The speed of the flyback invites and post-APA rejections convinces me, yet again, that interviews don't matter unless you're really brilliant or really awful. It seems logical that many SCs have a hierarchy already in mind by the APA, if not set in stone. This has been mentioned in other threads, and no one has troubled to deny it...
"And what the heck is wrong with that? And why should anyone deny it? Seems like a perfectly natural way of making a decision."
Waste of candidates' time and money? False hopes? I don't deny it's a logical and reasonable method, but it can be a cruel one. Think how you feel in years where it's not good to be a Roman historian.
And invites on the Sunday seem reasonable, before SCs part ways and don't see each other for a few weeks, but Penn on the Saturday? Seems rushed. How would the news affect candidates still interviewing on the Saturday and Sunday?
Anonymous 7:42 (and those listening in on the line):
It's never a waste of time to interview, especially if you're still a grad or relatively junior: after all, it's a good way of getting more people to know about you and your work, and might lead to something that helps your career somewhere down the line. In this line of work, the more people who know about you, the better. That's how you get jobs, conference invitations, etc. (To give an example from my own life: I once applied for a job and did not get it, and wasn't interviewed, but one very senior member of the search committee was intrigued by my work, has remained in touch with me, has invited me to a conference, and is now considering me for a position at his university. It's an imperfect parallel because no interview was involved, but you can see what I mean about how valuable it can be to meet people through this process.)
And anyway, you seem to have misread the earlier post. The person was not complaining about interviews that are "fixed," but rather that committees sometimes/often have a good idea going in of who their most promising candidates are.
You (and others, I suspect) seem to be hung up on how unpleasant and stressful it can be to interview, but if you put aside those emotions and look at the situation logically, you will see that every interview should be viewed as an opportunity that could still pay off long after the position has been filled by someone else.
Sorry to spoil everyone's day with some sunny optimism...
For better or worse, SCs cast their nets out wide to guarantee a nice, diverse candidate pool but in fact usually have a specific type of person in mind. There is too much at stake to have a weak candidate pool. Now whether they hold to this plan is entirely up in the air, but you could say most searches are generally "fixed" but not specifically "fixed" if you catch my drift.
From Fairfield 1/9/08: "We will be bringing finalists to campus over the next several weeks and you are not among them". Well at least I know where I stand.
Why is staying sober necessary to interview? I do far better with a bit of vodka keeping me warm.
I'm not saying it's necessary to stay sober for interviewing. But the hang over the next morning is really no fun. I do not recommend interviewing hung over.
That is the purpose for which Bloody Marys were invented.
The fact that the Big Bar closed at 1:30 was criminal. They could have made another $2000 bucks off of that crowd had they stayed open until 3am. And then I wouldn't have had to buy that bottle of Jim Beam in the supermarket.
I had an 8am interview with FancyPantsMcUniversity the next day and the fact that I was at least two sheets to the wind made it go down nicely, thank you.
I haven't received either a rejection or an invite from Fairfield. Has anyone actually gotten positive news? Was this in response to a thank-you note or unsolicited?
Florida State just had their search canceled by state budget cuts. I feel particularly bad for them because they were exemplary in making the interview process clear and straightforward and actually read my writing sample.
To Dingbats: Write your job talk now. It looks like a number of places are working fast this year - some institutions are scheduling interviews as early as next week. Some places will be flexible, but of course your 2 or 3 competitors will probably also try to push their interviews out -- and someone's got to go first.
Are candidates applying to more jobs than usual? It seemed like the average number of interviews was WAY up this year in comparison to previous years. I know somebody who had 23 interviews, and the average number for friends of mine was between 10 and 12.
More jobs, more of a shotgun approach, a mix?
Maybe this is why schools feel like they have to quicken the process and get people to campus next week! Crazy!
Do you mean the Toronto Art Department job? I heard that they didn't interview at the APA but that they also haven't invited anyone to campus. Something strange is going on there, but no one seemed to know what...
You all didn't hear?!?! The department received a 27 million dollar instructional support grant from the Canadian government, expressly for the study of material cultures in the ancient Mediterranean!
They are in the midst of figuring out how to spread the money around. I think they are going to establish 6 new tenure-stream lines and 4 new 3-year post-doctoral fellowships. Since this happened recently they have decided to delay the current search.
That *is* interesting. Any links to news stories we might read about this influx of cash?
Nestor:
I think Not Me is referring to the tenure track Greek Art position, not the tenured Aegean prehistoric archaeologist position. But also interesting that that one has been offered.
I was not on our dept's SC, but I attended all of the interviews 'cause, hey, I was there, and who doesn't want to spend 8 hours a day in a hotel room? Seriously!?! It was grand.
There was a lot of talk here, pre-APA, about the usefulness of interviews. If we think we know which four or five will be our top runners, why interview another ten or so?
Here's why: we had our interviews. Some of the ones we thought would be strong were hella strong. Some of the ones we though would be strong were total duds face to face (put this person in front of a class?! No way! Sit next to this person at a faculty meeting? Ugh! Have a drink with this dude? I'd rather bathe a cat!); sometimes chinks in research or methodology or preparation made themselves clear. Sometimes it was just a vibe: a great scholar, but not a good fit for us.
And then there is the dark horse. Without giving too much away, there was one candidate, toward the end, to whom we wanted to speak initially but who, at the end of that long final day, seemed to have no chance to trump our front-runners at the time. This person was obviously strong, but in light of whom we had seen (with very few exceptions, our interviews were all very strong), we found ourselves thinking we had probably already found our fly-backs.
ShaZam!
This dark horse enters the room. Hangovers were waning, and the shaking had stopped; but we were tired and feeling cranky. I'd hardly made it to the book exhibit, and now I had to sit through one more of these things, when there was no chance we were going to hire a...
Whoa. The room lit up. This candidate was not slick or calm or smooth. This candidate was just *real*. Massively enthusiastic. Funny. Honest. Excited: didn't worry about being cool—this person was just excited about her / his work, and excited us. I kept thinking "what's going on?... Am I alone here? This is fantastic! We went way overtime, as neither the candidate nor we had anything immediately following. When we all finally agreed we should part, I felt sad. The candidate left the room, and there was silence as we all sat smiling and kind of giggling at each other, eyes wide.
Finally, I yelled "holy hell! I loved [pronoun]!"
We all cracked up, and spent another ten or fifteen minutes talking about how fantastic this person was, how they [apologies for the awkward pronoun] blew us away, how we had to see more of them.
And so PhD dark horse is now coming out for a visit. Before meeting this person, I had slightly resented them even being on our interview list; not because they weren't qualified or interesting, but because they seemed incredibly marginal to what "we'd" thought we wanted in a new hire.
I have no idea if this person will be offered the job; none of us do. But the point I want to make here is that this person may be offered the job, and it is the interview that did it, no questions asked. The dark horse has become a front runner.
So, interviews are important, and for those of you with fly-backs, consider those similarly important. We already know you are good: we also want to like you. We already like you: but we want to know if we can like you for a few decades. Be yourself. Unless you unlikable. Then, be someone else. Someone likable.
And if you don't yet have a fly-back (or not yet with your top or a favored position), keep in mind that a lot shakes out in the coming month or so: a fly-back may be offered, and accept, a job elsewhere first, and cancel. Depts may only be able to fly out three or four, but have a good five or six they would love to fly out if they were able. Things get very subjective, and SCs operate on the "hope and prayer" model. As much as you all want the right job, SCs want the right colleague.
Can anybody offer advice/reflections/random thoughts on the difference between a liberal arts fly-out and a phd-granting institution flyout? Should I pitch the job-talk differently, talk about research differently, etc. etc. etc.?
I am excited about both of the opportunities, but I don't know how to approach them. I have been told to not write out my job talk and read it for the liberal arts interview, but that I am expected to do so for the Big U. interview. Is this true? Must I then have two separate job talks? Also, what about the teaching demonstration?
Thanks, and sorry for rambling. I am feeling a bit overwhelmed.
I've done job talks at both of the kinds of places you describe. I don't think they need to be hugely different. My rule of thumb for talks was that they be accessible; I would even think of the students, grad and undergrad, as your main audience, not your future colleagues. Talk to them. (And students do come to these things, even undergrads.)
If you are giving a talk at a SLAC, most likely the committee will let you know that the talk is geared to undergraduates and they want to see how you would interact with them more than how you would faculty in other departments. I have always been given pretty clear guidelines on how they wanted the material presented. Do they want a real research talk or do they want you to present something as if presenting it to a class? I use notes when I teach though not a full script so having something written down is not only recommended but smart. Do they have you on a time limit? If you are asked to structure your talk as a lecture for students, is it in a situation where you would need to finish something in a set time frame as if for a class? Having notes helps here.
If you have any questions about the talk, ask the committee if they haven't already told you who the audience will be and what they are expecting. Nothing wrong with asking them for some guidance.
If you are giving a talk at a SLAC, most likely the committee will let you know that the talk is geared to undergraduates and they want to see how you would interact with them more than how you would faculty in other departments. I have always been given pretty clear guidelines on how they wanted the material presented. Do they want a real research talk or do they want you to present something as if presenting it to a class? I use notes when I teach though not a full script so having something written down is not only recommended but smart. Do they have you on a time limit? If you are asked to structure your talk as a lecture for students, is it in a situation where you would need to finish something in a set time frame as if for a class? Having notes helps here.
If you have any questions about the talk, ask the committee if they haven't already told you who the audience will be and what they are expecting. Nothing wrong with asking them for some guidance.
Given anon 10:53pm's comment about the Dark Horse, does it seem like having an interview at the end of the docket is a disadvantage? Everybody on the SC is tired, they have their line-up selected, and by the end may be just going through the motions...
I don't have a great deal of experience, but in my limited number of years on the market I have never gotten a call back from interviews conducted on Sat. night or any time on Sunday. Never. That might say more about me than the various committees. Until now I figured I had no stamina. Now, I'm not so sure. I'm not trying to read malicious things into a nice comment, and this is meant in no way to be critical of Dark Horses' interviewers, but it did get me thinking.
Anybody else have other thoughts on scheduling and viability? If I have to go through this again next year I might very well select only Friday and early Saturday as possible times.
I think places are moving faster this year for a couple of reasons.
A) It is the best year for applicants in living memory, at least for most fields. Schools know they have to work quick to get the best candidates.
B) The wiki allows SCs to figure out that their competitors are moving quickly, so they have to respond as well. This is why some of the deadlines we were given at the APA have been rendered meaningless.
I have no complaint at being flown out, but being given 9 days in which to write a job talk really blows.
It sounds like Augustana flew a bit too close to the sun. In this day and age, I'm still surprised how SCs ignore "hirability" when making their decisions. I admit few things give me greater pleasure than to see the collective look of horror on a SC's face when their arrogance precludes them from understanding that a seller's market only gets them so far, especially when they're all angling for some candidate du jour.
One of my friends actually turned down an offer for a pre-APA flyback to Augustana. Said she didn't want to be forced into anything before seeing all her options. I don't blame her. Temple did a pre-APA hire a few years ago and the person ended up leaving.
Genau! What was Augustana smoking in moving the search up like that? Was it the department, or the deans, who made this unfortunate decision? Does anybody who knows care to comment?
The place seems like it might actually be a good place to work, and to live, but they put all involved in a tight spot by their strategy. It will be interesting to see how things shake out. Maybe if word gets out on the street about this then next year we won't see as many zany attempts to ensnare candidates before the game even gets going.
Too bad there isn't better communication between the APA and the administrators who are no doubt primarily to blame in these snafus. If the APA could enforce a strict schedule of opening announcements, interview scheduling, and fly-outs, we'd all be much happier. As it is, the betterment of the market as a whole has resulted in some rather questionable strategies employed by institutions.
If this is the person who left for UC-Irvine, I don't think it had anything to do with the way she was hired. She had a family and Irvine just offered a better all around environment for her family.
The APA's role in all this is similar to the Russian Duma. Neither the establishment nor those attempting to join it are particularly keen on placing their fates wholesale into the hands of the APA Placement Service as it is structured now. It's a good idea, but not necessarily one that works all that great.
Seneca, not ignored so much as "blinded" by the same thing making other SCs hot to trot for the same candidate. Shows you that we're too inbred for our own good.
On Pegasus's comment about the quality of Sunday interviews:
-as a candidate, I have the opposite experience; both my campus interviews last year came from Sun. am/Sat. pm interviews. The second and last Sun. am interview - for which I had no chance (it was Berkeley) - was my best interview of the entire conference. In my case, I suffer from nerves early on and calm down as the conference proceeds. Many people have the opposite experience.
-but for interviewers, yes, I think it's a disadvantage. I was one school's last Sun. interview this year, and one SC member was so busy rushing to pick up her suitcase she ignored my proferred handshake goodbye. An hour later, I was one school's next-to-last interview, and they could not run late because of getting to O'Hare. I kept calm and relaxed and funny, but the SC was clearly very stressed out.
Do SCs submit their candidates to the APA in some ranked order? If not, I can see a late interview hurting middle candidates the most. Presumably, the less qualified candidates had little chance anyway. The superstars presumably would have gotten flybacks short of wielding horns and carrying a pitchfork. If you're a candidate who could have gotten a flyback if your late interview was held on Friday or Saturday morning, that's where the travesty lies.
Has anyone had a 15 minute interview? Yep, I did and it tops my list of horrific moments in Chicago. I've had 1 hour interviews, a bunch of 30 minute ones, but 15 minutes was a first for me. Perhaps this is the wave of the future as SCs hedge their bets by bringing in 20 candidates for interview at the APA?
Scheduling 15 minute interviews is criminal. The main thing I realized interviewing this year is that half the time SCs haven't a freaking clue what they are doing.
Wait, are you saying that a SC scheduled an interview for only 15 minutes?! Or did it just get compressed or cut short at the time. The latter is bad enough, the former absurd.
I had a couple where we had to retire to the hall since the scheduling was backed up, but that isn't the end of the world.
I hate it when institutions don't send emails to candidates they've shortlisted for the APA, but that they've decided not to fly in for a campus visit. I'm sure there are some institutions where no fly-in candidate posts on the wiki; so that there's no way to know what the status of one's application is.
15 min interview--? That sounds crazy. I normally feel 30 minutes are too short. 45 minutes are about right.
I've only had a 15-minute interview for a temporary job, where we only talked about teaching. It wasn't scheduled as such, they told me when I got to the room. The 1-hour interviews I've had have been for major R1 places.
Has anyone been let into the room while the previous candidate was finishing up?! This happened to me this year. I was so embarrassed; I could see and hear everything, but they insisted I not wait in the hall (they came out and got me). I tried to melt into the wallpaper until the 5 minutes from hell was over (and I made sure to get out of there before the next interviewee arrived).
"Has anyone been let into the room while the previous candidate was finishing up?! This happened to me this year. I was so embarrassed; I could see and hear everything, but they insisted I not wait in the hall (they came out and got me). I tried to melt into the wallpaper until the 5 minutes from hell was over (and I made sure to get out of there before the next interviewee arrived)."
Eegadds, that is just so gauche and awkward. What a bunch of fools. Sorry you and the other candidate had to endure that!
OOC, is the sense that a few grad programs dominated the interview market correct, or did it really depend on the specifics of the job?
Yes, Princeton students had a ridiculous number of interviews. The rich get richer! I think Berkeley and Chicago did OK as well, but Princeton cleaned up. This is a bad trend. Not that there is anything wrong with Princeton or the students there, but anyway.......
Now that the market is getting better the field would profit immensely by a bit of wealth redistribution.
I've seen a fair share of Princeton letters, and IMNSHO, there's rampant inflation across the board. One would think each candidate could walk on water. You've got to hand it to the faculty - they are quite unified in presenting their students in this manner, as if it's a given that by sheer acceptance into the program and completion, their students are superstars. Does this bear out years after the fact? In my experience, not noticeably more than any of the other top schools.
On the question of pitching job talks, my advice is to ask the chair of the SC what they are looking for. Schools can vary widely and even SLAC's often want a "serious" job talk (that is, a 40-45 minute, carefully argued, scholarly lecture). Ask who the audience will be, whether the SC is looking for something more scholarly or more like an ugrad lecture, etc. The job talk is extremely important and it is not uncommon for finalists to miscalculate and pitch it at too low a level (and then get hammered for that when their candidacy is discussed). Ask questions and make sure that you know exactly what is expected of you. Also, ask for a schedule of your visit ahead of time--with whom you will meet; the time of your talk; etc. Some places will send this unprompted, but others won't. It will help you prepare for meetings with individual faculty and also avoid any nasty surprises (as happened to me once when I showed up for a campus visit and found out the morning of the festivities that I would have a 2 hour, PhD exam style "interview" with the entire faculty following my job talk and questions. A little advance notice would have been helpful...).
Princeton has had the rep of inflating job references for at least the last decade; when I'm on an SC, I take them with a huge grain of salt, unless the person has outside references or publications/other awards external to Princeton. This is not to bash Princeton grads, many of whom are excellent. Their weakness, in my experience of having half a dozen or so as colleagues, is their teaching: they do hardly any teaching as grad students, and it shows.
EVERYBODY inflates references. It is absolutely absurd. If the Princeton faculty do it more efficiently and with better results, that is one, and just one, very good reason to go there!
Even the Oxford letters are beginning to make their students sound like the second coming. It used to be that English and European letter-writers could be counted on for brevity and judiciousness. That style is now going the way of the Dodo. Pretty soon letters of recommendation are going to be worth less than the photocopy paper they come on.
Does that information about Columbia's history department job come from a candidate who has received notice or does it still mean that candidates have not been notified yet?
And for the record, I've heard Nehamas complain about the lack of teaching opportunities for Princeton grads!
But yeah; they have more time to work on publications than those of us doing regular teaching, but have often seemed to flounder a little when presented with a full-time teaching load in their first job, no matter how brilliant they may be. Of course, all individuals differ here.
I really like the approach of gradually wading into pedagogy through t.a.ships rather than being thrown straight into the deep water. This is easy for me to say, however.
Livy, the info on Columbia's search comes from a candidate who was told he/she has made it onto the shortened list of candidates, following informal interviews at the APA/AIA conference.
No. Not any more. He changed it to an "e" after I told him that the "e" looks better than the "a" in the font I chose for my CV. He didn't want issues of bad typographic aesthetics dragging down my application. He thinks I'm that good a candidate. And he's kinda into aesthetics.
On a related note, a friend of mine got his Ph.D. in Sociology at Ohio State, which has a very good program. He once told me that despite the program's quality, though, OSU grads were at a severe disadvantage on the job market because deans and provosts (especially at small liberal arts schools) love to boast to parents that this professor or that comes from Princeton/Harvard/Yale/etc. He had been told this by someone reliable (I can't remember who, but presumably one or more of his professors). I wonder to what extent this sort of thinking applies to our field(s) as well.
FYI, Princeton has a 'no-Princeton' short-list. Why? Because such inbreeding is beneath us. Usually. Anyway, all the better to export our master race...
I'm guessing the Princeton-heavy schools are among the Ivy-league wannabes - Tufts, Notre Dame, Michigan, Amherst, Wellesley, Georgetown, Chicago, Washington University, etc.
I'm guessing the Princeton-heavy schools are among the Ivy-league wannabes - Tufts, Notre Dame, Michigan, Amherst, Wellesley, Georgetown, Chicago, Washington University, etc."
georgetown has no princeton grads on its shortlist.
Any other places? With 19 recent, new or soon-to-be Princeton grads on the market this year, we're not going to be outing anyone with this info.
19?! Princeton isn't Texas circa 1997. I don't think it is possible for them to have so many on the market at once. They aren't that large a program.
Unless they've been keeping their graduates in cryogenic chambers in order to flood the market in especially good years...... Hmmmmm..... what a devilishly effective plan!
Does anybody know what the status of that search is. They apparently skipped the APA and invited candidates to campus, but I have heard no news. Anybody more clued in than I am?
Oh, c'mon. It ain't, really. It managed to join the club because of football years ago, but it is just a small step above SUNY-Binghamton. Real ivies can't have schools of hotel management and dairy management.
No, it is an Ivy because its peers said it was, regardless of its history, or lack thereof. Using the football analogy, it's the Fiesta Bowl of the BCS. It should have been the Cotton Bowl but they screwed up, it's not the Fiesta Bowl's fault. Rutgers, William and Mary, etc. could have very well been the eighth Ivy if they had played their cards right and had some luck. As it stands, Cornell would be a good school even it was not in the Ivy League and I don't doubt it being fine with them, unlike schools like Tufts, George Washington, Notre Dame, etc.
Yep, it has to be a two way street, just like all the job searches going on. It's difficult to take a candidate seriously when they're your lapdog. That said, I would love a job at Tufts...
Yep, it has to be a two way street, just like all the job searches going on. It's difficult to take a candidate seriously when they're your lapdog. That said, I would love a job at Tufts...
What are you saying here? Is this a response to an earlier comment?
I know that the wiki and blog were set up by and for applicants, but I also know (or presume, rather) that search committee members, and other random faculty members, are regular readers here.
Do these sites providing useful information for that end of the process as well? For example, if I was on a SC I think that I would be interested to know what my competitors are doing in terms of scheduling fly-outs. But I don't know if that intelligence is actionable. Can SCs move their own schedules forward in response? How about the requests for better communication? Do they encourage SC members to send email updates and such to job applicants?
I check this site way more often than is healthy for me, but I am in a waiting game now. But SCs are in one as well, of a fashion. If any faculty/SC members are out there, I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts.
This is off-topic, but why isn't it good? I mean, I know the old bromide that departments shouldn't hire their own. But if someone is a good scholar and a good teacher and is a good fit, why in the hell shouldn't their department hire them? Other than because it will look bad to outsiders, I mean.
Sometimes we academics take ourselves and what we do too seriously.
Not to split hairs, but Princeton's hire last year was a Comp Lit Ph.D. who had spent a few years teaching in another university. This is not the same thing as a dept hiring one of their own current graduate students...
Yeah, I'm sure UNC was happy about a recent TT hire jumping back to her alma mater.
Note to all the schools trying to lure a Princetonian. Yeah, you might roll the dice and with 10:1 odds get a good one. Otherwise, you'll probably have a colleague who will try to jump ship to a school "worthy" of his/her talents. The other scenario is you'll have a total dud who's living off of the name. Don't believe me? I can give numerous examples. The latest one I can think of before this one is a Fordham TT person jumping to Cornell. Yet departments will continue to get lured in by these overrated, overly ambitious people.
Enough with the gossip/thinly veiled attacks on recognizable individuals. Please show a bit more class and grace. Discussing departmental hiring preferences and placement records, in general terms, is fine. But these last couple of comments are getting too close to naming names, and are completely inappropriate. I will yank such comments if they veer so close again. I hate doing this, as I think this forum should be self-policing, so please don't force my hand. Before you type, please think about how you'd feel if you were the object of such an anonymous, on-line "discussion"!
With regard to the more interesting - and less divisive - question of why departments shouldn't hire their own, I think the main argument is that it promotes narrowness. People who have been trained in certain modes and styles of thought by Professors X, Y, and Z will likely continue in that same mode, adding their own refinements as time goes on. Fairly quickly, you get a department where everyone approaches problems in the same way. If the ideal is to have a department where multiple perspectives can be engaging each other and learning from each other, then hiring your own, no matter how talented, risks losing that breadth.
There are, of course, reasonable exceptions. For instance, I believe that it is still tradition for the Yale history department to offer a job to its "best" Ph.D. as an Asst. Prof. each year. Now, that's an enormous department, so one assistant professor doesn't skew viewpoints too much and, in any case, they're still very unlikely to get tenure and will probably wind up someplace else eventually.
Mind you, I'm not sure how well the breadth thing actually works in practice. My approach to classics has absolutely been largely shaped by the model of my advisors. While I've encountered a variety of other approaches in the last few years (at a non t-t job), I don't think they've actually affected my thinking much. Maybe I'm a stick in the mud; maybe that's due to the nature of my colleagues' research. But I suspect that hiring from within hurts the department more than the individual grad student/professor.
1. Yes, there are about 19 (give or take a couple) Princeton current and recent grads on the job market this year. So if it seems that we are dominating (sorry, no other term for that!) the market, then that's because we ARE the market this year. I wouldn't be surprised if we form 20% of the job seekers this year for entry-level positions.
2. Just because we are coming from Princeton, seems like too many folks here (and at APA interviews)assume that we are snobs, and wouldn't want to stay in the long term in any school other than another Ivy. Well, my dream job is a SLAC, and same goes for quite a few of my peers. So there.
3. If you're still feeling cranky, go eat some chocolate.
As an SC Chair I have checked the wikis and famae occasionally. One of my students currently on the market told me about them, so I thought I should familiarize myself with the state of things.
I have to say that I am glad they didn't exist whilst I was looking for work as they would have only fed my neuroses. But I can see their utility, and given the progress of technology, it was only a matter of time before something like this happened. So, weighing all the alternatives, you all have done a good job with them, and they are interesting to watch. Commentators are often a bit too free in their criticisms for my taste, but I also understand that it can be healthy to vent to one's peers.
The information gleaned from them has not impacted our schedule this year. We have to run things by a couple of deans, so their schedule is often more a determinant. That said, I can see how such public information might impact us in the future.
We discussed skipping the APA, and had we thought about video interviewing, we might have gone in that direction. Knowing that Oregon has done it, and with apparent success, will be a factor in our own future discussions. If any candidates who interviewed with Oregon, or any other school who conducted "green" interviews, would like to comment on their experiences, I am sure many people would be grateful to you.
As far as issues of communication, of which I was quite aware thanks to my students, I can sympathize. I have tried to send updates when I can, but writing individual emails to over 140 candidates really is too much. Our office assistant has handled much of that, and quite capably, though it has taken the form of mass-emailing. I think having students in the department who are themselves on the market when we conduct searches has been most helpful.
We are now also beginning to review graduate applications, so it seems like this is a good time to comment on the latest thread. Don't make the mistake of thinking there is much correlation between degree, employer, and objective merits. There are wonderful scholars and people coming out of each and every PhD program. Some will go on to prestigious positions, some not. Most will be good teachers who care about their students, whether those students are themselves ivy-leaguers or not. Sometimes hard-work and diligence win out. Sometimes they don't. So do recognize that there is a certain degree of chance involved, every step of the way.
Think back to how and where you decided to get your own degrees. Who accepted you and who rejected you? Did you decide to apply to or attend a program based on funding, location, a particular faculty member, the needs of your own family, the presence of a now very ex-boyfriend?
The name behind any individual's PhD is built upon much too varied a process to have any sort of predictive value with regards to long-term scholarship. So too with respect to employment. And so too with respect to their personal desires, motivations, and character! Given the process you are currently participating in, you ought to recognize this and comment/act accordingly. There are certain structural inequalities built into the system as it stands, and it will be up to your generation to try and ameliorate them further. But in the meanwhile, don't make things worse!
Best of luck to you all. I enjoyed meeting many of you in Chicago, and am truly optimistic about the health and future of our profession!
Might I suggest that we use this thread also to announce when we HEAR about other people getting on-campus invites, even if we ourselves don't have them? The wiki worked well because for most jobs there were 10+ being interviewed at the APA, so the odds were good that one of them would update the wiki. But now, with just 3-4 people getting on-campus invites, the odds are much smaller. In fact, I'm teaching at a school that is conducting a search and has invited candidates, but the wiki gives no indication of this, so I know it's happening.
So, if you KNOW of schools that have reached the point of inviting people, please do post. (I'll do so myself, but a bit later.)
1. Yes, there are about 19 (give or take a couple) Princeton current and recent grads on the job market this year. So if it seems that we are dominating (sorry, no other term for that!) the market, then that's because we ARE the market this year. I wouldn't be surprised if we form 20% of the job seekers this year for entry-level positions.
I'm sure you didn't mean to come off as having an inflated view of yourselves, but there are hundreds of people on the market looking for entry-level positions. Princeton might dominate a peculiar sub-speciality b/c of historical strengths and/or current faculty, but you hardly "are" the market as a whole. Doing the math, 19 is 5% or so of the pool.
2. Just because we are coming from Princeton, seems like too many folks here (and at APA interviews)assume that we are snobs, and wouldn't want to stay in the long term in any school other than another Ivy. Well, my dream job is a SLAC, and same goes for quite a few of my peers. So there.
I'm hope you're right, but I'm not sure if your post convinces otherwise. IMNSHO, I would hardly beleive that the average Princeton grad is yearning for a SLAC.
The wiki says they have contacted for campus visits. Is this true? Please, whoever posted on the wiki, can you confirm? I was really hoping for this one, but I'd rather find out the bad news now than wait any longer. And congratulations to you if it is the case. WU is a wonderful place.
Prejudices? I think s/he correctly pointed out using statistics that you are hardly "the" market. And how can people not think Princetonians are full of themselves when representatives like you choose to err on the side of over-inflating the group with elitist comments like that, intentional or not?
jeez, yalie, lighten up... As it happens I wrote the second chocolate-related post, not the first one, and I was referring to Anon 2:47's refusal to believe that a P'ton PhD might actually want a job at a SLAC. But anyway, go ahead with your Princeton mudslinging, which is what this board has clearly devolved into....
I have a t-shirt that says "Harvard Sucks and Princeton Doesn't Matter". As far as we are concerned Harvard is our one rival, and Princeton is just a poseur. But plainly this is not the case when it comes to graduate schools! If I went to graduate school here I think we'd have to say that Princeton Sucks and Nobody Else Matters.
I am in the middle of applying to graduate programs in Classics and a few of the grad students at my university mentioned this blog, so I decided to take a look. What an education!
I have applied to Princeton, as well as Chicago, Berkeley, Columbia and Penn. My advisors say to wait and see what happens and to not get fixated on any one place. But now I really hope I get into Princeton! If one program is the object of so much jealousy when it comes to the job-market, then plainly they must be the top program! All of you complaining about Princeton have done nothing but provide excellent advertising for them. Thanks for making my decision that much easier!
I would add to Servius's earlier comment on criticizing individuals that criticisms of the graduates of entire programs as well as individuals are inappropriate. So Princeton has a lot of people on the market (but they are not THE market, and that comment was inappropriate). So correspondingly they will dominate more than it would seem they should. Some other year Berkeley or Harvard or Yale will dominate.
The job search is hard enough as it is, why make it harder with threads like this?
What are you all doing?(This may be somewhat less relevant for the pure philologists out there.)
Oh, and Eli, your advisors are right. Grad programs are very fluky in admissions, and it's best to find out where you got in and then weigh alternatives, also taking into consideration things like your social life. (This is not meant to imply that any institution has greater or lower social possibilities than any other, but different people want different life experiences.)
Though overly heated at times and perhaps a bit off topic, isn't this entire website about information? Hopefully, it will veer away from mere speculation, but I find nothing speculative about some of the facts stated here, welcome or not. Once cannot ignore that two recent Princeton alums jumped ship quite early from two VERY good schools in desirable locations (i.e. UNC and Fordham) to scurry back to the Ivy League. I'm sure there are reasons, but UNC and Fordham?!
Anonymous 5:16, Not to keep the focus on Princeton, but I've heard that because there isn't much to do there a lot of the grad population turns to drinking.
Of course, for some applying there this might be a plus...
You guys ever stop to wonder why there are 19 of us on the market this year? And what do you think my chances are when there are 7 or 8 others (most of them "better" than me on paper) from my program applying to the exact same jobs? When all is said and done the top jobs will be pretty evenly distributed among grads from the top programs I suspect. And next year I'll be back on the market...
powerpoint is a highly divisive topic, I'm afraid. An essential presentation tool or a fancy slide projector? powerpoint now marks the great divide between sciences and the humanities (that and funding, I suppose).
I always like a handout; it gives me something to doodle on.
I think it is time to start the uninformed bashing of some other schools. What about Brown?
Given that I have between 0 and 2 campus visits (I don't want to give myself away), and none at schools as good as Fordham, I am the wrong person to be venting on...
Thank you for the post about powerpoint. Unless you're an archaeologist or art historian, I would stick with old-fashioned paper for a job talk. There's less to go wrong. But for a sample lecture, using powerpoint could be a good way to show that you know all the fancy technology stuff.
Please, please no more program bashing. Let's keep this blog friendly and constructive.
Yeah, I'm sure you'll be back on the market next year...after you snag a TT position this year at a "second-rate" school like Fordham.
Ummm, right school, wrong program. She wasn't in the Classics dept. at Princeton, she was in Art & Arch.
And for both the examples given (Fordham and UNC), have you considered the possibility that they moved for very good external reasons, i.e. significant others?
Nope, didn't think so.
A job is a job. It is a rare person nowadays who manages to find the job of their dreams the first time out. Mobility is common, so get over it.
So one would move from UNC (with all the schools and jobs nearby) to Princeton or Fordham (with all the schools and jobs nearby) to Cornell for a significant other? RIGHT...
Please stop this. I know some of you mean well (while it's pretty clear others don't) - but please let's agree to stop with the ad hominem stuff (or ad feminam, as it were...)
Someone mentioned "hirability" in an earlier post. The way I see it, Fordham and UNC are as much to blame for ignoring the "retainability" of their hires, especially in this dog-eat-dog, cherry-picking culture we live in today. Surely departments can hire just as qualified and interesting people from a slew of other programs who will stay happily for more than 2-3 years.
Alas, there is a lot less transparency in our profession, from both ends, than in many others. Our version of a central clearinghouse, the APA Placement Service, is more of a clerical technicality than a service. As a result, both departments and candidates are often left scrambling in the spring with ultimately the discipline as a whole suffering in the end due to failed searches and whatnot.
Yes, I'm also struggling with the power-point versus handout versus power-point plus handout dilemma. The important things fit on one double-sided handout, so my gut feeling is handout only. But my friends tell me that they like to see images during a talk and think it makes a better impression. Some discussion of this here would be very helpful.
If it's really only to demonstrate technological know-how, I wouldn't do it. There is a simple reason for this - technical difficulties. You'll be sweating a bit and the last thing you want to worry about is why only half the screen is showing or why your slides are formatted incorrectly on their computer. Yes, you can bring your own laptop, but this introduces another set of difficulties.
I think if you are giving a good old-fashioned philology talk, use a handout. If history (involving material culture) or archaeology, use PowerPoint. And the two latter should have handouts, to enable note-taking.
So, if I give the talk I'd most like to give, I definitely need to show images. (I'm trying to get the SC's opinion on which talk first, because some of the images are necessarily risque, and I don't want to shock my audience.)
If I show images, my instinct is to put the text up on different slides and not bother with a handout for quotations, as then people will be looking back and forth and it will likely be reasonably dark.
However, I know some people like having the physical piece of paper and the ability to take notes on it. Hence my dilemma - although with handouts there's also the issue of bringing them or getting them printed out by the dept and so forth.
Power point is fine if you really think the images are necessary. But be prepared to give the talk without it by having a handout ready to go (including ample photocopies) just in case something goes wrong. You never know what can happen and you can recycle the handouts later if need be.
I'm of the opinion that no handout is necessary for archaeologists and art historians--and sometimes a handout can be bad news if it steals the thunder from your talk. The handout is really a matter of preference for MC types.
For philologists and historians, I think the above posters who urge caution are spot on. Don’t use images during your job talk if you don’t otherwise. There are many sad stories cautioning against this. If you do use PP for text, beware of boring everyone. If you throw in a few images (see below) for good measure, make sure you know enough about them. (E.g., if you show a copy of Polyeuktos’ Demosthenes, make sure D's hands are clasped [empty]).
As for the nudy pics, I think you're right, Anon. 8:47, to ask first, just in case. But nothing gets more attention than the naked, the overtly sexual, the deformed, or, best yet, the deformed-naked-and overtly sexual. You'll be remembered—because ancient gay hunchback sex does rawk.
Although I actually did cover ancient gay deformed sex in one of my comps, the images I plan to use in my talk are much more conventional and sedate, I'll confess. I won't say anything more specific for fear of rendering my anonymity totally meaningless, but thanks for the perspectives, folks.
I'm well aware of the risks of technical difficulties, but with multiple backups and prep time, it tends to work out all right. I use PP for most of my non-language teaching, so I'm very familiar with it.
If you are used to ppt and have relevent/interesting images, I don't see why you shouldn't go ahead. Technical issues might have been a problem a few years ago, but these days everything have been so neatly standardized I think there is no difficulty even if you are doing it for the first time in a new place. One risk I guess is that some dinasour sitting in the audience takes immediate offence for your using an unphilological, unscholarly tool, but that risk is small.
Technical issues might have been a problem a few years ago, but these days everything have been so neatly standardized I think there is no difficulty even if you are doing it for the first time in a new place.
I taught at a school that still has rooms without 3-prong outlets. I was also told once in an interview explicitly that I would not have access to powerpoint for the interview since the department did not have access to a projector. This was recently. There are no guarantees. Always be prepared for a technology failure.
Also don't forget problems that still exist between Mac and PC versions of powerpoint. Don't assume that the format you use will be what's available during your visit.
The Penn search has been finalized. At the risk of Ralph Rosen's ire, I think it's not out of bounds to say that there are four candidates who hail from Chicago, Georgetown, Lampeter, and Stanford - a healthy group with no Princetonian in sight for you conspiracy theorists.
While I will not list names though they will go public soon enough, all the candidates are in non-TT positions (VAP, grad students, etc.) so no one is being "outed." If anything, it does reflect the well-rouned, judicious search that Penn is conducting. In terms of trends, it is not surprising that a top school like Penn is inviting candidates who have teaching experience as VAPs and/or have exceptional qualifications as grad students. I would also like to think Wales-Lampeter suggests that they are not just shooting for something exotic and are considering smaller programs, or one would have expected an Oxbridge representative.
That's not surprising about NYU. They've been left on the altar and the victim of faculty openly chasing other positions once they realize that teaching sporadic classes pertaining to their specialities at the IFA is just not worth it when one has to commute from downtown. Yet they continue to chase the least retainable. You reap what you sow - Princeton 10, NYU 0!
I don't think it's so much the commute, but the fact you can't live anywhere near Manhattan with the salary a non-chaired classics prof makes. I think many schools are experiencing this in other places like Boston and the Bay Area.
Dear people, Please please stop worrying about institutional affiliations. Since many many people do not get plum jobs immediately, one often cannot tell anything from a person's affiliation from a department's "events" page.
This Princeton obsession on the part of posters (or is just one really bent person?) must end. As a long-time observer of and participant in, and hirer of people in, the job market, I can vouch that, long-term, a Princeton PhD guarantees nothing.
It would be much more healthy to denounce the predominance of Boston area sports teams, or, for example, for me to express my delight that the Steelers lost in the first round of the playoffs, as a long-time fan of one of their rivals.
And if you have no idea how hard it is to live on the east coast on a classicist's salary, please learn. You really do not want that job in NYC or Boston or Philadelphia unless you're single or were smart enough not to date one of your peers in grad school.
Sheesh, the place is crawling with daddy's-girl heiresses and you can't snag one of them? I guess you're too busy gearing up for them applications or having a drink to look, eh?
Would it be too much to post the 19? That way we could have a running tally and perhaps inspire people in the know to chime in with updates anonymously.
Sorry to get back to a possibly unpopular topic, but... "And if you have no idea how hard it is to live on the east coast on a classicist's salary, please learn."
Is it really that difficult to make ends meet with your six-figure salaries and oodles of internal funding?
Well, I am TT at a CUNY with a 4/4 load and I do not crack $60k. I'm not starving but do the math and see how it stacks up with the cost of living here. Yeah, if you're a full/chaired professor or at one of the well-funded schools, you'll do fine, but the vast majority are not in that bracket.
I think it's more than 19. I've just listed the ones which start with A, then skipped to U(University of S) and then the rest (V/W/X/Y) and look how many there are..I've added the searches about which we know nothing ( maybe failed searches?)
you're welcome to add the rest..
A/ Ashland University (T-T Greek and Roman History) Ave Maria (T-T Latinist) failed search?
Univ.S-W/ U-South Carolina (T-T Generalist/Comp Lit) U-Southern California (T-T Latin Lit or Greek History) U-Southern Mississippi (T-T Ancient/Medieval History) failed search? U-Toronto (Open Rank Greek Art) (+) U-Toronto-Scarborough (T-T Ancient History) (+) U-Victoria (T-T Latinist) U-Waterloo (Open Rank Generalist) University of the South (T-T Hellenist ) University of the South (T-T Latinist) V/ Villanova (T-T Generalist) failed search? Virginia Wesleyan (T-T Generalist) W/ Wake Forest (T-T Generalist) (+) Washington University-St. Louis (T-T Hellenist) (+) West Chester University (T-T Ancient History) (+) Wellesley College (T-T Archaeology) (+) failed search? Whitman College (T-T Ancient History) X/ Xavier University (T-T General) (+) Y/ York University (T-T Romanist) (+)
It would be much more healthy to denounce the predominance of Boston area sports teams, or, for example, for me to express my delight that the Steelers lost in the first round of the playoffs, as a long-time fan of one of their rivals.
You are way out of line, buddy. Steeler-bashing, fine. Knock the Sox, Patriots, Celtics or Bruins. You are crusin' for a bruisin'.
As mentioned before, there's something strange going on with the Wellesley search. They are supposedly looking for an underwater person but didn't even give two INA grads interviews in Chicago?! Combined with the same search failing last year, there is something not straightforward about the search. Yeah, call me a conspiracy theorist or a hater, but the facts do not lie.
753 comments:
1 – 200 of 753 Newer› Newest»Cornell requested campus interview on 1/6/07
(contacted me by phone at the APA)
oops, I mean 1/06/08!
Dickinson College
Campus interview notification (1/6/08)
U Penn (ancient history)
campus visit request on 1/05/08 (ph)
Georgetown has invited their finalists for campus visits.
The speed of the flyback invites and post-APA rejections convinces me, yet again, that interviews don't matter unless you're really brilliant or really awful. It seems logical that many SCs have a hierarchy already in mind by the APA, if not set in stone. This has been mentioned in other threads, and no one has troubled to deny it...
And what the heck is wrong with that? And why should anyone deny it? Seems like a perfectly natural way of making a decision.
By the way, U-Chicago Roman History SC has invited it's short list, too.
its, not it's
drats
Anon. 6:39 said:
"And what the heck is wrong with that? And why should anyone deny it? Seems like a perfectly natural way of making a decision."
Waste of candidates' time and money? False hopes? I don't deny it's a logical and reasonable method, but it can be a cruel one. Think how you feel in years where it's not good to be a Roman historian.
And invites on the Sunday seem reasonable, before SCs part ways and don't see each other for a few weeks, but Penn on the Saturday? Seems rushed. How would the news affect candidates still interviewing on the Saturday and Sunday?
Anonymous 7:42 (and those listening in on the line):
It's never a waste of time to interview, especially if you're still a grad or relatively junior: after all, it's a good way of getting more people to know about you and your work, and might lead to something that helps your career somewhere down the line. In this line of work, the more people who know about you, the better. That's how you get jobs, conference invitations, etc. (To give an example from my own life: I once applied for a job and did not get it, and wasn't interviewed, but one very senior member of the search committee was intrigued by my work, has remained in touch with me, has invited me to a conference, and is now considering me for a position at his university. It's an imperfect parallel because no interview was involved, but you can see what I mean about how valuable it can be to meet people through this process.)
And anyway, you seem to have misread the earlier post. The person was not complaining about interviews that are "fixed," but rather that committees sometimes/often have a good idea going in of who their most promising candidates are.
You (and others, I suspect) seem to be hung up on how unpleasant and stressful it can be to interview, but if you put aside those emotions and look at the situation logically, you will see that every interview should be viewed as an opportunity that could still pay off long after the position has been filled by someone else.
Sorry to spoil everyone's day with some sunny optimism...
I found that drinking in between interviews made them far less stressful. I had six. I don't know how people do more than that and stay sober.
For better or worse, SCs cast their nets out wide to guarantee a nice, diverse candidate pool but in fact usually have a specific type of person in mind. There is too much at stake to have a weak candidate pool. Now whether they hold to this plan is entirely up in the air, but you could say most searches are generally "fixed" but not specifically "fixed" if you catch my drift.
Why is staying sober necessary to interview? I do far better with a bit of vodka keeping me warm.
From Fairfield 1/9/08: "We will be bringing finalists to campus over
the next several weeks and you are not among them". Well at least I know where I stand.
Why is staying sober necessary to interview? I do far better with a bit of vodka keeping me warm.
I'm not saying it's necessary to stay sober for interviewing. But the hang over the next morning is really no fun. I do not recommend interviewing hung over.
Hangovers? We don't need no stinking hangovers!
That is the purpose for which Bloody Marys were invented.
The fact that the Big Bar closed at 1:30 was criminal. They could have made another $2000 bucks off of that crowd had they stayed open until 3am. And then I wouldn't have had to buy that bottle of Jim Beam in the supermarket.
I had an 8am interview with FancyPantsMcUniversity the next day and the fact that I was at least two sheets to the wind made it go down nicely, thank you.
Amherst College
Campus visit request via email on Jan. 7
I haven't received either a rejection or an invite from Fairfield. Has anyone actually gotten positive news? Was this in response to a thank-you note or unsolicited?
So when are people actually getting flown out to campus?
I have yet to write a job talk and am worried that, if I actually get an invite, I will have to do so in a week or less.
Is the scheduling of these things pretty flexible, or are you locked into a quick turnaround?
Florida State just had their search canceled by state budget cuts. I feel particularly bad for them because they were exemplary in making the interview process clear and straightforward and actually read my writing sample.
Re: 10:32 AM. The Fairfield email was unsolicited.
To Dingbats: Write your job talk now. It looks like a number of places are working fast this year - some institutions are scheduling interviews as early as next week. Some places will be flexible, but of course your 2 or 3 competitors will probably also try to push their interviews out -- and someone's got to go first.
Yale Junior Hellenist Position
Campus Invite on 01.07.08
Thanks for the advice, and what do yo know, I just got an invite!
And I have to come to campus in the next two weeks, at the latest.
So schools are moving earlier this year, it is not just my imagination?
Ohio State University
campus interview notification
UCLA
campus interview notification(01/08/2008)
Florida State just wrote - their search has been canceled by state budget cuts.
Are candidates applying to more jobs than usual? It seemed like the average number of interviews was WAY up this year in comparison to previous years. I know somebody who had 23 interviews, and the average number for friends of mine was between 10 and 12.
More jobs, more of a shotgun approach, a mix?
Maybe this is why schools feel like they have to quicken the process and get people to campus next week! Crazy!
NYU - Greek History has asked candidates to campus.
C'mon Buffalo, contact me already, you know I want you!! ;-)
University of Washington
T-T Archaeology
Campus visit notification
Hannibal,
I think Buffalo said next week they'd meet. Although such statements mean nothing (ask Penn State).
I'm not sure where to post this question, but here goes:
has anyone heard anything yet about Toronto's Greek MC job? I'm thinking that even rumors/wild speculation would be better than the silence.
Do you mean the Toronto Art Department job?
I heard that they didn't interview at the APA but that they also haven't invited anyone to campus. Something strange is going on there, but no one seemed to know what...
Toronto MC
You all didn't hear?!?! The department received a 27 million dollar instructional support grant from the Canadian government, expressly for the study of material cultures in the ancient Mediterranean!
They are in the midst of figuring out how to spread the money around. I think they are going to establish 6 new tenure-stream lines and 4 new 3-year post-doctoral fellowships. Since this happened recently they have decided to delay the current search.
If you're talking about the Thompson chair, I heard an offer has been made and accepted.
Not Me:
That *is* interesting. Any links to news stories we might read about this influx of cash?
Nestor:
I think Not Me is referring to the tenure track Greek Art position, not the tenured Aegean prehistoric archaeologist position. But also interesting that that one has been offered.
Sorry, that should be "open-rank Greek Art position," not "tenure-track."
Gettysburg requested campus interview, 1/9/07.
I took the bold step of contacting Toronto about the Greek art search and was told:
"The search committee is still deliberating on the candidates files. I will revert by end feb/march with news."
So there you have it.
A random thought on interviews:
I was not on our dept's SC, but I attended all of the interviews 'cause, hey, I was there, and who doesn't want to spend 8 hours a day in a hotel room? Seriously!?! It was grand.
There was a lot of talk here, pre-APA, about the usefulness of interviews. If we think we know which four or five will be our top runners, why interview another ten or so?
Here's why: we had our interviews. Some of the ones we thought would be strong were hella strong. Some of the ones we though would be strong were total duds face to face (put this person in front of a class?! No way! Sit next to this person at a faculty meeting? Ugh! Have a drink with this dude? I'd rather bathe a cat!); sometimes chinks in research or methodology or preparation made themselves clear. Sometimes it was just a vibe: a great scholar, but not a good fit for us.
And then there is the dark horse. Without giving too much away, there was one candidate, toward the end, to whom we wanted to speak initially but who, at the end of that long final day, seemed to have no chance to trump our front-runners at the time. This person was obviously strong, but in light of whom we had seen (with very few exceptions, our interviews were all very strong), we found ourselves thinking we had probably already found our fly-backs.
ShaZam!
This dark horse enters the room. Hangovers were waning, and the shaking had stopped; but we were tired and feeling cranky. I'd hardly made it to the book exhibit, and now I had to sit through one more of these things, when there was no chance we were going to hire a...
Whoa. The room lit up. This candidate was not slick or calm or smooth. This candidate was just *real*. Massively enthusiastic. Funny. Honest. Excited: didn't worry about being cool—this person was just excited about her / his work, and excited us. I kept thinking "what's going on?... Am I alone here? This is fantastic! We went way overtime, as neither the candidate nor we had anything immediately following. When we all finally agreed we should part, I felt sad. The candidate left the room, and there was silence as we all sat smiling and kind of giggling at each other, eyes wide.
Finally, I yelled "holy hell! I loved [pronoun]!"
We all cracked up, and spent another ten or fifteen minutes talking about how fantastic this person was, how they [apologies for the awkward pronoun] blew us away, how we had to see more of them.
And so PhD dark horse is now coming out for a visit. Before meeting this person, I had slightly resented them even being on our interview list; not because they weren't qualified or interesting, but because they seemed incredibly marginal to what "we'd" thought we wanted in a new hire.
I have no idea if this person will be offered the job; none of us do. But the point I want to make here is that this person may be offered the job, and it is the interview that did it, no questions asked. The dark horse has become a front runner.
So, interviews are important, and for those of you with fly-backs, consider those similarly important. We already know you are good: we also want to like you. We already like you: but we want to know if we can like you for a few decades. Be yourself. Unless you unlikable. Then, be someone else. Someone likable.
And if you don't yet have a fly-back (or not yet with your top or a favored position), keep in mind that a lot shakes out in the coming month or so: a fly-back may be offered, and accept, a job elsewhere first, and cancel. Depts may only be able to fly out three or four, but have a good five or six they would love to fly out if they were able. Things get very subjective, and SCs operate on the "hope and prayer" model. As much as you all want the right job, SCs want the right colleague.
Good luck!
It was nice meeting you this past Sunday as well! I'm looking forward to coming out!
Union College
Campus invite 1/09/08 (em)
4 candidates total for the 2 positions
Can anybody offer advice/reflections/random thoughts on the difference between a liberal arts fly-out and a phd-granting institution flyout? Should I pitch the job-talk differently, talk about research differently, etc. etc. etc.?
I am excited about both of the opportunities, but I don't know how to approach them. I have been told to not write out my job talk and read it for the liberal arts interview, but that I am expected to do so for the Big U. interview. Is this true? Must I then have two separate job talks? Also, what about the teaching demonstration?
Thanks, and sorry for rambling. I am feeling a bit overwhelmed.
I've done job talks at both of the kinds of places you describe. I don't think they need to be hugely different. My rule of thumb for talks was that they be accessible; I would even think of the students, grad and undergrad, as your main audience, not your future colleagues. Talk to them. (And students do come to these things, even undergrads.)
If you are giving a talk at a SLAC, most likely the committee will let you know that the talk is geared to undergraduates and they want to see how you would interact with them more than how you would faculty in other departments. I have always been given pretty clear guidelines on how they wanted the material presented. Do they want a real research talk or do they want you to present something as if presenting it to a class? I use notes when I teach though not a full script so having something written down is not only recommended but smart. Do they have you on a time limit? If you are asked to structure your talk as a lecture for students, is it in a situation where you would need to finish something in a set time frame as if for a class? Having notes helps here.
If you have any questions about the talk, ask the committee if they haven't already told you who the audience will be and what they are expecting. Nothing wrong with asking them for some guidance.
If you are giving a talk at a SLAC, most likely the committee will let you know that the talk is geared to undergraduates and they want to see how you would interact with them more than how you would faculty in other departments. I have always been given pretty clear guidelines on how they wanted the material presented. Do they want a real research talk or do they want you to present something as if presenting it to a class? I use notes when I teach though not a full script so having something written down is not only recommended but smart. Do they have you on a time limit? If you are asked to structure your talk as a lecture for students, is it in a situation where you would need to finish something in a set time frame as if for a class? Having notes helps here.
If you have any questions about the talk, ask the committee if they haven't already told you who the audience will be and what they are expecting. Nothing wrong with asking them for some guidance.
Augustana College
The wiki says an offer has been made, but that it was a while ago. Has it been accepted, and if not, has a second offer been made yet?
Given anon 10:53pm's comment about the Dark Horse, does it seem like having an interview at the end of the docket is a disadvantage? Everybody on the SC is tired, they have their line-up selected, and by the end may be just going through the motions...
I don't have a great deal of experience, but in my limited number of years on the market I have never gotten a call back from interviews conducted on Sat. night or any time on Sunday. Never. That might say more about me than the various committees. Until now I figured I had no stamina. Now, I'm not so sure. I'm not trying to read malicious things into a nice comment, and this is meant in no way to be critical of Dark Horses' interviewers, but it did get me thinking.
Anybody else have other thoughts on scheduling and viability? If I have to go through this again next year I might very well select only Friday and early Saturday as possible times.
Augustana is inviting new candidates to campus.
I think places are moving faster this year for a couple of reasons.
A) It is the best year for applicants in living memory, at least for most fields. Schools know they have to work quick to get the best candidates.
B) The wiki allows SCs to figure out that their competitors are moving quickly, so they have to respond as well. This is why some of the deadlines we were given at the APA have been rendered meaningless.
I have no complaint at being flown out, but being given 9 days in which to write a job talk really blows.
It sounds like Augustana flew a bit too close to the sun. In this day and age, I'm still surprised how SCs ignore "hirability" when making their decisions. I admit few things give me greater pleasure than to see the collective look of horror on a SC's face when their arrogance precludes them from understanding that a seller's market only gets them so far, especially when they're all angling for some candidate du jour.
One of my friends actually turned down an offer for a pre-APA flyback to Augustana. Said she didn't want to be forced into anything before seeing all her options. I don't blame her. Temple did a pre-APA hire a few years ago and the person ended up leaving.
My Dearest Seneca,
Genau! What was Augustana smoking in moving the search up like that? Was it the department, or the deans, who made this unfortunate decision? Does anybody who knows care to comment?
The place seems like it might actually be a good place to work, and to live, but they put all involved in a tight spot by their strategy. It will be interesting to see how things shake out. Maybe if word gets out on the street about this then next year we won't see as many zany attempts to ensnare candidates before the game even gets going.
Too bad there isn't better communication between the APA and the administrators who are no doubt primarily to blame in these snafus. If the APA could enforce a strict schedule of opening announcements, interview scheduling, and fly-outs, we'd all be much happier. As it is, the betterment of the market as a whole has resulted in some rather questionable strategies employed by institutions.
If this is the person who left for UC-Irvine, I don't think it had anything to do with the way she was hired. She had a family and Irvine just offered a better all around environment for her family.
The APA's role in all this is similar to the Russian Duma. Neither the establishment nor those attempting to join it are particularly keen on placing their fates wholesale into the hands of the APA Placement Service as it is structured now. It's a good idea, but not necessarily one that works all that great.
Seneca, not ignored so much as "blinded" by the same thing making other SCs hot to trot for the same candidate. Shows you that we're too inbred for our own good.
On Pegasus's comment about the quality of Sunday interviews:
-as a candidate, I have the opposite experience; both my campus interviews last year came from Sun. am/Sat. pm interviews. The second and last Sun. am interview - for which I had no chance (it was Berkeley) - was my best interview of the entire conference. In my case, I suffer from nerves early on and calm down as the conference proceeds. Many people have the opposite experience.
-but for interviewers, yes, I think it's a disadvantage. I was one school's last Sun. interview this year, and one SC member was so busy rushing to pick up her suitcase she ignored my proferred handshake goodbye. An hour later, I was one school's next-to-last interview, and they could not run late because of getting to O'Hare. I kept calm and relaxed and funny, but the SC was clearly very stressed out.
Re: late APA interviews
Do SCs submit their candidates to the APA in some ranked order? If not, I can see a late interview hurting middle candidates the most. Presumably, the less qualified candidates had little chance anyway. The superstars presumably would have gotten flybacks short of wielding horns and carrying a pitchfork. If you're a candidate who could have gotten a flyback if your late interview was held on Friday or Saturday morning, that's where the travesty lies.
This just reinforces me in believing my refusal to be available after 4pm any day or on Sunday at all is the right thing.
Has anyone had a 15 minute interview? Yep, I did and it tops my list of horrific moments in Chicago. I've had 1 hour interviews, a bunch of 30 minute ones, but 15 minutes was a first for me. Perhaps this is the wave of the future as SCs hedge their bets by bringing in 20 candidates for interview at the APA?
Scheduling 15 minute interviews is criminal. The main thing I realized interviewing this year is that half the time SCs haven't a freaking clue what they are doing.
Wait, are you saying that a SC scheduled an interview for only 15 minutes?! Or did it just get compressed or cut short at the time. The latter is bad enough, the former absurd.
I had a couple where we had to retire to the hall since the scheduling was backed up, but that isn't the end of the world.
What can a committee learn in 15 minutes?
I hate it when institutions don't send emails to candidates they've shortlisted for the APA, but that they've decided not to fly in for a campus visit. I'm sure there are some institutions where no fly-in candidate posts on the wiki; so that there's no way to know what the status of one's application is.
15 min interview--? That sounds crazy. I normally feel 30 minutes are too short. 45 minutes are about right.
I've only had a 15-minute interview for a temporary job, where we only talked about teaching. It wasn't scheduled as such, they told me when I got to the room. The 1-hour interviews I've had have been for major R1 places.
Has anyone been let into the room while the previous candidate was finishing up?! This happened to me this year. I was so embarrassed; I could see and hear everything, but they insisted I not wait in the hall (they came out and got me). I tried to melt into the wallpaper until the 5 minutes from hell was over (and I made sure to get out of there before the next interviewee arrived).
Tulane University (Greek history)
Campus Visit Request 1/10/08 (em)
"Has anyone been let into the room while the previous candidate was finishing up?! This happened to me this year. I was so embarrassed; I could see and hear everything, but they insisted I not wait in the hall (they came out and got me). I tried to melt into the wallpaper until the 5 minutes from hell was over (and I made sure to get out of there before the next interviewee arrived)."
Eegadds, that is just so gauche and awkward. What a bunch of fools. Sorry you and the other candidate had to endure that!
Wow that is gauche. I had a few "oh, hi, it's you" moments as the previous candidate walked out the door and I walked in, but at least we got privacy.
OOC, is the sense that a few grad programs dominated the interview market correct, or did it really depend on the specifics of the job?
OOC, is the sense that a few grad programs dominated the interview market correct, or did it really depend on the specifics of the job?
Yes, Princeton students had a ridiculous number of interviews. The rich get richer! I think Berkeley and Chicago did OK as well, but Princeton cleaned up. This is a bad trend. Not that there is anything wrong with Princeton or the students there, but anyway.......
Now that the market is getting better the field would profit immensely by a bit of wealth redistribution.
For what it is worth, I know one (non-Princeton) person who landed 23 interviews.
I don't think she saw sunshine for 3 days.
I've seen a fair share of Princeton letters, and IMNSHO, there's rampant inflation across the board. One would think each candidate could walk on water. You've got to hand it to the faculty - they are quite unified in presenting their students in this manner, as if it's a given that by sheer acceptance into the program and completion, their students are superstars. Does this bear out years after the fact? In my experience, not noticeably more than any of the other top schools.
On the question of pitching job talks, my advice is to ask the chair of the SC what they are looking for. Schools can vary widely and even SLAC's often want a "serious" job talk (that is, a 40-45 minute, carefully argued, scholarly lecture). Ask who the audience will be, whether the SC is looking for something more scholarly or more like an ugrad lecture, etc. The job talk is extremely important and it is not uncommon for finalists to miscalculate and pitch it at too low a level (and then get hammered for that when their candidacy is discussed). Ask questions and make sure that you know exactly what is expected of you. Also, ask for a schedule of your visit ahead of time--with whom you will meet; the time of your talk; etc. Some places will send this unprompted, but others won't. It will help you prepare for meetings with individual faculty and also avoid any nasty surprises (as happened to me once when I showed up for a campus visit and found out the morning of the festivities that I would have a 2 hour, PhD exam style "interview" with the entire faculty following my job talk and questions. A little advance notice would have been helpful...).
Princeton has had the rep of inflating job references for at least the last decade; when I'm on an SC, I take them with a huge grain of salt, unless the person has outside references or publications/other awards external to Princeton. This is not to bash Princeton grads, many of whom are excellent. Their weakness, in my experience of having half a dozen or so as colleagues, is their teaching: they do hardly any teaching as grad students, and it shows.
looks like Princeton students are doing pretty good with fly-ins too this year
EVERYBODY inflates references. It is absolutely absurd. If the Princeton faculty do it more efficiently and with better results, that is one, and just one, very good reason to go there!
Even the Oxford letters are beginning to make their students sound like the second coming. It used to be that English and European letter-writers could be counted on for brevity and judiciousness. That style is now going the way of the Dodo. Pretty soon letters of recommendation are going to be worth less than the photocopy paper they come on.
Sorry to break it everyone, but I am the Second Coming. And I do have the letters to prove it. I did not, however, go to Princeton.
Not doing fly-outs yet, but Columbia's History Dept. has narrowed down their list of candidates, apparently. I haven't heard more than that.
Yeah, well I'm Aristotle's "Prime Mover", and I have kick-ass letters from John Cooper and Alexander Nehemas to prove it.
Look upon my candidacy, and despair!
it's neh_a_mas, man
Does that information about Columbia's history department job come from a candidate who has received notice or does it still mean that candidates have not been notified yet?
And for the record, I've heard Nehamas complain about the lack of teaching opportunities for Princeton grads!
But yeah; they have more time to work on publications than those of us doing regular teaching, but have often seemed to flounder a little when presented with a full-time teaching load in their first job, no matter how brilliant they may be. Of course, all individuals differ here.
I really like the approach of gradually wading into pedagogy through t.a.ships rather than being thrown straight into the deep water. This is easy for me to say, however.
Livy, the info on Columbia's search comes from a candidate who was told he/she has made it onto the shortened list of candidates, following informal interviews at the APA/AIA conference.
"it's neh_a_mas, man"
No. Not any more. He changed it to an "e" after I told him that the "e" looks better than the "a" in the font I chose for my CV. He didn't want issues of bad typographic aesthetics dragging down my application. He thinks I'm that good a candidate. And he's kinda into aesthetics.
New College of Florida has invited candidates to campus
Dartmouth T-T Latinist
Campus invite 1/11/08 (ph)
Fordham (TT Latinist)
Campus interview notification
University of Miami campus visit invitation 1/12/08 (ph)
at least 3 schools have all-Princeton short lists??? Give me a break.
Re: Princeton
How did you figure this out?
On a related note, a friend of mine got his Ph.D. in Sociology at Ohio State, which has a very good program. He once told me that despite the program's quality, though, OSU grads were at a severe disadvantage on the job market because deans and provosts
(especially at small liberal arts schools) love to boast to parents that this professor or that comes from Princeton/Harvard/Yale/etc. He had been told this by someone reliable (I can't remember who, but presumably one or more of his professors). I wonder to what extent this sort of thinking applies to our field(s) as well.
i suppose it depends on whether there are in our fields outstanding grad programs at places like OSU that are comparable to Princeton etc.
Re Princeton
yes, I'd like to know too which schools have all-Princeton shortlists
I'm pretty sure Princeton has an all-Princeton short-list
Any other places? With 19 recent, new or soon-to-be Princeton grads on the market this year, we're not going to be outing anyone with this info.
Florida State?
FYI, Princeton has a 'no-Princeton' short-list. Why? Because such inbreeding is beneath us. Usually. Anyway, all the better to export our master race...
Florida State's search was cancelled.
I'm guessing the Princeton-heavy schools are among the Ivy-league wannabes - Tufts, Notre Dame, Michigan, Amherst, Wellesley, Georgetown, Chicago, Washington University, etc.
I heard UCLA has an all-Princeton list. Don't know about the others.
Didn't Princeton hire one of their own last year for the Hellenist job?
I'm guessing the Princeton-heavy schools are among the Ivy-league wannabes - Tufts, Notre Dame, Michigan, Amherst, Wellesley, Georgetown, Chicago, Washington University, etc."
georgetown has no princeton grads on its shortlist.
Any other places? With 19 recent, new or soon-to-be Princeton grads on the market this year, we're not going to be outing anyone with this info.
19?!
Princeton isn't Texas circa 1997. I don't think it is possible for them to have so many on the market at once. They aren't that large a program.
Unless they've been keeping their graduates in cryogenic chambers in order to flood the market in especially good years...... Hmmmmm..... what a devilishly effective plan!
Arizona State
Does anybody know what the status of that search is. They apparently skipped the APA and invited candidates to campus, but I have heard no news. Anybody more clued in than I am?
Cornell has a no-Princeton list, and yet they are an Ivy-League wannabe. Go figure.
Cornell has a no-Princeton list, and yet they are an Ivy-League wannabe.
An Ivy-League wannabe?
Dickinson invited at least 2 Princeton-ites.
Cornell IS an Ivy League school - sheesh.
georgetown has no princeton grads on its shortlist.
No, it's probably something like Harvard, Penn, and Columbia then...
Cornell IS an Ivy League school - sheesh.
Oh, c'mon. It ain't, really. It managed to join the club because of football years ago, but it is just a small step above SUNY-Binghamton. Real ivies can't have schools of hotel management and dairy management.
:8)
No, it is an Ivy because its peers said it was, regardless of its history, or lack thereof. Using the football analogy, it's the Fiesta Bowl of the BCS. It should have been the Cotton Bowl but they screwed up, it's not the Fiesta Bowl's fault. Rutgers, William and Mary, etc. could have very well been the eighth Ivy if they had played their cards right and had some luck. As it stands, Cornell would be a good school even it was not in the Ivy League and I don't doubt it being fine with them, unlike schools like Tufts, George Washington, Notre Dame, etc.
Yep, it has to be a two way street, just like all the job searches going on. It's difficult to take a candidate seriously when they're your lapdog. That said, I would love a job at Tufts...
Yep, it has to be a two way street, just like all the job searches going on. It's difficult to take a candidate seriously when they're your lapdog. That said, I would love a job at Tufts...
What are you saying here? Is this a response to an earlier comment?
U Georgia campus interview
I know that the wiki and blog were set up by and for applicants, but I also know (or presume, rather) that search committee members, and other random faculty members, are regular readers here.
Do these sites providing useful information for that end of the process as well? For example, if I was on a SC I think that I would be interested to know what my competitors are doing in terms of scheduling fly-outs. But I don't know if that intelligence is actionable. Can SCs move their own schedules forward in response? How about the requests for better communication? Do they encourage SC members to send email updates and such to job applicants?
I check this site way more often than is healthy for me, but I am in a waiting game now. But SCs are in one as well, of a fashion. If any faculty/SC members are out there, I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts.
Didn't Princeton hire one of their own last year for the Hellenist job?
Yes, they did. Not good.
This is off-topic, but why isn't it good? I mean, I know the old bromide that departments shouldn't hire their own. But if someone is a good scholar and a good teacher and is a good fit, why in the hell shouldn't their department hire them? Other than because it will look bad to outsiders, I mean.
Sometimes we academics take ourselves and what we do too seriously.
Not to split hairs, but Princeton's hire last year was a Comp Lit Ph.D. who had spent a few years teaching in another university. This is not the same thing as a dept hiring one of their own current graduate students...
Yeah, I'm sure UNC was happy about a recent TT hire jumping back to her alma mater.
Note to all the schools trying to lure a Princetonian. Yeah, you might roll the dice and with 10:1 odds get a good one. Otherwise, you'll probably have a colleague who will try to jump ship to a school "worthy" of his/her talents. The other scenario is you'll have a total dud who's living off of the name. Don't believe me? I can give numerous examples. The latest one I can think of before this one is a Fordham TT person jumping to Cornell. Yet departments will continue to get lured in by these overrated, overly ambitious people.
Everybody,
Enough with the gossip/thinly veiled attacks on recognizable individuals. Please show a bit more class and grace. Discussing departmental hiring preferences and placement records, in general terms, is fine. But these last couple of comments are getting too close to naming names, and are completely inappropriate. I will yank such comments if they veer so close again. I hate doing this, as I think this forum should be self-policing, so please don't force my hand. Before you type, please think about how you'd feel if you were the object of such an anonymous, on-line "discussion"!
-Servius
Thank you, Servius. There has been a hole lot of stupid hitting this blog lately.
I second that.
I third that.
Not to mention the whole lot of stupid that has also hit.
I think the holes are worse than the wholes, personally. But YMMV.
With regard to the more interesting - and less divisive - question of why departments shouldn't hire their own, I think the main argument is that it promotes narrowness. People who have been trained in certain modes and styles of thought by Professors X, Y, and Z will likely continue in that same mode, adding their own refinements as time goes on. Fairly quickly, you get a department where everyone approaches problems in the same way. If the ideal is to have a department where multiple perspectives can be engaging each other and learning from each other, then hiring your own, no matter how talented, risks losing that breadth.
There are, of course, reasonable exceptions. For instance, I believe that it is still tradition for the Yale history department to offer a job to its "best" Ph.D. as an Asst. Prof. each year. Now, that's an enormous department, so one assistant professor doesn't skew viewpoints too much and, in any case, they're still very unlikely to get tenure and will probably wind up someplace else eventually.
Mind you, I'm not sure how well the breadth thing actually works in practice. My approach to classics has absolutely been largely shaped by the model of my advisors. While I've encountered a variety of other approaches in the last few years (at a non t-t job), I don't think they've actually affected my thinking much. Maybe I'm a stick in the mud; maybe that's due to the nature of my colleagues' research. But I suspect that hiring from within hurts the department more than the individual grad student/professor.
Just three quick points for the record:
1. Yes, there are about 19 (give or take a couple) Princeton current and recent grads on the job market this year. So if it seems that we are dominating (sorry, no other term for that!) the market, then that's because we ARE the market this year. I wouldn't be surprised if we form 20% of the job seekers this year for entry-level positions.
2. Just because we are coming from Princeton, seems like too many folks here (and at APA interviews)assume that we are snobs, and wouldn't want to stay in the long term in any school other than another Ivy. Well, my dream job is a SLAC, and same goes for quite a few of my peers. So there.
3. If you're still feeling cranky, go eat some chocolate.
In response to "Dexter"
As an SC Chair I have checked the wikis and famae occasionally. One of my students currently on the market told me about them, so I thought I should familiarize myself with the state of things.
I have to say that I am glad they didn't exist whilst I was looking for work as they would have only fed my neuroses. But I can see their utility, and given the progress of technology, it was only a matter of time before something like this happened. So, weighing all the alternatives, you all have done a good job with them, and they are interesting to watch. Commentators are often a bit too free in their criticisms for my taste, but I also understand that it can be healthy to vent to one's peers.
The information gleaned from them has not impacted our schedule this year. We have to run things by a couple of deans, so their schedule is often more a determinant. That said, I can see how such public information might impact us in the future.
We discussed skipping the APA, and had we thought about video interviewing, we might have gone in that direction. Knowing that Oregon has done it, and with apparent success, will be a factor in our own future discussions. If any candidates who interviewed with Oregon, or any other school who conducted "green" interviews, would like to comment on their experiences, I am sure many people would be grateful to you.
As far as issues of communication, of which I was quite aware thanks to my students, I can sympathize. I have tried to send updates when I can, but writing individual emails to over 140 candidates really is too much. Our office assistant has handled much of that, and quite capably, though it has taken the form of mass-emailing. I think having students in the department who are themselves on the market when we conduct searches has been most helpful.
We are now also beginning to review graduate applications, so it seems like this is a good time to comment on the latest thread. Don't make the mistake of thinking there is much correlation between degree, employer, and objective merits. There are wonderful scholars and people coming out of each and every PhD program. Some will go on to prestigious positions, some not. Most will be good teachers who care about their students, whether those students are themselves ivy-leaguers or not. Sometimes hard-work and diligence win out. Sometimes they don't. So do recognize that there is a certain degree of chance involved, every step of the way.
Think back to how and where you decided to get your own degrees. Who accepted you and who rejected you? Did you decide to apply to or attend a program based on funding, location, a particular faculty member, the needs of your own family, the presence of a now very ex-boyfriend?
The name behind any individual's PhD is built upon much too varied a process to have any sort of predictive value with regards to long-term scholarship. So too with respect to employment. And so too with respect to their personal desires, motivations, and character! Given the process you are currently participating in, you ought to recognize this and comment/act accordingly. There are certain structural inequalities built into the system as it stands, and it will be up to your generation to try and ameliorate them further. But in the meanwhile, don't make things worse!
Best of luck to you all. I enjoyed meeting many of you in Chicago, and am truly optimistic about the health and future of our profession!
"Lycophron"
U Colorado (t-t Hellenist)
Campus visit invite 1/14/08 (ph)
Might I suggest that we use this thread also to announce when we HEAR about other people getting on-campus invites, even if we ourselves don't have them? The wiki worked well because for most jobs there were 10+ being interviewed at the APA, so the odds were good that one of them would update the wiki. But now, with just 3-4 people getting on-campus invites, the odds are much smaller. In fact, I'm teaching at a school that is conducting a search and has invited candidates, but the wiki gives no indication of this, so I know it's happening.
So, if you KNOW of schools that have reached the point of inviting people, please do post. (I'll do so myself, but a bit later.)
Northwestern has made an offer for the Mellon Post-Doc.
1. Yes, there are about 19 (give or take a couple) Princeton current and recent grads on the job market this year. So if it seems that we are dominating (sorry, no other term for that!) the market, then that's because we ARE the market this year. I wouldn't be surprised if we form 20% of the job seekers this year for entry-level positions.
I'm sure you didn't mean to come off as having an inflated view of yourselves, but there are hundreds of people on the market looking for entry-level positions. Princeton might dominate a peculiar sub-speciality b/c of historical strengths and/or current faculty, but you hardly "are" the market as a whole. Doing the math, 19 is 5% or so of the pool.
2. Just because we are coming from Princeton, seems like too many folks here (and at APA interviews)assume that we are snobs, and wouldn't want to stay in the long term in any school other than another Ivy. Well, my dream job is a SLAC, and same goes for quite a few of my peers. So there.
I'm hope you're right, but I'm not sure if your post convinces otherwise. IMNSHO, I would hardly beleive that the average Princeton grad is yearning for a SLAC.
Willamette University
The wiki says they have contacted for campus visits. Is this true? Please, whoever posted on the wiki, can you confirm? I was really hoping for this one, but I'd rather find out the bad news now than wait any longer. And congratulations to you if it is the case. WU is a wonderful place.
Thanks
well, anon 2:47, if we can't shake you in your prejudices, I guess you'll just have to resort to chocolate...
Dear Portland native, I didn't alter the wiki but I also did receive a phone call from Willamette about scheduling an on-campus interview.
McMaster University (T-T Greek Art/Archaeology)
Campus interview notification (em) - 1.14.08
Prejudices? I think s/he correctly pointed out using statistics that you are hardly "the" market. And how can people not think Princetonians are full of themselves when representatives like you choose to err on the side of over-inflating the group with elitist comments like that, intentional or not?
jeez, yalie, lighten up... As it happens I wrote the second chocolate-related post, not the first one, and I was referring to Anon 2:47's refusal to believe that a P'ton PhD might actually want a job at a SLAC. But anyway, go ahead with your Princeton mudslinging, which is what this board has clearly devolved into....
Dear Anon 3:56,
Thanks for telling me the bad news. Best of luck on your visit, and congratulations!!
Time for me to drown my sorrows and think about the Spring! Yay!
I have a t-shirt that says "Harvard Sucks and Princeton Doesn't Matter". As far as we are concerned Harvard is our one rival, and Princeton is just a poseur. But plainly this is not the case when it comes to graduate schools! If I went to graduate school here I think we'd have to say that Princeton Sucks and Nobody Else Matters.
I am in the middle of applying to graduate programs in Classics and a few of the grad students at my university mentioned this blog, so I decided to take a look. What an education!
I have applied to Princeton, as well as Chicago, Berkeley, Columbia and Penn. My advisors say to wait and see what happens and to not get fixated on any one place. But now I really hope I get into Princeton! If one program is the object of so much jealousy when it comes to the job-market, then plainly they must be the top program! All of you complaining about Princeton have done nothing but provide excellent advertising for them. Thanks for making my decision that much easier!
ROLLEYES
This must be a all time low for a Princetonian - to pretend that he or she is a Yalie...
Thanks, Portland Native! Best of luck to you, too.
--Anon. 3:56.
I would add to Servius's earlier comment on criticizing individuals that criticisms of the graduates of entire programs as well as individuals are inappropriate. So Princeton has a lot of people on the market (but they are not THE market, and that comment was inappropriate). So correspondingly they will dominate more than it would seem they should. Some other year Berkeley or Harvard or Yale will dominate.
The job search is hard enough as it is, why make it harder with threads like this?
Can we please move on to other topics?
A hopefully non-controversial topic:
For people who are prepping job talks currently -
Powerpoint? Handouts? Powerpoint _and_ handouts?
What are you all doing?(This may be somewhat less relevant for the pure philologists out there.)
Oh, and Eli, your advisors are right. Grad programs are very fluky in admissions, and it's best to find out where you got in and then weigh alternatives, also taking into consideration things like your social life. (This is not meant to imply that any institution has greater or lower social possibilities than any other, but different people want different life experiences.)
Though overly heated at times and perhaps a bit off topic, isn't this entire website about information? Hopefully, it will veer away from mere speculation, but I find nothing speculative about some of the facts stated here, welcome or not. Once cannot ignore that two recent Princeton alums jumped ship quite early from two VERY good schools in desirable locations (i.e. UNC and Fordham) to scurry back to the Ivy League. I'm sure there are reasons, but UNC and Fordham?!
Anonymous 5:16,
Not to keep the focus on Princeton, but I've heard that because there isn't much to do there a lot of the grad population turns to drinking.
Of course, for some applying there this might be a plus...
You guys ever stop to wonder why there are 19 of us on the market this year? And what do you think my chances are when there are 7 or 8 others (most of them "better" than me on paper) from my program applying to the exact same jobs? When all is said and done the top jobs will be pretty evenly distributed among grads from the top programs I suspect. And next year I'll be back on the market...
Yeah, I'm sure you'll be back on the market next year...after you snag a TT position this year at a "second-rate" school like Fordham.
powerpoint is a highly divisive topic, I'm afraid. An essential presentation tool or a fancy slide projector? powerpoint now marks the great divide between sciences and the humanities (that and funding, I suppose).
I always like a handout; it gives me something to doodle on.
I think it is time to start the uninformed bashing of some other schools. What about Brown?
Given that I have between 0 and 2 campus visits (I don't want to give myself away), and none at schools as good as Fordham, I am the wrong person to be venting on...
Thank you for the post about powerpoint. Unless you're an archaeologist or art historian, I would stick with old-fashioned paper for a job talk. There's less to go wrong. But for a sample lecture, using powerpoint could be a good way to show that you know all the fancy technology stuff.
Please, please no more program bashing. Let's keep this blog friendly and constructive.
Yeah, I'm sure you'll be back on the market next year...after you snag a TT position this year at a "second-rate" school like Fordham.
Ummm, right school, wrong program. She wasn't in the Classics dept. at Princeton, she was in Art & Arch.
And for both the examples given (Fordham and UNC), have you considered the possibility that they moved for very good external reasons, i.e. significant others?
Nope, didn't think so.
A job is a job. It is a rare person nowadays who manages to find the job of their dreams the first time out. Mobility is common, so get over it.
So one would move from UNC (with all the schools and jobs nearby) to Princeton or Fordham (with all the schools and jobs nearby) to Cornell for a significant other? RIGHT...
Please stop this. I know some of you mean well (while it's pretty clear others don't) - but please let's agree to stop with the ad hominem stuff (or ad feminam, as it were...)
I believe the correct internet slang is troll (according to wikipedia, s.v. "troll (internet)"; I couldn't find the entry in RE)
Someone mentioned "hirability" in an earlier post. The way I see it, Fordham and UNC are as much to blame for ignoring the "retainability" of their hires, especially in this dog-eat-dog, cherry-picking culture we live in today. Surely departments can hire just as qualified and interesting people from a slew of other programs who will stay happily for more than 2-3 years.
Stanford University (open rank Latinist)
Campus interview notification
Alas, there is a lot less transparency in our profession, from both ends, than in many others. Our version of a central clearinghouse, the APA Placement Service, is more of a clerical technicality than a service. As a result, both departments and candidates are often left scrambling in the spring with ultimately the discipline as a whole suffering in the end due to failed searches and whatnot.
Yes, I'm also struggling with the power-point versus handout versus power-point plus handout dilemma. The important things fit on one double-sided handout, so my gut feeling is handout only. But my friends tell me that they like to see images during a talk and think it makes a better impression. Some discussion of this here would be very helpful.
If it's really only to demonstrate technological know-how, I wouldn't do it. There is a simple reason for this - technical difficulties. You'll be sweating a bit and the last thing you want to worry about is why only half the screen is showing or why your slides are formatted incorrectly on their computer. Yes, you can bring your own laptop, but this introduces another set of difficulties.
I think if you are giving a good old-fashioned philology talk, use a handout. If history (involving material culture) or archaeology, use PowerPoint. And the two latter should have handouts, to enable note-taking.
So, if I give the talk I'd most like to give, I definitely need to show images. (I'm trying to get the SC's opinion on which talk first, because some of the images are necessarily risque, and I don't want to shock my audience.)
If I show images, my instinct is to put the text up on different slides and not bother with a handout for quotations, as then people will be looking back and forth and it will likely be reasonably dark.
However, I know some people like having the physical piece of paper and the ability to take notes on it. Hence my dilemma - although with handouts there's also the issue of bringing them or getting them printed out by the dept and so forth.
Thoughts and reactions?
Risque? Is this the "Ancient Gay Sex Rawks!" talk we've been hearing so much about?
If you do have relevent images/graphs etc. to accompany your presentation, I think powerpoint is a good addition.
Power point is fine if you really think the images are necessary. But be prepared to give the talk without it by having a handout ready to go (including ample photocopies) just in case something goes wrong. You never know what can happen and you can recycle the handouts later if need be.
I'm of the opinion that no handout is necessary for archaeologists and art historians--and sometimes a handout can be bad news if it steals the thunder from your talk. The handout is really a matter of preference for MC types.
For philologists and historians, I think the above posters who urge caution are spot on. Don’t use images during your job talk if you don’t otherwise. There are many sad stories cautioning against this. If you do use PP for text, beware of boring everyone. If you throw in a few images (see below) for good measure, make sure you know enough about them. (E.g., if you show a copy of Polyeuktos’ Demosthenes, make sure D's hands are clasped [empty]).
As for the nudy pics, I think you're right, Anon. 8:47, to ask first, just in case. But nothing gets more attention than the naked, the overtly sexual, the deformed, or, best yet, the deformed-naked-and overtly sexual. You'll be remembered—because ancient gay hunchback sex does rawk.
Although I actually did cover ancient gay deformed sex in one of my comps, the images I plan to use in my talk are much more conventional and sedate, I'll confess. I won't say anything more specific for fear of rendering my anonymity totally meaningless, but thanks for the perspectives, folks.
I'm well aware of the risks of technical difficulties, but with multiple backups and prep time, it tends to work out all right. I use PP for most of my non-language teaching, so I'm very familiar with it.
Thoughts on this from anybody?
floating in limbo
substitute APA for AHA and you have the same basic situation.
There is a Chronicle thread on this
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,45747.0.html
Chapel Hill Hellenist position
Anybody heard anything?!
How about the Arizona Latinist position?
re:U. of Arizona Latinist Position.
Going by what the search committee said, I would expect this week to be the earliest one might hear.
If you are used to ppt and have relevent/interesting images, I don't see why you shouldn't go ahead. Technical issues might have been a problem a few years ago, but these days everything have been so neatly standardized I think there is no difficulty even if you are doing it for the first time in a new place. One risk I guess is that some dinasour sitting in the audience takes immediate offence for your using an unphilological, unscholarly tool, but that risk is small.
Technical issues might have been a problem a few years ago, but these days everything have been so neatly standardized I think there is no difficulty even if you are doing it for the first time in a new place.
I taught at a school that still has rooms without 3-prong outlets. I was also told once in an interview explicitly that I would not have access to powerpoint for the interview since the department did not have access to a projector. This was recently. There are no guarantees. Always be prepared for a technology failure.
Also don't forget problems that still exist between Mac and PC versions of powerpoint. Don't assume that the format you use will be what's available during your visit.
"re:U. of Arizona Latinist Position.
Going by what the search committee said, I would expect this week to be the earliest one might hear."
Thanks, Poldy. I must have misconstrued that tidbit during Chicago.
The Penn search has been finalized. At the risk of Ralph Rosen's ire, I think it's not out of bounds to say that there are four candidates who hail from Chicago, Georgetown, Lampeter, and Stanford - a healthy group with no Princetonian in sight for you conspiracy theorists.
But Georgetown doesn't have a PhD in Classics, so how could they be from there?
Unless they're from another dept., but Penn's is a Greek Lit search, no?
No one explain to Anonymous 3:23 what's going on with the Georgetown person. Let's see if he/she can figure it out...
Unless they're from another dept., but Penn's is a Greek Lit search, no?
Ancient History
Some of the above affiliations are job posts, not PhD awardees.
Darn Anon. 3:26--I didn't read your post first. Sorry!
No, anon 3:23 is right. I totally have a PhD from G-town. I'm that awesome.
(I guess prosopography is a lost art)
While I will not list names though they will go public soon enough, all the candidates are in non-TT positions (VAP, grad students, etc.) so no one is being "outed." If anything, it does reflect the well-rouned, judicious search that Penn is conducting. In terms of trends, it is not surprising that a top school like Penn is inviting candidates who have teaching experience as VAPs and/or have exceptional qualifications as grad students. I would also like to think Wales-Lampeter suggests that they are not just shooting for something exotic and are considering smaller programs, or one would have expected an Oxbridge representative.
Did anyone else just get the really random application acknowledgment email from Arizona State that said they will begin reviewing applications soon?
I did - and who is the nameless "Director and Professor of Chinese"???
No Princetonians at Penn, maybe, but the NYU Ancient History search is all Princeton, all the time.
That's not surprising about NYU. They've been left on the altar and the victim of faculty openly chasing other positions once they realize that teaching sporadic classes pertaining to their specialities at the IFA is just not worth it when one has to commute from downtown. Yet they continue to chase the least retainable. You reap what you sow - Princeton 10, NYU 0!
I don't think it's so much the commute, but the fact you can't live anywhere near Manhattan with the salary a non-chaired classics prof makes. I think many schools are experiencing this in other places like Boston and the Bay Area.
What does the IFA have to do with a Greek History position?
I don't think the NYU finalists are all Princeton, btw. Maybe somebody can post the institutional affiliations like they did for Penn.
Personally, I hope the Georgetown PhD gets all the job offers. :-)
Dear people,
Please please stop worrying about institutional affiliations. Since many many people do not get plum jobs immediately, one often cannot tell anything from a person's affiliation from a department's "events" page.
This Princeton obsession on the part of posters (or is just one really bent person?) must end. As a long-time observer of and participant in, and hirer of people in, the job market, I can vouch that, long-term, a Princeton PhD guarantees nothing.
It would be much more healthy to denounce the predominance of Boston area sports teams, or, for example, for me to express my delight that the Steelers lost in the first round of the playoffs, as a long-time fan of one of their rivals.
And if you have no idea how hard it is to live on the east coast on a classicist's salary, please learn. You really do not want that job in NYC or Boston or Philadelphia unless you're single or were smart enough not to date one of your peers in grad school.
unless you're single or were smart enough not to date one of your peers in grad school.
This is why I always strongly recommend dating lawyers or future lawyers.
Alas - there is no law school at Princeton... Maybe this is why we turn to drinking...
Sheesh, the place is crawling with daddy's-girl heiresses and you can't snag one of them? I guess you're too busy gearing up for them applications or having a drink to look, eh?
Just to change the discussion (I'm sick of Princeton haters and afficionados), which places haven't decided their on-campus lists? I've counted 19.
Would it be too much to post the 19? That way we could have a running tally and perhaps inspire people in the know to chime in with updates anonymously.
Sorry to get back to a possibly unpopular topic, but...
"And if you have no idea how hard it is to live on the east coast on a classicist's salary, please learn."
Is it really that difficult to make ends meet with your six-figure salaries and oodles of internal funding?
Well, I am TT at a CUNY with a 4/4 load and I do not crack $60k. I'm not starving but do the math and see how it stacks up with the cost of living here. Yeah, if you're a full/chaired professor or at one of the well-funded schools, you'll do fine, but the vast majority are not in that bracket.
THIS SITE IS HEREBY POSTED:
!! PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS !!
still waiting for the final lists...
I think it's more than 19. I've just listed the ones which start with A, then skipped to U(University of S) and then the rest (V/W/X/Y) and look how many there are..I've added the searches about which we know nothing ( maybe failed searches?)
you're welcome to add the rest..
A/
Ashland University (T-T Greek and Roman History)
Ave Maria (T-T Latinist) failed search?
Univ.S-W/
U-South Carolina (T-T Generalist/Comp Lit)
U-Southern California (T-T Latin Lit or Greek History)
U-Southern Mississippi (T-T Ancient/Medieval History) failed search?
U-Toronto (Open Rank Greek Art) (+)
U-Toronto-Scarborough (T-T Ancient History) (+)
U-Victoria (T-T Latinist)
U-Waterloo (Open Rank Generalist)
University of the South (T-T Hellenist )
University of the South (T-T Latinist)
V/
Villanova (T-T Generalist) failed search?
Virginia Wesleyan (T-T Generalist)
W/
Wake Forest (T-T Generalist) (+)
Washington University-St. Louis (T-T Hellenist) (+)
West Chester University (T-T Ancient History) (+)
Wellesley College (T-T Archaeology) (+) failed search?
Whitman College (T-T Ancient History)
X/
Xavier University (T-T General) (+)
Y/
York University (T-T Romanist) (+)
It would be much more healthy to denounce the predominance of Boston area sports teams, or, for example, for me to express my delight that the Steelers lost in the first round of the playoffs, as a long-time fan of one of their rivals.
You are way out of line, buddy. Steeler-bashing, fine. Knock the Sox, Patriots, Celtics or Bruins. You are crusin' for a bruisin'.
Bean-Title-Town USA!!
I had an APA interview with UVic, but have heard nothing since. They were very nice, for what it is worth!
Any word on the 1-year position at Duke? Its not in the canonical list of 19 (or so) you've got here . . . so just wondering.
As mentioned before, there's something strange going on with the Wellesley search. They are supposedly looking for an underwater person but didn't even give two INA grads interviews in Chicago?! Combined with the same search failing last year, there is something not straightforward about the search. Yeah, call me a conspiracy theorist or a hater, but the facts do not lie.
The Villanova job isn't due till Feb. 1, so it is hardly a failed search.
Post a Comment