It doesn't mean the search was fixed. It means someone else was hired. It's happened to everyone on this blog. I hate rejection as much as anyone else here, but assuming that if an internal candidate gets the job, it means that a) the search was fixed, and b) the candidate is undeserving, is bollocks.
For those guessing the rationale for the comment about Penn. It was made in response to the previous discussion:
---------------- anonymous said... I think both the Penn history job and the post-doc have been offered. One has certainly been accepted.
February 14, 2008 3:13 PM
anonymous said...
RE: Penn
Just to be clear. Are you saying that the Penn Ancient History job has been accepted? If you are the one, congratulations, and if not, best of luck yourself!
Thanks for any info you can give!
February 14, 2008 3:21 PM ------------
Previous posters have explained why in some circumstances information about the status of searches can be useful for resolving the hold-ups caused by people with other offers. It was primarily intended for the benefit of the other candidates, so that nobody makes hasty commitments before a search is finalized.
If one finds it inappropriate for a second candidate to know that an offer was given to someone else, then the complaints should be lodged with those who post that an offer has been made (unless they are also reporting that it has been accepted). In this case, it was already public knowledge.
Wow, talk about going to town on a straw man. No one ever said that all internal candidates who get said jobs are undeserving. But if 50% of all hires (which you admit is consistent with your own anecodotal evidence) are really internal candidates, what, pray tell, do you think is the statistical likelihood that all, or even most, of said jobs have really gone to the most deserving candidates? And what percentage of internal hires need to be rigged/inside jobs before we are allowed to express dismay? I suspect that you and I both have been involved in questionable searches. I've seen better candidates get torpedoed so an internal candidate could make a short-list and I've even seen short-lists populated with unappointable candidates just to make the inside candidate easier to swallow. And I have not seen but have strong reason to believe second-hand reports of underhanded dealings of all kinds, such as SC members agreeing to support an inside candidate in exchange for similar favors in the future. I'll see your bollocks and raise you a 'get real.'
Previous posters have explained why in some circumstances information about the status of searches can be useful for resolving the hold-ups caused by people with other offers. It was primarily intended for the benefit of the other candidates, so that nobody makes hasty commitments before a search is finalized.
If one finds it inappropriate for a second candidate to know that an offer was given to someone else, then the complaints should be lodged with those who post that an offer has been made (unless they are also reporting that it has been accepted). In this case, it was already public knowledge.
I'm assuming that the one writing the above was offered the Penn job. Regardless, however, I think this was an admirable move, and seems to have been made for altruistic reasons. I'm not on the Penn short-list, but had I been I would have been very thankful for this sort of anonymous communication. Thanks for making your intentions clear. It is all appreciated!
What about those instances when the inside candidate is told straight out BEFORE the search that he/she will be getting the job, and that the search is just in order to avoid APA wrist-slapping? I have heard at least two such stories from the past two years. Granted this is gossip, but then this blog is titled "Famae Volent"!
The very correct distinction between internal and inside candidates has been raised. I think we should all observe it and be more careful with our language from this point on. Anecdotal evidence does seem to bear out that internal candidates get the job 50% of the time; I guess we must assume that inside candidates get the job 100% of the time.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
Inside candidates are another matter. Only they and the members of the department know what arrangements were made in advance.
It is the latter group, and especially the programs that hire them, that is drawing the fire on this blog. It has happened at least once this year that I am aware of.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
I think this is an important point. Many VAPs will turn into t-t positions, and the VAP is hired in the same specialty the t-t person will be. The person hired as VAP may well have been hired with the thought in mind that they would also be a good candidate for the t-t job. So their VAP-ship is in some sense a semester-long job interview before other candidates are brought in around APA time. And they can blow that, or they can do really well. Either way, they're under a ton of pressure, and they actually have it pretty hard: they need to prove themselves quickly in an unfamiliar environment, they're under the microscope, and they have to deal with the humiliation of rejection if it occurs. These are internal candidates; they deserve our sympathy, because, really, they're fellow-sufferers with additional problems to deal with.
I think part of what set CGP off was that several previous posters had clearly assumed that because they didn't get the job and an internal candidate did, that candidate was "inside," yet they offered no valid proof for this. Their formula appeared to be: job offer + internal candidate = inside candidate/fixed search. Yeah, fixed searches happen (at least one last year, at a VERY prominent school), but we can't always tell that. The best thing to do is move on.
What? Do you really think this sort of thing is secret? I've never met any of the Penn finalists, and don't think I know anyone who knows them, but the second I saw that a certain other job had been accepted I knew what was going on. And I doubt I'm the only one...
Okay, giving yes/no information about offers and acceptances is one thing. Public speculation about reasons behind decisions or debate about whether these major life decisions are sensible or not -- these things are verging on rude. Let's not go there.
"Okay, giving yes/no information about offers and acceptances is one thing. Public speculation about reasons behind decisions or debate about whether these major life decisions are sensible or not -- these things are verging on rude. Let's not go there."
Since we cannot name names here, but now that everybody is beside themselves with curiosity, maybe the poster can leave us hints. An easter egg hunt for Classicists!
Make an acrostic using phrases from Rhodes' commentary on the Ath Pol, or a magic square that can only be deciphered using the dossier of inscriptions from Aphrodisias.
Be creative! We obviously have nothing better to do with our time.
"The second I saw that a certain other job had been accepted I knew what was going on."
Boy, you all really are clueless. That other job, the one the Penn job was turned down for, is not even listed on the Wiki yet.
I never said I read anything on the wiki. The information is provided on this very blog. Unless the person who turned down the Penn job got a third offer that I didn't hear about. But that wouldn't make me clueless, only not fully clued in. And if I'm right, I'm not the clueless one.
At some point, people will start posting their names when they got jobs, or others will post the information after a suitable period of time has gone by, and we'll know who's the fool.
Seriously, have you people no shame? Can we please go back to the regularly scheduled program -- reporting interviews, reporting offers, reporting acceptances? I know that it is exciting for a bunch of cloistered, bored classicists to gossip anonymously, but please think how you would feel if your decisions were publicly scrutinized. I think most of us are decent people. Gossip discretely with your close friends, not here. I don't care if this is a gossip site or not -- there is a limit. As other hires are announced, there is going to be more speculation about inside hires, which graduate programs scored big this year, who made poor choices, etc. Can we just report facts here and then go back to our respective departments and discuss the gory details with our friends? T-A-C-K-Y. And up to this point I had been so proud to be a classicist. Go check out the snark on the wikis/blogs for other fields. We are doing so much better, and we should work together to keep it that way, if only to remind ourselves that as humanities fields go, we are pretty damn awesome.
"I never said I read anything on the wiki. The information is provided on this very blog. Unless the person who turned down the Penn job got a third offer that I didn't hear about. But that wouldn't make me clueless, only not fully clued in. And if I'm right, I'm not the clueless one."
No, that information is not provided anywhere on this very blog, and yes you are clueless.
Seriously, have you people no shame? Can we please go back to the regularly scheduled program -- reporting interviews, reporting offers, reporting acceptances? I know that it is exciting for a bunch of cloistered, bored classicists to gossip anonymously, but please think how you would feel if your decisions were publicly scrutinized. I think most of us are decent people. Gossip discretely with your close friends, not here. I don't care if this is a gossip site or not -- there is a limit. As other hires are announced, there is going to be more speculation about inside hires, which graduate programs scored big this year, who made poor choices, etc. Can we just report facts here and then go back to our respective departments and discuss the gory details with our friends? T-A-C-K-Y. And up to this point I had been so proud to be a classicist. Go check out the snark on the wikis/blogs for other fields. We are doing so much better, and we should work together to keep it that way, if only to remind ourselves that as humanities fields go, we are pretty damn awesome.
February 22, 2008 1:36 PM
Worth restating.
Seriously, if I ran this site, I'd shut it down until the jerks and gossips cut it out. You guys are like third graders. Yes, god I remember that like it was yesterday. Or maybe seventh grade is better -- during my seventh grade year, the class was at each other's throats with the gossip, the put-downs, the accusations, the judgments. It was so bad that classes were canceled for two weeks, and we all had to watch John Hughes movies and then talk about our feelings. Then we went bowling as a bonding activity. The fights in the bowling alley bathroom were appalling. I feel like I'm in that bathroom right now.
I agree. As one of the people who has posted something in the Penn-related discussion (though I am far from the worst violator) I'm hereby vowing not to write any post that has relevance to the job search of a specific individual, even if the relevance is tangential. Nor will I respond to such a post. This discussion started innocently enough, but has gone on for too long, and achieves no purpose.
This has nothing to do with a thick skin -- it just has to do with civility and decency. Obviously you're one of those every-man-for-himself, grow some chest hair, I'm the best and I know it, pretentious, rude jerks that frequent some departments. You have no morals, no ethics, you take what you can get, and you give back nothing. The rest of us hate you. You should know that. What's worse -- you probably don't even care that the rest of us hate you -- you think we're just jealous or moronic or something like that. Actually we're good people, and you're not, and you will be loathed for the rest of your life -- again, not that you care. But don't insult us by saying that those of us who are suggesting kind, decent behavior are thin-skinned. There's a difference. You can be good without being weak. Have fun voting for your neo-con heroes.
For the record, I voted for George Bush twice, and even though I'm not one myself I think that your comment about neo-cons makes you look like a narrow-minded jackass. But I think we're off-topic now.
(Hey, I vowed not to post anymore about job searches that are linked to a specific individual. I never promised to not to comment on anonymous individuals whose posts were unworthy of someone with a Ph.D.)
The wiki says that the Tulane greek history job has been offered. Does anybody know if it has been accepted already?
Does anybody have anything informative and useful to say about Pomona's greek history job? Will it run next year, and will it continue to be a joint appt. in history and classics?
Does anyone have any information about ISAW's plans? Are they already hiring? Are they still interviewing? Are they indeed looking at junior people at this stage, or just senior types?
Does anyone have any information about ISAW's plans? Are they already hiring? Are they still interviewing? Are they indeed looking at junior people at this stage, or just senior types?
Not true. NYU has some awesome housing stock for faculty, which makes it relatively affordable. Of course, this is assuming that ISAW fellows have access to NYU faculty housing.
I know. A friend of mine teaches in the NYU law school and lives in one of their buildings. I've seen her apartment, and it was one that would make 99% of New Yorkers salivate.
I heard something like third-hand that the Arizona archaeology position was offered. Is this true? If so, it's too bad as I enjoyed my visit to Tucson.
I wouldn't give up yet on Arizona -- people turn down even the best offers for all sorts of reasons. Unless you've heard that it has been offered and accepted.
Anon 7:58, it ain't over til it's over. Arizona is a nice school, but going down the wiki list, I can see at least several "better" positions and several more on the same level. What does this mean? Whoever was offered the position will probably get one, if not more, better/comparable offers. I can tell you as the SC chair for an archaeology position that there are not that many hot candidates out there. Let the chips fall where they may and you may be in the running yet once the smoke clears.
I absolutely concur with my previous colleague. When I was on the market for the first time 15 years ago, I had exactly two campus interviews - a VAP and an open rank Ivy. The two superstars for the latter dropped out and I was the lucky one standing. You never know.
Though it might sound hollow at this point, you should be thrilled about making the campus cut. As mentioned, finding an explicit archaeology position is a tremendous task based sheerly on the number of positions, let alone what goes on behind the scenes. A former student did not make the campus cut for the very same position and he is exceptional by all measures. I was quite surprised, but not totally based on the complexity of the entire process. Good luck.
What I hate: when it takes an institution more than a month to process reimbursement claims (especially when it includes airfare). It's like they stop caring after they've made their decision.
Sometimes the state schools have to abide by a schedule set by the controller, and can cut checks only once a month, which means up to 7 weeks of wait-time. Not that it makes it suck less to be on the hook for that money.
Hint to SCs: Use the institutional/departmental credit card or travel service for big expenses.
Can anybody confirm that the position has been offered and has been accepted?
I wasn't a finalist, but I have been offered another position, so I want to make sure that they are not going to go further down their list before I move on and accept this other offer.
I know it is extremely unlikely that this might happen, but I'd like to make sure.
No, in this case it's a private institution. I think this reimbursement issue is something the APA may want to look into. With more than one or two campus visits, one quickly end up spending a lot of one's own money, especially when coast-to-coast flights are involved. It is quite enough that the job search strains one's nerves; it shouldn't also strain one's bank account.
So is it cool to update the wiki, or to post news here, if you aren't the one involved? For example, I know somebody who had a campus visit at school X. That information is not reflected on either wiki. Can I just add a line that says "at least one campus visit made", to get a bit more information out there? Or, if I know that an offer has been made somewhere, should I post that on the wiki, or here? Obviously I have no vested interest other than hopefully helping other unknown people who might be sitting on pins and needles (like I am now!).
I say the more information on the wiki list the better. I have posted information about jobs that I have no stake in when I am certain of the veracity of my source.
Buffalo told my friend early March or so they would decide right after the last visit. And they invited 4, after interviewing 15 in Chicago, so my guess is they won't go down the list further. The wait is crazy-making, though.
I'm waiting for news of my own, too. Sympathies to all of you in the same boat.
You know, the crazy thing is the there are already deadlines for second-wave jobs. Northwestern last week, Franklin and Marshall this Saturday, others next week and the week after. So people who will end up with jobs from the APA are still being forced to apply to some of these new jobs. I know this will never happen, but perhaps the APA can enforce a no-deadlines-before-March-15 policy in the future.
Wouldn't an "all decisions should be made by 1 March for those interviewing at APA" deadline be better? :) I'm just saying. I have to give it to Dayton -- they established deadlines for themselves, and they stuck to them. Their candidates knew exactly what was going on.
Thank you SO much for the info regarding Buffalo. It is much better for me to be able to simply move on and focus my energies elsewhere.
I really wish SCs - and this is not a comment directed at the folks at Buffalo, whom I though were great in my interview in Chicago, but rather at the whole process - could post or send stuff like this to all applicants. Even if they admit that they "could" go further down the list, at least we would know exactly where we stand. In my case it helps tremendously, both psychologically and logistically.
Maybe the APA could set up some sort of bulletin board where this info would be available to candidates, and posted only by institutions.
I interviewed at a SLAC at the APA, after which I heard nothing directly from them. After they hired someone they managed to notify 1) the remaining members of the shortlist and 2) all the people who applied for the job but didn't get any kind of interview. But they clearly omitted to notify those who interviewed at the APA alone. Bizarre. Explanation anyone?
Two Possible Expanations: 1) part-time department secretary [=19 year old doing his ten weekly work-study hours] screwed up; 2) department chair learned to use a computer in 2006, when the SLAC in question told him it would no longer allow him to submit his grades and other official business on typed index cards [he managed to make it online in 2007, should have a rudimentary grasp of university webmail applications by 2011]] and he screwed up.
"When you have just been told that the girl you love is definitely betrothed to another, you begin to understand what anarchists feel when the bomb goes off too soon."
And what Classicists feel when the wiki tells them that their hopes are dashed.
Not if you got the same rejection email I did (the last week of January), which to me implies that there's a shortlist and that's it. See an earlier entry in this blog, which says they've been inviting people to campus. Don't know more than that.
The very correct distinction between internal and inside candidates has been raised. I think we should all observe it and be more careful with our language from this point on. Anecdotal evidence does seem to bear out that internal candidates get the job 50% of the time; I guess we must assume that inside candidates get the job 100% of the time.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
Inside candidates are another matter. Only they and the members of the department know what arrangements were made in advance.
It is the latter group, and especially the programs that hire them, that is drawing the fire on this blog. It has happened at least once this year that I am aware of.
I am considering accepting a temporary position that I have been told might become a TT position. Can anybody who has been in this position talk about their own experience? Is it advisable? If I decide to take this position, should I ask the department before applying to the TT job? Is it true that my time there will be one long interview?
In the end, am I better off going somewhere else where I would be a straight-up sabbatical replacement and not have to worry? I will want to get letters from my colleagues in any case, but I don't want thing to be awkward. I don't have another offer in hand, but am feeling good about my chances.
So, does it just completely suck to be the internal candidate who is not the inside candidate?
Think about this objectively: you are letting the potential for awkwardness make you question whether to accept a job that could become tenure-track, and the only thing arguing for that is your self-assessment that you have a good shot at another job down the road. Having been around for a while, I can tell you that unless the job itself is one that is not worth having for some reason (e.g., terribly stupid students who will drain your will to live, wretched library, exposed asbestos in the building, weekly departmental games of Russian Roulette, you would be a unjustified not to accept this job.
Forgot to write: if they really do have a tenure-track job, they will still be willing to write letters for you (assuming that you've earned good reviews, I guess). But you really can't think of this is a future tenure-track job: think of it as a one-year, and if it becomes tenure-track that's all the better.
It is a one-year, possible two, but presumably non-renewable, as I was told they expect the TT slot to be advertised next year, budget willing.
Yes, I know it is a possible TT, but that is all, possible. It isn't a bad place by any stretch, but the question is whether the TT possibility outweighs the benefits of other VAP positions. I have some time to decide, during which I expect to hear news from other institutions, and thus be able to make a more informed decision.
But yes, I don't think I'd turn it down out of fear of awkwardness.
I was once faced with deciding between two VAP's, one which was supposed to become tenure track. I ending up choosing the terminal one year. The next year when the tt job at the other institution did appear I almost didn't apply because I was sure they wouldn't give me another chance. But I did apply -- and surprisingly did get the job. Not sure how that will help your decision, though it does show how many options there are for the way things may turn out.
Last year I had to decide between 5 VAPs, 4 of which were likely to become t-t. The school I chose (on the principle that if the jobs offered then were t-t that was the school I would have chosen), of course, did not get the position because of budget constraints, but I applied to the others and got at least APA interviews for all.
So I think it doesn't hurt not to take it, but I would, if I were you, unless you can't see yourself there for any length of time. They will indeed still write letters for you if you do well.
Servius, Could we have a new thread devoted solely to jobs with post-APA deadlines? With multiple deadline coming up, there will soon be the need (urge?) to discuss these.
For a thread title I would suggest "The Long, Twilight Struggle" (taken from the title of a "Babylon-5" episode: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long,_Twilight_Struggle).
Servius, Could we have a new thread devoted solely to jobs with post-APA deadlines? With multiple deadline coming up, there will soon be the need (urge?) to discuss these.
Apologies for barging in on this thread, but I'm not sure where to ask this.
Does the APA maintain any sort of placement record for PhD programs? I have found some information on a few departmental websites, but I don't know how accurate it is, and some departments don't have any info at all. Is this something the APA tracks? Any advice on how to go about finding this out?
Another question about negotiation: so I've looked at the Chronicle AAUP salary averages, now what does that mean? Since it's an average I assume I should expect to get less as a starting salary, right? And is it an average for sciences as well as humanities, in which case I can expect to get still less, right? Help. Sorry if these questions are stupid. Thanks.
I am pretty sure the AAUP averages include all sorts so you should expect to be below the average. For example, I think the average starting salary for an Asst. Professor of Business is around 120k/year, Chemistry 95k/year, etc. so we humanities people can expect, much, much less.
Are you negotiating with the Dean or the dept. chair? If the dean, talk to your chair about this. They should be your advocate, and know that everybody has a vested interest in your getting as much as possible. Also, remember that stuff like travel budgets, research money, moving costs, etc. are much easier to bump up that starting salary. So if the salary is locked, try and negotiate as fat a research budget as possible.
State schools should have absolute transparency regarding salaries, so you can find out exactly what other humanities professors who started last year make, to the penny. This might help. Private schools don't publish this info.
Not knowing where you are I have no idea what you should expect, but if you give general hints perhaps I (or others) can help. Location and institution-type are big factors, obviously.
AAUP data includes all salaries except for medical faculty, so if the average salary is in the mid-sixties and you are being offered somewhere in the fifties, given law/business/engineering salaries, you are not being lowballed. In addition, many schools have already fixed the salaries in their budgets and can't do anything about it (this is why you should pass your third-year review and try to get some outside offers, so you can negotiate). Ask for more in moving, if you are coming from far away, and ask for more research -- sometimes the Dean's Office will give you a little extra, but the department can promise some extra departmental resources, plus get you a course reduction for a term from the Dean.
With the course reductions -- feel out the department vibe first. If it is a small department where everyone, junior and senior, pitches in and teaches about the same amount, then you need to ask for the course reduction in the spirit of 'As the new guy, it would be great to have a little space my first year to kick off my research program,' not, 'My research is so important, that I shouldn't have to teach so much.'
What is the etiquette for a finalist for a position contacting an SC chair and asking about the status of their search? (I have no reason to think they've made a decision yet, but I'm fairly sure the last candidate has been, last week.)
Hey, if you're a medieval Latinist you tend to know a lot of other un(der)employed medieval Latinists, and worrying on their behalf is more fun than, you know, working, so you surf, and you lurk, and eventually you comment.
Thanks for the compliment. As I scramble to finish my dissertation I'm saddened to see that that post may have been my best writing in...ooh...350 pages.
I presume that at least a number of folks reading this are planning on going to CAMWS. Does anyone have familiarity with Tucson who could perhaps offer some restaurant recommendations as was done for Chicago?
753 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 601 – 753 of 753Hell, I even know some very embarrassing sexual stories about people I barely know or have never even met...
Is this the one about the well-known archaeologist "negotiating" with the deans?
As long as there are no names mentioned, I don't see any problem. One could argue that's it's a small world, but isn't your line as arbitrary as the opposing view?
This site is about transparency while remaining within the boundaries of personal decency. Knowing how the market works and how departments operate is a learning experience for all. It can only force the the process to become more civilized, IMHO, especially on the SC end.
RE: Penn (Open Rank Ancient History)
The person first offered the position has turned it down and accepted another offer.
Forgive me for musing at the keyboard here.
I have to wonder what the point of this was. Was it the person who has been offered both the Penn job and presumably Mystery Greek History Job X? Was it the Penn SC wanting to let everybody know that their pool rocked so hard that they'd be happy to keep going down the list? Was it some random third party privy to this knowledge?
I mean, I do think Anon 11:40 is right. This is all educational, but I suppose at some level I am curious about how the information provider thought this was appropriate or useful. Am I missing something here?
I don't expect an answer, though of course getting one would be cool.
I'm not the OP, but to me, it's 911, simple as that. If I had applied for the job, which I didn't, I would want to know the latest, whether it's been offered and accepted or whatever. The thing is, we don't know what will happen next. Perhaps Penn will can the search. Maybe they will bring in a couple more candidates from the mythical waitlist. If posting such information devoid of names causes SCs or candidates to throw a little hissy-fit, let them. As people have mentioned numerous times, the top 5 if not the top 10 candidates in any search would probably fill the position superbly; there's that little in long-term performance actually separating the top.
I meant 411, yikes, it's been a long week. But perhaps 911 wouldn't be a bad call...
Ummm... culturally clueless here.
What does "911" mean?
heh.
Or "411", for that matter.
Not the previous poster, but 411 and 911 are universal telephone dialing codes in the US. 411 gets you information while 911 is used for emergencies.
Ah, so it was just "FYI"?
I think "911" is what we are all dialing right about now.
I agree with anon 12:04. Departments are creatures of habit. Searches are usually run by precedent and past behavior is the best predictor for future behavior. IF I ever applied to a particular department, Penn in this case, I wil have a better idea of what to expect once I'm in the middle of the process. Knowledge is power and I also agree with the poster who commented on the civilizing nature of this knowledge.
"Ah, so it was just "FYI"?"
The presume the poster is commenting on the usefulness of this information connoted by the 411 reference - that it's not just idle chatter.
I presume. Sheesh, I think we all need to head to bed or have a stiff drink...or both.
This really isn't the big deal some of you think it is. It is unimaginable that a candidate would be upset for the world to know that he/she was Penn's #2 choice.
Think of it this way -- did Joe DiMaggio mind that he wasn't Marilyn Monroe's first husband?
This one case may not be that big of a deal, but it does set a precedent, so I think the discussion is worth having.
Or for SCs out there, did the Yankees suffer for long when their starting 1st baseman who twice led the league in homeruns was replaced by the unproven Lou Gehrig?
Hey search committees!
Call me!
1-800-CALLNO2
Dear Cheerleader / Interlocutor / Anonymous January 28, 2008 8:16 PM,
I got the job (or maybe that was just a Mayweather left hook?). Thanks for your support - the small things mean a lot. Whatever your situation, I hope some of my luck rubs off.
r
-------
r:
Best of luck and just remember:
You're not human. You're like a piece of iron.
"...the poster is commenting on the usefulness of this information connoted by the 411 reference - that it's not just idle chatter."
Yes, this is actually tremendously useful to the #2 candidate, who is put in a stronger position by it. They can negotiate more forcefully for a slight raise in pay, travel funds, etc. Searches cost serious bucks and time, so the last thing a school wants to do is lose a candidate they want. Having lost one already, they are going to be even more jittery about losing the second.
So, Number Two, you can use this info to your advantage, just be smart about it!
(1) I am persuaded by the posts of Feb. 20th 11:02pm and 11:40pm.
(2) This information is now public on the wiki in any case.
(3) There is precedent.
Bucknell (T-T Generalist):
Job was offered and has been (regretfully!) turned down at least once.
first is the worst, second is the best...
Although I tend to agree with those who advocate openness about when offers are made, I do not think that the other view absolutely without merit.
"It is unimaginable that a candidate would be upset" - Anon.
It is imaginable and in fact happens. This is why I mentioned "ego" and ignorance about potential colleagues frank discussions.
Nevertheless, it would be nice if we - candidates and committees alike - put on our big-kid undies on and behave like the adults we pretend to be.
toodle-pip,
Poldy
Per Poldy's suggestion, I just put on my big-kid undies. I do have another can of worms - style question, however, just because I have nothing better to do than speculate while waiting for SOMEONE to offer me a job (I might be waiting until next year, at this point): how often do inside candidates in searches get the job, and does the APA have anything to say about this? Probably best not to name any names/schools in answering this. I'm just curious about the statistics on this issue.
On internal candidates:
I have heard that the percentage was as low as 50% but I can't say where I heard that or if it's true.
as low as 50%
That is a substantial percentage, and if true suggests that "inside" candidates have a big advantage.
Anybody else see the latest update on the wiki for the Toronto History position:
Job offered and possibly accepted
Huh? WTF?
Hmm, of my 2 fly-outs this year, one already went to the inside candidate. Still waiting to hear from the other, but it had an inside candidate as well. Feeling really screwed right about now.
I got a rejection email from Toronto yesterday (very late). It implied that a job had been offered, but not that it had been accepted. So that may be the source of the wiki comment (I didn't make it).
It's frustrating when a job goes to the inside candidate, especially when the search committee has made it seem like they're running an honest search. I won't mention specific school's names, but see elsewhere on this blog for some possibilities. (None of which, I should add, were interested in me.)
I have to confess that my partner is now an inside candidate in a tenure-track job search (in another completely unrelated discipline that involves machines). This gives me a different perspective on the matter. The school s/he is at knows my partner's personality, teaching strengths, research potential, etc., they like what they see, and to hire anyone else is for them at this point is a major gamble. A bird in the hand, you know?
So while it may suck to lose out to that inside candidate, realize that the school probably has a very good reason (or a list of them) to retain the person they already employ and not to risk hiring a wildcard like you (or me). We all know how often new hires (like spring-breakers) go bad.
The rub will be if my partner gets the job and the school offers me nothing.
"I won't mention specific school's names, but see elsewhere on this blog for some possibilities."
Ah, you must be a Greek archaeologist. Not to startup up a mud-sling again, but I heard the same thing about the position in question. If I understood correctly, the chosen one was the first choice for a couple other positions so this should start a chain reaction as mentioned before. The interesting thing is that this person did not even sniff a TT position for over 10 years. It's amazing what one break can do for one's career...
I'm not a Greek archaeologist and I have no idea what poor bloke you're talking about.
But you're correct that there is a cascade effect to one major school deciding to interview or hire you. It assures others of your worth (or successful presentation of such).
The assumption seems to be: if inside candidate gets the job, the search was not honest (however honest it seemed to be) and the candidate is undeserving.
This is illogical. No school would put themselves through the hell of a job search - who _does_ want to spend all day at the APA in a hotel interviewing folks, or entertain 2-5 candidates (whose visits are not inexpensive or un-time-consuming), or spend hours in SC and faculty meetings? - if they didn't have to.
Sometimes (I also have heard 50%, and it bears out my anecdotal experience), the INTERNAL candidate (I stress the difference from "inside") gets the job. If it's in their field, why the heck shouldn't they apply? And why the heck shouldn't they be a viable candidate? And why the heck shouldn't they get the job if the faculty considers them the best choice? Just because they're already there? Gimme a break.
So you didn't get the job. It sucks. It doesn't mean the search was fixed. It means someone else was hired. It's happened to everyone on this blog. I hate rejection as much as anyone else here, but assuming that if an internal candidate gets the job, it means that a) the search was fixed, and b) the candidate is undeserving, is bollocks.
I third Poldy: grown-up undies, everyone.
For those guessing the rationale for the comment about Penn. It was made in response to the previous discussion:
----------------
anonymous said...
I think both the Penn history job and the post-doc have been offered. One has certainly been accepted.
February 14, 2008 3:13 PM
anonymous said...
RE: Penn
Just to be clear. Are you saying that the Penn Ancient History job has been accepted? If you are the one, congratulations, and if not, best of luck yourself!
Thanks for any info you can give!
February 14, 2008 3:21 PM
------------
Previous posters have explained why in some circumstances information about the status of searches can be useful for resolving the hold-ups caused by people with other offers. It was primarily intended for the benefit of the other candidates, so that nobody makes hasty commitments before a search is finalized.
If one finds it inappropriate for a second candidate to know that an offer was given to someone else, then the complaints should be lodged with those who post that an offer has been made (unless they are also reporting that it has been accepted). In this case, it was already public knowledge.
Wow, talk about going to town on a straw man. No one ever said that all internal candidates who get said jobs are undeserving. But if 50% of all hires (which you admit is consistent with your own anecodotal evidence) are really internal candidates, what, pray tell, do you think is the statistical likelihood that all, or even most, of said jobs have really gone to the most deserving candidates? And what percentage of internal hires need to be rigged/inside jobs before we are allowed to express dismay? I suspect that you and I both have been involved in questionable searches. I've seen better candidates get torpedoed so an internal candidate could make a short-list and I've even seen short-lists populated with unappointable candidates just to make the inside candidate easier to swallow. And I have not seen but have strong reason to believe second-hand reports of underhanded dealings of all kinds, such as SC members agreeing to support an inside candidate in exchange for similar favors in the future. I'll see your bollocks and raise you a 'get real.'
Previous posters have explained why in some circumstances information about the status of searches can be useful for resolving the hold-ups caused by people with other offers. It was primarily intended for the benefit of the other candidates, so that nobody makes hasty commitments before a search is finalized.
If one finds it inappropriate for a second candidate to know that an offer was given to someone else, then the complaints should be lodged with those who post that an offer has been made (unless they are also reporting that it has been accepted). In this case, it was already public knowledge.
I'm assuming that the one writing the above was offered the Penn job. Regardless, however, I think this was an admirable move, and seems to have been made for altruistic reasons. I'm not on the Penn short-list, but had I been I would have been very thankful for this sort of anonymous communication. Thanks for making your intentions clear. It is all appreciated!
To respond to Channeling Grumpy Prof:
What about those instances when the inside candidate is told straight out BEFORE the search that he/she will be getting the job, and that the search is just in order to avoid APA wrist-slapping? I have heard at least two such stories from the past two years. Granted this is gossip, but then this blog is titled "Famae Volent"!
The very correct distinction between internal and inside candidates has been raised. I think we should all observe it and be more careful with our language from this point on. Anecdotal evidence does seem to bear out that internal candidates get the job 50% of the time; I guess we must assume that inside candidates get the job 100% of the time.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
Inside candidates are another matter. Only they and the members of the department know what arrangements were made in advance.
It is the latter group, and especially the programs that hire them, that is drawing the fire on this blog. It has happened at least once this year that I am aware of.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
I think this is an important point. Many VAPs will turn into t-t positions, and the VAP is hired in the same specialty the t-t person will be. The person hired as VAP may well have been hired with the thought in mind that they would also be a good candidate for the t-t job. So their VAP-ship is in some sense a semester-long job interview before other candidates are brought in around APA time. And they can blow that, or they can do really well. Either way, they're under a ton of pressure, and they actually have it pretty hard: they need to prove themselves quickly in an unfamiliar environment, they're under the microscope, and they have to deal with the humiliation of rejection if it occurs. These are internal candidates; they deserve our sympathy, because, really, they're fellow-sufferers with additional problems to deal with.
I think part of what set CGP off was that several previous posters had clearly assumed that because they didn't get the job and an internal candidate did, that candidate was "inside," yet they offered no valid proof for this. Their formula appeared to be: job offer + internal candidate = inside candidate/fixed search. Yeah, fixed searches happen (at least one last year, at a VERY prominent school), but we can't always tell that. The best thing to do is move on.
Does anyone understand the posting about the Dartmouth 2-year VAP?
"Rejection letter 2.21.07"
Now I guess "07" is a mistake for "08". But that info has been up on the wiki list since last weekend - so can the poster read the future?
I wonder if I applied to that job...
What? Do you really think this sort of thing is secret? I've never met any of the Penn finalists, and don't think I know anyone who knows them, but the second I saw that a certain other job had been accepted I knew what was going on. And I doubt I'm the only one...
Ooooohhhhhh! I just figured it out!
Eeeenteresting. Veerrry Veeerry Eeeenteresting.....
Yeah, perhaps it's a geographic thing and he's native to the region or subsequently fell in love with it? I personally don't get it.
Okay, giving yes/no information about offers and acceptances is one thing. Public speculation about reasons behind decisions or debate about whether these major life decisions are sensible or not -- these things are verging on rude. Let's not go there.
"Okay, giving yes/no information about offers and acceptances is one thing. Public speculation about reasons behind decisions or debate about whether these major life decisions are sensible or not -- these things are verging on rude. Let's not go there."
STRONGLY SECONDED!
"The second I saw that a certain other job had been accepted I knew what was going on."
Boy, you all really are clueless. That other job, the one the Penn job was turned down for, is not even listed on the Wiki yet.
How to make a Clueless Cake:
Take any number of academic neurotics, fold in random bits of non-verifiable information, bake at high heat for approximately six months.
Voila!
Since we cannot name names here, but now that everybody is beside themselves with curiosity, maybe the poster can leave us hints. An easter egg hunt for Classicists!
Make an acrostic using phrases from Rhodes' commentary on the Ath Pol, or a magic square that can only be deciphered using the dossier of inscriptions from Aphrodisias.
Be creative! We obviously have nothing better to do with our time.
"The second I saw that a certain other job had been accepted I knew what was going on."
Boy, you all really are clueless. That other job, the one the Penn job was turned down for, is not even listed on the Wiki yet.
I never said I read anything on the wiki. The information is provided on this very blog. Unless the person who turned down the Penn job got a third offer that I didn't hear about. But that wouldn't make me clueless, only not fully clued in. And if I'm right, I'm not the clueless one.
At some point, people will start posting their names when they got jobs, or others will post the information after a suitable period of time has gone by, and we'll know who's the fool.
Seriously, have you people no shame? Can we please go back to the regularly scheduled program -- reporting interviews, reporting offers, reporting acceptances? I know that it is exciting for a bunch of cloistered, bored classicists to gossip anonymously, but please think how you would feel if your decisions were publicly scrutinized. I think most of us are decent people. Gossip discretely with your close friends, not here. I don't care if this is a gossip site or not -- there is a limit. As other hires are announced, there is going to be more speculation about inside hires, which graduate programs scored big this year, who made poor choices, etc. Can we just report facts here and then go back to our respective departments and discuss the gory details with our friends? T-A-C-K-Y. And up to this point I had been so proud to be a classicist. Go check out the snark on the wikis/blogs for other fields. We are doing so much better, and we should work together to keep it that way, if only to remind ourselves that as humanities fields go, we are pretty damn awesome.
"I never said I read anything on the wiki. The information is provided on this very blog. Unless the person who turned down the Penn job got a third offer that I didn't hear about. But that wouldn't make me clueless, only not fully clued in. And if I'm right, I'm not the clueless one."
No, that information is not provided anywhere on this very blog, and yes you are clueless.
Well, it was a good, educated guess, and was the best conclusion based on available data. At least I'm not a jerk about these things.
Seriously, have you people no shame? Can we please go back to the regularly scheduled program -- reporting interviews, reporting offers, reporting acceptances? I know that it is exciting for a bunch of cloistered, bored classicists to gossip anonymously, but please think how you would feel if your decisions were publicly scrutinized. I think most of us are decent people. Gossip discretely with your close friends, not here. I don't care if this is a gossip site or not -- there is a limit. As other hires are announced, there is going to be more speculation about inside hires, which graduate programs scored big this year, who made poor choices, etc. Can we just report facts here and then go back to our respective departments and discuss the gory details with our friends? T-A-C-K-Y. And up to this point I had been so proud to be a classicist. Go check out the snark on the wikis/blogs for other fields. We are doing so much better, and we should work together to keep it that way, if only to remind ourselves that as humanities fields go, we are pretty damn awesome.
February 22, 2008 1:36 PM
Worth restating.
Seriously, if I ran this site, I'd shut it down until the jerks and gossips cut it out. You guys are like third graders. Yes, god I remember that like it was yesterday. Or maybe seventh grade is better -- during my seventh grade year, the class was at each other's throats with the gossip, the put-downs, the accusations, the judgments. It was so bad that classes were canceled for two weeks, and we all had to watch John Hughes movies and then talk about our feelings. Then we went bowling as a bonding activity. The fights in the bowling alley bathroom were appalling. I feel like I'm in that bathroom right now.
I agree. As one of the people who has posted something in the Penn-related discussion (though I am far from the worst violator) I'm hereby vowing not to write any post that has relevance to the job search of a specific individual, even if the relevance is tangential. Nor will I respond to such a post. This discussion started innocently enough, but has gone on for too long, and achieves no purpose.
Thank you, Anonymous 3:37!
Get a thicker skin people. If this is even close to the worst you experience in academia, I would count yourself lucky.
This has nothing to do with a thick skin -- it just has to do with civility and decency. Obviously you're one of those every-man-for-himself, grow some chest hair, I'm the best and I know it, pretentious, rude jerks that frequent some departments. You have no morals, no ethics, you take what you can get, and you give back nothing. The rest of us hate you. You should know that. What's worse -- you probably don't even care that the rest of us hate you -- you think we're just jealous or moronic or something like that. Actually we're good people, and you're not, and you will be loathed for the rest of your life -- again, not that you care. But don't insult us by saying that those of us who are suggesting kind, decent behavior are thin-skinned. There's a difference. You can be good without being weak. Have fun voting for your neo-con heroes.
For the record, I voted for George Bush twice, and even though I'm not one myself I think that your comment about neo-cons makes you look like a narrow-minded jackass. But I think we're off-topic now.
(Hey, I vowed not to post anymore about job searches that are linked to a specific individual. I never promised to not to comment on anonymous individuals whose posts were unworthy of someone with a Ph.D.)
People, please don't feed the damn trolls.
This should be all about flying the FRIENDLY skies, not the thuggish, in your face, thoughtless ones where the passengers need thicker skins.
Remember everybody, big-kid undies.
Elmo said: "Remember everybody, big-kid undies."
Then why do they make diapers in grown-up sizes?
two questions:
The wiki says that the Tulane greek history job has been offered. Does anybody know if it has been accepted already?
Does anybody have anything informative and useful to say about Pomona's greek history job? Will it run next year, and will it continue to be a joint appt. in history and classics?
Does anyone have any information about ISAW's plans? Are they already hiring? Are they still interviewing? Are they indeed looking at junior people at this stage, or just senior types?
Does anyone have any information about ISAW's plans? Are they already hiring? Are they still interviewing? Are they indeed looking at junior people at this stage, or just senior types?
Ahhhh, the $64,000 Question!
You can barely live in New York on that.
Not true. NYU has some awesome housing stock for faculty, which makes it relatively affordable. Of course, this is assuming that ISAW fellows have access to NYU faculty housing.
I know. A friend of mine teaches in the NYU law school and lives in one of their buildings. I've seen her apartment, and it was one that would make 99% of New Yorkers salivate.
I heard something like third-hand that the Arizona archaeology position was offered. Is this true? If so, it's too bad as I enjoyed my visit to Tucson.
I wouldn't give up yet on Arizona -- people turn down even the best offers for all sorts of reasons. Unless you've heard that it has been offered and accepted.
Oh -- I got to make comment number 666! How disturbing.
Dear Anon 8:08,
I Love You!
???
666 = The Devil Hand = "I love you" in American Sign Language.
FWIW....
Hey! I was close! I thought it was a Braille joke.
Anon 7:58, it ain't over til it's over. Arizona is a nice school, but going down the wiki list, I can see at least several "better" positions and several more on the same level. What does this mean? Whoever was offered the position will probably get one, if not more, better/comparable offers. I can tell you as the SC chair for an archaeology position that there are not that many hot candidates out there. Let the chips fall where they may and you may be in the running yet once the smoke clears.
I absolutely concur with my previous colleague. When I was on the market for the first time 15 years ago, I had exactly two campus interviews - a VAP and an open rank Ivy. The two superstars for the latter dropped out and I was the lucky one standing. You never know.
Though it might sound hollow at this point, you should be thrilled about making the campus cut. As mentioned, finding an explicit archaeology position is a tremendous task based sheerly on the number of positions, let alone what goes on behind the scenes. A former student did not make the campus cut for the very same position and he is exceptional by all measures. I was quite surprised, but not totally based on the complexity of the entire process. Good luck.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
...at least the crickets sing purdy.
Lonestar Two, How's it going down there?
It's quiet out here. Too quiet...
I've always wanted to say that.
What I hate: when it takes an institution more than a month to process reimbursement claims (especially when it includes airfare). It's like they stop caring after they've made their decision.
Is the institution private or public?
Sometimes the state schools have to abide by a schedule set by the controller, and can cut checks only once a month, which means up to 7 weeks of wait-time. Not that it makes it suck less to be on the hook for that money.
Hint to SCs: Use the institutional/departmental credit card or travel service for big expenses.
Regarding the NYU Greek History position.
Can anybody confirm that the position has been offered and has been accepted?
I wasn't a finalist, but I have been offered another position, so I want to make sure that they are not going to go further down their list before I move on and accept this other offer.
I know it is extremely unlikely that this might happen, but I'd like to make sure.
Anybody?
Yes, the NYU Greek history position has been accepted.
Re: reimbursement:
No, in this case it's a private institution. I think this reimbursement issue is something the APA may want to look into. With more than one or two campus visits, one quickly end up spending a lot of one's own money, especially when coast-to-coast flights are involved. It is quite enough that the job search strains one's nerves; it shouldn't also strain one's bank account.
Thanks, whoever you are, for the confirmation on NYU. I appreciate it!
Well, since the NYU informant was so forthcoming... Anybody have the dirt on the Buffalo Greek history position? Offered, accepted, none of the above?
You have to remember that because it's so cold in Buffalo, molecules move around more slowly. Therefore, searches take longer.
I got that from the Federal Bureau of Miscellaneous Information.
How about the Ohio State Latinist job? Anything of note?
I know they've had people on campus for the Ohio State Latin job - including one Hellenist (n.b., not for the senior position either)!
O tempora...
So is it cool to update the wiki, or to post news here, if you aren't the one involved? For example, I know somebody who had a campus visit at school X. That information is not reflected on either wiki. Can I just add a line that says "at least one campus visit made", to get a bit more information out there? Or, if I know that an offer has been made somewhere, should I post that on the wiki, or here? Obviously I have no vested interest other than hopefully helping other unknown people who might be sitting on pins and needles (like I am now!).
Any opinions or thoughts about this out there?
I say the more information on the wiki list the better. I have posted information about jobs that I have no stake in when I am certain of the veracity of my source.
Anon. 1:43 -
I have a friend who's a finalist at Buffalo. They haven't even had all their candidates visit yet.
Does anyone has info on the University of Georgia post-doc search? I see they brought people to campus but that was a long time ago.
Anyone heard anything about Villanova?
Wow, it must be REALLY cold in Buffalo if even the visits of the finalists themselves are slowed down so much!
Anon 2:40, did Buffalo tell your friend that there were still finalists left, or is it possible they were going to go deeper into the mix (!hoping!)?
Anon. 3:37 -
Buffalo told my friend early March or so they would decide right after the last visit. And they invited 4, after interviewing 15 in Chicago, so my guess is they won't go down the list further. The wait is crazy-making, though.
I'm waiting for news of my own, too. Sympathies to all of you in the same boat.
Anon. 2:40
You know, the crazy thing is the there are already deadlines for second-wave jobs. Northwestern last week, Franklin and Marshall this Saturday, others next week and the week after. So people who will end up with jobs from the APA are still being forced to apply to some of these new jobs. I know this will never happen, but perhaps the APA can enforce a no-deadlines-before-March-15 policy in the future.
Wouldn't an "all decisions should be made by 1 March for those interviewing at APA" deadline be better? :) I'm just saying. I have to give it to Dayton -- they established deadlines for themselves, and they stuck to them. Their candidates knew exactly what was going on.
Dear Anon 3:55,
Thank you SO much for the info regarding Buffalo. It is much better for me to be able to simply move on and focus my energies elsewhere.
I really wish SCs - and this is not a comment directed at the folks at Buffalo, whom I though were great in my interview in Chicago, but rather at the whole process - could post or send stuff like this to all applicants. Even if they admit that they "could" go further down the list, at least we would know exactly where we stand. In my case it helps tremendously, both psychologically and logistically.
Maybe the APA could set up some sort of bulletin board where this info would be available to candidates, and posted only by institutions.
Pipe dreams, I know!
I interviewed at a SLAC at the APA, after which I heard nothing directly from them. After they hired someone they managed to notify 1) the remaining members of the shortlist and 2) all the people who applied for the job but didn't get any kind of interview. But they clearly omitted to notify those who interviewed at the APA alone. Bizarre. Explanation anyone?
Two Possible Expanations: 1) part-time department secretary [=19 year old doing his ten weekly work-study hours] screwed up; 2) department chair learned to use a computer in 2006, when the SLAC in question told him it would no longer allow him to submit his grades and other official business on typed index cards [he managed to make it online in 2007, should have a rudimentary grasp of university webmail applications by 2011]] and he screwed up.
Our dearest Poldy,
"When you have just been told that the girl you love is definitely betrothed to another, you begin to understand what anarchists feel when the bomb goes off too soon."
And what Classicists feel when the wiki tells them that their hopes are dashed.
-700, and thinking of you.
Can it be inferred from the post-APA-interview rejection email from Lafayette that they have offered the job and that it has been accepted?
Not if you got the same rejection email I did (the last week of January), which to me implies that there's a shortlist and that's it. See an earlier entry in this blog, which says they've been inviting people to campus. Don't know more than that.
The very correct distinction between internal and inside candidates has been raised. I think we should all observe it and be more careful with our language from this point on. Anecdotal evidence does seem to bear out that internal candidates get the job 50% of the time; I guess we must assume that inside candidates get the job 100% of the time.
I don't think any of us would lodge a complaint against internal candidates; there is a reason that they are at the school in the first place, they are known quantities, and as such have an advantage in landing the permanent position.
Inside candidates are another matter. Only they and the members of the department know what arrangements were made in advance.
It is the latter group, and especially the programs that hire them, that is drawing the fire on this blog. It has happened at least once this year that I am aware of.
I am considering accepting a temporary position that I have been told might become a TT position. Can anybody who has been in this position talk about their own experience? Is it advisable? If I decide to take this position, should I ask the department before applying to the TT job? Is it true that my time there will be one long interview?
In the end, am I better off going somewhere else where I would be a straight-up sabbatical replacement and not have to worry? I will want to get letters from my colleagues in any case, but I don't want thing to be awkward. I don't have another offer in hand, but am feeling good about my chances.
So, does it just completely suck to be the internal candidate who is not the inside candidate?
Thanks for the help!
Do you know when it might become a T-T? Next year? 5 years down the road? If it's 5 years later, will your position be renewable in the meantime?
Think about this objectively: you are letting the potential for awkwardness make you question whether to accept a job that could become tenure-track, and the only thing arguing for that is your self-assessment that you have a good shot at another job down the road. Having been around for a while, I can tell you that unless the job itself is one that is not worth having for some reason (e.g., terribly stupid students who will drain your will to live, wretched library, exposed asbestos in the building, weekly departmental games of Russian Roulette, you would be a unjustified not to accept this job.
Anonymous 3:46
Forgot to write: if they really do have a tenure-track job, they will still be willing to write letters for you (assuming that you've earned good reviews, I guess). But you really can't think of this is a future tenure-track job: think of it as a one-year, and if it becomes tenure-track that's all the better.
It is a one-year, possible two, but presumably non-renewable, as I was told they expect the TT slot to be advertised next year, budget willing.
Yes, I know it is a possible TT, but that is all, possible. It isn't a bad place by any stretch, but the question is whether the TT possibility outweighs the benefits of other VAP positions. I have some time to decide, during which I expect to hear news from other institutions, and thus be able to make a more informed decision.
But yes, I don't think I'd turn it down out of fear of awkwardness.
I was once faced with deciding between two VAP's, one which was supposed to become tenure track. I ending up choosing the terminal one year. The next year when the tt job at the other institution did appear I almost didn't apply because I was sure they wouldn't give me another chance. But I did apply -- and surprisingly did get the job.
Not sure how that will help your decision, though it does show how many options there are for the way things may turn out.
Last year I had to decide between 5 VAPs, 4 of which were likely to become t-t. The school I chose (on the principle that if the jobs offered then were t-t that was the school I would have chosen), of course, did not get the position because of budget constraints, but I applied to the others and got at least APA interviews for all.
So I think it doesn't hurt not to take it, but I would, if I were you, unless you can't see yourself there for any length of time. They will indeed still write letters for you if you do well.
Re: Lafayette (if anyone's still interested)
I hear that job has been offered and accepted.
Does anyone know if the Grand Valley State job has been offered?
Servius,
Could we have a new thread devoted solely to jobs with post-APA deadlines? With multiple deadline coming up, there will soon be the need (urge?) to discuss these.
For a thread title I would suggest "The Long, Twilight Struggle" (taken from the title of a "Babylon-5" episode: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long,_Twilight_Struggle).
Does anyone know if the Grand Valley State job has been offered?
Damn good question. I was a finalist, but I haven't heard heard squat.
Servius,
Could we have a new thread devoted solely to jobs with post-APA deadlines? With multiple deadline coming up, there will soon be the need (urge?) to discuss these.
At your service!
Apologies for barging in on this thread, but I'm not sure where to ask this.
Does the APA maintain any sort of placement record for PhD programs? I have found some information on a few departmental websites, but I don't know how accurate it is, and some departments don't have any info at all. Is this something the APA tracks? Any advice on how to go about finding this out?
Does anyone know if there'll be a start of the month job listing, or do we have to wait until the 15th?
I think we get to wait
Ah, more waiting. Beckett has nothing on this.
I can barely contain myself... the February listings were just so damn good.
Cal-State Chico: according to an email from the chair, offer made (alas, not to me) and accepted.
Another question about negotiation: so I've looked at the Chronicle AAUP salary averages, now what does that mean? Since it's an average I assume I should expect to get less as a starting salary, right? And is it an average for sciences as well as humanities, in which case I can expect to get still less, right? Help. Sorry if these questions are stupid. Thanks.
These are not stupid questions!
I am pretty sure the AAUP averages include all sorts so you should expect to be below the average. For example, I think the average starting salary for an Asst. Professor of Business is around 120k/year, Chemistry 95k/year, etc. so we humanities people can expect, much, much less.
Are you negotiating with the Dean or the dept. chair? If the dean, talk to your chair about this. They should be your advocate, and know that everybody has a vested interest in your getting as much as possible. Also, remember that stuff like travel budgets, research money, moving costs, etc. are much easier to bump up that starting salary. So if the salary is locked, try and negotiate as fat a research budget as possible.
State schools should have absolute transparency regarding salaries, so you can find out exactly what other humanities professors who started last year make, to the penny. This might help. Private schools don't publish this info.
Not knowing where you are I have no idea what you should expect, but if you give general hints perhaps I (or others) can help. Location and institution-type are big factors, obviously.
AAUP data includes all salaries except for medical faculty, so if the average salary is in the mid-sixties and you are being offered somewhere in the fifties, given law/business/engineering salaries, you are not being lowballed. In addition, many schools have already fixed the salaries in their budgets and can't do anything about it (this is why you should pass your third-year review and try to get some outside offers, so you can negotiate). Ask for more in moving, if you are coming from far away, and ask for more research -- sometimes the Dean's Office will give you a little extra, but the department can promise some extra departmental resources, plus get you a course reduction for a term from the Dean.
Course reductions are key! Negotiate hard for this! Worth their weight in gold, imho.
Thanks to the last three posters for all that advice. It's given me a really precise idea of what is reasonable and important to ask for.
With the course reductions -- feel out the department vibe first. If it is a small department where everyone, junior and senior, pitches in and teaches about the same amount, then you need to ask for the course reduction in the spirit of 'As the new guy, it would be great to have a little space my first year to kick off my research program,' not, 'My research is so important, that I shouldn't have to teach so much.'
I agree with the last comment. Even if the Chair wholeheartedly supports the course-reduction, they'll appreciate having first been asked.
Does anyone know whether UNC-Greensboro made an offer?
What is the etiquette for a finalist for a position contacting an SC chair and asking about the status of their search? (I have no reason to think they've made a decision yet, but I'm fairly sure the last candidate has been, last week.)
It's perfectly find to contact the search chair if you have a valid reason--such as another offer. Otherwise, I would wait it out.
Does anyone have any idea what is going on with the Willamette or Buffalo searches?
UNC Greensboro has made an offer.
Willamette campus visits in progress.
Grand Valley State
T-T Ancient Philosophy
Any word out there?
Does anyone have any news about any of the medieval Latin jobs (Berkeley, Notre Dame, UNC)?
Holy Crap!
A Medievalist!!
Welcome, Young Skywalker!
What a hearteningly enthusiastic response! Thank you, thank you. All we usually get is "a medievalist......oh."
(I have no personal stake in these searches, but am hopelessly nosey.)
Three cheers for the medievalists. Hip hip...
(I'm not actually a medievalist, but a little camaraderie never hurt anyone).
... Hooray!!
Hooray for the medievalist!
How did a medievalist wander into this joint?
It is kinda like seeing a coyote wandering around Park Slope - not out of the realm of the possible, but surprising.
Hey, if you're a medieval Latinist you tend to know a lot of other un(der)employed medieval Latinists, and worrying on their behalf is more fun than, you know, working, so you surf, and you lurk, and eventually you comment.
Anyone know anything about the Chicago searches? I hear Greek has been offered- but accepted? And history? Yes, just nosy nosey nosy....
Sheesh, you've asked this question in just about every thread of this blog...
March comes in like a lion... bearing desperation on its back.
This gets my vote for best blog posting of the Classics job search season so far:
How to make a Clueless Cake:
Take any number of academic neurotics, fold in random bits of non-verifiable information, bake at high heat for approximately six months.
Voila!
February 22, 2008 11:12 AM
Clearly you didn't see the James Bond post on "The Long, Twilight Struggle." (March 7, Anon. 7:14)
To the last poster:
Thanks for the compliment. As I scramble to finish my dissertation I'm saddened to see that that post may have been my best writing in...ooh...350 pages.
Oddjob -
You're welcome!
Five years on, my dissertation is STILL the worst thing I've ever written.
Anon. 8:09
"Cameron, dear friend, you thought we wouldn't have any fun. Shame on you."
Yep, you got it.
Villanova is in the middle of phone interviewing for the tenure-track job.
Has Bryn Mawr confirmed their hire for the TT Arch. job?
On Bryn Mawr (T-T Archaeology) - true that there were _6_ finalists?! as the wiki reports?
The art history wiki was where the 6 finalists figure originally was reported.
Random question regarding CAMWS:
I presume that at least a number of folks reading this are planning on going to CAMWS. Does anyone have familiarity with Tucson who could perhaps offer some restaurant recommendations as was done for Chicago?
Post a Comment