Has anyone heard how the proposed $5.2 billion in budget cuts in NY may affect searches this year? I noticed that there are at least several state universities in NY conducting searches this year.
Attention all MC Peeps with a willingness to teach 4/4 in many disciplines:
St. Ambrose University, Tenure Track, Assistant Professor, with specialization in Classical Greek and Roman History and Art History. The position is a joint appointment in support of the university's interdisciplinary programs in Classical Studies and Art History. Earned PhD by August 2009. Teaching load (4+4) will include courses in Greek and Roman History and Art History, Latin at all levels, as well as general education courses in World Civilizations and introductory Art History. Successful candidates will show firm commitment to excellent teaching and evidence of scholarly engagement and future potential. The position is contingent on funding approval. Review of applications will begin December 15, 2008, and continue until the position is filled. Submit cover letter, curriculum vitae, a statement of teaching philosophy, and a list of three professional references to: Director of Human Resources, St. Ambrose University, 518 West Locust Street, Davenport, Iowa 52803-2898. AA/EOE
NOTES: International Candidates Will Be Considered
I teach in one of the larger SUNY schools (actually no longer SUNY per se, but no matter). There is a soft freeze. Some faculty searches are moving forward, while some are not, and there is a sharp slow-down with staff hirings. T-T lines are most likely to be continued, while VAP slots might not be. I suspect that the spring market will be especially grim, since Deans are likely to nix sabbatical replacements and ask departments to cover courses or shrink curricula. There might be adjunct possibilities, but full-time VAP hires will shrink dramatically.
I wish this were less gloomy, but things are looking increasingly bad for all involved. Smaller SUNY and CUNY campuses will be hit especially hard.
With all of this mind I would strongly encourage everybody to apply as widely as possible NOW. Don't think the Spring market is going to help, because there is a very good chance it will be practically non-existent. Belt-tightening has not really hit yet, but after January it will, and with a vengeance.
Yeah, it's true. I admit it. You've totally cracked the code.
I went to Princeton and am now at Stanford. I am not yet on the job market (I still haven't even finished my qualies), but Columbia just called out of the blue in order to offer me an APA interview. They also said, unofficially mind you, that if I finish this semester's classes strong and get a decent haircut then I can be assured of a campus invite. It is really, really sweet to have this trumping pedigree.
I am soooooo glad I didn't go to Harvard or Berkeley or Michigan or North Carolina or Anywhere Else. Things would have been impossible for me. I'd actually have to send in something called a "writing sample" (WTF?). I'd have to type out a CV longer than two lines (Princeton on one, Stanford on the other; different type-faces, though. It looks awesome.). I'd have to ask faculty to write actual letters of recommendation instead of simply watching them pick up the amazing Princeford JobsPhone (an Apple product, natch) and calling up their buds in the cities where I want to live. I'd even have to finish my degree and teach for a few years before getting tenure. Ugh. Double ugh!
I don't know how the rest of you non-Princeton/Stanford types do it. You have real courage. We all admire you. Often we feel like we are you, but only for a fleeting moment.
Admit it though, reality does bite sometimes. Doesn't it? It's not just a series of clips from "Do the Right Thing", "Say Anything" and "Stand and Deliver", or is it? Inquiring minds want to know!
Not to chance the subject but... can I just vent about the ass-backwartude of our field? Some places have started doing online apps this year, which is just fab-u-lous, except that almost all are asking for paper applications IN ADDITION. Which means more work for applicants than when we just had to mail stuff in. WTF?
"You're "trying to gauge" how many people Columbia has contacted? Probably lots. Certainly every applicant from Stanford and Princeton."
I am a recent Princeton PhD, and no, Columbia did not contact me, even though my formet diss. advisor is married to someone who is on the Columbia search committee. Believe it or not, Columbia really is looking at the merit of applications, rather than just asking for a sample from everyone from Princeton (this is not meant to diss the merits of my application, but...).
So if you are trying to start yet another round of Princeton bashing, please be advised that the big name, big as it is, does not necessarily open all the doors for us.
The Princeton obsession is odd. It's one of maybe three to six schools that reliably have extremely strong placement. Is "Princeton" shorthand for "elite graduate program" in this discussion, or are there actually people out there who believe that one program is so dominant? Do people who believe this have any data to support their belief?
So I've said a couple of times (this year and last) that I made a list of institutions by t-t and non t-t placement for 2006-7 (based on the wiki). I thought it would be useful and I also thought it would shut those anti-Princeton/Stanford whiners up (I'm not from either). Should I post it somewhere? I can't guarantee it's error-free but it's a better guide than paranoia.
i for one am not sure that everyone is "paranoid" or "whining", although that would perhaps be more comforting to many in the field. there may very well be some opposition to the kind of "Classics" that these (elite?) programs promote and the very notion of some kind of ideal associated with these programs.
Your list of institutions and placement is inherently flawed because it did not (as far as I recall) take account of degree date. Thus in abolute terms graduates of second-tier schools did as well as, say, those from Princeton or Stanford.
But to compare someone with a circa 1998 degree from, say, Texas who has just been denied tenure but gotten another TT job with, say, an ABD from Stanford who has also just landed a TT job isn't helpful.
What people here grumble about it seems to me is that ABDs from certain schools are scooped up far out of proportion to those from schools like Michigan or Texas etc.
No one is bashing Stanford or Princeton for having excellent placement rates. Your statistics, however, make it seem like all the good schools have near 100% placement rates for their ABDs, which is very far from the truth; only some do. Again, there is nothing inherently wrong, unfair, or conspiratorial about this BUT LET'S PLEASE ADMIT IT IS A FACT. Move on.
I'm perfectly aware of that, but thank you. If I didn't already have a job I'd be happy to work out which hire got their PhD when. What I was hoping, as I said at the time, was that someone else would compile the data for other years. That would give a better picture. But I suppose blind carping may be constructive in its own strange way.
Wow, panic is setting in, and it's not entirely clear why.
Where candidates went to school can and probably to some extent ought to figure into the decision. Those who began their careers are more prestigious places are naturally going to have an advantage over those who didn't. And why not? In a sense, one might be justified in thinking that part of the work of identifying really promising students had been done for the committee way back when, when these grads were applying for schools/programs in the first place. Is that fair? Maybe, maybe not. But it's at least reasonable to suppose so. That's how colleges work, based on the SAT and all the rest.
I don't know. The idea that my SAT score somehow decided where I ended up getting a job after my PhD is a little distressing. Kinda like telling someone they won't ever get tenure because they didn't go to pre-school.
I understand the distress of those who dislike the earlier post. But it's a real problem. Let's say you're on a search committee, since it's likely everyone reading this will be in the near future. You get 100 applications for a single spot (which is a realistic number, probably even a little low for some places). How would you go about processing them? Personally read all 100 of them? Only read part of them? Would you set a cutoff of grades, dissertation topic, recommendations, what?
Perhaps departments should stop posting ads that essentially say that anyone with a Ph.D. in anything can apply. Maybe that way they will get fewer applications that they need to focus on. You have to respect the University of Michigan this year: they said right out that they recently hired a Latin poetry person, and therefore they don't have an interest in such types for this year's Latinist/Roman historian search. I don't remember seeing a department be that admirably blunt before...
"You get 100 applications for a single spot (which is a realistic number, probably even a little low for some places). How would you go about processing them? Personally read all 100 of them? Only read part of them? Would you set a cutoff of grades, dissertation topic, recommendations, what?"
The quickest ways to cut down a stack are 1). exclude applications from people whose work obviously does not fit the position advertised and 2). read the applicant's own, and her/his recommenders', descriptions of the applicant's research to see if it seems at all interesting and promising. If it does, then you pretty much have to read the writing sample. But sometimes things can be made easier in the initial pass by splitting a committee in two and giving half of the files to each subcommittee.
The last time I was on a search committee, we also cut out all ABDs. In the end we did hire someone who completed their diss in the spring before taking the job in the fall, but only because we had to go back to the applicant pool a second time. I am on a committee again right now, and again I'm going to cut down the giant stack by only looking at apps from those who are out of grad school.
Perhaps departments should stop posting ads that essentially say that anyone with a Ph.D. in anything can apply. Maybe that way they will get fewer applications that they need to focus on.
Often (for those departments with graduate programs) this is the sign of a weak, divisive department where no one is really in charge. Then they make matters worse for themselves by getting hundreds of applications and having epic fights over the job.
Why don't searches explicitly say degree must be in hand NOW. The only reason I can surmise is the desire to get the next best thing hot off the presses. But c'mon, how many of these "superstars" end up being real superstars 10-20 years down the road? And how many scholars who end up being superstars were branded so straight out of grad school? I think we will find that more future superstars get missed and that most of the fresh scholars we prematurely crown as superstars end up being average, which isn't so bad. My point is that this desire to snatch up the next best thing is foolhardy at best. Wait at least 2 years to get a better bearing on how they will pan out. (I'm talking about research institutions here.)
Re: the Temple job. When I first saw the ad on the Placement Service site, it said "Roman history." That was two weeks ago. Now it says either Roman history or Greek prose. And the deadline was yesterday. What gives? I would have given it a shot for Greek prose (depending on how they define that).
Anon 12:53, Temple's August announcement was just for Roman history. The revised description, adding Greek prose, was already in the Oct. early edition (as I recall, there was some confusion at the time, but it's clarified in the October regular edition and on the APA website). Sorry, but you're mistaken.
While we're talking ads, anyone want to speculate on how ugly tomorrow's listings will be? Or why the Placement Service seems incapable of sending an e-mail in a timely fashion? It's not difficult. And yet it looks like we will get November's batch of ads a full week after the APA's deadline for those listings. Now that's a problem that needs some attention. C.M.C.G., by any chance are you reading? Late registrations are a problem, but let's be honest: the Placement Service needs a complete overhaul. Its inefficiency just boggles the mind.
The Placement Service is a train wreck. And it is a symptom of this silly field that the APA continues to charge fees from job seekers and institutions and year after year provide the same poor service, yet no one does anything. Plus how about the issue of the APA having such primitive technology?? Submitting camera-ready cvs? Yikes. The APA director and officers don't care, nor do the institutions who list with the service. There are consistent problems with lateness and professional goofs, such as last year's episode of the coordinator sending a mass email with all registered candidates' emails in the open. But since things in N. American Classical studies change at a pace that rivals the movement of glaciers, the Service will be overhauled at some point in a far distant future ....
Just to pile on - the web ads on the Placement Service site really annoy me. Internal links are often wrong, and the page used to be alphabetized, so it was easy to find the ad you wanted if that happened. And it's often hard to find an update for an ad, if there was one (the Temple problem above illustrates that), nor do they update quickly - once a month only. The job market moves faster than that, especially in the spring.
And the ads are almost always late, annoying if there are due dates close by. The Placement Service itself wants jobs to be advertised a month before their due date, but often that rule is ignored. Surely the APA has the basic web technology to have some sort of searchable bulletin board for ads, a la Chronicle of Higher Education?
To add to this, and respond to the last post -- the APA's technology infrastructure is stuck someplace in the 1990s - it appears that they author their homepage with "Claris homepage 3.0" which is vintage 1999 or so, I think. So you want searchability? Forget it.
I am sure they are overworked and underpaid, and our own complaining is partially due to the fact that we are on the receiving end of a difficult process. Fine, got that out of the way.
The APA does a TERRIBLE job at this. Why must they release ads once every 30 days? Why not post them to a website as soon as they are received? How hard would it be to put them into a searchable and taggable file online? Not very! Why do they insist on using a ridiculous paper system at the conference? How hard would it be to invest in some relatively inexpensive scheduling software and post the results online as they become available? Not very!
If they were stuck in 1999 things would be five times as well-run. They are way back in 1983. I wouldn't be surprised to discover them using a few TRS-80s in order to run the whole shebang. Invest in some new hardware and hire somebody to rehaul the whole system. Everybody's life would be easier, especially the poor schmucks who have to deal with stressed job candidates in the meat-market room.
I've been on the market for three years running and each year I get more and more angry at how absurdly incompetent the APA Placement Service is. I swear to all that is holy if I ever get a tenure-track position I am going to do my best to get on the placement service committee, figure out what the heck goes on there, and hopefully change it! Gahhhhhh!!!
To add insult to injury, I would venture to guess that there's been jobs in the past that have failed IN PART due to this Byzantine system. There are so few precious jobs as it is, wouldn't you think that priority #1 for the APA would be making sure that every one gets filled? We could go years without have a conference and I would venture to say that the discipline would be fine. You have a couple years that zero jobs get filled and it could have ramifications for decades (candidates leaving the field, departments missing a window to fill positions, etc.). So what IS the APA's top priority? To sit there and look pretty?
Within the last three years I raised several issues relating to the Placement Service and its technologically outdated and inefficient way of doing things with people at the APA who have the power to effect change, and have seen no evidence of movement in the right direction. Perhaps someone should run for the APA's Placement Committee (or whatever it's called) on a platform of much-needed reform. I'll vote for that person if their statement shows an awareness of the issues.
I don't mind the disorganization of the Placement Service; I mind the rudeness. I can't remember if it was last year or the year before that one of the job listings came out several days late, with a very flip message about how RP didn't send them sooner because she had been on vacation. Thanks.
And then forget any kind of anonymity in the survey they do about the Placement Service at the end of the job hunting season. I didn't bother with the survey last year. Are they afraid of an honest assessment? I guess they should be, but it might actually serve some purpose if they did it anonymously.
"Perhaps someone should run for the APA's Placement Committee (or whatever it's called) on a platform of much-needed reform. I'll vote for that person if their statement shows an awareness of the issues."
Change is coming to Philadelphia. Yes we can.
I have the impression that all candidates already say they're going to bring us into the 21st century, right?
My assumption is that the professional personnel running the service is technophobic and continues to use paper slips by choice. That's something that can happen in a very small organization. But maybe I'm wrong about that.
the placement service has always worked quite well in my experience. The jobs come out in time to apply and they handle much of the scheduling. It is quite humane and straightforward. -poldy
Why don't they hired some pimple-faced work-study student who knows some html. 10 hours/week would run them what? $200/month? Job announcements could be sent online using a form and this student would just have to cut and paste. Imagine that, jobs posted within 24 hours of arrival. The webpage as it stands now is ca. 1994. Every time I visit the site it feels like a time warp but I'm not using a 486 AT computer in a dorm room.
While the service leaves much to be desired, I second Poldy's comment (welcome back!) that the system works pretty well most of the time. I would hate to hear about each job as it's posted--or would hate to have to check constantly for website updates. (Can you imagine all the new avenues for obsessiveness?) Bundling the ads gives this process a welcome kind of rhythm and encourages those placing ads to do so on some sort of schedule. When the ads seem late--say Texas Tech's position this month--I blame the school, not the service. I feel the same way about schools that don't advertise with APA.
I do agree that the website itself is dated and it blows my mind that the AIA positions aren't listed on the APA site, too.
"Why don't they hired some pimple-faced work-study student who knows some html."
At the risk of letting my imagination run riot: think of an extremely small office run by a technophobe who sees nothing wrong with the way things are and has no interest in introducing things that s/he does not like or understand into the environment that s/he controls, and feels threatened by the prospect of being made expendable.
As I say, and I'm serious, this is entirely a production of my imagination: I have no knowledge of the office, apart from having used the service a couple of times. But this is how I explain the state of the service to myself.
Poldy, who may be a real person (I like to think so) or just some weird oral composite, was a very soothing influence last year, kind of like the Buddha of FV. His/"Their" posts didn't seek to offend anyone or show you how just much smarter than you he/"she" was (oh, this is just getting plain irritating, it's not like anyone writes "Homer")--anyway, Poldy was nice and I for one was grateful for that. So it's good to see him back (and I wasn't even one of the two posters who already welcomed him). See, if you don't post anonymously you might get some weird classics fanclub. Result. Best wishes, Poldy!
Leopold the Scarecrow? I'm confused. And what does that have to do with the gender of the poster? And why are there no jobs? (Don't answer that, I'm just wailing). Guess I'll just save my Philadelphia money and buy an ounce of gold and a small goat. You know, to hedge my bets.
I'm pretty sure that it's *canned* pet food that has traditionally been resorted to in hard times, since it can be used in recipes that call for meat. I mean, not that I don't like the idea of everybody crunching away on 9 Lives.
I also was pleased to see poldy back. I was afraid s/he completely left the profession last year after communications fell off in the spring.
I was actually pleasantly surprised by today's job ads. 4 I will apply for, 5 if I get up the courage to apply to a place I had an on-campus at a few years back. (And no, I'm not a Latinist.)
Fancy Feast! Now that's good eatin' in any economic environment. I defy anyone to find a canned meat marketed to humans that is more delicious than Chopped Grill Feast.
I too will be applying to many of the jobs listed, but it's a discouraging sign on the whole that most are 1 or 2 years... Then again, there's always Abu Dhabi.
Fancy Feast! Now that's good eatin' in any economic environment. I defy anyone to find a canned meat marketed to humans that is more delicious than Chopped Grill Feast.
But have you seen the new Fancy Feasts? They make them sound like you'd want to eat them - I just bought my cat "Turkey Primavera with Garden Greens" for her Thanksgiving dinner. It actually SMELLS good.
I think the slim pickings in the November list can be attributed to T-T lines being frozen. I bet the rash of temporary positions are an attempt to get sabbatical replacements lined up before the Spring budgets end up canceling them as well. Normally we'd see these jobs in the February and March listings.
I think I'm finally in the camp that believes that classics is dead (and I disagree with most of WKH?). We have all these boomers clinging on to their jobs until they literally keel over and die. In the meantime, we'll have a bunch of young Ph.D.s leaving. What's going to happen in 5-10 years when these geezers are finally 6 feet under? There will be much fewer qualified people to take their spots and it's even more likely that they won't be replaced. Yeah, we'll still have classicists here and there, but they will be the oddballs in language, art history, and history departments. Thanks a lot, boomers, for everything, including the national debt.
We need to consider as well that people who were planning on retiring this coming year have now backed out because their retirement accounts lost 20-40% in the recent stock market hit. I have at least 3 colleagues in other departments who were planning on retiring within the next 1-3 years who now say they can't. It may not be that a line is killed or frozen but that the person whose line it was isn't leaving anymore. Or, the department has asked them not to leave so they don't lose the line. That might explain, in part, the scarcity of jobs this year.
These latest postings make me want to say to the Panicked and Depressed: Welcome to our world! Material culture job-seekers have been living here for quite some time. If you've got stamina, it's not such a bad place.
OTOH, I find the number of good MC positions all but unchanged from last year (and the year before). Any other MC's agree? Or am I being oddly optimistic?
This boomer just made sure that at least one position is not frozen and was able to expand the department by one position. So perhaps wishing me six ft under is a bit ungracious. Perhaps you might rather go figure out how not to underwhelm my committee during our interview in Philly.
"OTOH, I find the number of good MC positions all but unchanged from last year (and the year before). Any other MC's agree? Or am I being oddly optimistic?"
There's really no where to go but up, so I don't see it as a good or bad sign.
"So perhaps wishing me six ft under is a bit ungracious."
Depends, are you wearing Depends and need to take the elevator to make it to your office? Are you making $150k/year teaching a class per term that is at the 800 level? Are most of your hours spent working from home rather than at school? Are you old enough to remember Sputnik? Then YES, retire already, voluntarily or involuntarily.
"Depends, are you wearing Depends and need to take the elevator to make it to your office? Are you making $150k/year teaching a class per term that is at the 800 level? Are most of your hours spent working from home rather than at school? Are you old enough to remember Sputnik? Then YES, retire already, voluntarily or involuntarily."
Now, now. If he retired, the university would probably freeze the line anyway. What good would that do anyone?
That's my entire point. It's not about one person, but about their generation as a whole. If the boomer's barely hanging on to life had retired gradually over years, like most other disciplines, classics would likely be more productive and less expensive now. Wouldn't this go a long way toward making it more attractive to deans who are now questioning our very existence? It would have also guaranteed the discipline's future by having junior faculty in place before the questioning got more intense and the economy got worse. As it stands, the last of the echo boomers are coming on the market now to find almost all the seats still taken. Combined with the fact that the echo boomers did not enter the humanities in nearly as many numbers - and will now leave academia in increasing numbers - this might spell the coup de grâce for the discipline in 10 years. Surely there wouldn't be enough qualified people if all the boomers retired now. What will it look like in 10 years - fuglier. I doubt the echo boomers will have hung around in VAPs for 10 years.
In this environment, however, malt liquor and a big bag of dry food is all we can reasonably expect.
We have all these boomers clinging on to their jobs until they literally keel over and die. In the meantime, we'll have a bunch of young Ph.D.s leaving.
Well, the obvious solution here is for job seekers to consume the flesh of aged faculty. This would not only open up a number of positions, but also provide a source of precious (and delicious!) calories.
Now, some may say that being a known cannibal is likely to hurt one's chances of being hired into one of those positions, and that therefore this strategy, however mouthwatering, would risk being self-defeating. Yet that is not entirely clear to me. We have too little data so far to say whether cannibals fare any worse (or better!) on the market than scholars who refrain from consuming members of their own species.
"That's my entire point. It's not about one person, but about their generation as a whole. If the boomer's barely hanging on to life had retired gradually over years, like most other disciplines, classics would likely be more productive and less expensive now."
Wah? Some of these people are in their 50s! Is that when we start putting our scholars out to pasture these days? What is this? Logan's Run? And those in their 60s are still vibrant scholars and teachers! I really hope my life doesn't end so soon. That means I've only got 20 or so left before y'all take me out behind the shed and shoot me.
The field is threatened by baby-boomers? No, I think it's threatened by the massively greater importance of science, profile of social science, and the ever-increasing interest in non-Western cultures; and by the tanking economy. That's it, those are the threats. But go ahead, don't let me keep you from scapegoating. (I'm in my twenties by the way, just in case you think I'm a vampire leeching your blood). And I only know of one colleague in the institutions I'm familiar with who's stringing things out (into his late seventies, and trust me he doesn't need the money). You should feel free to scapegoat him personally - he's not very popular anyway.
The field is threatened by baby-boomers? No, I think it's threatened by the massively greater importance of science, profile of social science, and the ever-increasing interest in non-Western cultures; and by the tanking economy. That's it, those are the threats.
Nonsense. The fact of the matter is that the greatest threat to our field is gay Classics. If gays are permitted to do the same kind of Classics as the rest of society, who knows what effect that will have on traditional Classics—and at a moment at which Classics needs most of all to be strengthened, not further undermined. Since the beginning of time Classics has been defined as a sacred union between a straight man and a Teubner, and that has always worked out fine.
"Don't you geezers have a doobie to smoke somewhere? When did FV get frequented by so many lurking tenured faculty?"
I strongly agree. The last thing this blog needs is any kind of participation from people who have succeeded in getting tenure-track employment and who serve on search committees.
Last year, some of the best insights came from people who have real jobs, especially tenured real jobs. Without them, this blog is nothing but a bunch of prattle with the occasional insight. Not that the prattle isn't sometimes enjoyable, but it isn't useful, other than as a form of catharsis for some.
The last thing this blog needs is any kind of participation from people who have succeeded in getting tenure-track employment and who serve on search committees.
What's the deal with Florida? Have they just announced they'll phone interview in November, or has someone actually been invited to phone interview? I.e., should I put my votives in a different basket? (Dwindling votives, stupidly large basket).
Last year, some of the best insights came from people who have real jobs, especially tenured real jobs. Without them, this blog is nothing but a bunch of prattle with the occasional insight. Not that the prattle isn't sometimes enjoyable, but it isn't useful, other than as a form of catharsis for some.
Yes, it almost makes one regret that many of them are about to meet the fate of Thyestes' children. Perhaps it would make sense to extract some pearls of wisdom before turning them into ribs and rump roasts.
Or perhaps it would suffice simply to eat the brains along with everything else.
I'm somewhat concerned that frying the brains would cook the ideas out, however; the safe thing to do would be to eat them raw, which might not be so pleasant. On the other hand, zombies eat raw brains all the time, and they obviously can't get enough of them. You never see a zombie saying "No thanks, I've had enough brains for now." So maybe they're not so bad.
Anyone have any advice on applying for jobs in Canada?
So far as I understand it, in general the best advice is, "be Canadian." Or at least, "don't be from the States." Although I can think of exceptions in recent years, so maybe that's no longer the obstacle it once was.
I think the actual law is that they have to prove that there were no Canadians better suited to the job than the non-Canadian they hired. So there's no harm in applying. Just be kick-ass.
As an American hired in Canada who has served on a search committee, I can offer some insight that is not mere speculation. The law was more strict in the past, but loosened a few years ago (not exactly sure when). The rule at my university was that consideration of nationality did not come into play until the actual job offer --that meant if a department created a short list that contained no Canadians, then nationality never became an issue. We had to provide our short list to the Dean with a justification of our chosen hire (I think that is pretty normal even in the US). If there was a Canadian on the list, one just had to explain that the non-Canadian was clearly better -- but it definitely had to be explained. This was also the point at which we had to justify gender inequalities vel sim (which was defined by a balance, so in some cases and in some departments that did not mean "hire women.") I have not checked, but it is possible that other universities have a different system and consider nationality at a different point in the process. And Quebec is a whole other story. My impression was that departments use the Canadian card just like they use anything else. If a faculty member had a favorite candidate who happened to be a Canadian, then their nationality was a big deal. It's just another factor for SCs to fight over. Additionally, Canadian universities are concerned with a lot of the same things those in the US are, and having a new hire with a fancy degree and international connections (what an easy way to seem "international"!) is desirable. One of the things that shocked me during the search was that there was a big hurry to send out our ad because the province does not produce enough PhDs to fill all the jobs that open. Of the top of my head, I can think of 7 jobs that opened in my region over a 2 year spam: 6 went to non-Canadians and the 7th to a Canadian with an American degree. That said, I do think think one of the best things to be on the market is a qualified Canadian who has studied in the US. DO NOT hesitate to apply for a Canadian job just because you're not Canadian. If you are a good fit, your application will be taken seriously -- or at least as much as it is in the US.
A Canadian SC member once explained to me that the rule was that they could not even READ non-Canadian applications until they have decided that there were no Canadians qualified for the job. So all the applications from non-Canadians were simply filed away for the (highly unlikely) case that they might be needed later. But enforcing this policy does depend on each university, to some extent.
Another Canadian former SC-member here. It used to be that there had to be two searches. The first search was Canadian only, and only if it failed would there be an international search, often the following year. That rule changed maybe a decade ago, and is probably what anon @ 11:33 was told. Now there is one search, but Canadians have to be identified and if they are not appointed, explanations have to be made (as outlined by anon @ 10:49). So my advice is to apply.
Zing, the availability form arrived today! Where to begin? It seems like prime time for another Placement Service pile-on:
(1) When was the last time you saw carbon triplicate? I am tempted to frame this relic. (2) Speaking of carbon, the environmental impact of this beast must be pretty heinous. We have the interwebs for communicating this kind of information. Everyone please remember to recycle the enormous envelope it was mailed in. (3) It cost the APA a dollar to send this to me. Think what that postage budget could buy! Scheduling software? The time of the aforementioned work-study student? A CLUE?!
Put me on the placement committee. I'm ready for battle.
I admit to wanting to defend the Placement Service a while ago when everybody was piling on.
Then the triplicate scheduling form arrived. Holy bureaucratic incompetency Batman!! WTF?!?! Why can't the APA set up a website where candidates and schools can click on a few boxes to do this? What a waste of money, paper and time.
The Placement Service has always used this form. The last seven years, either I or a friend have been on the market, so I know.
What I want to know is are they really going to email us our interview schedules in mid-December like they promised in the summer? If they actually do, I'll take back three mean things I've thought about them.
I realize that the placement service is a convenient whipping post, but having just witnessed the placement service of another discipline (which shall remain nameless) I have to say that Renie et al are doing a heck of a job, and not in the Brownie sense. Seriously, it's not easy scheduling a dozen interviews per job in a way that is convenient to the committees and all the applicants they want to see. The other discipline lets the institutions arrange things themselves. The total lack of centralization ends up meaning that some institutions interview before their posted deadline have expired! To top it off, many institutions just show up at the meeting and pin up a sheet of paper on a bulletin board and then anyone who wants can leave a resume to be considered, maybe, by the committee, if they stop by. And to top it off, all the interviews take place in a public brothel-like setting, separated only by opaque curtains. I think we have a lot to be grateful for. I don't know if it's all thanks to Renie, but we're lucky as it is.
having just witnessed the placement service of another discipline
When you're doing something in a needlessly bad way, it's not much of a defense to say that other people have found even worse ways of doing it.
it's not easy scheduling a dozen interviews per job in a way that is convenient to the committees and all the applicants they want to see.
Actually, with scheduling software, this should be really extra super easy. Today's modern computing machines are neat.
I think we have a lot to be grateful for.
Of course we do. We should be grateful that we don't live in a Sudanese refugee camp, too. But it doesn't therefore follow that there's no point in improving our conditions of existence so long as they are already preferable to living in a Sudanese refugee camp.
It's the Saturday after Thanksgiving and I'm in my office reading through my half of the 180+ applications my department received. Decided to take a break, skim the latest chatter on Famae Volent. To offer some insight into at least one department's methods: we have four SC members plus a chair of the committee. Each member will read half of the files + any others that are relevant to our research specialties. The chair will read through all files. I spend an average of 20 minutes on each file. I start with the cover letter, which I read carefully. I glance at the CV, noting things like publications, papers delivered, degree status. I then read through the recommendation letters, largely looking for warning signs but also trying to get a sense of the way the rec letters mesh with the candidate's description of his/her work and its importance. For the most part, I find rec letters fairly useless. Unless I have decided on a firm yes or no, I then begin to read the writing sample. Once the SC meets to go over our initial impressions, we will come up with a list of semi-finalists and will look carefully at those files, esp. the writing samples. In my department, at least, we take hiring very seriously and devote a lot of time and energy to reading files carefully. It is certainly true that a candidate with degree in hand has a bit of an advantage, but generally only because they are more skilled at presenting their research and identifying its significance. We do not rule out promising and articulate ABDs, however.
180+ apps screams "large R1 university that advertised without research specification." There are a couple of those every year. Based on my own experience, I'd say 180 was probably par for such an institution, given not only newbie applications but probably some from senior scholars hoping to change ships. Had a colleague at a big state school that did that kind of search back in 2006, and they got over 300 apps.
I'm not Anonymous File Reader 3:13, because thank the good Lord above I'm not on a search committee this year, but I have my own thoughts on some of the questions.
2) Why do you find rec-letters useless? Too glowing, too generic? What are warning signs?
They're a problem because the job of every writer is to make their candidate sound as terrific as is rhetorically possible, not to give a fair and judicious assessment of the person's record and promise.
What they can be good for is something like this: if neither the cover letter nor the letters of rec can describe a candidate's work in such a way as to make evident that it is interesting and important, then there's a good chance it isn't.
(Incidentally, this is why in my view it's better to get people who actually know your work to write for you than than to ask a famous person who heard you give a paper once.)
3) How many semi-finalists do you generally look at? Out of those how many do you interview at the APA?
Here the first cut might be 40 or so, and there might be a dozen interviews.
4) Is 180 an average number for a search in your department?
No, that's high for an average. The number depends very much on the parameters of the job description.
I’m another senior person who’s done a few searches, most of them with descriptions too focused to get 180 applications. I use the c.v.’s and letter of application to tell me when I should read the writing sample and letters of recommendation carefully. I don’t find letters useless, but they have to be read with a knowledge of the encomiastic conventions of the genre, and ideally with a knowledge of the person writing (e.g. does he or she call someone “brilliant” once every ten years or once every ten minutes?). The letters give a valuable perspective on what the research is about, although it can be worrisome if the letter-writer seems to understand the work better than the candidate. I look both for excitement in the letters, though that can be faked, and also for factual or quasi-factual claims; a letter-writer can look foolish by claiming that too many people are the best in his/her year, or “among the best in my x years of teaching”. Claims about when the dissertation will be done and which things will soon be publishable can be optimistic, but people who are wildly optimistic will often get a reputation for that; I hope all applicants know that it’s good to give your letter-writers info on this when you ask for letters. It’s good when the people supervising your research have also come to see you teach at least once or twice and can talk about that, or can at least cite features of your work and personality and habits that might make you a good teacher. I also look for what is left out, in part because when I write letters I list all the person’s strengths and accomplishments and turn them into sentences and paragraphs; if they’re not good at X, I tend not to mention that much, so if I see four letters that do not say a person is good at Greek or at teaching, and can cross-reference that by seeing that letter-writers from that school do praise those qualities in another candidate, well then maybe I’ve learned something. I second the opinion that letter-writers who know your work well are better than Famous People you met at a conference, but I don’t mind an extra letter from someone who knows your work less well, especially if it’s someone I know, or whose letter-writing practices I know. It often takes me more than one visit to the files to decide whether I like someone; often my first go through them produces a lot of files that I mark as “Yes?”or “No?” (often with a noun or two of explanation next to the “No?”), and then come back when I’m in a different mood to read more carefully and make more of a decision.
As an occasional SC member at an R1 institution, I also tend to reserve judgment on references, often until I've met the applicant. I look for everything the previous poster lists, and I'd add, for a top-level research school where heavy research/publication is needed for tenure, one of the things that matters most is how much of a sign the letter gives of the quality of the applicant's mind. I want to know that even if X's work on author Y now is brilliant, X can apply that same mind and produce brilliant work on topic Z, too, ten years down the road. We want to see applicants who are more than their dissertation and who have other projects in the works besides that.
I pretty much follow the reasoning of the last poster. I might use the letters to clarify and supplement what I've learned from the letter and cv, but I don't consider them too heavily until after the APA interviews. To me, they add largely subjective variables that are best left for later in the process.
The letter clues me in as to whether the candidate is interesting while serving as a narrative for the cv. Once I get to the cv, assuming that there are no fabrications, I feel that the candidate is nicely distilled in front of your eyes - no exaggerations, hopes, etc. You can get a good idea of what a candidate is capable of doing by looking at their teaching/publishing history and WHEN they've done these things, which allows you to plot a rough trajectory of their production.
Of course, this can be quite difficult if the candidate is ABD. Depending on institutional and departmental proclivities, the postdoctoral experience of the candidate can be critical, a non-issue, or anything else in between. If a school is more worried about research production (like Euro schools), you are more likely to go after the hotshot ABD and assume that they will eventually catch on as teachers, no matter how bad they might be. However, don't assume that all research schools are like this. There are undercurrents that might affect this factor (e.g. faculty member recently denied tenure, pressure to increase class enrollment for the department, etc.). On the flipside, don't assume that every SLAC is looking for that "preacher teacher" who seems to levitate off the ground and invite rabid applause after every lecture. It all depends, which is why one of the best lessons conveyed by this site is the need to apply widely.
I'm an ancient historian in a large department and I want to add that the sub-discipline being targeted by the department plays a role in how I approach each candidate. I've found during our search this year that reference letters tend to be less helpful about a candidate's research as one gets closer to the material culture side. While most classicists tend to be quite predictable based on who they've studied under, archaeology searches can be quite difficult.
On our side, search committee members often have very little experience with the sub-discipline. On the candidate's side, his/her research field might be quite different from his/her referees. I will go as far as to say that several candidates I've flagged as possible APA invites have referees who understand the importance of the candidate's work, but know little about the specifics involved. From what I can gather, it's because the candidates have picked up different methodologies not native to their referees' research - something common to archaeology?
Yes, 500 words or so (1.5 pages) is optimal in my opinion. I wish I could share one letter that was one page long - succinct yet comprehensive enough that you couldn't wait to tackle the cv. I've rarely, if ever, read a 3 page letter that left me wanting more.
Going back to what anon 11:26 said, yes, I think it's tougher as a classical archaeologist hitting the market for the first time. I've learned the fundamentals of archaeology and classics from my time in grad school, but I don't work in the field with any of my advisors.
There is no clear path, in my opinion, for archaeology dissertations. My classmates pursuing more standard classical studies research often model their diss directly on their supervisor's research, but with a slightly different topic. So the methodology is already in place. For my research, I developed a research question and had to shore up, or in some cases learn from scratch, relevant archaeological techniques, often from outside departments like anthro. The methodology is built around the research question, not the other way around.
So an anthro prof might be in an excellent position to comment about the methodological details of my diss, but s/he would be in a terrible position to write a letter for a classics search. My classics referees know generally what I'm doing, but understand only vaguely the archaeological importance of my work. I appreciate the fact that at least some SCs seem to recognize this dilemma.
I second the notion that you should "show your letter to people who are not you," and would add that professors teaching in your graduate program should be willing to read your c.v., letter, and writing sample, simply as part of their job. E-mail makes this possible even when you're off at a one-year job. This assumes that you get the materials to them in plenty of time, and have not been avoiding them because of your dissertation and then asking for recommendations the day before the due date.
On the other hand, there is a reasonable chance (I dare think) that the 2009-10 market and the one after that would bring a big surge in positions. Looking at it from the inside, you can see so much pent-up demand with searches being deferred everywhere. Though of course this all depends on how the economy looks like next year and later.
Isn't there a chance that some people might defer retirement for another year or two if they've been hit hard? I say this not to dredge up the offensive comments about vampiric babyboomers but just as a possible objection to the idea that lots of positions will be vacant.
And what if some universities take the opportunity to downsize humanities depts? I mean, everyone's complaining about lack of science funding and at the same time there's an economic squeeze - sounds like they might recycle my living body for lab parts...
Isn't there a chance that some people might defer retirement for another year or two if they've been hit hard?
This is a real possibility. I have already heard a number of colleagues in various departments tell me they need to defer thanks to losses in their retirement funds. It is likely that next year's market will be as bad or worse than this one but the year after should hopefully be more normal.
Both are good objections, but I would counter them as follows. 1) Older faculty won't defer retirement for ever. Many of them have waited long enough already, and their patience is wearing thin. 2) Humanities depts. have been downsized frequently enough already - of course they may suffer even more cuts, but that is contingent on future economic conditions. I think (or hope) that there is more than a 50% chance that the next few years would actually see a big jump in state and federal spending on research and education - most of that will go to the sciences (esp. green ones) of course, but some of that gush will trickle around.
Since my father is an expert in investing, I might as well momentarily carry on the tradition and point out that faculty who are close to retirement age should be moving their investments from volatile stocks into safer vehicles as they get closer and closer to that day. If, say, someone who is 65 has just lost 50% or some similarly enormous amount from his/her investment portfolio he/she almost certainly wasn't doing this, or wasn't doing this enough.
I point this out only because there's an obvious lesson here for all of us, assuming that we remember it a few decades from now.
Does anyone know why the APA hasn't bothered posting the electronic abstracts for the meeting this year? It seems pretty late compared to the last few years, and it would be helpful in scheduling time at the APA...
Does anyone know why the APA hasn't bothered posting the electronic abstracts for the meeting this year?
Yes. They are trying to create suspense and thereby make your APA experience more dramatic and thrilling. I would think you'd be a little more grateful to them, honestly.
Could someone please (pretty please?) post the Wilfrid Laurier Greek history job ad? Famae volent that it exists, but I have yet to see it advertised anywhere.
What did Blistein mean that there are going to be as few as 50-60 institutions interviewing at the APA this year? Aren't there many more jobs advertised? Does he know something we don't at this point? Crap, crap, crap....
I couldn't figure out those low-ball numbers either, checking both the wiki and the APA's own list. I think either the interviewer got it wrong and dropped a digit from the hundreds place, or Blistein was qualifying it somehow -- "60 tenure-track" -- and the qualification got lost.
BTW I'm not on the market this year - I have no axe to grind either way.
Blistein's comment was in a hot-under-the-collar article in today's Inside Higher Ed, about the supposedly vanishing humanities job market. Caveat lector. At the least, the classics part of the article was wrong.
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
Yeah, well I'm the SC chair for one of the places that just wasted an APA invite on you. Enjoy the pounding we're gonna give your young butt in our luxury suite, 'cause the road ends in Philly for the likes of you. Milites Gloriosi do not get fly-outs.
What IS wrong with our discipline that several candidates get 15+ interviews? I dismissed much of the bs that was flying a while back, but I'm beginning to think there is something to the theory that we are a bunch of inbred freaks who want our sisters.
Looking over the wiki, I'm guessing that the snotty villain does Greek prose? SC chairs, if you interview a Hellenist with a smug air around him/her, you know what to do.
No offense to the schools that have issued APA invites, but this princeford villian is probably going to blow you off anyway for a more prestigious program. Please, think outside the box.
this princeford villian is probably going to blow you off anyway for a more prestigious program.
1). please not "princeford" again. We've been through this like 20 times.
2). I have never been in any way affiliated with either of those institutions, but I know extremely nice people who have, and to jump from "villain" to "Princeton product" is pretty lousy.
3). You would blow off everyone else for the bigger, better deal, too (at least, bigger and better from the perspective of your particular needs and interests). In this, you and the douchebag are indentical. The douchebag differs from you in running around trying to make other people feel bad, which you don't do. Unless those other people have taken their degrees at Princeton or Stanford.
This must be the same a-hole who ridiculed this forum for helping "competitors."
Every discipline has its sociopaths.
I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts! -- the forum by pointing out that it's silly to give helpful and potentially significant advice to someone competing with you for a job. I am NOT, however, the one with the three interviews.
And I stand by my earlier comments, and think it shows an absurd lack of pragmatism not to appreciate them. I mean, does a catcher tell the opposing hitter that he'd raise his batting average by trying to go to the opposite field sometimes? Did Obama tell McCain he'd get more votes by linking Obama to Rev. Wright than William Ayers in the final weeks of the campaign? Did Roosevelt and Churchill advise Hitler that perhaps he should pay a bit less attention to that phantom army Patton was commanding in southern England? In the "Book of Job," did God tell Satan how he might be able to shatter Job's faith? Did Toyota advise Ford on how to make cars that Americans would want to buy? And finally, for Heaven's sake, back in high school when you and a friend were both sweet on the same guy/girl did you give advice on how to win his/her heart? If you answered "No" or "Hell, no!" to all of these then you should be perfectly capable of understanding that this is indeed a competition, and while we can be supportive of each other we shouldn't be helpful to each other. Or would you really prefer that we act like Penelope's suitors, satisfied so long as one of us gets a coveted job?
And for the record, I probably do enjoy watching "Dexter" a bit too much, but I don't believe I meet the DSM IV's definition of "sociopath."
I have no idea whether Mr/Ms 3 interviews (it's a Mr - who am I kidding)- anyway, I have no idea whether this person was joking or not, but I thought I'd offer some small modicum of comfort before the rest of you get freaked out by such dubious threats.
One of the people who was interviewing with me for a VAP last year actually let me know just how many countless interviews they had; they made it seem like a right chore, but in that transparently smug, faux way. This as I was forcing the overpriced bistro food down my throat and desperately trying not to vomit on anyone wearing an APA tag. Anyway, I might have been a bilious-smelling headlight-struck rabbit, but the committee ended up preferring that to the pompous ass, who ended up with a less desirable job. You can be as canny as you like, but if you're a prick it'll come through, and most places (though sadly not all) won't hire you.
"I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts! -- the forum by pointing out that it's silly to give helpful and potentially significant advice to someone competing with you for a job."
Well, Mr. Sillypants (sorry, I'm assuming you're a guy), why would you go and do something so altruistic as cautioning others about this? Or were your words of caution all part of a clever ruse....?
Honestly, I think that virtually nothing of use is given by job candidates to job candidates in these comments. Knowledge about the status of different searches isn't especially useful, although it can scratch an itch. Commiseration is very comforting, but doesn't affect who gets employment. Whatever actually useful counsel you're getting here is from people who are already employed, and they don't have a stake in the outcome of individual candidates' searches for work. They just feel for everybody looking for work: lacrimae rerum, etc.
"You can be as canny as you like, but if you're a prick it'll come through, and most places (though sadly not all) won't hire you."
Yes, this.
Unfortunately, the poor pricks of this world often have a terrible time not projecting their prickishness in person.
"I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts!"
Even if you are not the same person, you sure sound like the person with your disparaging remarks. For the record, archaeologists need to read quite well and not just look at stones. Hell, we can even teach Latin and are often the grunts required to do so! So if anything, our career depends on reading and teaching texts more than the average classicist, because we wouldn't get a job otherwise.
And finally, for Heaven's sake, back in high school when you and a friend were both sweet on the same guy/girl did you give advice on how to win his/her heart?
Yep. Absolutely. My friend got the girl and while I was a little heart-broken for a while I kept my friendship with him and became good friends with her. And, largely because of my virtuous and magnanimous actions, her smokin' older sister decided I was a rock star. Best. Sex. Ever.
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
Only three interviews? I know people who have never had less than ten (I alas am not among them.) Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back just yet.
A glance at the wiki suggests you're not posting your interviews, either, since there are so few posted for the APA. Try being a team player instead of demanding we all worship you.
I have never been in any way affiliated with either of those institutions, but I know extremely nice people who have, and to jump from "villain" to "Princeton product" is pretty lousy.
Eh, no big deal. I'm a Princeton PhD and I feel like a villein in this job all the time.
Well, Mr. Sillypants (sorry, I'm assuming you're a guy), why would you go and do something so altruistic as cautioning others about this? Or were your words of caution all part of a clever ruse....?
Honestly, I think that virtually nothing of use is given by job candidates to job candidates in these comments. Knowledge about the status of different searches isn't especially useful, although it can scratch an itch. Commiseration is very comforting, but doesn't affect who gets employment. Whatever actually useful counsel you're getting here is from people who are already employed, and they don't have a stake in the outcome of individual candidates' searches for work. They just feel for everybody looking for work: lacrimae rerum, etc.
In my original post, which seems to have changed in people's memories, I wrote that it's good to get tips from people who already have jobs and are free to advise without hurting their own chances. I was only saying that if we're on the market ourselves it's plain, well, silly to help our competitors. And speaking for myself, I could definitely give some tips that would make a difference for someone out there. Some very fine tips... that I got from people who already have jobs.
Even if you are not the same person, you sure sound like the person with your disparaging remarks. For the record, archaeologists need to read quite well and not just look at stones. Hell, we can even teach Latin and are often the grunts required to do so! So if anything, our career depends on reading and teaching texts more than the average classicist, because we wouldn't get a job otherwise.
Roman archaeologist, don't be so sensitive. Sure, there are archaeologists who need to pay attention to texts. There are also people who work on Cycladic female figurines, who don't exactly have to know their Plato. (And, based on my experience, some archaeologists who make use of texts need to go in for a refresher course!) But anyway, it was a joke, and not meant to disparage the entire field.
What IS wrong with our discipline that several candidates get 15+ interviews? I dismissed much of the bs that was flying a while back, but I'm beginning to think there is something to the theory that we are a bunch of inbred freaks who want our sisters.
Does the APA ever publish the breakdown of interviews? Right now we just have anecdotal evidence that a few people get thousands of interviews while rest chase rats in the basement of the Marriott. They could provide an anonymous list of all those who went through the service and how many conference interviews they were given. Just a thought.
"Does the APA ever publish the breakdown of interviews?"
Yes, or at least they used to; not sure if they still do. They publish(ed) it in the newsletters, which are archived as pdf docs on the APA website; you can go look through those if you're interested.
Unfortunately, the data is/was based on self-reporting by candidates, and that makes it problematic. I for one didn't fill out the APA's questionnaire when I was on the market, so none of the interviews I had entered the pool of data that year.
In response to the last two posts, although along a slightly different line, why don't we keep a tally on the wiki of the number of interviews schools request at the APA, and the number of campus invites? The APA never tracks those statistics, and I think it's useful information, much like the analysis Sisyphus is doing.
Everyone would add ONLY themselves on a counter after the interview request, for accuracy. The numbers probably won't be complete, since not everyone checks the wiki, but it would give us some idea of our odds. I'll go add mine now.
Right now we just have anecdotal evidence that a few people get thousands of interviews while rest chase rats in the basement of the Marriott.
Not thousands of interviews, but there are at least a few every year that get double-digit interviews. This is a fact, nothing anecdotal about it. Yes some of these people bomb and garner "only" several flybacks, but I would guess that almost all of them get at least five. I personally know at least four people who've been in this position and I don't see any reason for them to have lied about it. Last year, one of these people received at least 5 job OFFERS from every top school that was on the market that year. I wouldn't be surprised if 20% of the candidates out there received 80% of the flybacks.
I would like to point out how the math actually breaks down, in most cases. I speak from a fair bit of experience.
A really good candidate, top ABD or newly-minted PhD, gets 8-12 first round interviews, some at the APA/AIA, some phone interviews (phone interviews more common with historians, who are missing the AHA, or LA people missing the SBL, or art history types missing the CAA), and some for general humanities post-doc fellowships.
S/he then may get 3-6 flyouts, again, a combo of Classics depts., history/art history/religious studies depts., and also for fellowships.
Those flyouts translate into 1-2 job offers.
Sometimes while the candidate is going through this process, s/he might get called also for an interview with a VAP-seeking department, so this could get thrown into the mix also.
In any case, there are rare exceptions, where great candidates get 3-4 job offers, but these are EXCEPTIONS. Usually a great candidate, who seems to have phenomenal luck with first-round interviews, will end up with 1-2 job offers in the end. So it was good that the person had multiple interviews to begin with, because it isn't as if s/he is ending up with 4 job offers at the end of the process, in most cases.
Yes, there are a select group of philologists who get ridiculous numbers of APA interviews each year, like in the 15-17 range, and there's always the person who gets 21. I know someone who was in the 15-21 range a few years back, flashing interview slips all over the place while other candidates in line at the Placement Service desk held their 2 slips discretely tucked away in their programs or jacket pockets. This person also was rude as hell to the Placement Service folks and the other people in line, charging ahead, saying s/he was in a hurry, bumping people, speaking in a loud and aggressive tone of voice to the placement service folks. S/he did get a job, but not a very good one, in spite of the ridiculous number of first round interviews s/he garnered. And it was the only job offer.
Anyway, my $0.02 about how good candidates USUALLY do. Yes, you can say that they are lucky to have 1-2 job offers in the end, and they are, but by the end of the process you do not have a select group of people monopolizing ALL of the job offers.
Oh god, you people are so fatalistic. The point is that there AREN'T sloppy seconds. The job offers actually ARE spread around, and all offers in a sub-discipline are NOT monopolized by a handful of candidates. That is how the math works out. Yes, there are people who do not get job offers the first time they go on the market. But it isn't because 8 candidates are getting ALL the offers. The math simply does not work out that way.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I accepted four different jobs last year, just to make sure nobody else was able to get them! The commutes really suck, but reading the last few comments make them worth it. I'm going on the market again this year, simply for the hell of it, and to ensure that nobody from Ohio State lands a job.
We must all thank Anon. 12:49 for giving us his insight, which I am sure hits the mark as far as the average goes. Now although I have less experience than him/her, I just want to add that Tyche can scramble up things in any number of ways. On the one hand, you get someone who looks mediocre when she finishes grad school, is lucky to eke out a few years on VAP's, but then works really hard on publication and networking, and ends up TT in a top-tier school. Then you have the brilliant ABD who goes straight to an Ivy but dithers on publication, develops personal problems, and ends up outside the mainstream (ie non-tenured). So I believe one must never lose hope and humility, and must keep on working, whatever his/her current condition.
In response to the last two posts, although along a slightly different line, why don't we keep a tally on the wiki of the number of interviews schools request at the APA, and the number of campus invites? The APA never tracks those statistics, and I think it's useful information, much like the analysis Sisyphus is doing.
Everyone would add ONLY themselves on a counter after the interview request, for accuracy. The numbers probably won't be complete, since not everyone checks the wiki, but it would give us some idea of our odds. I'll go add mine now.
This is a good idea, but I think your method is inefficient. Moreover, it is potentially revealing of identity, which we should try to avoid (motivated along strict game-theory lines).
Better to make a list of numbers, zero through 25. These will represent the total number of APA interviews per individual (25 seems like the max - I know of somebody last year who had 22). Change the counter next to each number on this list as you yourself receive that number. Thus, as I have received one interview so far, and have read that one person has received three (though on the actual one I wouldn't write them in myself) and will initiate the system, at initial state it will look like this:
0 : 0 1 : 1 2 : 0 3 : 1 4 : 0 5 : 0 6 : 0 and so on.
Then, when I receive another one, I will remove my token from the "1" column and move it to two. Imagine that two other people have joined, each of whom have 0 and 1 respectively. The original 3-score earns two more interviews. It will look this:
0 : 1 1 : 1 2 : 1 3 : 0 4 : 0 5 : 1 6 : 0
and so on. You never have to worry about any number but your own, and as long as you "move" up as you accrue interviews and change your old number accordingly, it will track total numbers of people, as well as interviews per person. It also makes it impossible for wiki-readers to correlate candidates with multiple interviews to those multiple ads. I am not paranoid, but keeping such info confidential (from SCs) is important.
"Roman archaeologist, don't be so sensitive. Sure, there are archaeologists who need to pay attention to texts. There are also people who work on Cycladic female figurines, who don't exactly have to know their Plato. (And, based on my experience, some archaeologists who make use of texts need to go in for a refresher course!) But anyway, it was a joke, and not meant to disparage the entire field."
Yeah, and there are plenty of philologists who couldn't find Greece on a map but can tell us about the beauty of Cicero's right scrotum. Maybe they should get their heads out of Cicero's crotch and travel once in a while. My bet is that the person who does Cycladic figurines can teach Greek, ancient history, and maybe even some Greek literature. The Cicerco scholar probably couldn't teach Roman history. No offence by the way.
So the APA "deadline" for schools to get lists of interviewed candidates in is Dec. 8, Monday. Ya think it'll be a busy day for contacting interviewees?
I don't have the cover letter that came with the carbon triplicate amazingness anymore, but I think I remember that the APA's toothless deadline for committees is actually 12/19, not 12/8 (which is for candidates).
I don't have the cover letter that came with the carbon triplicate amazingness anymore, but I think I remember that the APA's toothless deadline for committees is actually 12/19, not 12/8 (which is for candidates).
I DO have that cover letter, and you're right: candidates 12/8, schools 12/19. This interview-list email they've been vaunting as the sign that they care about candidates will be arriving a week before the meetings. (Even given the holidays, it's going to take them 2 weeks to assemble the schools that want to talk to each candidate? Any decent database software can do that much more quickly.)
The letter that came with the availability form for our SC says Dec. 8 for institutions. The placement guidelines said Dec. 19 for institutions. I asked for clarification and was told the earlier the better if the SC was planning on using an APA interview room.
1,771 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1771 Newer› Newest»Thank you!
Amazing 200+ posts on this thread and search committees have barely begun looking at applications.
Yeah, I can see that the wiki is moving forward about as rapidly as my career.
Has anyone heard how the proposed $5.2 billion in budget cuts in NY may affect searches this year? I noticed that there are at least several state universities in NY conducting searches this year.
Well, I know of one additional search that will almost certainly be suspended, but it is not in NY.
Attention all MC Peeps with a willingness to teach 4/4 in many disciplines:
St. Ambrose University, Tenure Track, Assistant Professor, with specialization in Classical Greek and Roman History and Art History. The position is a joint appointment in support of the university's interdisciplinary programs in Classical Studies and Art History. Earned PhD by August 2009. Teaching load (4+4) will include courses in Greek and Roman History and Art History, Latin at all levels, as well as general education courses in World Civilizations and introductory Art History. Successful candidates will show firm commitment to excellent teaching and evidence of scholarly engagement and future potential. The position is contingent on funding approval. Review of applications will begin December 15, 2008, and continue until the position is filled. Submit cover letter, curriculum vitae, a statement of teaching philosophy, and a list of three professional references to: Director of Human Resources, St. Ambrose University, 518 West Locust Street, Davenport, Iowa 52803-2898. AA/EOE
NOTES: International Candidates Will Be Considered
From CAA
I heard from a reliable source that the Temple job will not be affected by the hiring freeze, though there was a scare.
anyone else get a request for writing samples from columbia? just trying to gauge how many they are requesting.
In answer to the SUNY/CUNY question:
I teach in one of the larger SUNY schools (actually no longer SUNY per se, but no matter). There is a soft freeze. Some faculty searches are moving forward, while some are not, and there is a sharp slow-down with staff hirings. T-T lines are most likely to be continued, while VAP slots might not be. I suspect that the spring market will be especially grim, since Deans are likely to nix sabbatical replacements and ask departments to cover courses or shrink curricula. There might be adjunct possibilities, but full-time VAP hires will shrink dramatically.
I wish this were less gloomy, but things are looking increasingly bad for all involved. Smaller SUNY and CUNY campuses will be hit especially hard.
With all of this mind I would strongly encourage everybody to apply as widely as possible NOW. Don't think the Spring market is going to help, because there is a very good chance it will be practically non-existent. Belt-tightening has not really hit yet, but after January it will, and with a vengeance.
Good luck!
Re: Columbia search. If you don't mind saying, was that for the lit. job or the hist. postdoc?
I also got the Columbia request (lit. job).
i'm the original columbia poster - the writing sample request was for the lit. position.
Well that's just excellent. (Good for you though).
You're "trying to gauge" how many people Columbia has contacted?
Probably lots. Certainly every applicant from Stanford and Princeton.
You must be very new to this.
Yeah, it's true. I admit it. You've totally cracked the code.
I went to Princeton and am now at Stanford. I am not yet on the job market (I still haven't even finished my qualies), but Columbia just called out of the blue in order to offer me an APA interview. They also said, unofficially mind you, that if I finish this semester's classes strong and get a decent haircut then I can be assured of a campus invite. It is really, really sweet to have this trumping pedigree.
I am soooooo glad I didn't go to Harvard or Berkeley or Michigan or North Carolina or Anywhere Else. Things would have been impossible for me. I'd actually have to send in something called a "writing sample" (WTF?). I'd have to type out a CV longer than two lines (Princeton on one, Stanford on the other; different type-faces, though. It looks awesome.). I'd have to ask faculty to write actual letters of recommendation instead of simply watching them pick up the amazing Princeford JobsPhone (an Apple product, natch) and calling up their buds in the cities where I want to live. I'd even have to finish my degree and teach for a few years before getting tenure. Ugh. Double ugh!
I don't know how the rest of you non-Princeton/Stanford types do it. You have real courage. We all admire you. Often we feel like we are you, but only for a fleeting moment.
Admit it though, reality does bite sometimes. Doesn't it? It's not just a series of clips from "Do the Right Thing", "Say Anything" and "Stand and Deliver", or is it? Inquiring minds want to know!
Sad, we're only midway through November and people are already cracking.
Not to chance the subject but... can I just vent about the ass-backwartude of our field? Some places have started doing online apps this year, which is just fab-u-lous, except that almost all are asking for paper applications IN ADDITION. Which means more work for applicants than when we just had to mail stuff in. WTF?
"You're "trying to gauge" how many people Columbia has contacted?
Probably lots. Certainly every applicant from Stanford and Princeton."
I am a recent Princeton PhD, and no, Columbia did not contact me, even though my formet diss. advisor is married to someone who is on the Columbia search committee. Believe it or not, Columbia really is looking at the merit of applications, rather than just asking for a sample from everyone from Princeton (this is not meant to diss the merits of my application, but...).
So if you are trying to start yet another round of Princeton bashing, please be advised that the big name, big as it is, does not necessarily open all the doors for us.
How is pointing out preferential hiring practices "bashing"?
"I am a recent Princeton PhD, and no, Columbia did not contact me".
I guess you did not drink enough of the Kool-Aid while there. Then again, the way you refer to "merit" suggests that maybe you did.
Tiger Tree--I'd give you a job just for that post.
The Princeton obsession is odd. It's one of maybe three to six schools that reliably have extremely strong placement. Is "Princeton" shorthand for "elite graduate program" in this discussion, or are there actually people out there who believe that one program is so dominant? Do people who believe this have any data to support their belief?
So I've said a couple of times (this year and last) that I made a list of institutions by t-t and non t-t placement for 2006-7 (based on the wiki). I thought it would be useful and I also thought it would shut those anti-Princeton/Stanford whiners up (I'm not from either). Should I post it somewhere? I can't guarantee it's error-free but it's a better guide than paranoia.
why don't you post it here? I'd be curious to know...
please do post it!! the more data the better.
i for one am not sure that everyone is "paranoid" or "whining", although that would perhaps be more comforting to many in the field. there may very well be some opposition to the kind of "Classics" that these (elite?) programs promote and the very notion of some kind of ideal associated with these programs.
Your list of institutions and placement is inherently flawed because it did not (as far as I recall) take account of degree date. Thus in abolute terms graduates of second-tier schools did as well as, say, those from Princeton or Stanford.
But to compare someone with a circa 1998 degree from, say, Texas who has just been denied tenure but gotten another TT job with, say, an ABD from Stanford who has also just landed a TT job isn't helpful.
What people here grumble about it seems to me is that ABDs from certain schools are scooped up far out of proportion to those from schools like Michigan or Texas etc.
No one is bashing Stanford or Princeton for having excellent placement rates. Your statistics, however, make it seem like all the good schools have near 100% placement rates for their ABDs, which is very far from the truth; only some do. Again, there is nothing inherently wrong, unfair, or conspiratorial about this BUT LET'S PLEASE ADMIT IT IS A FACT. Move on.
I'm perfectly aware of that, but thank you. If I didn't already have a job I'd be happy to work out which hire got their PhD when. What I was hoping, as I said at the time, was that someone else would compile the data for other years. That would give a better picture. But I suppose blind carping may be constructive in its own strange way.
Wow, panic is setting in, and it's not entirely clear why.
Where candidates went to school can and probably to some extent ought to figure into the decision. Those who began their careers are more prestigious places are naturally going to have an advantage over those who didn't. And why not? In a sense, one might be justified in thinking that part of the work of identifying really promising students had been done for the committee way back when, when these grads were applying for schools/programs in the first place. Is that fair? Maybe, maybe not. But it's at least reasonable to suppose so. That's how colleges work, based on the SAT and all the rest.
I don't know. The idea that my SAT score somehow decided where I ended up getting a job after my PhD is a little distressing. Kinda like telling someone they won't ever get tenure because they didn't go to pre-school.
No. You're not getting tenure because you went to the WRONG pre-school.
Shoulda done a better job of picking your parents, punk.
Ah, if only I'd been a different sperm.
I understand the distress of those who dislike the earlier post. But it's a real problem. Let's say you're on a search committee, since it's likely everyone reading this will be in the near future. You get 100 applications for a single spot (which is a realistic number, probably even a little low for some places). How would you go about processing them? Personally read all 100 of them? Only read part of them? Would you set a cutoff of grades, dissertation topic, recommendations, what?
Perhaps departments should stop posting ads that essentially say that anyone with a Ph.D. in anything can apply. Maybe that way they will get fewer applications that they need to focus on. You have to respect the University of Michigan this year: they said right out that they recently hired a Latin poetry person, and therefore they don't have an interest in such types for this year's Latinist/Roman historian search. I don't remember seeing a department be that admirably blunt before...
"You get 100 applications for a single spot (which is a realistic number, probably even a little low for some places). How would you go about processing them? Personally read all 100 of them? Only read part of them? Would you set a cutoff of grades, dissertation topic, recommendations, what?"
The quickest ways to cut down a stack are 1). exclude applications from people whose work obviously does not fit the position advertised and 2). read the applicant's own, and her/his recommenders', descriptions of the applicant's research to see if it seems at all interesting and promising. If it does, then you pretty much have to read the writing sample. But sometimes things can be made easier in the initial pass by splitting a committee in two and giving half of the files to each subcommittee.
The last time I was on a search committee, we also cut out all ABDs. In the end we did hire someone who completed their diss in the spring before taking the job in the fall, but only because we had to go back to the applicant pool a second time.
I am on a committee again right now, and again I'm going to cut down the giant stack by only looking at apps from those who are out of grad school.
Perhaps departments should stop posting ads that essentially say that anyone with a Ph.D. in anything can apply. Maybe that way they will get fewer applications that they need to focus on.
Often (for those departments with graduate programs) this is the sign of a weak, divisive department where no one is really in charge. Then they make matters worse for themselves by getting hundreds of applications and having epic fights over the job.
Why don't searches explicitly say degree must be in hand NOW. The only reason I can surmise is the desire to get the next best thing hot off the presses. But c'mon, how many of these "superstars" end up being real superstars 10-20 years down the road? And how many scholars who end up being superstars were branded so straight out of grad school? I think we will find that more future superstars get missed and that most of the fresh scholars we prematurely crown as superstars end up being average, which isn't so bad. My point is that this desire to snatch up the next best thing is foolhardy at best. Wait at least 2 years to get a better bearing on how they will pan out. (I'm talking about research institutions here.)
Re: the Temple job. When I first saw the ad on the Placement Service site, it said "Roman history." That was two weeks ago. Now it says either Roman history or Greek prose. And the deadline was yesterday. What gives? I would have given it a shot for Greek prose (depending on how they define that).
"Why don't searches explicitly say degree must be in hand NOW."
I've never been on a search committee that ignored applications from ABDs. I wonder how widespread that practice actually is.
Anon 12:53, Temple's August announcement was just for Roman history. The revised description, adding Greek prose, was already in the Oct. early edition (as I recall, there was some confusion at the time, but it's clarified in the October regular edition and on the APA website). Sorry, but you're mistaken.
While we're talking ads, anyone want to speculate on how ugly tomorrow's listings will be? Or why the Placement Service seems incapable of sending an e-mail in a timely fashion? It's not difficult. And yet it looks like we will get November's batch of ads a full week after the APA's deadline for those listings. Now that's a problem that needs some attention. C.M.C.G., by any chance are you reading? Late registrations are a problem, but let's be honest: the Placement Service needs a complete overhaul. Its inefficiency just boggles the mind.
Or why the Placement Service seems incapable of sending an e-mail in a timely fashion? It's not difficult.
Actually, it IS difficult. They spend most of their time at Logan Hall tending to earth-shaking matters, like Iran./
More seriously, I believe the woman in charge is ill.
The Placement Service is a train wreck. And it is a symptom of this silly field that the APA continues to charge fees from job seekers and institutions and year after year provide the same poor service, yet no one does anything. Plus how about the issue of the APA having such primitive technology?? Submitting camera-ready cvs? Yikes. The APA director and officers don't care, nor do the institutions who list with the service. There are consistent problems with lateness and professional goofs, such as last year's episode of the coordinator sending a mass email with all registered candidates' emails in the open. But since things in N. American Classical studies change at a pace that rivals the movement of glaciers, the Service will be overhauled at some point in a far distant future ....
Just to pile on - the web ads on the Placement Service site really annoy me. Internal links are often wrong, and the page used to be alphabetized, so it was easy to find the ad you wanted if that happened. And it's often hard to find an update for an ad, if there was one (the Temple problem above illustrates that), nor do they update quickly - once a month only. The job market moves faster than that, especially in the spring.
And the ads are almost always late, annoying if there are due dates close by. The Placement Service itself wants jobs to be advertised a month before their due date, but often that rule is ignored. Surely the APA has the basic web technology to have some sort of searchable bulletin board for ads, a la Chronicle of Higher Education?
To add to this, and respond to the last post -- the APA's technology infrastructure is stuck someplace in the 1990s - it appears that they author their homepage with "Claris homepage 3.0" which is vintage 1999 or so, I think. So you want searchability? Forget it.
To add further to the Placement Service Pile-On.
I am sure they are overworked and underpaid, and our own complaining is partially due to the fact that we are on the receiving end of a difficult process. Fine, got that out of the way.
The APA does a TERRIBLE job at this. Why must they release ads once every 30 days? Why not post them to a website as soon as they are received? How hard would it be to put them into a searchable and taggable file online? Not very! Why do they insist on using a ridiculous paper system at the conference? How hard would it be to invest in some relatively inexpensive scheduling software and post the results online as they become available? Not very!
If they were stuck in 1999 things would be five times as well-run. They are way back in 1983. I wouldn't be surprised to discover them using a few TRS-80s in order to run the whole shebang. Invest in some new hardware and hire somebody to rehaul the whole system. Everybody's life would be easier, especially the poor schmucks who have to deal with stressed job candidates in the meat-market room.
I've been on the market for three years running and each year I get more and more angry at how absurdly incompetent the APA Placement Service is. I swear to all that is holy if I ever get a tenure-track position I am going to do my best to get on the placement service committee, figure out what the heck goes on there, and hopefully change it! Gahhhhhh!!!
To add insult to injury, I would venture to guess that there's been jobs in the past that have failed IN PART due to this Byzantine system. There are so few precious jobs as it is, wouldn't you think that priority #1 for the APA would be making sure that every one gets filled? We could go years without have a conference and I would venture to say that the discipline would be fine. You have a couple years that zero jobs get filled and it could have ramifications for decades (candidates leaving the field, departments missing a window to fill positions, etc.). So what IS the APA's top priority? To sit there and look pretty?
Within the last three years I raised several issues relating to the Placement Service and its technologically outdated and inefficient way of doing things with people at the APA who have the power to effect change, and have seen no evidence of movement in the right direction. Perhaps someone should run for the APA's Placement Committee (or whatever it's called) on a platform of much-needed reform. I'll vote for that person if their statement shows an awareness of the issues.
I don't mind the disorganization of the Placement Service; I mind the rudeness. I can't remember if it was last year or the year before that one of the job listings came out several days late, with a very flip message about how RP didn't send them sooner because she had been on vacation. Thanks.
And then forget any kind of anonymity in the survey they do about the Placement Service at the end of the job hunting season. I didn't bother with the survey last year. Are they afraid of an honest assessment? I guess they should be, but it might actually serve some purpose if they did it anonymously.
"Perhaps someone should run for the APA's Placement Committee (or whatever it's called) on a platform of much-needed reform. I'll vote for that person if their statement shows an awareness of the issues."
Change is coming to Philadelphia. Yes we can.
I have the impression that all candidates already say they're going to bring us into the 21st century, right?
My assumption is that the professional personnel running the service is technophobic and continues to use paper slips by choice. That's something that can happen in a very small organization. But maybe I'm wrong about that.
the placement service has always worked quite well in my experience. The jobs come out in time to apply and they handle much of the scheduling. It is quite humane and straightforward. -poldy
Why don't they hired some pimple-faced work-study student who knows some html. 10 hours/week would run them what? $200/month? Job announcements could be sent online using a form and this student would just have to cut and paste. Imagine that, jobs posted within 24 hours of arrival. The webpage as it stands now is ca. 1994. Every time I visit the site it feels like a time warp but I'm not using a 486 AT computer in a dorm room.
While the service leaves much to be desired, I second Poldy's comment (welcome back!) that the system works pretty well most of the time. I would hate to hear about each job as it's posted--or would hate to have to check constantly for website updates. (Can you imagine all the new avenues for obsessiveness?) Bundling the ads gives this process a welcome kind of rhythm and encourages those placing ads to do so on some sort of schedule. When the ads seem late--say Texas Tech's position this month--I blame the school, not the service. I feel the same way about schools that don't advertise with APA.
I do agree that the website itself is dated and it blows my mind that the AIA positions aren't listed on the APA site, too.
"Why don't they hired some pimple-faced work-study student who knows some html."
At the risk of letting my imagination run riot: think of an extremely small office run by a technophobe who sees nothing wrong with the way things are and has no interest in introducing things that s/he does not like or understand into the environment that s/he controls, and feels threatened by the prospect of being made expendable.
As I say, and I'm serious, this is entirely a production of my imagination: I have no knowledge of the office, apart from having used the service a couple of times. But this is how I explain the state of the service to myself.
Poldy! I've missed you!
Uhhhhhhhhhh.... at the risk of seeming rude.... who's "Poldy", how do we know they are "here", and why is everybody so excited?
I'll be happy as well, as soon as I get clued in!
Poldy, who may be a real person (I like to think so) or just some weird oral composite, was a very soothing influence last year, kind of like the Buddha of FV. His/"Their" posts didn't seek to offend anyone or show you how just much smarter than you he/"she" was (oh, this is just getting plain irritating, it's not like anyone writes "Homer")--anyway, Poldy was nice and I for one was grateful for that. So it's good to see him back (and I wasn't even one of the two posters who already welcomed him). See, if you don't post anonymously you might get some weird classics fanclub. Result. Best wishes, Poldy!
I assumed Poldy was female.
I didn't really have an opinion on Poldy's gender--I just got tired of typographically equivocating.
YIKES
That's really it?
Abu Dhabi anyone?
Anyone who knows their Joyce would know that poldy is a "he."
Uh Oh!
)-:
Well, that blows chunks.
Anybody need a landscaper, nanny, or general dogsbody? Have Ph.D., will travel.
Leopold the Scarecrow? I'm confused. And what does that have to do with the gender of the poster? And why are there no jobs? (Don't answer that, I'm just wailing). Guess I'll just save my Philadelphia money and buy an ounce of gold and a small goat. You know, to hedge my bets.
Anyone want to trade a bag of Purina for my Wheelock?
I'll give somebody all of my OCTs and Green and Golds for two cases of Colt 45 and a 30lb bag of Meow Mix.
I'm pretty sure that it's *canned* pet food that has traditionally been resorted to in hard times, since it can be used in recipes that call for meat. I mean, not that I don't like the idea of everybody crunching away on 9 Lives.
I thought that if you added water, you could make your own gravy out of the dry stuff.
Canned cat food? Who can afford canned cat food? That's what water is for.
You are totally NOT poldy.
If this were just a run-o-the-mill recession we would be looking to score two cases of Michelob and 30 cans of Fancy Feast.
In this environment, however, malt liquor and a big bag of dry food is all we can reasonably expect.
And yes, mix one cup dry food with 4 oz. water, microwave for 3 minutes and voila!
I also was pleased to see poldy back. I was afraid s/he completely left the profession last year after communications fell off in the spring.
I was actually pleasantly surprised by today's job ads. 4 I will apply for, 5 if I get up the courage to apply to a place I had an on-campus at a few years back. (And no, I'm not a Latinist.)
Fancy Feast! Now that's good eatin' in any economic environment. I defy anyone to find a canned meat marketed to humans that is more delicious than Chopped Grill Feast.
I too will be applying to many of the jobs listed, but it's a discouraging sign on the whole that most are 1 or 2 years... Then again, there's always Abu Dhabi.
Fancy Feast! Now that's good eatin' in any economic environment. I defy anyone to find a canned meat marketed to humans that is more delicious than Chopped Grill Feast.
But have you seen the new Fancy Feasts? They make them sound like you'd want to eat them - I just bought my cat "Turkey Primavera with Garden Greens" for her Thanksgiving dinner. It actually SMELLS good.
I think the slim pickings in the November list can be attributed to T-T lines being frozen. I bet the rash of temporary positions are an attempt to get sabbatical replacements lined up before the Spring budgets end up canceling them as well. Normally we'd see these jobs in the February and March listings.
Fugly.
I think I'm finally in the camp that believes that classics is dead (and I disagree with most of WKH?). We have all these boomers clinging on to their jobs until they literally keel over and die. In the meantime, we'll have a bunch of young Ph.D.s leaving. What's going to happen in 5-10 years when these geezers are finally 6 feet under? There will be much fewer qualified people to take their spots and it's even more likely that they won't be replaced. Yeah, we'll still have classicists here and there, but they will be the oddballs in language, art history, and history departments. Thanks a lot, boomers, for everything, including the national debt.
We need to consider as well that people who were planning on retiring this coming year have now backed out because their retirement accounts lost 20-40% in the recent stock market hit. I have at least 3 colleagues in other departments who were planning on retiring within the next 1-3 years who now say they can't. It may not be that a line is killed or frozen but that the person whose line it was isn't leaving anymore. Or, the department has asked them not to leave so they don't lose the line. That might explain, in part, the scarcity of jobs this year.
These latest postings make me want to say to the Panicked and Depressed: Welcome to our world! Material culture job-seekers have been living here for quite some time. If you've got stamina, it's not such a bad place.
OTOH, I find the number of good MC positions all but unchanged from last year (and the year before). Any other MC's agree? Or am I being oddly optimistic?
This boomer just made sure that at least one position is not frozen and was able to expand the department by one position. So perhaps wishing me six ft under is a bit ungracious. Perhaps you might rather go figure out how not to underwhelm my committee during our interview in Philly.
"OTOH, I find the number of good MC positions all but unchanged from last year (and the year before). Any other MC's agree? Or am I being oddly optimistic?"
There's really no where to go but up, so I don't see it as a good or bad sign.
Hey! I though we only let unemployed or underemployed PhDs and ABDs in our tree-house! How did the SC member get in here?
I promise not to underwhelm you if you promise not to cancel the search after inviting me to campus next Spring.
"So perhaps wishing me six ft under is a bit ungracious."
Depends, are you wearing Depends and need to take the elevator to make it to your office? Are you making $150k/year teaching a class per term that is at the 800 level? Are most of your hours spent working from home rather than at school? Are you old enough to remember Sputnik? Then YES, retire already, voluntarily or involuntarily.
"Depends, are you wearing Depends and need to take the elevator to make it to your office? Are you making $150k/year teaching a class per term that is at the 800 level? Are most of your hours spent working from home rather than at school? Are you old enough to remember Sputnik? Then YES, retire already, voluntarily or involuntarily."
Now, now. If he retired, the university would probably freeze the line anyway. What good would that do anyone?
That's my entire point. It's not about one person, but about their generation as a whole. If the boomer's barely hanging on to life had retired gradually over years, like most other disciplines, classics would likely be more productive and less expensive now. Wouldn't this go a long way toward making it more attractive to deans who are now questioning our very existence? It would have also guaranteed the discipline's future by having junior faculty in place before the questioning got more intense and the economy got worse. As it stands, the last of the echo boomers are coming on the market now to find almost all the seats still taken. Combined with the fact that the echo boomers did not enter the humanities in nearly as many numbers - and will now leave academia in increasing numbers - this might spell the coup de grâce for the discipline in 10 years. Surely there wouldn't be enough qualified people if all the boomers retired now. What will it look like in 10 years - fuglier. I doubt the echo boomers will have hung around in VAPs for 10 years.
In this environment, however, malt liquor and a big bag of dry food is all we can reasonably expect.
We have all these boomers clinging on to their jobs until they literally keel over and die. In the meantime, we'll have a bunch of young Ph.D.s leaving.
Well, the obvious solution here is for job seekers to consume the flesh of aged faculty. This would not only open up a number of positions, but also provide a source of precious (and delicious!) calories.
Now, some may say that being a known cannibal is likely to hurt one's chances of being hired into one of those positions, and that therefore this strategy, however mouthwatering, would risk being self-defeating. Yet that is not entirely clear to me. We have too little data so far to say whether cannibals fare any worse (or better!) on the market than scholars who refrain from consuming members of their own species.
anon. @ 6:02 PM:
Do you have any data of any kind to support anything you are saying?
Classicists, whining about the job market since 399 BC.
"That's my entire point. It's not about one person, but about their generation as a whole. If the boomer's barely hanging on to life had retired gradually over years, like most other disciplines, classics would likely be more productive and less expensive now."
Wah? Some of these people are in their 50s! Is that when we start putting our scholars out to pasture these days? What is this? Logan's Run? And those in their 60s are still vibrant scholars and teachers! I really hope my life doesn't end so soon. That means I've only got 20 or so left before y'all take me out behind the shed and shoot me.
The field is threatened by baby-boomers? No, I think it's threatened by the massively greater importance of science, profile of social science, and the ever-increasing interest in non-Western cultures; and by the tanking economy. That's it, those are the threats. But go ahead, don't let me keep you from scapegoating. (I'm in my twenties by the way, just in case you think I'm a vampire leeching your blood). And I only know of one colleague in the institutions I'm familiar with who's stringing things out (into his late seventies, and trust me he doesn't need the money). You should feel free to scapegoat him personally - he's not very popular anyway.
The field is threatened by baby-boomers? No, I think it's threatened by the massively greater importance of science, profile of social science, and the ever-increasing interest in non-Western cultures; and by the tanking economy. That's it, those are the threats.
Nonsense. The fact of the matter is that the greatest threat to our field is gay Classics. If gays are permitted to do the same kind of Classics as the rest of society, who knows what effect that will have on traditional Classics—and at a moment at which Classics needs most of all to be strengthened, not further undermined. Since the beginning of time Classics has been defined as a sacred union between a straight man and a Teubner, and that has always worked out fine.
Since the beginning of time Classics has been defined as a sacred union between a straight man and a Teubner
I thought it was defined as between a gay man and his Oxford...
Or is that by gay men at Oxford?
Anon 6:19, aka Mr. Swift, your proposal is well-considered, modest, and altogether enticing.
Don't you geezers have a doobie to smoke somewhere? When did FV get frequented by so many lurking tenured faculty?
"Don't you geezers have a doobie to smoke somewhere? When did FV get frequented by so many lurking tenured faculty?"
I strongly agree. The last thing this blog needs is any kind of participation from people who have succeeded in getting tenure-track employment and who serve on search committees.
Last year, some of the best insights came from people who have real jobs, especially tenured real jobs. Without them, this blog is nothing but a bunch of prattle with the occasional insight. Not that the prattle isn't sometimes enjoyable, but it isn't useful, other than as a form of catharsis for some.
The last thing this blog needs is any kind of participation from people who have succeeded in getting tenure-track employment and who serve on search committees.
tenure-track employment? That's so last year.
What's the deal with Florida? Have they just announced they'll phone interview in November, or has someone actually been invited to phone interview? I.e., should I put my votives in a different basket? (Dwindling votives, stupidly large basket).
You have NO chance with Florida State if you call them Florida (as in University of). They are hated rivals...Gators and Noles?
Last year, some of the best insights came from people who have real jobs, especially tenured real jobs. Without them, this blog is nothing but a bunch of prattle with the occasional insight. Not that the prattle isn't sometimes enjoyable, but it isn't useful, other than as a form of catharsis for some.
Yes, it almost makes one regret that many of them are about to meet the fate of Thyestes' children. Perhaps it would make sense to extract some pearls of wisdom before turning them into ribs and rump roasts.
Or perhaps it would suffice simply to eat the brains along with everything else.
I'm somewhat concerned that frying the brains would cook the ideas out, however; the safe thing to do would be to eat them raw, which might not be so pleasant. On the other hand, zombies eat raw brains all the time, and they obviously can't get enough of them. You never see a zombie saying "No thanks, I've had enough brains for now." So maybe they're not so bad.
Florida State? Anyone? Anything? Bueller?
Anyone have any advice on applying for jobs in Canada?
Anyone have any advice on applying for jobs in Canada?
So far as I understand it, in general the best advice is, "be Canadian." Or at least, "don't be from the States." Although I can think of exceptions in recent years, so maybe that's no longer the obstacle it once was.
I think the actual law is that they have to prove that there were no Canadians better suited to the job than the non-Canadian they hired. So there's no harm in applying. Just be kick-ass.
Yes. It is a similar law that explains the rise of Rush, Bryan Adams, and Avril Lavigne.
On the other hand: Leonard Cohen.
As an American hired in Canada who has served on a search committee, I can offer some insight that is not mere speculation.
The law was more strict in the past, but loosened a few years ago (not exactly sure when). The rule at my university was that consideration of nationality did not come into play until the actual job offer --that meant if a department created a short list that contained no Canadians, then nationality never became an issue. We had to provide our short list to the Dean with a justification of our chosen hire (I think that is pretty normal even in the US). If there was a Canadian on the list, one just had to explain that the non-Canadian was clearly better -- but it definitely had to be explained. This was also the point at which we had to justify gender inequalities vel sim (which was defined by a balance, so in some cases and in some departments that did not mean "hire women.")
I have not checked, but it is possible that other universities have a different system and consider nationality at a different point in the process. And Quebec is a whole other story.
My impression was that departments use the Canadian card just like they use anything else. If a faculty member had a favorite candidate who happened to be a Canadian, then their nationality was a big deal. It's just another factor for SCs to fight over.
Additionally, Canadian universities are concerned with a lot of the same things those in the US are, and having a new hire with a fancy degree and international connections (what an easy way to seem "international"!) is desirable.
One of the things that shocked me during the search was that there was a big hurry to send out our ad because the province does not produce enough PhDs to fill all the jobs that open. Of the top of my head, I can think of 7 jobs that opened in my region over a 2 year spam: 6 went to non-Canadians and the 7th to a Canadian with an American degree.
That said, I do think think one of the best things to be on the market is a qualified Canadian who has studied in the US.
DO NOT hesitate to apply for a Canadian job just because you're not Canadian. If you are a good fit, your application will be taken seriously -- or at least as much as it is in the US.
A Canadian SC member once explained to me that the rule was that they could not even READ non-Canadian applications until they have decided that there were no Canadians qualified for the job. So all the applications from non-Canadians were simply filed away for the (highly unlikely) case that they might be needed later. But enforcing this policy does depend on each university, to some extent.
Another Canadian former SC-member here. It used to be that there had to be two searches. The first search was Canadian only, and only if it failed would there be an international search, often the following year. That rule changed maybe a decade ago, and is probably what anon @ 11:33 was told. Now there is one search, but Canadians have to be identified and if they are not appointed, explanations have to be made (as outlined by anon @ 10:49). So my advice is to apply.
Zing, the availability form arrived today! Where to begin? It seems like prime time for another Placement Service pile-on:
(1) When was the last time you saw carbon triplicate? I am tempted to frame this relic.
(2) Speaking of carbon, the environmental impact of this beast must be pretty heinous. We have the interwebs for communicating this kind of information. Everyone please remember to recycle the enormous envelope it was mailed in.
(3) It cost the APA a dollar to send this to me. Think what that postage budget could buy! Scheduling software? The time of the aforementioned work-study student? A CLUE?!
Put me on the placement committee. I'm ready for battle.
I admit to wanting to defend the Placement Service a while ago when everybody was piling on.
Then the triplicate scheduling form arrived. Holy bureaucratic incompetency Batman!! WTF?!?! Why can't the APA set up a website where candidates and schools can click on a few boxes to do this? What a waste of money, paper and time.
Last two anonymouses (anonymoose?):
The Placement Service has always used this form. The last seven years, either I or a friend have been on the market, so I know.
What I want to know is are they really going to email us our interview schedules in mid-December like they promised in the summer? If they actually do, I'll take back three mean things I've thought about them.
The Placement Service has always used this form. The last seven years, either I or a friend have been on the market, so I know.
Isn't that the point? Triplicate forms weren't on the cutting edge in 2001, either. The Placement Service is a total dinosaur.
I realize that the placement service is a convenient whipping post, but having just witnessed the placement service of another discipline (which shall remain nameless) I have to say that Renie et al are doing a heck of a job, and not in the Brownie sense. Seriously, it's not easy scheduling a dozen interviews per job in a way that is convenient to the committees and all the applicants they want to see. The other discipline lets the institutions arrange things themselves. The total lack of centralization ends up meaning that some institutions interview before their posted deadline have expired! To top it off, many institutions just show up at the meeting and pin up a sheet of paper on a bulletin board and then anyone who wants can leave a resume to be considered, maybe, by the committee, if they stop by. And to top it off, all the interviews take place in a public brothel-like setting, separated only by opaque curtains. I think we have a lot to be grateful for. I don't know if it's all thanks to Renie, but we're lucky as it is.
having just witnessed the placement service of another discipline
When you're doing something in a needlessly bad way, it's not much of a defense to say that other people have found even worse ways of doing it.
it's not easy scheduling a dozen interviews per job in a way that is convenient to the committees and all the applicants they want to see.
Actually, with scheduling software, this should be really extra super easy. Today's modern computing machines are neat.
I think we have a lot to be grateful for.
Of course we do. We should be grateful that we don't live in a Sudanese refugee camp, too. But it doesn't therefore follow that there's no point in improving our conditions of existence so long as they are already preferable to living in a Sudanese refugee camp.
Assuming that you didn't witness the Janjaweed Placement Service in action, why aren't you comfortable revealing what this other field is?
I just returned from the SBL in Boston, and it seemed to operate about on par with the APA. Just my own .02 worth of cheese.
Happy Thanksgiving everybody!
It's the Saturday after Thanksgiving and I'm in my office reading through my half of the 180+ applications my department received. Decided to take a break, skim the latest chatter on Famae Volent. To offer some insight into at least one department's methods: we have four SC members plus a chair of the committee. Each member will read half of the files + any others that are relevant to our research specialties. The chair will read through all files. I spend an average of 20 minutes on each file. I start with the cover letter, which I read carefully. I glance at the CV, noting things like publications, papers delivered, degree status. I then read through the recommendation letters, largely looking for warning signs but also trying to get a sense of the way the rec letters mesh with the candidate's description of his/her work and its importance. For the most part, I find rec letters fairly useless. Unless I have decided on a firm yes or no, I then begin to read the writing sample. Once the SC meets to go over our initial impressions, we will come up with a list of semi-finalists and will look carefully at those files, esp. the writing samples. In my department, at least, we take hiring very seriously and devote a lot of time and energy to reading files carefully. It is certainly true that a candidate with degree in hand has a bit of an advantage, but generally only because they are more skilled at presenting their research and identifying its significance. We do not rule out promising and articulate ABDs, however.
Thanks for the thoughts O Anonymous File Reader of 3:13,
1) Holy crap, that's a long slog. Assuming you read at least 105 files that is 35 hours on just the initial pass-through.
2) Why do you find rec-letters useless? Too glowing, too generic? What are warning signs?
3) How many semi-finalists do you generally look at? Out of those how many do you interview at the APA?
4) Is 180 an average number for a search in your department?
180+ apps screams "large R1 university that advertised without research specification." There are a couple of those every year. Based on my own experience, I'd say 180 was probably par for such an institution, given not only newbie applications but probably some from senior scholars hoping to change ships. Had a colleague at a big state school that did that kind of search back in 2006, and they got over 300 apps.
I'm not Anonymous File Reader 3:13, because thank the good Lord above I'm not on a search committee this year, but I have my own thoughts on some of the questions.
2) Why do you find rec-letters useless? Too glowing, too generic? What are warning signs?
They're a problem because the job of every writer is to make their candidate sound as terrific as is rhetorically possible, not to give a fair and judicious assessment of the person's record and promise.
What they can be good for is something like this: if neither the cover letter nor the letters of rec can describe a candidate's work in such a way as to make evident that it is interesting and important, then there's a good chance it isn't.
(Incidentally, this is why in my view it's better to get people who actually know your work to write for you than than to ask a famous person who heard you give a paper once.)
3) How many semi-finalists do you generally look at? Out of those how many do you interview at the APA?
Here the first cut might be 40 or so, and there might be a dozen interviews.
4) Is 180 an average number for a search in your department?
No, that's high for an average. The number depends very much on the parameters of the job description.
I’m another senior person who’s done a few searches, most of them with descriptions too focused to get 180 applications. I use the c.v.’s and letter of application to tell me when I should read the writing sample and letters of recommendation carefully. I don’t find letters useless, but they have to be read with a knowledge of the encomiastic conventions of the genre, and ideally with a knowledge of the person writing (e.g. does he or she call someone “brilliant” once every ten years or once every ten minutes?). The letters give a valuable perspective on what the research is about, although it can be worrisome if the letter-writer seems to understand the work better than the candidate. I look both for excitement in the letters, though that can be faked, and also for factual or quasi-factual claims; a letter-writer can look foolish by claiming that too many people are the best in his/her year, or “among the best in my x years of teaching”. Claims about when the dissertation will be done and which things will soon be publishable can be optimistic, but people who are wildly optimistic will often get a reputation for that; I hope all applicants know that it’s good to give your letter-writers info on this when you ask for letters. It’s good when the people supervising your research have also come to see you teach at least once or twice and can talk about that, or can at least cite features of your work and personality and habits that might make you a good teacher. I also look for what is left out, in part because when I write letters I list all the person’s strengths and accomplishments and turn them into sentences and paragraphs; if they’re not good at X, I tend not to mention that much, so if I see four letters that do not say a person is good at Greek or at teaching, and can cross-reference that by seeing that letter-writers from that school do praise those qualities in another candidate, well then maybe I’ve learned something. I second the opinion that letter-writers who know your work well are better than Famous People you met at a conference, but I don’t mind an extra letter from someone who knows your work less well, especially if it’s someone I know, or whose letter-writing practices I know. It often takes me more than one visit to the files to decide whether I like someone; often my first go through them produces a lot of files that I mark as “Yes?”or “No?” (often with a noun or two of explanation next to the “No?”), and then come back when I’m in a different mood to read more carefully and make more of a decision.
As an occasional SC member at an R1 institution, I also tend to reserve judgment on references, often until I've met the applicant. I look for everything the previous poster lists, and I'd add, for a top-level research school where heavy research/publication is needed for tenure, one of the things that matters most is how much of a sign the letter gives of the quality of the applicant's mind. I want to know that even if X's work on author Y now is brilliant, X can apply that same mind and produce brilliant work on topic Z, too, ten years down the road. We want to see applicants who are more than their dissertation and who have other projects in the works besides that.
I pretty much follow the reasoning of the last poster. I might use the letters to clarify and supplement what I've learned from the letter and cv, but I don't consider them too heavily until after the APA interviews. To me, they add largely subjective variables that are best left for later in the process.
The letter clues me in as to whether the candidate is interesting while serving as a narrative for the cv. Once I get to the cv, assuming that there are no fabrications, I feel that the candidate is nicely distilled in front of your eyes - no exaggerations, hopes, etc. You can get a good idea of what a candidate is capable of doing by looking at their teaching/publishing history and WHEN they've done these things, which allows you to plot a rough trajectory of their production.
Of course, this can be quite difficult if the candidate is ABD. Depending on institutional and departmental proclivities, the postdoctoral experience of the candidate can be critical, a non-issue, or anything else in between. If a school is more worried about research production (like Euro schools), you are more likely to go after the hotshot ABD and assume that they will eventually catch on as teachers, no matter how bad they might be. However, don't assume that all research schools are like this. There are undercurrents that might affect this factor (e.g. faculty member recently denied tenure, pressure to increase class enrollment for the department, etc.). On the flipside, don't assume that every SLAC is looking for that "preacher teacher" who seems to levitate off the ground and invite rabid applause after every lecture. It all depends, which is why one of the best lessons conveyed by this site is the need to apply widely.
I'm an ancient historian in a large department and I want to add that the sub-discipline being targeted by the department plays a role in how I approach each candidate. I've found during our search this year that reference letters tend to be less helpful about a candidate's research as one gets closer to the material culture side. While most classicists tend to be quite predictable based on who they've studied under, archaeology searches can be quite difficult.
On our side, search committee members often have very little experience with the sub-discipline. On the candidate's side, his/her research field might be quite different from his/her referees. I will go as far as to say that several candidates I've flagged as possible APA invites have referees who understand the importance of the candidate's work, but know little about the specifics involved. From what I can gather, it's because the candidates have picked up different methodologies not native to their referees' research - something common to archaeology?
Also, in light of the repeated references to the importance of the cover letter:
please in the name of all that is good and pure
1). show your letter to people who are not you
2). do not let your letter go onto a third page
3). proofread your letter. It's only two pages long: how much time would it have taken to make sure that there are no hilarious errors in it?
Yes, 500 words or so (1.5 pages) is optimal in my opinion. I wish I could share one letter that was one page long - succinct yet comprehensive enough that you couldn't wait to tackle the cv. I've rarely, if ever, read a 3 page letter that left me wanting more.
Going back to what anon 11:26 said, yes, I think it's tougher as a classical archaeologist hitting the market for the first time. I've learned the fundamentals of archaeology and classics from my time in grad school, but I don't work in the field with any of my advisors.
There is no clear path, in my opinion, for archaeology dissertations. My classmates pursuing more standard classical studies research often model their diss directly on their supervisor's research, but with a slightly different topic. So the methodology is already in place. For my research, I developed a research question and had to shore up, or in some cases learn from scratch, relevant archaeological techniques, often from outside departments like anthro. The methodology is built around the research question, not the other way around.
So an anthro prof might be in an excellent position to comment about the methodological details of my diss, but s/he would be in a terrible position to write a letter for a classics search. My classics referees know generally what I'm doing, but understand only vaguely the archaeological importance of my work. I appreciate the fact that at least some SCs seem to recognize this dilemma.
I second the notion that you should "show your letter to people who are not you," and would add that professors teaching in your graduate program should be willing to read your c.v., letter, and writing sample, simply as part of their job. E-mail makes this possible even when you're off at a one-year job. This assumes that you get the materials to them in plenty of time, and have not been avoiding them because of your dissertation and then asking for recommendations the day before the due date.
Sympathies to FSU, who just had their search officially denied and canceled again.
And sympathies to those of us glancing at the stash of cat food, wondering if it will last us through the economic fury.
Sympathies to FSU, who just had their search officially denied and canceled again.
Holy crap. Poor FSU. They have really gotten screwed the last couple of years.
On the other hand, there is a reasonable chance (I dare think) that the 2009-10 market and the one after that would bring a big surge in positions. Looking at it from the inside, you can see so much pent-up demand with searches being deferred everywhere. Though of course this all depends on how the economy looks like next year and later.
Isn't there a chance that some people might defer retirement for another year or two if they've been hit hard? I say this not to dredge up the offensive comments about vampiric babyboomers but just as a possible objection to the idea that lots of positions will be vacant.
And what if some universities take the opportunity to downsize humanities depts? I mean, everyone's complaining about lack of science funding and at the same time there's an economic squeeze - sounds like they might recycle my living body for lab parts...
Isn't there a chance that some people might defer retirement for another year or two if they've been hit hard?
This is a real possibility. I have already heard a number of colleagues in various departments tell me they need to defer thanks to losses in their retirement funds. It is likely that next year's market will be as bad or worse than this one but the year after should hopefully be more normal.
Both are good objections, but I would counter them as follows. 1) Older faculty won't defer retirement for ever. Many of them have waited long enough already, and their patience is wearing thin. 2) Humanities depts. have been downsized frequently enough already - of course they may suffer even more cuts, but that is contingent on future economic conditions. I think (or hope) that there is more than a 50% chance that the next few years would actually see a big jump in state and federal spending on research and education - most of that will go to the sciences (esp. green ones) of course, but some of that gush will trickle around.
Since my father is an expert in investing, I might as well momentarily carry on the tradition and point out that faculty who are close to retirement age should be moving their investments from volatile stocks into safer vehicles as they get closer and closer to that day. If, say, someone who is 65 has just lost 50% or some similarly enormous amount from his/her investment portfolio he/she almost certainly wasn't doing this, or wasn't doing this enough.
I point this out only because there's an obvious lesson here for all of us, assuming that we remember it a few decades from now.
Is your dad hiring?
No, but my daddy is. How are you with a lasso?
Does anyone know why the APA hasn't bothered posting the electronic abstracts for the meeting this year? It seems pretty late compared to the last few years, and it would be helpful in scheduling time at the APA...
Anon. 7:30 PM:
You're basically asking about the APA and its inefficiency. You're pondering the imponderable. Stop that.
/
Does anyone know why the APA hasn't bothered posting the electronic abstracts for the meeting this year?
Yes. They are trying to create suspense and thereby make your APA experience more dramatic and thrilling. I would think you'd be a little more grateful to them, honestly.
Could someone please (pretty please?) post the Wilfrid Laurier Greek history job ad? Famae volent that it exists, but I have yet to see it advertised anywhere.
Here it is:
http://info.wlu.ca/academic/postings/item/01302009MonOct20115205EDT2008.html
Looks like Sisyphus has been doing the numbers for other disciplines as well. We aren't the only ones screwed:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/04/jobs
Plus it looks like that first commenter's marriage is in trouble...
What did Blistein mean that there are going to be as few as 50-60 institutions interviewing at the APA this year? Aren't there many more jobs advertised? Does he know something we don't at this point? Crap, crap, crap....
What did Blistein mean that there are going to be as few as 50-60 institutions interviewing at the APA this year?
When/where did he say this? I haven't had an email since the early ads came out.
I couldn't figure out those low-ball numbers either, checking both the wiki and the APA's own list. I think either the interviewer got it wrong and dropped a digit from the hundreds place, or Blistein was qualifying it somehow -- "60 tenure-track" -- and the qualification got lost.
BTW I'm not on the market this year - I have no axe to grind either way.
Blistein's comment was in a hot-under-the-collar article in today's Inside Higher Ed, about the supposedly vanishing humanities job market. Caveat lector. At the least, the classics part of the article was wrong.
Does anyone know what is up with the Miami jobs? Are they not interviewing at the APA?
Not to doubt those who last month said that things have changed at Canadian universities... but did any non-Canadians get interviews at McMaster?
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
Yeah, well I'm the SC chair for one of the places that just wasted an APA invite on you. Enjoy the pounding we're gonna give your young butt in our luxury suite, 'cause the road ends in Philly for the likes of you. Milites Gloriosi do not get fly-outs.
What do you get when you mix three parts
APA interview with one part douche bag?
Ew, please, take me off the list.
Well, depends whether you shake it or stir it!
What IS wrong with our discipline that several candidates get 15+ interviews? I dismissed much of the bs that was flying a while back, but I'm beginning to think there is something to the theory that we are a bunch of inbred freaks who want our sisters.
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
LOL. Right, right, I forgot about those ads that expressed a strong preference for snotty villains from 80s teen movies.
Looking over the wiki, I'm guessing that the snotty villain does Greek prose? SC chairs, if you interview a Hellenist with a smug air around him/her, you know what to do.
Perhaps Canadian?
Wake me up when December ends.
No offense to the schools that have issued APA invites, but this princeford villian is probably going to blow you off anyway for a more prestigious program. Please, think outside the box.
I thought we've been over this. This "villian" should be a Prinkely, Princhigan, or Princago villian, if anything.
this princeford villian is probably going to blow you off anyway for a more prestigious program.
1). please not "princeford" again. We've been through this like 20 times.
2). I have never been in any way affiliated with either of those institutions, but I know extremely nice people who have, and to jump from "villain" to "Princeton product" is pretty lousy.
3). You would blow off everyone else for the bigger, better deal, too (at least, bigger and better from the perspective of your particular needs and interests). In this, you and the douchebag are indentical. The douchebag differs from you in running around trying to make other people feel bad, which you don't do. Unless those other people have taken their degrees at Princeton or Stanford.
And yes, I meant "indentical."
Deal with it.
This must be the same a-hole who ridiculed this forum for helping "competitors."
This must be the same a-hole who ridiculed this forum for helping "competitors."
Every discipline has its sociopaths.
This must be the same a-hole who ridiculed this forum for helping "competitors."
Every discipline has its sociopaths.
I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts! -- the forum by pointing out that it's silly to give helpful and potentially significant advice to someone competing with you for a job. I am NOT, however, the one with the three interviews.
And I stand by my earlier comments, and think it shows an absurd lack of pragmatism not to appreciate them. I mean, does a catcher tell the opposing hitter that he'd raise his batting average by trying to go to the opposite field sometimes? Did Obama tell McCain he'd get more votes by linking Obama to Rev. Wright than William Ayers in the final weeks of the campaign? Did Roosevelt and Churchill advise Hitler that perhaps he should pay a bit less attention to that phantom army Patton was commanding in southern England? In the "Book of Job," did God tell Satan how he might be able to shatter Job's faith? Did Toyota advise Ford on how to make cars that Americans would want to buy? And finally, for Heaven's sake, back in high school when you and a friend were both sweet on the same guy/girl did you give advice on how to win his/her heart? If you answered "No" or "Hell, no!" to all of these then you should be perfectly capable of understanding that this is indeed a competition, and while we can be supportive of each other we shouldn't be helpful to each other. Or would you really prefer that we act like Penelope's suitors, satisfied so long as one of us gets a coveted job?
And for the record, I probably do enjoy watching "Dexter" a bit too much, but I don't believe I meet the DSM IV's definition of "sociopath."
I have no idea whether Mr/Ms 3 interviews (it's a Mr - who am I kidding)- anyway, I have no idea whether this person was joking or not, but I thought I'd offer some small modicum of comfort before the rest of you get freaked out by such dubious threats.
One of the people who was interviewing with me for a VAP last year actually let me know just how many countless interviews they had; they made it seem like a right chore, but in that transparently smug, faux way. This as I was forcing the overpriced bistro food down my throat and desperately trying not to vomit on anyone wearing an APA tag. Anyway, I might have been a bilious-smelling headlight-struck rabbit, but the committee ended up preferring that to the pompous ass, who ended up with a less desirable job. You can be as canny as you like, but if you're a prick it'll come through, and most places (though sadly not all) won't hire you.
"I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts! -- the forum by pointing out that it's silly to give helpful and potentially significant advice to someone competing with you for a job."
Well, Mr. Sillypants (sorry, I'm assuming you're a guy), why would you go and do something so altruistic as cautioning others about this? Or were your words of caution all part of a clever ruse....?
Honestly, I think that virtually nothing of use is given by job candidates to job candidates in these comments. Knowledge about the status of different searches isn't especially useful, although it can scratch an itch. Commiseration is very comforting, but doesn't affect who gets employment. Whatever actually useful counsel you're getting here is from people who are already employed, and they don't have a stake in the outcome of individual candidates' searches for work. They just feel for everybody looking for work: lacrimae rerum, etc.
"You can be as canny as you like, but if you're a prick it'll come through, and most places (though sadly not all) won't hire you."
Yes, this.
Unfortunately, the poor pricks of this world often have a terrible time not projecting their prickishness in person.
So sad. :(
"I am the one who a few weeks ago CAUTIONED -- I sure hope you're an archaeologist and not someone whose career depends on a close reading of texts!"
Even if you are not the same person, you sure sound like the person with your disparaging remarks. For the record, archaeologists need to read quite well and not just look at stones. Hell, we can even teach Latin and are often the grunts required to do so! So if anything, our career depends on reading and teaching texts more than the average classicist, because we wouldn't get a job otherwise.
If it makes anyone feel any better, at least one of the dreaded Princagofordigans (to wit, myself) has no interviews so far. Take that, haters!
And finally, for Heaven's sake, back in high school when you and a friend were both sweet on the same guy/girl did you give advice on how to win his/her heart?
Yep. Absolutely. My friend got the girl and while I was a little heart-broken for a while I kept my friendship with him and became good friends with her. And, largely because of my virtuous and magnanimous actions, her smokin' older sister decided I was a rock star. Best. Sex. Ever.
So, Mr. Pragmatism, who's the Big Winner?
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
Only three interviews? I know people who have never had less than ten (I alas am not among them.) Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back just yet.
A glance at the wiki suggests you're not posting your interviews, either, since there are so few posted for the APA. Try being a team player instead of demanding we all worship you.
I have never been in any way affiliated with either of those institutions, but I know extremely nice people who have, and to jump from "villain" to "Princeton product" is pretty lousy.
Eh, no big deal. I'm a Princeton PhD and I feel like a villein in this job all the time.
So much for the chicken littles out there. I've racked up three APA interviews and I'm just getting started.
LOL. Right, right, I forgot about those ads that expressed a strong preference for snotty villains from 80s teen movies.
Hah! Nailed it!
Well, Mr. Sillypants (sorry, I'm assuming you're a guy), why would you go and do something so altruistic as cautioning others about this? Or were your words of caution all part of a clever ruse....?
Honestly, I think that virtually nothing of use is given by job candidates to job candidates in these comments. Knowledge about the status of different searches isn't especially useful, although it can scratch an itch. Commiseration is very comforting, but doesn't affect who gets employment. Whatever actually useful counsel you're getting here is from people who are already employed, and they don't have a stake in the outcome of individual candidates' searches for work. They just feel for everybody looking for work: lacrimae rerum, etc.
In my original post, which seems to have changed in people's memories, I wrote that it's good to get tips from people who already have jobs and are free to advise without hurting their own chances. I was only saying that if we're on the market ourselves it's plain, well, silly to help our competitors. And speaking for myself, I could definitely give some tips that would make a difference for someone out there. Some very fine tips... that I got from people who already have jobs.
Even if you are not the same person, you sure sound like the person with your disparaging remarks. For the record, archaeologists need to read quite well and not just look at stones. Hell, we can even teach Latin and are often the grunts required to do so! So if anything, our career depends on reading and teaching texts more than the average classicist, because we wouldn't get a job otherwise.
Roman archaeologist, don't be so sensitive. Sure, there are archaeologists who need to pay attention to texts. There are also people who work on Cycladic female figurines, who don't exactly have to know their Plato. (And, based on my experience, some archaeologists who make use of texts need to go in for a refresher course!) But anyway, it was a joke, and not meant to disparage the entire field.
What IS wrong with our discipline that several candidates get 15+ interviews? I dismissed much of the bs that was flying a while back, but I'm beginning to think there is something to the theory that we are a bunch of inbred freaks who want our sisters.
Does the APA ever publish the breakdown of interviews? Right now we just have anecdotal evidence that a few people get thousands of interviews while rest chase rats in the basement of the Marriott. They could provide an anonymous list of all those who went through the service and how many conference interviews they were given. Just a thought.
"Does the APA ever publish the breakdown of interviews?"
Yes, or at least they used to; not sure if they still do. They publish(ed) it in the newsletters, which are archived as pdf docs on the APA website; you can go look through those if you're interested.
Unfortunately, the data is/was based on self-reporting by candidates, and that makes it problematic. I for one didn't fill out the APA's questionnaire when I was on the market, so none of the interviews I had entered the pool of data that year.
In response to the last two posts, although along a slightly different line, why don't we keep a tally on the wiki of the number of interviews schools request at the APA, and the number of campus invites? The APA never tracks those statistics, and I think it's useful information, much like the analysis Sisyphus is doing.
Everyone would add ONLY themselves on a counter after the interview request, for accuracy. The numbers probably won't be complete, since not everyone checks the wiki, but it would give us some idea of our odds. I'll go add mine now.
A glance at the wiki suggests you're not posting your interviews, either, since there are so few posted for the APA.
Nice try male, Canadian Hellenist. I think we sniffed you out the first time.
Right now we just have anecdotal evidence that a few people get thousands of interviews while rest chase rats in the basement of the Marriott.
Not thousands of interviews, but there are at least a few every year that get double-digit interviews. This is a fact, nothing anecdotal about it. Yes some of these people bomb and garner "only" several flybacks, but I would guess that almost all of them get at least five. I personally know at least four people who've been in this position and I don't see any reason for them to have lied about it. Last year, one of these people received at least 5 job OFFERS from every top school that was on the market that year. I wouldn't be surprised if 20% of the candidates out there received 80% of the flybacks.
"Last year, one of these people received at least 5 job OFFERS from every top school that was on the market that year."
So besides the tt offer, they were also offered jobs as deans, chairs, cooks and janitors? Must be from Princeton or Stanford.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but has anyone who received a request for writing samples from Columbia heard back yet?
So besides the tt offer, they were also offered jobs as deans, chairs, cooks and janitors? Must be from Princeton or Stanford.
Don't be ridiculous; it's perfectly obvious what the commenter was trying to say.
S/he meant that last year one candidate received job offers in four alternate universes as well as in our own.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but has anyone who received a request for writing samples from Columbia heard back yet?
nothing so far here
I would like to point out how the math actually breaks down, in most cases. I speak from a fair bit of experience.
A really good candidate, top ABD or newly-minted PhD, gets 8-12 first round interviews, some at the APA/AIA, some phone interviews (phone interviews more common with historians, who are missing the AHA, or LA people missing the SBL, or art history types missing the CAA), and some for general humanities post-doc fellowships.
S/he then may get 3-6 flyouts, again, a combo of Classics depts., history/art history/religious studies depts., and also for fellowships.
Those flyouts translate into 1-2 job offers.
Sometimes while the candidate is going through this process, s/he might get called also for an interview with a VAP-seeking department, so this could get thrown into the mix also.
In any case, there are rare exceptions, where great candidates get 3-4 job offers, but these are EXCEPTIONS. Usually a great candidate, who seems to have phenomenal luck with first-round interviews, will end up with 1-2 job offers in the end. So it was good that the person had multiple interviews to begin with, because it isn't as if s/he is ending up with 4 job offers at the end of the process, in most cases.
Yes, there are a select group of philologists who get ridiculous numbers of APA interviews each year, like in the 15-17 range, and there's always the person who gets 21. I know someone who was in the 15-21 range a few years back, flashing interview slips all over the place while other candidates in line at the Placement Service desk held their 2 slips discretely tucked away in their programs or jacket pockets. This person also was rude as hell to the Placement Service folks and the other people in line, charging ahead, saying s/he was in a hurry, bumping people, speaking in a loud and aggressive tone of voice to the placement service folks. S/he did get a job, but not a very good one, in spite of the ridiculous number of first round interviews s/he garnered. And it was the only job offer.
Anyway, my $0.02 about how good candidates USUALLY do. Yes, you can say that they are lucky to have 1-2 job offers in the end, and they are, but by the end of the process you do not have a select group of people monopolizing ALL of the job offers.
Okay, so here's hoping for sloppy seconds along with the majority of candidates. Classics is FANTASTIC.
Oh god, you people are so fatalistic. The point is that there AREN'T sloppy seconds. The job offers actually ARE spread around, and all offers in a sub-discipline are NOT monopolized by a handful of candidates. That is how the math works out. Yes, there are people who do not get job offers the first time they go on the market. But it isn't because 8 candidates are getting ALL the offers. The math simply does not work out that way.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I accepted four different jobs last year, just to make sure nobody else was able to get them! The commutes really suck, but reading the last few comments make them worth it. I'm going on the market again this year, simply for the hell of it, and to ensure that nobody from Ohio State lands a job.
We must all thank Anon. 12:49 for giving us his insight, which I am sure hits the mark as far as the average goes. Now although I have less experience than him/her, I just want to add that Tyche can scramble up things in any number of ways. On the one hand, you get someone who looks mediocre when she finishes grad school, is lucky to eke out a few years on VAP's, but then works really hard on publication and networking, and ends up TT in a top-tier school. Then you have the brilliant ABD who goes straight to an Ivy but dithers on publication, develops personal problems, and ends up outside the mainstream (ie non-tenured). So I believe one must never lose hope and humility, and must keep on working, whatever his/her current condition.
In response to the last two posts, although along a slightly different line, why don't we keep a tally on the wiki of the number of interviews schools request at the APA, and the number of campus invites? The APA never tracks those statistics, and I think it's useful information, much like the analysis Sisyphus is doing.
Everyone would add ONLY themselves on a counter after the interview request, for accuracy. The numbers probably won't be complete, since not everyone checks the wiki, but it would give us some idea of our odds. I'll go add mine now.
This is a good idea, but I think your method is inefficient. Moreover, it is potentially revealing of identity, which we should try to avoid (motivated along strict game-theory lines).
Better to make a list of numbers, zero through 25. These will represent the total number of APA interviews per individual (25 seems like the max - I know of somebody last year who had 22). Change the counter next to each number on this list as you yourself receive that number. Thus, as I have received one interview so far, and have read that one person has received three (though on the actual one I wouldn't write them in myself) and will initiate the system, at initial state it will look like this:
0 : 0
1 : 1
2 : 0
3 : 1
4 : 0
5 : 0
6 : 0
and so on.
Then, when I receive another one, I will remove my token from the "1" column and move it to two. Imagine that two other people have joined, each of whom have 0 and 1 respectively. The original 3-score earns two more interviews. It will look this:
0 : 1
1 : 1
2 : 1
3 : 0
4 : 0
5 : 1
6 : 0
and so on. You never have to worry about any number but your own, and as long as you "move" up as you accrue interviews and change your old number accordingly, it will track total numbers of people, as well as interviews per person. It also makes it impossible for wiki-readers to correlate candidates with multiple interviews to those multiple ads. I am not paranoid, but keeping such info confidential (from SCs) is important.
Make sense?
"Roman archaeologist, don't be so sensitive. Sure, there are archaeologists who need to pay attention to texts. There are also people who work on Cycladic female figurines, who don't exactly have to know their Plato. (And, based on my experience, some archaeologists who make use of texts need to go in for a refresher course!) But anyway, it was a joke, and not meant to disparage the entire field."
Yeah, and there are plenty of philologists who couldn't find Greece on a map but can tell us about the beauty of Cicero's right scrotum. Maybe they should get their heads out of Cicero's crotch and travel once in a while. My bet is that the person who does Cycladic figurines can teach Greek, ancient history, and maybe even some Greek literature. The Cicerco scholar probably couldn't teach Roman history. No offence by the way.
OK, I figure its a Wiki, so what the hell. System is now in place. It will work, just make sure and participate.
My guess now is that the Mean by the time of the APA will be 5.6 and Median 3.2.
Best of luck to everybody!!
Anon 12:49 here, to Anon 1:39,
Yes, you are correct; definitely throw those people into the 'mix' of good candidates.
I'm behind the wiki counter idea. But it disturbs me that once again, we're doing a better job than the APA of looking after job seekers' interests.
So the APA "deadline" for schools to get lists of interviewed candidates in is Dec. 8, Monday. Ya think it'll be a busy day for contacting interviewees?
I don't have the cover letter that came with the carbon triplicate amazingness anymore, but I think I remember that the APA's toothless deadline for committees is actually 12/19, not 12/8 (which is for candidates).
I don't have the cover letter that came with the carbon triplicate amazingness anymore, but I think I remember that the APA's toothless deadline for committees is actually 12/19, not 12/8 (which is for candidates).
I DO have that cover letter, and you're right: candidates 12/8, schools 12/19. This interview-list email they've been vaunting as the sign that they care about candidates will be arriving a week before the meetings. (Even given the holidays, it's going to take them 2 weeks to assemble the schools that want to talk to each candidate? Any decent database software can do that much more quickly.)
The letter that came with the availability form for our SC says Dec. 8 for institutions. The placement guidelines said Dec. 19 for institutions. I asked for clarification and was told the earlier the better if the SC was planning on using an APA interview room.
A small silverish lining -- some searches may be canceled, but those that go ahead are MUCH less likely to declare failed searches this year.
Post a Comment