Cinna fully admits that Cinna had first written "three minutes" and later changed it to "five."
Yes, three minutes would be much better, and it's a good idea (as noted, I believe) to say something, without being aggressive, about what your study adds to the present state of the field. And I'd suggest that it's best not to preface this all on another scholar's errors or shortcomings, but rather what you are doing to learn from these, and to add to the blah blah blah you get my point.
Cinna fully admits that Cinna had first written "three minutes" and later changed it to "five."
Yes, three minutes would be much better, and it's a good idea (as noted, I believe) to say something, without being aggressive, about what your study adds to the present state of the field. And I'd suggest that it's best not to preface this all on another scholar's errors or shortcomings, but rather what you are doing to learn from these, and to add to the blah blah blah you get my point.
Chapter outlines are expected, though? I'm glad I checked. I'd been told five minutes and didn't think that was enough time to get into the content of individual chapters. I was just going to talk about the diss in general terms.
Depending on how many chapters you have, you may well not have time to deal substantively with each one. Instead, have 1-3 sentences explaining what each chapter does and what its role in the whole project is. Give the "take away" for the chapter, not an outline of it. You can use the "what does it show and why should I care" principle at the level of chapter as well as at that of the whole diss. Trying to walk a committee through the steps in the argument of individual chapters is a reliable way of getting lost in the weeds and needing to be cut off by the committee after you've been talking for ten minutes.
Relatedly, if a committee does try to move the conversation on to a new topic, don't just keep plowing ahead with the rest of your spiel. You'd be surprised how often people do that.
I have never once gone into detail like chapter summaries in an interview. I was told the diss pitch should be 2-3 minutes, start with what exciting argument you put forth, what it shows us that we did not know, briefly explain your methodology, and include one illustrative example. Very brief. If they want more info, they'll ask for it. Never go on for 5 minutes.
One thing to make sure of beyond the diss spiel is that your second book project is connected in some way to the diss. How do the two projects represent you as a whole scholar with an exciting trajectory? While the diss will often be the tenure book if only one book is required, the second book will tell a committee where your mind is going as a colleague. And if the two projects seem unrelated, you better find a way to relate them succinctly and interestingly.
The advice above depends on the interview. Some of these SCs consist of assoc/full profs who never published one book; I seriously doubt they would like to hear some upstart kid fresh out of the PhD talk about her second.
Likewise, VAPs probably don't give a fuck about your second book.
But yeah, if you are interviewing at an R1 (or an RU/VH, as they're now called) you probably want that second book spiel and some kind of connection to your work in the first.
You have me curious: why must a second book be linked to the dissertation? Your advice doesn't apply to me -- my second book will most certainly be linked to the diss., but that is happenstance more than planning. I can't see a good reason why there must be so strong a link. Especially since if you look at some of the big name scholars in our field you'll find they've written (and edited) books on a broad range of subjects.
So does anyone know what's happening with the Case Western Reserve Roman Art or University of North Carolina Latinist positions? The wiki has nothing for either, and Seattle's coming up pretty soon.
That's right; there is no particular reason for the second project to be linked to the dissertation, and I'm not sure where that advice is coming from. It's true that it shouldn't be so far out of your area of knowledge that it's implausible that you could do it (e.g. your dissertation is on brick stamps and your proposed second project is on archaic lyric) but if anything your second project should show at least a little distance from your dissertation, to demonstrate that you might be able to come up with more than one idea in your life.
SC members: At the time of conference interview, is everyone on equal footing? I.e. do you think you will simply invite to campus the three people who perform best in the interview? Or are there people you are interviewing who are so good on paper that they would really need to screw up to not be invited, and likewise people who are very unlikely to perform well enough in interview to compete with others who are more impressive on paper?
At the time of conference interview, is everyone on equal footing? I.e. do you think you will simply invite to campus the three people who perform best in the interview? Or are there people you are interviewing who are so good on paper that they would really need to screw up to not be invited, and likewise people who are very unlikely to perform well enough in interview to compete with others who are more impressive on paper?
The interview is just new information about candidates that you put alongside information you already had. In some cases it will confirm and in some allay your suspicions; in some cases it will create concerns that you didn't have before or show you a side of someone that wasn't evident from the file. But what you thought about the relative strength of the files before the interview doesn't just magically disappear; it only gets adjusted, sometimes a great deal, by the interview.
It's usually not possible to rank the interviews with anything like "top three" precision, and it's definitely not the case that everybody starts out the interview with zero points and the three highest scores move on to the next round. But a poor interview is often disqualifying of even a very strong application. It's rare that a terrific interview can help someone who has a very poor application, but only because you're unlikely to have an interview at all if the committee thinks your application is poor.
Yes, it is useless to say that. I would instead say that it's unusual for someone to get an invitation to a campus visit if their interview didn't go well.
Do those of us who are not efficient schmoozers have any chance in hell?
Yes. Interviewing doesn't have anything to do with "schmoozing" as I understand that term anyway. If you are able to sustain a conversation about your research and about teaching, you are able to do a good interview. And obviously Classics job searches don't in general prioritize charm; if they did, the Classics professoriate would look pretty different. Just give good, thoughtful, and non-self-defeating answers to questions and be polite and positive.
I've been asked about a second project at interviews for R1s, teaching heavy institutions AND for a 1 year VAP. Actually, I've never not been asked about a second major project in a TT interview and have been in many VAPs so it is good to have an idea.
But I don't think the diss needs to be related to the second book project. As long as it is within the same field (Greek lit, etc) that is fine. Though I've seen some struggle between those who work on prose/poetry wanting to make the leap to the other side. While I think that is good, that is also where dots should be connected about approach, theme, etc.
Interviews: --a second book (or just "what you would do after the diss book" which might be just articles) might have some intellectual connection with your first, but it shouldn't be too close. If your diss = Kneecaps in Shakespeare and you say your second book = Kneecaps in Spenser, you sound boring. --and it is absolutely not true that everyone interviewed is at the same level and whoever interviews best will get the callback. Each member of a committee will probably have the finalists loosely ranked in his/her mind, and the interview will fill in some blanks, answer some questions, or possibly expose weaknesses. People will move up and people will move down. This is not a game show with rounds. We also might be talking to your teachers at parties or seeing yours talks. --I've also been on committees where someone did really well in an interview but we realized that the person was probably just good at interviews.
1:44 p.m. said: "Each member of a committee will probably have the finalists loosely ranked in his/her mind, and the interview will fill in some blanks, answer some questions, or possibly expose weaknesses."
I'd agree with this, with the clarification that for me at least the "loose ranking" is no more specific, pre-convention, than "top six FILES out of the 150 we read"; "second six FILES "; etc. If you were not already way at the top of the list, you wouldn't have gotten an interview at all -- remember that. We had nearly 150 files to read and we're doing 12 preliminary interviews.
At least in the committees I've been on, we do not even tentatively "rank" the candidates before the conference. We agree on the 12 we're going to interview, but we don't talk at all, at that point, about who's at the top of that list. Indeed, it would really be meaningless to do so; these are the 12 most impressive FILES, but the second crucial part of the process is the interview and the two together--file plus interview--determine who gets invited to a fly-out.
After the conference, we will meet and discuss how to rank the candidates based on the whole picture from file-plus-interview. Our administration won't pay for more than three SC members (out of a total of 6) to attend the conference, so the meeting will start with those who did attend giving careful and detailed reports on each interview to the rest of us. Then, we talk. We've blocked out four hours on a Saturday for the meeting, and if we need longer (we may) we'll meet a second time. Getting those 12 campus interviews down to 3 fly-outs is hard-- there's no magic formula, and it's not possible to say that the "three best interviews" automatically get the campus visits.
Not yet, but if we get a search next year I'm going to push for an obstacle course round, a round where the candidates have to eat stick insects or moose anuses or something, and a round where they sing a Whitney Houston song.
Not yet, but if we get a search next year I'm going to push for an obstacle course round, a round where the candidates have to eat stick insects or moose anuses or something, and a round where they sing a Whitney Houston song.
Does anyone have a sense of whether the job listings of the American Classical League are kept up to date? Whenever I apply to those jobs, I don't even get rejection letters. I might as well just be writing up an application and filing it in the trash can.
You probably would have better luck with a placement service like Carney Sandoe. My impression is that independent schools take applications through such services more seriously than those received directly, if only because going through the process of applying to Carney Sandoe and being accepted shows you are not applying for a random job on a whim. Nor are all independent school jobs listed on the ACL site. I don't know anything about public schools, so I can't help you there.
If post-APA rejections have apparently been sent out, and you didn't get one, but you also haven't gotten an on-campus interview call, what does this mean?
It might mean that you're on the pseudo waiting list - too good to reject but you fell through the A list cracks for reasons only known to the SC. From the twelve or so you invite to the APA, you can often cut that list in half without too much trouble. Once you get down to the last batch, it's honestly a total crap shoot. It's also when senior scholars often join the fray to try and put their protege over the top - seen it too often and I don't agree with it. Let the chips fall where they may, people.
Some SCs don't deliberate at the end of the APA and their terms haven't started yet. I wouldn't give up hope until the end of the month. If you haven't heard by then, you're almost certainly on the cut list.
It is absolutely NOT time to despair. Many if not most SCs don't deliberate until after their spring terms start, and most terms have not started yet. Every SC I've ever been on (which is several, at this point) has met during the first week of class to decide about the short list for fly-outs --and the first week of class starts after MLK Day. Don't panic. The decisions haven't been made yet.
I'm on a current T-T SC (I won't say which one here), and we are not going to meet until next Friday, and maybe also Saturday. Why so late? Those are the first days that everybody in the department (not just those of us who went to Seattle) will have time to meet in order to discuss the results of the APA interviews. Also, fwiw, I didn't hear back from one place that offered me a campus visit, lo those many years ago, until February. Don't abandon hope until you have confirmation, the wheels grind slowly.
Same here as 9:36 said. The T-T SC I'm on is meeting Friday Jan. 18. Not all of us could go to the APA so those who did are writing up detailed notes for the rest of us, which we'll read before Friday and discuss at the meeting. We'll decide on fly-outs then if we can, but very likely it'll take another meeting on Saturday. Thus, those selected for fly-outs will probably not hear from us until Jan. 20th or even later.
Why didn't we meet to discuss earlier? Some of us are just now returning to campus, and several of us have scheduled other commitments for this week, which is our window of opportunity between APA and classes to deal with all the minutiae of maintaining health and household that are impossible during the semester. But finding a time during the first week of class when all six of us could meet for the three hours minimum we figure it will take wasn't easy. Late Friday afternoon was the best we could do.
At the APA I followed generally accepted wisdom by not trying to chat up the SC members with whom I had interviewed, though of course I did give a smile and nod when the inevitable run-in happened. Is it a bad sign if no SC members chatted *me* up when they had the opportunity? Would they have done this for a top choice?
I suggested last year that we were seeing the shortcomings of the Web 2.0 reflected in the lack of updates on the Wiki. I was immediately accused of being an antediluvian ingrate.
But I would submit again that too many individuals have grown bored of updating the Wiki or have decided for some other reason that it is not worth the trouble it takes to keep the rest of the field up to date.
There is a new lectureship at the University of Kentucky (http://www.as.uky.edu/lecturer-positions). It promises "a competitive salary."
How should "a competitive salary" be read? Would it be obnoxious to email and ask what is meant by this? I would kind of like the job, but I have a family to support, and I am worried that competitive means $3,000 per class.
Re: 12:46: the salary you'd be offered would depend on a number of factors, but in any case even the chair would not be able to tell you what that amount is even if they offer you the job. To be blunt, you aren't in a position to be picky (if you were, you wouldn't be asking). Wait until they offer you the job, then decide.
Thanks, 9:43. You mean well, and you are probably right that I should just apply.
But the advice that I am not in a position to be picky is ridiculous. I don't have to live in poverty, and it is not self-evident that applying for lectureships which mean precisely that is preferable to spending my time investigating alternative careers.
You have a point, of course, about other things. Many professions are far more remunerative than classics and will allow you to pay for things like food, clothing, and shelter. And, if the APA did not lead to very many opportunities, this may well be the time of year to explore other things. There are the traditional professions, law and medicine, if you can tolerate (a lot) more formal education, more administrative positions in higher education, working for the government, in various capacities, and any number of other possibilities.
This sort of thinking does take some time and really should not be done under the pressure of needing to find a job to avoid, say, eviction, to use an extreme example.
All that said, I would caution you very strongly against thinking that you have to make a choice at any time before actually accepting and starting a new job. Explore your options, but keep applying for whatever positions in classics there may be. The whole idea of a job search is to find a job, particularly if you have a strong interest in compensation. Jobs in classics are jobs nonetheless.
Anyone else having all kinds of trouble with the USF Instructor application? There are nine different spaces for required documents, to which you have to attach something in order to submit the application. One of them is "Letter of Recommendation", though of course you shouldn't have this as an applicant and they already asked for the contact info for letter writers earlier in the application.
Suppose you went the APA with one T-T interview. Interview seemed to go well. Afterwards, the school cancelled its search. My question is: is it cool to send your receipts from Seattle (near to $1500) to the school? Because I'd like that.
The financial demands on the job seeker are huge - and growing. The demand for conference attendance for first-round screening interviews is a tough requirement - especially when most candidates are stuck on the market merry-go-round for numerous years. Schools need to be more expeditious in these searches as well.
Last year, I sent one application, did first-round interview via Skype, got to oncampus. this year, I did 2 first-round interviews via skype, no oncampus. I do not know if skipping APA is a fatal mistake. On the other hand, if a place wants you, they will do the rest.
UNC probably won't fail again (some personnel changes since last year). But if they do, they still have another iteration of the search guaranteed by the university's search policies.
Has anyone heard from Howard University? They had a late job posting so I'm wondering if they're also late in determining campus visits. (Well, hoping so.)
Strategic question about VAPs that interviewed at the APA: if they asked us to "keep in touch" about our candidacy for tenure track jobs (which would obviously take precedence) does that really just mean that we should e-mail if a TT job takes us out of the running? Or does it mean we should also write to say "I'm out of the running for the TT and remain really excited about your position"? The latter would technically be following directions, but it still seems to me to smack of desperation. I am hesitant.
Overanalyzer: I would only contact the SC if you accept a TT gig. They will assume if they don't hear from you that you are still in the running and interested in their position. Besides, noting that you're out of the running for a TT job doesn't necessarily paint you in the most positive light (I would imagine; I've never been on an SC). Good luck!
Thanks for the information. I assume you have genuine knowledge of the situation and that your tone is sarcastic. Is that correct? What with bitterness at an all time high, you might have invented this simply as a joke; but that strikes me as the less likely possibility.
Yes, 1:12. Sometimes the Internet makes it look like someone is an inside candidate when they do not really have a chance.
On the other hand, I have a friend who was told this year by the chair of the search committee where s/he is teaching that they will hire her/him if s/he wants the job.
I don't want to reopen this can of worms, since there are good reasons to hire an inside candidate; and it is not worth our time.
Wouldn't we all be better served if there were more clarity in our profession on this issue? In some cases, it could be negative -- this is a one year job for you, period, no exceptions. In other cases, it could be positive -- this is an open line, so if you hit these specific teaching/publication milestones, if you get a positive annual review, we will convert it T-T, renew you for another three years etc. I think clear expectations, stated up front, would save much labor and heartache for everyone. And we all would know that positions listed as open are truly open.
Stick with archaeology or history. You'll get laid and drunk more. In ten years, when you get out of grad school, there will be much less competition for not that many fewer jobs. As for temp jobs? "You can always get a job teaching Latin" should be "you can always get a job teaching some crap civ/history/archaeology course."
Typical clarch attitude to evidence: assumptions multiplied by inductions.
A) I am not homeless. My parents kept my room just like I left it in preparation for this day. B) I didn't type that in a library. I was on my 5-minute break at Starbucks. We do have wi-fi access here, you know. C) That frazzled professional woman who comes in here every morning for the same half-caff thinks I'm pretty cute. So, there. You don't have to get dirty to get laid.
Lots of searches cancelled this year after the fact (Creighton, Colby ... ). The contributing factors must be complicated, but surely this is something for the Professional Matters committee to address and the discipline as a whole to respond to?
Creighton's search, at least, was cancelled due to budget shortfalls in the university - the CNE search was but one of many searches cancelled. I fail to see what the Professional Matters Committee could do about that type of thing. Searches are approved by administrations with one set of numbers, then, when new numbers result in budget adjustments, searches are taken away. It is all sadly too common in this economic climate. Apart from admitting fewer graduate students and helping graduate students prepare for both academic and non-academic jobs, I also don't see what the discipline as a whole can do. Perhaps others have ideas.
The discipline as a hole could get their heads out of their asses and start thinking about how we can start growing again.
If I have to hear one more senior scholar complain about having to deal with donors, I think I'll have an aneurysm. We (or a significant percentage of us) ought to be actively campaigning for Classics, if we want the discipline to survive. Really, there is no reason to think that the decline of the field is inevitable, unless you think that the human knowledge will become obsolete at the arrival of the singularity.
"We (or a significant percentage of us) ought to be actively campaigning for Classics, if we want the discipline to survive. Really, there is no reason to think that the decline of the field is inevitable, unless you think that the human knowledge will become obsolete at the arrival of the singularity."
Well, as long as we insist on having 40% Latinists, 40 Hellenists, and 20% everyone else (who have to teach Latin/Greek at advanced levels anyway), it's inevitable. Read a previous post on here that reeks of hierarchy and disdain for the 20% who threaten their dominance. The vast majority of the "80%" does not sell to the academy or the general public. Your dog don't hunt in the 21st century. It's taken 10 years to figure out, but a senior administrator with a couple drinks in him said to my face that they've learned from other places that have attempted to shut down classics abruptly. They didn't think there would be much resistance for an "insular and hopelessly outdated discipline," but they've encountered an unexpected "emotional attachment" to classics. Now they'll slowly choke us off while publicly pledging support.
Look 2:45, academia as a whole (no puns this time) is in trouble, because of our collective shortsightedness.
That administrator you mention probably thinks that freshman courses in business writing are the wave of the future. I have no time for such people, nor do I think they matter.
My large lecture classes are filled with undergrads who enjoy reading the Odyssey and the Aeneid. That is something to build on. And, of course, Classics will never be what it was in the 19th century, but we should at least remain a piece of the pie that is World Literature.
And, if we could convince the public that the arts are a better investment (in human terms) than (e.g.) Tomahawk cruise missiles, then we would all have more than enough funding to go around. Instead, we sit around and talk about how the sky is falling.
Pinning our hopes on World Literature, Art History, History, etc. is a zero sum game and we stand the most to lose. As much as I want to preserve our discipline, I don't fault these other programs for distributing their offerings better by hiring someone to teach Polynesian Art, Chinese literature, and Latin America history. Wouldn't it look ridiculous if UCLA had four ancient historians and no one teaching East Asian art or Spanish-American history? No, I think we need to make the case that classics deserves to be a self standing department and we should think broader to justify it. We should cover prehistory to Late Antiquity (if not Medieval) and Europe, North Africa, and West Asia to India. Enough of the tired dissertations and research agendas that could have been written in the 19th century.
"I have no time for such people, nor do I think they matter."
Great, the ostrich with head in ground technique. That sure worked well for SUNY Albany, Royal Holloway, and others. If many others truly believe deans, provosts, etc. don't matter, we're in serious trouble.
Read this comment in a Royal Holloway article by someone supposedly friendly towards classics:
Worth of Classics? 1 July, 2011 Although I have an academic interest in Classics, all the same it would be best if most if not all Classics departments closed. Few Classicists in the UK seem to know what they are doing. Older Classicist colleagues have been mostly blimps. In an `ancient university`, which produced those blimps, the colleagues in my college were way below the average level of academics elsewhere. Young classics academics there and in a former polytechnic in London were so ignorant of their own discipline, and so bad at lecturing, that they caused despair among an audience of scholars. They were no use at the most boastful `ancient university`, and they were no use at a former poly either. Sorry to have to say, the future of Classics is not something one can care about at all.
If you recall, I started ranting at 11:36 because of the senior scholars I know who complain about having to talk to potential donors (potential donors who have already expressed interest in giving money to their department!). No administrator is going to shut down a department that is bringing in money! And I am not advocating the ostrich approach.
Instead, we should focus on changing the public discourse, since trying to talk sense into individual administrators will only buy you a few years at best. And the imperialistic approach is not bad either: we could work on expanding Classic's umbrella, rather than circling the wagons and hiring one more person who works on Euripides.
In my experience, senior faculty in the humanities, not just classics, are generally indifferent or woefully ineffectual when it comes to working the system. When donors come along, departments are often terribly unimaginative with what money they get. These greybeard donors, they grew up when even public high schools regularly offered Latin and every major university had a classics program. Do you think we'll still be getting these donors regularly in 30 years when their kids will likely have never encountered classics? Not that it matters anyway since we piss the money away for Loebs or sending a vain senior faculty member to some irrelevant conference in Capetown.
despite so much study, it seems a rare occasion that the 'wisdom of the ancients' actually serves our field. if classics peters out, let "died of willful myopia" be written on its sepulcher.
"Read this comment in a Royal Holloway article by someone supposedly friendly towards classics:
Worth of Classics? 1 July, 2011 Although I have an academic interest in Classics, all the same it would be best if most if not all Classics departments closed. Few Classicists in the UK seem to know what they are doing. Older Classicist colleagues have been mostly blimps. In an `ancient university`, which produced those blimps, the colleagues in my college were way below the average level of academics elsewhere. Young classics academics there and in a former polytechnic in London were so ignorant of their own discipline, and so bad at lecturing, that they caused despair among an audience of scholars. They were no use at the most boastful `ancient university`, and they were no use at a former poly either. Sorry to have to say, the future of Classics is not something one can care about at all."
Yes, this is not surprising at all and we will have to deal with the same irrelevance here if we let History, English/Comp. Lit., Archaeology/Anthropology, Art History, etc. take scholars who can and should be in classics.
Yes, but I don't see the vast majority of classicists in any sort of power pulling this off. I'm sorry, but there is at least a kernel of truth in the Royal Holloway comment. I don't think it's by chance that many of the thriving programs have had historians or archaeologists in charge. I'm a Latinist myself, but my grad school peers in history or archaeology were forced to regularly interact with the social sciences and sciences, preparing them much better to serve as chairs in the future. They wrote grant proposals to national and international foundations, which forces one to think about their research under a much broader light. In this way, I think our insular foundations and individual benefactors have ironically weakened our long term survival.
This just in from two college presidents on the website of the Chronicle of Higher Education:
"The lately popular image of the university president as CEO further complicates matters. Most CEOs run organizations whose objective is profit; we run nonprofits whose purpose is to advance knowledge. A CEO who eliminates a product line with sinking sales may be making a smart decision. A president who closes the classics department simply because enrollment is down should probably move to another profession" (http://chronicle.com/article/College-Presidents-Bruised/137227/).
But it's probably bad news for us that the first example on their minds was closing a classics department ...
You would be wise to remove the "probably" from your final sentence; the threat to classics is not hypothetical and distant, but imminent, even ongoing. Even as I write this, dozens of administrators across this country, faced with an age of austerity, are drawing up plans to reduce their investment in Classics (as in practically everything else related to the liberal arts). And if our best response is to ignore and disdain the mandates of these administrators, or suggest that classics graduate programs admit fewer students, then we will be marched rather meekly to our all-too-well-foreseen doom and we will lose forever the generation of classicists just now entering the market, as well as those slaving away at these terrible contingent positions. The first question is, of course, how much do we care?
Another French guy immolated himself because of unemployment recently. Is it worrisome that when I read about it my first thought was, "Now there's an idea?"
And, of course, tenured faculty have been conditioned not to care. More and more, I admire those who have managed to fight off every incentive not to care.
Those of us fighting to survive as Classicists are (or feel) powerless.
I'm more than a bit skeptical regarding whether internet petitions ever succeed -- does anyone have empirical evidence that they do? if so, please share it -- but thought I would share this one, regarding Thessaloniki and its Byzantine remains: http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Breaking_the_heart_of_Thessaloniki_through_time_Save_citys_byzantine_center_the_citys_memory_and_identity/?tLlXzdb
How to deal with the anguish? Quit. That's right, put down the OCT and back away. Do something else with your life. That's what I'm doing.
Right now, I'm deciding between something in IT or becoming a physician's assistant. Sure, it'll take me a few years of additional education, but at the end, I'll have a job, mobility, and more money than I'd ever earn in academia.
This is not an easy decision for me, but I'd sooner take charge of my life now than twist and turn on the job market for a few more years. Despite what you may have been told, things are not going to get better for Classics. Most jobs now receive 150+ applications---that number will only increase as the number of positions decreases.
For your own mental and physical health, give a career change some thought. Be a mercenary. Do what's best for you, not the discipline that might have left you behind.
take it from a veteran of this shitty process who has survived as a visitor and an adjunct - if you find it miserable, save yourself and change careers. do it now.
It seems like there are fewer jobs this winter/spring than there have been in past years. Assuming that this is true, does anyone have any theories for why that would be? Should we assume that the next couple of months will see jobs trickling out at the same slow pace?
Hopefully this won't seem idiotic, even though it may be rather obvious: I suspect that the many TT positions of the fall were due to the slight recovery and consequent budgetary changes at universities that would have, in the past few years, listed short term positions in the Spring. Since many of those were converted to TT positions, there are fewer vaps this year. But maybe the total number of jobs this year will be roughly comparable to previous years. Maybe.
To ask an obvious question, people here keep bemoaning the death of classics, but is there any real evidence for this? I know of only two departments shut down, both 2-3 years ago, and one of those was partly because of dysfunctional faculty practically begging for it to happen (SUNY-Albany; Michigan State seems to have been more the innocent victim). Sure, tenure lines at many places haven't been replaced, but that's true of other departments. Is there some evidence showing that classics departments, and/or ancient history positions within history departments, and/or ancient art/archaeology positions within art history departments, are shrinking at unusually rapid rates?
I'm starting to wonder whether all these claims of the "death of classics" are just nonsense from emotionally overwrought job-seekers, of which this blog has plenty.
One thing to keep in mind is that the healthy out-put of graduate students with Ph.D. from U.S. graduate programs is contributing to the log-jam problem, esp. with retirements being deferred. Is Classics under threat? You bet. Look at any of the Tea Party governors who are openly hostile to non-revenue fields in higher education (FL, NC e.g.). But Classics has its own challenges. A lot of the frustrated folks here on FV (I am one) find issue with inertia, inconsistency, and a shortage of opportunity. Graduate programs could scale back their admissions, but that is not in their immediate interest. The R-1 where I adjunct tasks those bright-eyed folks to various TA chores. They need them. But they care little for their actual fate, in the professional sense, when you get down to it. And Classicists feel very helpless when planning the jump out of the academy (I do) b/c of fear about 'transferability of skills' and the like - and competing for jobs with people the same age as the students in your Latin 101 section. So, shortage of opportunity 'at home' and not enough skills for the great beyond makes for some angsty, fussy people.
So departments in states with hostile governors/legislatures need to be smart about things, and not just sit there hoping for rescue like a bunch of Melians. Why not offer a large lecture course on "Ancient Morality," in which students can read Augustine, Seneca, Hammurabi, Old and New Testament, the Melian Debate, etc.? That's the kind of thing that would make classics departments relevant to the right people, i.e. those with the purse strings. There's a reason Bill Bennett's "Book of Virtues" was a major best-seller -- why not take advantage of that conservative impulse to teach moral values? And it's hardly selling out, since the course I've outlined is a perfectly legitimate one, not to mention potentially a damn good one.
I have no sympathy for departments that can see the writing on the wall but don't initiate significant changes to make themselves less likely to become targets of cuts.
they don't do it b/c a lot of folks with clout in big R1 depts are horrible snobs who still embrace colonialist delusions about the supremacy of Graeco-Roman civilization and treat reading ancient languages as a barrier to students rather than a ramp to success. i know well an R1 dept that needs more Greek enrollments but it too snooty to offer New Testament Greek regularly. They will still believe this mantra on their way to the budgetary slaughter house.
I think 10:30 hit the nail on the head. I am also one of those people, as, I bet, are you, dear reader.
Classics may not actually be dying at all; but it is certainly the case that the careers of most of the brilliant young scholars coming out of PhD programs in the last few and next few years are fucking stillborn.
Graduate programs could scale back their admissions, but that is not in their immediate interest.
Some have been, because as state governments have cut back support tuition has gone up and the number of students a department can support via fellowship has dropped.
In order for the people currently on the job market to benefit from this, though, the time for graduate programs to scale back admissions (and for some Ph.D. programs to shut down, which I think is a good idea as well) was 6-10 years ago, but of course 6-10 years ago we didn't know about the impending financial crisis and recession.
Also, since it's that time of year again, I just want to point out that graduate programs do not compel people to attend them; blaming my graduate program for admitting me on the basis of my application to attend that graduate program seems like a Hell of an evasion.
So this gets asked a lot, and no one ever has an answer. Nevertheless, I'll try asking again, because I am desperate:
What can we Classics PhDs do for work now that many of us can't get anything, not even part-time adjunct work, from an international job search? What alternative career paths are there in which our resumes might actually get a second glance? Has anyone had success they would like to share?
I am not interested in blame or complaining; I really want a dialogue about what we can do to get to a point where we can pay rent, day to day. I am applying very broadly to many different kinds of academic jobs, but I am getting nothing.
In response to this query: "What can we Classics PhDs do for work now that many of us can't get anything, not even part-time adjunct work, from an international job search? What alternative career paths are there in which our resumes might actually get a second glance?"
Hasn't the Placement Committee organized panels for the past two years on this very topic? I wasn't able to attend them, because I was either not at that APA or was busy doing something else, but I noted them in the program. Did anyone attend, and get useful information regarding this?
I didn't attend, I suspect like many others, because I was actively on the Classics job market and didn't know who might be taking note of who was there.
Your PhD in Classics (mine too) is essentially worthless. If you know someone, say a family member, at a law firm or a corporation, maybe they can get you a job doing something. But the degree by itself won't open any doors. At least mine hasn't.
You can explore the para-Classics jobs: library science, publishing, high school Latin. One of those requires an additional degree, one state certification (if teaching at public schools), and publishing jobs are exceedingly scarce.
Or you can do a quick Google search and see what are the hottest careers for the next ten years. Always at the top are medicine and IT. Either obviously will require a few years of additional education.
A Ph.D. in Classics isn't worthless. But you have got to sell your skills and talents to whichever employer you are approaching. Obviously you have highly developed critical thinking, analysis, and writing skills. You have good organizational skills, and public speaking skills. As a teacher, you developed leadership skills. I have a number of friends with Ph.D.s in classics and English who have found good jobs in various fields such as healthcare (one is now Executive Director of a hospital out in California), in government (policy analysis), and in technical writing for various business firms. Another friend started an (non-academic) publishing business that is picking up speed (selling his own, at first, but now also others' books). Don't sell yourself short. It is a tough economy all around but there are still opportunities.
If you combine the previous two comments, you will reach an answer that's, in my view, about correct. There are opportunities for the classics Ph.D. There are the traditional places of refuge for fallen classicists, more administrative or student services-type positions in higher education, academic publishing, high school teaching, and then there are other options. Law and medicine come to mind quickly, although these of course require more education and, especially now in the case of law, do not promise success.
But it is very true that it will not be easy to find positions beyond classics, particular outside of the most often followed Plan Bs, as it were. Institutional, systemitized hiring does not lend itself to favoring humanities Ph.Ds. Do not expect much success applying, e.g., to Fortune 500 companies, for entry level positions, when all you can say is "I have a Ph.D. and top critical thinking skills."
Does this mean that there is no chance of employment or professional success outside of classics? No. Not at all. But, as I've noted before, it will require a good amount of effort to to locate what opportunities there may be and to compete for them.
Here's a suggestion, try to get in touch with us fallen classicists who have gone on to do other things and see what might be possible. Look for smaller organizations that may be less likely to follow a systemitized hiring process.
BUT, as I've said before also, I would not recommend giving up on classics. Certainly, not just because you believe that there are limited options left in classics. Now, it may be true that there are limited options in classics, but you know how to be competitive for them.
What you need to avoid is desperation or, worse, appearing that you are seeking other options because you failed as a classicist. What employer is going to want to engage someone who worked toward a goal for, say, 6-10 years, did not succeed, and now needs to find something else to do?
"What employer is going to want to engage someone who worked toward a goal for, say, 6-10 years, did not succeed, and now needs to find something else to do?"
BUT, as I've said before also, I would not recommend giving up on classics. Certainly, not just because you believe that there are limited options left in classics. Now, it may be true that there are limited options in classics, but you know how to be competitive for them.
thanks, Fallen, for the thoughts. but we mere mortals have to, you know, eat and such. and the scraps leftover after the t-t slots are offered to the flavor of the moment or the latest tenure refugee from a slightly better university don't cut it. there are quite a lot of pigs here and the trough is pretty meager. oh, and all of those folks who need to retire are busy slurping up more than their fair share of the gruel.
unless Fallen Classicist wants to reveal how he/she/it pays the bills, I call bullshit on his/her/its 'pep talk'. keep the classics fires burning? as if.
this disaffected job seeker in classics is getting off the merry-go-round for good and just wants to say, by way of venting, what a horrible, soul crushing, logic-defying experience it has been to be in the classics biz. once the external, bleeding wounds heal, I really don't think I'll miss this crap - but I will always wonder why this field is so fracked up. good luck to those who continue to follow the thread to try and escape the Labyrinth. who would have thought that teaching some language and culture would make one so embittered?
I understand that, for the classics job seeker, especially at this time of year, things are not good, that there are a decidedly limited number of opportunities, etc. I am in no way trying to minimize that.
My point, rather, is to offer some view, of the risks--and opportunities--that may present themselves beyond the world of the academy, because, really, that's the world I live in now.
When I say "don't give up on classics" I mean to say that there are some jobs in classics, like there are some jobs for which classicists are qualified in, say, banking or nonprofit administration. And, if you are looking for a job, it's not the best idea to ignore a sector of jobs for which you are qualified, even if you are actively seeking other opportunities at the same time.
Now, when you apply for jobs outside classics, when you interview, you will be asked about why you are not seeking a job in classics. You NEED a good answer to this question, an answer that is positive and does not just say "I'm running away from the academy" or, worse, "I flunked out of the academy," or, even worse, "I'm just doing this until I can find my way back to the academy."
I empathize completely with 10:35 PM and hope it works out. I am genuinely happy I do not have a child b/c in 3 months' time I do not know how I will feed myself. no joke.
Is Classics more fucked up than other academic fields? I suspect that it is, but I'm not sure why. Any opinions?
I think that it seems as though it is because our familiarity with it is much more intimate than with other fields.
I also think that a lot of what seems fucked up about it is the sudden, sharp constriction of demand for labor, with no corresponding reduction in supply, that began with the recession and that the academic job market hasn't recovered from any more than the broader labor market has. A field that seems fine when you have a 50% shot of finding a job in it in 2007 seems like an irremediably fucked up one when you have a 20% shot in 2010 (I am pulling these percentages out of my ass but they are just given exempli gratia). All of a sudden people who could till recently count on finding a job sooner or later could no longer count on that, and it happened overnight, even though the quality of the job seekers had not changed. Nor had the field of Classics changed overnight, nor had the humanities in general. What changed overnight was the economy.
There may be all kinds of things that are fucked up about Classics, but the thing that most job seekers are currently experiencing as fucked up about it isn't inherent to Classics but is the consequence of a very specific historical event that caused massive unemployment that nobody except the unemployed apparently feels any urgency about remedying.
"it happened overnight, even though the quality of the job seekers had not changed. Nor had the field of Classics changed overnight, nor had the humanities in general. What changed overnight was the economy."
No, the world changed and classics as a culturally dependent exercise hasn't aged nearly as well as most disciplines despite being among the most vulnerable. It was asking a lot, but a previous generation needed tremendous foresight and guts to recalibrate for a new, global audience. Instead, we're still stuck with the Cleavers calling the shots, training and hiring more Cleavers while academia sees us as living fossils. Some would defend it as loyalty and steadiness while others see stagnation and ossification. Whatever the case, we're screwed regardless of the economy. Don't blame the earthquake. Blame the architects for building on fill.
Yep. It amazes me how ubiquitous shameless exploitation of candidates is, in every field. I've been applying outside of Classics as well as for yet another year of VAPs, and one of the civilian jobs wanted all applicants to do a week of work for free so that the employer could evaluate how well they did the job. This for a low-paying job that literally anyone with some high school education could do. Our field's requirement that candidates shell out $1,000 for the APA for one or two first-round interviews is similarly absurd. Especially since so many searches end up failing.
I was a finalist for a certain job this year. I am currently a VAP and have a book in print. But one of my fellow finalists -- who had not yet landed a TT job -- also had one book in print and *another* forthcoming! And the third finalist already had a TT job, had a book out, and was getting close to tenure!! What does that say about the state of our field?
Buyer's market. Hiring institutions can have extremely demanding criteria and still find people who fit them, because there are a lot of job-seekers but only a few jobs.
2:13 is picking up on the fact that according to Lady Fama at least four T-T jobs this year have gone to candidates looking to leave other T-T jobs that they already have. It is a sea of lateral moves.
1,279 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 601 – 800 of 1279 Newer› Newest»Cinna fully admits that Cinna had first written "three minutes" and later changed it to "five."
Yes, three minutes would be much better, and it's a good idea (as noted, I believe) to say something, without being aggressive, about what your study adds to the present state of the field. And I'd suggest that it's best not to preface this all on another scholar's errors or shortcomings, but rather what you are doing to learn from these, and to add to the blah blah blah you get my point.
—Cinna
Cinna fully admits that Cinna had first written "three minutes" and later changed it to "five."
Yes, three minutes would be much better, and it's a good idea (as noted, I believe) to say something, without being aggressive, about what your study adds to the present state of the field. And I'd suggest that it's best not to preface this all on another scholar's errors or shortcomings, but rather what you are doing to learn from these, and to add to the blah blah blah you get my point.
—Cinna
Chapter outlines are expected, though? I'm glad I checked. I'd been told five minutes and didn't think that was enough time to get into the content of individual chapters. I was just going to talk about the diss in general terms.
Clearly I am much too verbose.
Depending on how many chapters you have, you may well not have time to deal substantively with each one. Instead, have 1-3 sentences explaining what each chapter does and what its role in the whole project is. Give the "take away" for the chapter, not an outline of it. You can use the "what does it show and why should I care" principle at the level of chapter as well as at that of the whole diss. Trying to walk a committee through the steps in the argument of individual chapters is a reliable way of getting lost in the weeds and needing to be cut off by the committee after you've been talking for ten minutes.
Relatedly, if a committee does try to move the conversation on to a new topic, don't just keep plowing ahead with the rest of your spiel. You'd be surprised how often people do that.
Something I've been pondering of late: does there exist any American equivalent of the Liverpool Classics Listserv? If not, why not?
I have never once gone into detail like chapter summaries in an interview. I was told the diss pitch should be 2-3 minutes, start with what exciting argument you put forth, what it shows us that we did not know, briefly explain your methodology, and include one illustrative example. Very brief. If they want more info, they'll ask for it. Never go on for 5 minutes.
All right. I have a three minute spiel all ready to go. I am ready to talk for an hour if asked on the content of any one sentence thereof.
I probably won't be asked to talk for an hour. I might be begged not to!
One thing to make sure of beyond the diss spiel is that your second book project is connected in some way to the diss. How do the two projects represent you as a whole scholar with an exciting trajectory? While the diss will often be the tenure book if only one book is required, the second book will tell a committee where your mind is going as a colleague. And if the two projects seem unrelated, you better find a way to relate them succinctly and interestingly.
The advice above depends on the interview. Some of these SCs consist of assoc/full profs who never published one book; I seriously doubt they would like to hear some upstart kid fresh out of the PhD talk about her second.
Likewise, VAPs probably don't give a fuck about your second book.
But yeah, if you are interviewing at an R1 (or an RU/VH, as they're now called) you probably want that second book spiel and some kind of connection to your work in the first.
Anon. 11:45,
You have me curious: why must a second book be linked to the dissertation? Your advice doesn't apply to me -- my second book will most certainly be linked to the diss., but that is happenstance more than planning. I can't see a good reason why there must be so strong a link. Especially since if you look at some of the big name scholars in our field you'll find they've written (and edited) books on a broad range of subjects.
So does anyone know what's happening with the Case Western Reserve Roman Art or University of North Carolina Latinist positions? The wiki has nothing for either, and Seattle's coming up pretty soon.
That's right; there is no particular reason for the second project to be linked to the dissertation, and I'm not sure where that advice is coming from. It's true that it shouldn't be so far out of your area of knowledge that it's implausible that you could do it (e.g. your dissertation is on brick stamps and your proposed second project is on archaic lyric) but if anything your second project should show at least a little distance from your dissertation, to demonstrate that you might be able to come up with more than one idea in your life.
SC members: At the time of conference interview, is everyone on equal footing? I.e. do you think you will simply invite to campus the three people who perform best in the interview? Or are there people you are interviewing who are so good on paper that they would really need to screw up to not be invited, and likewise people who are very unlikely to perform well enough in interview to compete with others who are more impressive on paper?
At the time of conference interview, is everyone on equal footing? I.e. do you think you will simply invite to campus the three people who perform best in the interview? Or are there people you are interviewing who are so good on paper that they would really need to screw up to not be invited, and likewise people who are very unlikely to perform well enough in interview to compete with others who are more impressive on paper?
The interview is just new information about candidates that you put alongside information you already had. In some cases it will confirm and in some allay your suspicions; in some cases it will create concerns that you didn't have before or show you a side of someone that wasn't evident from the file. But what you thought about the relative strength of the files before the interview doesn't just magically disappear; it only gets adjusted, sometimes a great deal, by the interview.
It's usually not possible to rank the interviews with anything like "top three" precision, and it's definitely not the case that everybody starts out the interview with zero points and the three highest scores move on to the next round. But a poor interview is often disqualifying of even a very strong application. It's rare that a terrific interview can help someone who has a very poor application, but only because you're unlikely to have an interview at all if the committee thinks your application is poor.
Is it accurate to say, then, that you don't have to be one of the top three best in interview to be selected?
Or is it just useless to say that?
Do those of us who are not efficient schmoozers have any chance in hell?
Or is it just useless to say that?
Yes, it is useless to say that. I would instead say that it's unusual for someone to get an invitation to a campus visit if their interview didn't go well.
Do those of us who are not efficient schmoozers have any chance in hell?
Yes. Interviewing doesn't have anything to do with "schmoozing" as I understand that term anyway. If you are able to sustain a conversation about your research and about teaching, you are able to do a good interview. And obviously Classics job searches don't in general prioritize charm; if they did, the Classics professoriate would look pretty different. Just give good, thoughtful, and non-self-defeating answers to questions and be polite and positive.
I've been asked about a second project at interviews for R1s, teaching heavy institutions AND for a 1 year VAP. Actually, I've never not been asked about a second major project in a TT interview and have been in many VAPs so it is good to have an idea.
But I don't think the diss needs to be related to the second book project. As long as it is within the same field (Greek lit, etc) that is fine. Though I've seen some struggle between those who work on prose/poetry wanting to make the leap to the other side. While I think that is good, that is also where dots should be connected about approach, theme, etc.
Interviews:
--a second book (or just "what you would do after the diss book" which might be just articles) might have some intellectual connection with your first, but it shouldn't be too close. If your diss = Kneecaps in Shakespeare and you say your second book = Kneecaps in Spenser, you sound boring.
--and it is absolutely not true that everyone interviewed is at the same level and whoever interviews best will get the callback. Each member of a committee will probably have the finalists loosely ranked in his/her mind, and the interview will fill in some blanks, answer some questions, or possibly expose weaknesses. People will move up and people will move down. This is not a game show with rounds. We also might be talking to your teachers at parties or seeing yours talks.
--I've also been on committees where someone did really well in an interview but we realized that the person was probably just good at interviews.
1:44 p.m. said: "Each member of a committee will probably have the finalists loosely ranked in his/her mind, and the interview will fill in some blanks, answer some questions, or possibly expose weaknesses."
I'd agree with this, with the clarification that for me at least the "loose ranking" is no more specific, pre-convention, than "top six FILES out of the 150 we read"; "second six FILES "; etc. If you were not already way at the top of the list, you wouldn't have gotten an interview at all -- remember that. We had nearly 150 files to read and we're doing 12 preliminary interviews.
At least in the committees I've been on, we do not even tentatively "rank" the candidates before the conference. We agree on the 12 we're going to interview, but we don't talk at all, at that point, about who's at the top of that list. Indeed, it would really be meaningless to do so; these are the 12 most impressive FILES, but the second crucial part of the process is the interview and the two together--file plus interview--determine who gets invited to a fly-out.
After the conference, we will meet and discuss how to rank the candidates based on the whole picture from file-plus-interview. Our administration won't pay for more than three SC members (out of a total of 6) to attend the conference, so the meeting will start with those who did attend giving careful and detailed reports on each interview to the rest of us. Then, we talk. We've blocked out four hours on a Saturday for the meeting, and if we need longer (we may) we'll meet a second time. Getting those 12 campus interviews down to 3 fly-outs is hard-- there's no magic formula, and it's not possible to say that the "three best interviews" automatically get the campus visits.
This is not a game show with rounds.
Not yet, but if we get a search next year I'm going to push for an obstacle course round, a round where the candidates have to eat stick insects or moose anuses or something, and a round where they sing a Whitney Houston song.
Not yet, but if we get a search next year I'm going to push for an obstacle course round, a round where the candidates have to eat stick insects or moose anuses or something, and a round where they sing a Whitney Houston song.
up yours, fucktard.
"up yours, fucktard."
Dude, don't give away the lightning round!
Hey are you guys going to the APA? We should all hang out! I'll be the one in the suit with the name tag.
any news on otago, anybody?
Ok, children... enough of the banter, foul lanuage and ads hominem... we get it... you are frustrated... but any word on the Pitt Classics/Phil. job?
Any news on IUPUI?
and what's the deal with Pittsburgh??
made inquiries and they're running behind...yet to determine who they'll interview
Did anyone catch Harvard's timetable?
Re: Otago - word on the APA street is that there's an offer on someone's table.
can someone pls confirm that both Georgetown and Cornell arranged on-campus so quickly? thanks.
I know someone with a Georgetown campus and they were notified before they even got home from the APA.
someone pass the whisky ... and the want ads.
Forget that shit. Where are the suicide booths? Anybody got a quarter?
any word on Melbourne? anybody pls?
Does anyone have a sense of whether the job listings of the American Classical League are kept up to date? Whenever I apply to those jobs, I don't even get rejection letters. I might as well just be writing up an application and filing it in the trash can.
You probably would have better luck with a placement service like Carney Sandoe. My impression is that independent schools take applications through such services more seriously than those received directly, if only because going through the process of applying to Carney Sandoe and being accepted shows you are not applying for a random job on a whim. Nor are all independent school jobs listed on the ACL site. I don't know anything about public schools, so I can't help you there.
The wiki is so silent today ... it's killing me!
Yes, I have had much better luck getting interviews going through Carney Sandoe.
If post-APA rejections have apparently been sent out, and you didn't get one, but you also haven't gotten an on-campus interview call, what does this mean?
Make sure you check your spam filter again.
If nothing's there, I have no idea what it means.
It might mean that you're on the pseudo waiting list - too good to reject but you fell through the A list cracks for reasons only known to the SC. From the twelve or so you invite to the APA, you can often cut that list in half without too much trouble. Once you get down to the last batch, it's honestly a total crap shoot. It's also when senior scholars often join the fray to try and put their protege over the top - seen it too often and I don't agree with it. Let the chips fall where they may, people.
Is it late enough now that those of us who haven't heard from TT positions should despair? Or is there still some hope in a silent wiki?
Some SCs don't deliberate at the end of the APA and their terms haven't started yet. I wouldn't give up hope until the end of the month. If you haven't heard by then, you're almost certainly on the cut list.
It is absolutely NOT time to despair. Many if not most SCs don't deliberate until after their spring terms start, and most terms have not started yet. Every SC I've ever been on (which is several, at this point) has met during the first week of class to decide about the short list for fly-outs --and the first week of class starts after MLK Day. Don't panic. The decisions haven't been made yet.
I'm on a current T-T SC (I won't say which one here), and we are not going to meet until next Friday, and maybe also Saturday. Why so late? Those are the first days that everybody in the department (not just those of us who went to Seattle) will have time to meet in order to discuss the results of the APA interviews. Also, fwiw, I didn't hear back from one place that offered me a campus visit, lo those many years ago, until February. Don't abandon hope until you have confirmation, the wheels grind slowly.
Same here as 9:36 said. The T-T SC I'm on is meeting Friday Jan. 18. Not all of us could go to the APA so those who did are writing up detailed notes for the rest of us, which we'll read before Friday and discuss at the meeting. We'll decide on fly-outs then if we can, but very likely it'll take another meeting on Saturday. Thus, those selected for fly-outs will probably not hear from us until Jan. 20th or even later.
Why didn't we meet to discuss earlier? Some of us are just now returning to campus, and several of us have scheduled other commitments for this week, which is our window of opportunity between APA and classes to deal with all the minutiae of maintaining health and household that are impossible during the semester. But finding a time during the first week of class when all six of us could meet for the three hours minimum we figure it will take wasn't easy. Late Friday afternoon was the best we could do.
So yes, the wheels grind slowly.
At the APA I followed generally accepted wisdom by not trying to chat up the SC members with whom I had interviewed, though of course I did give a smile and nod when the inevitable run-in happened. Is it a bad sign if no SC members chatted *me* up when they had the opportunity? Would they have done this for a top choice?
Is it a bad sign if no SC members chatted *me* up when they had the opportunity?
Not necessarily. It's an awkward situation unless the decision has already been finalized and many people will prefer to avoid it.
Is it a bad sign if no SC members chatted *me* up when they had the opportunity?
Yes, it is a bad sign.
Any word on Pitt, anyone?
Is this newly advertised 9-month Instructor position at South Florida in addition to the TT position? Or has that gone bye-bye?
Can anyone confirm the Case Western interview from the Art History wiki? Is it in fact a CAA interview?
Yes, the instructor position at USF is in addition to the TT.
USF must have made a move by now on that T-T job. The wiki has been disappointing this year.
I suggested last year that we were seeing the shortcomings of the Web 2.0 reflected in the lack of updates on the Wiki. I was immediately accused of being an antediluvian ingrate.
But I would submit again that too many individuals have grown bored of updating the Wiki or have decided for some other reason that it is not worth the trouble it takes to keep the rest of the field up to date.
Why don't search committee members update the wiki?
Is it time to despair yet? I'm getting impatient.
Any word on where Earlham is in their search? Any knowledge of their timeline for Skype/phone interviews and fly-outs?
I can only speak for myself, but I'm pretty sure it was time to despair several years ago.
despair has been here so long that he gets mail at my address.
I will ask once again: is it possible that nobody knows what the heck is going on with Melbourne? and yes, high despair here too.
Has anyone heard from Buffalo yet?
I've been told that Buffalo will decide by the end of this week.
I have known despair, and his name is academe.
Any word on Pittsburgh? Seriously. Anything at all?
Wikitiki.
Perhaps this is old news, but it might explain the Pitt delay:
http://www.change.org/petitions/dean-of-graduate-studies-the-university-of-pittsburgh-reinstate-the-department-of-classics-graduate-program
http://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/save-classics-at-pittsburgh/
There is a new lectureship at the University of Kentucky (http://www.as.uky.edu/lecturer-positions). It promises "a competitive salary."
How should "a competitive salary" be read? Would it be obnoxious to email and ask what is meant by this? I would kind of like the job, but I have a family to support, and I am worried that competitive means $3,000 per class.
thanks for the update re:melbourne. this one too is down the drain, though I got no email from them.
Re: 12:46: the salary you'd be offered would depend on a number of factors, but in any case even the chair would not be able to tell you what that amount is even if they offer you the job. To be blunt, you aren't in a position to be picky (if you were, you wouldn't be asking). Wait until they offer you the job, then decide.
Thanks, 9:43. You mean well, and you are probably right that I should just apply.
But the advice that I am not in a position to be picky is ridiculous. I don't have to live in poverty, and it is not self-evident that applying for lectureships which mean precisely that is preferable to spending my time investigating alternative careers.
9:45, you can get salary info for UK here:
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/01/18/2481500/new-university-of-kentucky-employee.html
9:45 and all -
You have a point, of course, about other things. Many professions are far more remunerative than classics and will allow you to pay for things like food, clothing, and shelter. And, if the APA did not lead to very many opportunities, this may well be the time of year to explore other things. There are the traditional professions, law and medicine, if you can tolerate (a lot) more formal education, more administrative positions in higher education, working for the government, in various capacities, and any number of other possibilities.
This sort of thinking does take some time and really should not be done under the pressure of needing to find a job to avoid, say, eviction, to use an extreme example.
All that said, I would caution you very strongly against thinking that you have to make a choice at any time before actually accepting and starting a new job. Explore your options, but keep applying for whatever positions in classics there may be. The whole idea of a job search is to find a job, particularly if you have a strong interest in compensation. Jobs in classics are jobs nonetheless.
Anyone else having all kinds of trouble with the USF Instructor application? There are nine different spaces for required documents, to which you have to attach something in order to submit the application. One of them is "Letter of Recommendation", though of course you shouldn't have this as an applicant and they already asked for the contact info for letter writers earlier in the application.
anyone know anything about Rice University (T-T Greek & Roman Art or Architecture)?
Poor Creighton T-T position, we hardly knew ye!
Lugete, o Veneres Cupidinesque.
Shit, there went my last chance for a TT job this year.
Suppose you went the APA with one T-T interview. Interview seemed to go well. Afterwards, the school cancelled its search. My question is: is it cool to send your receipts from Seattle (near to $1500) to the school? Because I'd like that.
The financial demands on the job seeker are huge - and growing. The demand for conference attendance for first-round screening interviews is a tough requirement - especially when most candidates are stuck on the market merry-go-round for numerous years. Schools need to be more expeditious in these searches as well.
Last year, I sent one application, did first-round interview via Skype, got to oncampus. this year, I did 2 first-round interviews via skype, no oncampus. I do not know if skipping APA is a fatal mistake. On the other hand, if a place wants you, they will do the rest.
Anyone with a Pitt interview know their timeline?
Anyone heard from Buffalo this week?
Looks like Buffalo has scheduled campus visits.
how about the UNC Latin job? are they going to fail again?
UNC probably won't fail again (some personnel changes since last year). But if they do, they still have another iteration of the search guaranteed by the university's search policies.
if UNC fails to hire a Latinist yet again, then that is just pathetic.
Has anyone heard from Howard University? They had a late job posting so I'm wondering if they're also late in determining campus visits. (Well, hoping so.)
Anyone figure out the USF application procedure?
did anyone get rejected from Pittsburgh after interviews? anyone get flyouts?
I'm waiting on Howard too.
> I'm waiting on Howard too
Quite a few things still up in the air... Iowa? Notre Dame?
Anyone care to lay odds that Colby's search has failed?
How is that possible? Colby's a great place, and it's a buyer's market.
speaking of relatively slow-moving search committees: what's up with Centre?
Strategic question about VAPs that interviewed at the APA: if they asked us to "keep in touch" about our candidacy for tenure track jobs (which would obviously take precedence) does that really just mean that we should e-mail if a TT job takes us out of the running? Or does it mean we should also write to say "I'm out of the running for the TT and remain really excited about your position"? The latter would technically be following directions, but it still seems to me to smack of desperation. I am hesitant.
Overanalyzer:
I would only contact the SC if you accept a TT gig. They will assume if they don't hear from you that you are still in the running and interested in their position. Besides, noting that you're out of the running for a TT job doesn't necessarily paint you in the most positive light (I would imagine; I've never been on an SC). Good luck!
Has anyone heard from Iowa?
Iowa has an inside candidate and will not be hiring you.
Thanks for the information. I assume you have genuine knowledge of the situation and that your tone is sarcastic. Is that correct? What with bitterness at an all time high, you might have invented this simply as a joke; but that strikes me as the less likely possibility.
There are inside candidates at many of these places. It's somewhat pessimistic (or optimistic?) to assume that they're all shoe-ins for the job.
Yes, 1:12. Sometimes the Internet makes it look like someone is an inside candidate when they do not really have a chance.
On the other hand, I have a friend who was told this year by the chair of the search committee where s/he is teaching that they will hire her/him if s/he wants the job.
I don't want to reopen this can of worms, since there are good reasons to hire an inside candidate; and it is not worth our time.
Wouldn't we all be better served if there were more clarity in our profession on this issue? In some cases, it could be negative -- this is a one year job for you, period, no exceptions. In other cases, it could be positive -- this is an open line, so if you hit these specific teaching/publication milestones, if you get a positive annual review, we will convert it T-T, renew you for another three years etc. I think clear expectations, stated up front, would save much labor and heartache for everyone. And we all would know that positions listed as open are truly open.
Besides changing your major from Classics to Accounting, anything you'd want to tell your 20-year-old self?
http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,125483.0.html
"Change your major from Classics to Engineering."
Stick with archaeology or history. You'll get laid and drunk more. In ten years, when you get out of grad school, there will be much less competition for not that many fewer jobs. As for temp jobs? "You can always get a job teaching Latin" should be "you can always get a job teaching some crap civ/history/archaeology course."
And so it starts......
Nah. All the clarchs and historians are too busy interviewing to care about homeless philologists typing shit in a library somewhere.
Typical clarch attitude to evidence: assumptions multiplied by inductions.
A) I am not homeless. My parents kept my room just like I left it in preparation for this day. B) I didn't type that in a library. I was on my 5-minute break at Starbucks. We do have wi-fi access here, you know. C) That frazzled professional woman who comes in here every morning for the same half-caff thinks I'm pretty cute. So, there. You don't have to get dirty to get laid.
Any word from Earlham? Has the search been cancelled?
9.17 - No, the search has not (to my knowledge) been cancelled. Just moving very slowly.
Is it just me, or were there many more VAPs advertised by this time last year? There's been very little indeed since the APA.
I used to think oral Latin was useless, but now I know better. It's a great gimmick for snagging VAPs!
You're getting Latin confused with sex.
Yeah, that happens a lot.
Student reactions are mixed.
Lots of searches cancelled this year after the fact (Creighton, Colby ... ). The contributing factors must be complicated, but surely this is something for the Professional Matters committee to address and the discipline as a whole to respond to?
Creighton's search, at least, was cancelled due to budget shortfalls in the university - the CNE search was but one of many searches cancelled. I fail to see what the Professional Matters Committee could do about that type of thing. Searches are approved by administrations with one set of numbers, then, when new numbers result in budget adjustments, searches are taken away. It is all sadly too common in this economic climate. Apart from admitting fewer graduate students and helping graduate students prepare for both academic and non-academic jobs, I also don't see what the discipline as a whole can do. Perhaps others have ideas.
φεύγωμεν σὺν νηυσὶ φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν:
οὐ γὰρ ἔτι Τροίην αἱρήσομεν εὐρυάγυιαν.
ἐμοὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἔδωκας οὔτέ κω χλαῖναν
δασεῖαν ἐν χειμῶνι φάρμακον ῥίγς,
οὔτ' ἀσκέρηισι τοὺς πόδας δασείηισι
ἔκρυψας, ὥς μοι μὴ χίμετλα ῥήγνυται.
The discipline as a hole could get their heads out of their asses and start thinking about how we can start growing again.
If I have to hear one more senior scholar complain about having to deal with donors, I think I'll have an aneurysm. We (or a significant percentage of us) ought to be actively campaigning for Classics, if we want the discipline to survive. Really, there is no reason to think that the decline of the field is inevitable, unless you think that the human knowledge will become obsolete at the arrival of the singularity.
I think you should have stopped with "the discipline as a hole."
That pretty much nailed it.
A sarlacc-esque hairy bunghole, from which the only possible escape is to be forcibly ejected by the occasional fart.
"We (or a significant percentage of us) ought to be actively campaigning for Classics, if we want the discipline to survive. Really, there is no reason to think that the decline of the field is inevitable, unless you think that the human knowledge will become obsolete at the arrival of the singularity."
Well, as long as we insist on having 40% Latinists, 40 Hellenists, and 20% everyone else (who have to teach Latin/Greek at advanced levels anyway), it's inevitable. Read a previous post on here that reeks of hierarchy and disdain for the 20% who threaten their dominance. The vast majority of the "80%" does not sell to the academy or the general public. Your dog don't hunt in the 21st century. It's taken 10 years to figure out, but a senior administrator with a couple drinks in him said to my face that they've learned from other places that have attempted to shut down classics abruptly. They didn't think there would be much resistance for an "insular and hopelessly outdated discipline," but they've encountered an unexpected "emotional attachment" to classics. Now they'll slowly choke us off while publicly pledging support.
Look 2:45, academia as a whole (no puns this time) is in trouble, because of our collective shortsightedness.
That administrator you mention probably thinks that freshman courses in business writing are the wave of the future. I have no time for such people, nor do I think they matter.
My large lecture classes are filled with undergrads who enjoy reading the Odyssey and the Aeneid. That is something to build on. And, of course, Classics will never be what it was in the 19th century, but we should at least remain a piece of the pie that is World Literature.
And, if we could convince the public that the arts are a better investment (in human terms) than (e.g.) Tomahawk cruise missiles, then we would all have more than enough funding to go around. Instead, we sit around and talk about how the sky is falling.
No one's heard from Austin College?
Pinning our hopes on World Literature, Art History, History, etc. is a zero sum game and we stand the most to lose. As much as I want to preserve our discipline, I don't fault these other programs for distributing their offerings better by hiring someone to teach Polynesian Art, Chinese literature, and Latin America history. Wouldn't it look ridiculous if UCLA had four ancient historians and no one teaching East Asian art or Spanish-American history? No, I think we need to make the case that classics deserves to be a self standing department and we should think broader to justify it. We should cover prehistory to Late Antiquity (if not Medieval) and Europe, North Africa, and West Asia to India. Enough of the tired dissertations and research agendas that could have been written in the 19th century.
"I have no time for such people, nor do I think they matter."
Great, the ostrich with head in ground technique. That sure worked well for SUNY Albany, Royal Holloway, and others. If many others truly believe deans, provosts, etc. don't matter, we're in serious trouble.
Read this comment in a Royal Holloway article by someone supposedly friendly towards classics:
Worth of Classics? 1 July, 2011
Although I have an academic interest in Classics, all the same it would be best if most if not all Classics departments closed. Few Classicists in the UK seem to know what they are doing. Older Classicist colleagues have been mostly blimps. In an `ancient university`, which produced those blimps, the colleagues in my college were way below the average level of academics elsewhere. Young classics academics there and in a former polytechnic in London were so ignorant of their own discipline, and so bad at lecturing, that they caused despair among an audience of scholars. They were no use at the most boastful `ancient university`, and they were no use at a former poly either. Sorry to have to say, the future of Classics is not something one can care about at all.
Whoa, people.
If you recall, I started ranting at 11:36 because of the senior scholars I know who complain about having to talk to potential donors (potential donors who have already expressed interest in giving money to their department!). No administrator is going to shut down a department that is bringing in money! And I am not advocating the ostrich approach.
Instead, we should focus on changing the public discourse, since trying to talk sense into individual administrators will only buy you a few years at best. And the imperialistic approach is not bad either: we could work on expanding Classic's umbrella, rather than circling the wagons and hiring one more person who works on Euripides.
In my experience, senior faculty in the humanities, not just classics, are generally indifferent or woefully ineffectual when it comes to working the system. When donors come along, departments are often terribly unimaginative with what money they get. These greybeard donors, they grew up when even public high schools regularly offered Latin and every major university had a classics program. Do you think we'll still be getting these donors regularly in 30 years when their kids will likely have never encountered classics? Not that it matters anyway since we piss the money away for Loebs or sending a vain senior faculty member to some irrelevant conference in Capetown.
despite so much study, it seems a rare occasion that the 'wisdom of the ancients' actually serves our field. if classics peters out, let "died of willful myopia" be written on its sepulcher.
Dammit, I was saving that for *my* tombstone.
That, and delicious pepperoni.
Damn straight.
"Read this comment in a Royal Holloway article by someone supposedly friendly towards classics:
Worth of Classics? 1 July, 2011
Although I have an academic interest in Classics, all the same it would be best if most if not all Classics departments closed. Few Classicists in the UK seem to know what they are doing. Older Classicist colleagues have been mostly blimps. In an `ancient university`, which produced those blimps, the colleagues in my college were way below the average level of academics elsewhere. Young classics academics there and in a former polytechnic in London were so ignorant of their own discipline, and so bad at lecturing, that they caused despair among an audience of scholars. They were no use at the most boastful `ancient university`, and they were no use at a former poly either. Sorry to have to say, the future of Classics is not something one can care about at all."
Yes, this is not surprising at all and we will have to deal with the same irrelevance here if we let History, English/Comp. Lit., Archaeology/Anthropology, Art History, etc. take scholars who can and should be in classics.
Yes, but I don't see the vast majority of classicists in any sort of power pulling this off. I'm sorry, but there is at least a kernel of truth in the Royal Holloway comment. I don't think it's by chance that many of the thriving programs have had historians or archaeologists in charge. I'm a Latinist myself, but my grad school peers in history or archaeology were forced to regularly interact with the social sciences and sciences, preparing them much better to serve as chairs in the future. They wrote grant proposals to national and international foundations, which forces one to think about their research under a much broader light. In this way, I think our insular foundations and individual benefactors have ironically weakened our long term survival.
It explains why departments at places like Arizona are totally screwed.
How does total screwing work? In the bum and out the mouth? That still doesn't account for the legs, though.
Wow, it looks like someone hurt the feelings of someone at Arizona...one of the poor souls that couldn't get out.
DC!
intercrural (obviously)
Anyone heard from UCSB yet? I think their last candidate did their on-campus this past weekend.
I think UCSB has made an offer.
This just in from two college presidents on the website of the Chronicle of Higher Education:
"The lately popular image of the university president as CEO further complicates matters. Most CEOs run organizations whose objective is profit; we run nonprofits whose purpose is to advance knowledge. A CEO who eliminates a product line with sinking sales may be making a smart decision. A president who closes the classics department simply because enrollment is down should probably move to another profession" (http://chronicle.com/article/College-Presidents-Bruised/137227/).
But it's probably bad news for us that the first example on their minds was closing a classics department ...
You would be wise to remove the "probably" from your final sentence; the threat to classics is not hypothetical and distant, but imminent, even ongoing. Even as I write this, dozens of administrators across this country, faced with an age of austerity, are drawing up plans to reduce their investment in Classics (as in practically everything else related to the liberal arts). And if our best response is to ignore and disdain the mandates of these administrators, or suggest that classics graduate programs admit fewer students, then we will be marched rather meekly to our all-too-well-foreseen doom and we will lose forever the generation of classicists just now entering the market, as well as those slaving away at these terrible contingent positions. The first question is, of course, how much do we care?
Another French guy immolated himself because of unemployment recently. Is it worrisome that when I read about it my first thought was, "Now there's an idea?"
And, of course, tenured faculty have been conditioned not to care. More and more, I admire those who have managed to fight off every incentive not to care.
Those of us fighting to survive as Classicists are (or feel) powerless.
I'm more than a bit skeptical regarding whether internet petitions ever succeed -- does anyone have empirical evidence that they do? if so, please share it -- but thought I would share this one, regarding Thessaloniki and its Byzantine remains: http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Breaking_the_heart_of_Thessaloniki_through_time_Save_citys_byzantine_center_the_citys_memory_and_identity/?tLlXzdb
Okay, now back to the usual grousing.
I don't even give a fuck about surviving as a Classicist anymore. I just don't know what else to do with my life at my age.
I am right with you. And I want to curse the fucking institution I graduate from.
anyone have any info on Urbana? That part of the wiki has been quite quiet and their webpage suggests they had at least 5 campus visitors!
Oh yeah. My grad faculty are pure fucking evil.
There is a job listed on the wiki at Regent University. Is that a new listing? I do not see anything about the position on Regent's website.
Re: Regent
Search canceled. If I remember correctly, they had the same outcome last year.
FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK
Sympathies, friend. Sympathies.
Classics: Because *not* feeling like you're about to die all the time is overrated.
Any advice on dealing with this misery?
Anti-depressants and booze help to dull the pain from day to day.
There is no long-term solution as far as I can tell.
How to deal with the anguish? Quit. That's right, put down the OCT and back away. Do something else with your life. That's what I'm doing.
Right now, I'm deciding between something in IT or becoming a physician's assistant. Sure, it'll take me a few years of additional education, but at the end, I'll have a job, mobility, and more money than I'd ever earn in academia.
This is not an easy decision for me, but I'd sooner take charge of my life now than twist and turn on the job market for a few more years. Despite what you may have been told, things are not going to get better for Classics. Most jobs now receive 150+ applications---that number will only increase as the number of positions decreases.
For your own mental and physical health, give a career change some thought. Be a mercenary. Do what's best for you, not the discipline that might have left you behind.
take it from a veteran of this shitty process who has survived as a visitor and an adjunct - if you find it miserable, save yourself and change careers. do it now.
On it. Unfortunately, it's not the best market for a resume that says, "I have no relevant experience, but look at my shiny PhD!"
The word "dying" is in my "please prove you're not a robot" box; I am pretty sure this is significant.
It seems like there are fewer jobs this winter/spring than there have been in past years. Assuming that this is true, does anyone have any theories for why that would be? Should we assume that the next couple of months will see jobs trickling out at the same slow pace?
I'm guessing it has something to do with our field continuing to die out combined with the continuing recession.
Then why were there so many TT positions in the fall? I wasn't looking for the obvious, idiotic response. It was a serious question.
Hopefully this won't seem idiotic, even though it may be rather obvious: I suspect that the many TT positions of the fall were due to the slight recovery and consequent budgetary changes at universities that would have, in the past few years, listed short term positions in the Spring. Since many of those were converted to TT positions, there are fewer vaps this year. But maybe the total number of jobs this year will be roughly comparable to previous years. Maybe.
To ask an obvious question, people here keep bemoaning the death of classics, but is there any real evidence for this? I know of only two departments shut down, both 2-3 years ago, and one of those was partly because of dysfunctional faculty practically begging for it to happen (SUNY-Albany; Michigan State seems to have been more the innocent victim). Sure, tenure lines at many places haven't been replaced, but that's true of other departments. Is there some evidence showing that classics departments, and/or ancient history positions within history departments, and/or ancient art/archaeology positions within art history departments, are shrinking at unusually rapid rates?
I'm starting to wonder whether all these claims of the "death of classics" are just nonsense from emotionally overwrought job-seekers, of which this blog has plenty.
One thing to keep in mind is that the healthy out-put of graduate students with Ph.D. from U.S. graduate programs is contributing to the log-jam problem, esp. with retirements being deferred. Is Classics under threat? You bet. Look at any of the Tea Party governors who are openly hostile to non-revenue fields in higher education (FL, NC e.g.). But Classics has its own challenges. A lot of the frustrated folks here on FV (I am one) find issue with inertia, inconsistency, and a shortage of opportunity. Graduate programs could scale back their admissions, but that is not in their immediate interest. The R-1 where I adjunct tasks those bright-eyed folks to various TA chores. They need them. But they care little for their actual fate, in the professional sense, when you get down to it. And Classicists feel very helpless when planning the jump out of the academy (I do) b/c of fear about 'transferability of skills' and the like - and competing for jobs with people the same age as the students in your Latin 101 section. So, shortage of opportunity 'at home' and not enough skills for the great beyond makes for some angsty, fussy people.
So departments in states with hostile governors/legislatures need to be smart about things, and not just sit there hoping for rescue like a bunch of Melians. Why not offer a large lecture course on "Ancient Morality," in which students can read Augustine, Seneca, Hammurabi, Old and New Testament, the Melian Debate, etc.? That's the kind of thing that would make classics departments relevant to the right people, i.e. those with the purse strings. There's a reason Bill Bennett's "Book of Virtues" was a major best-seller -- why not take advantage of that conservative impulse to teach moral values? And it's hardly selling out, since the course I've outlined is a perfectly legitimate one, not to mention potentially a damn good one.
I have no sympathy for departments that can see the writing on the wall but don't initiate significant changes to make themselves less likely to become targets of cuts.
they don't do it b/c a lot of folks with clout in big R1 depts are horrible snobs who still embrace colonialist delusions about the supremacy of Graeco-Roman civilization and treat reading ancient languages as a barrier to students rather than a ramp to success. i know well an R1 dept that needs more Greek enrollments but it too snooty to offer New Testament Greek regularly. They will still believe this mantra on their way to the budgetary slaughter house.
I think 10:30 hit the nail on the head. I am also one of those people, as, I bet, are you, dear reader.
Classics may not actually be dying at all; but it is certainly the case that the careers of most of the brilliant young scholars coming out of PhD programs in the last few and next few years are fucking stillborn.
Graduate programs could scale back their admissions, but that is not in their immediate interest.
Some have been, because as state governments have cut back support tuition has gone up and the number of students a department can support via fellowship has dropped.
In order for the people currently on the job market to benefit from this, though, the time for graduate programs to scale back admissions (and for some Ph.D. programs to shut down, which I think is a good idea as well) was 6-10 years ago, but of course 6-10 years ago we didn't know about the impending financial crisis and recession.
Also, since it's that time of year again, I just want to point out that graduate programs do not compel people to attend them; blaming my graduate program for admitting me on the basis of my application to attend that graduate program seems like a Hell of an evasion.
So this gets asked a lot, and no one ever has an answer. Nevertheless, I'll try asking again, because I am desperate:
What can we Classics PhDs do for work now that many of us can't get anything, not even part-time adjunct work, from an international job search? What alternative career paths are there in which our resumes might actually get a second glance? Has anyone had success they would like to share?
I am not interested in blame or complaining; I really want a dialogue about what we can do to get to a point where we can pay rent, day to day. I am applying very broadly to many different kinds of academic jobs, but I am getting nothing.
EDIT: I am applying very broadly to many different kinds of NON-academic jobs, even.
(Though the non-edited version is also still accurate.)
In response to this query: "What can we Classics PhDs do for work now that many of us can't get anything, not even part-time adjunct work, from an international job search? What alternative career paths are there in which our resumes might actually get a second glance?"
Hasn't the Placement Committee organized panels for the past two years on this very topic? I wasn't able to attend them, because I was either not at that APA or was busy doing something else, but I noted them in the program. Did anyone attend, and get useful information regarding this?
I didn't attend, I suspect like many others, because I was actively on the Classics job market and didn't know who might be taking note of who was there.
Your PhD in Classics (mine too) is essentially worthless. If you know someone, say a family member, at a law firm or a corporation, maybe they can get you a job doing something. But the degree by itself won't open any doors. At least mine hasn't.
You can explore the para-Classics jobs: library science, publishing, high school Latin. One of those requires an additional degree, one state certification (if teaching at public schools), and publishing jobs are exceedingly scarce.
Or you can do a quick Google search and see what are the hottest careers for the next ten years. Always at the top are medicine and IT. Either obviously will require a few years of additional education.
A Ph.D. in Classics isn't worthless. But you have got to sell your skills and talents to whichever employer you are approaching. Obviously you have highly developed critical thinking, analysis, and writing skills. You have good organizational skills, and public speaking skills. As a teacher, you developed leadership skills. I have a number of friends with Ph.D.s in classics and English who have found good jobs in various fields such as healthcare (one is now Executive Director of a hospital out in California), in government (policy analysis), and in technical writing for various business firms. Another friend started an (non-academic) publishing business that is picking up speed (selling his own, at first, but now also others' books). Don't sell yourself short. It is a tough economy all around but there are still opportunities.
If you combine the previous two comments, you will reach an answer that's, in my view, about correct. There are opportunities for the classics Ph.D. There are the traditional places of refuge for fallen classicists, more administrative or student services-type positions in higher education, academic publishing, high school teaching, and then there are other options. Law and medicine come to mind quickly, although these of course require more education and, especially now in the case of law, do not promise success.
But it is very true that it will not be easy to find positions beyond classics, particular outside of the most often followed Plan Bs, as it were. Institutional, systemitized hiring does not lend itself to favoring humanities Ph.Ds. Do not expect much success applying, e.g., to Fortune 500 companies, for entry level positions, when all you can say is "I have a Ph.D. and top critical thinking skills."
Does this mean that there is no chance of employment or professional success outside of classics? No. Not at all. But, as I've noted before, it will require a good amount of effort to to locate what opportunities there may be and to compete for them.
Here's a suggestion, try to get in touch with us fallen classicists who have gone on to do other things and see what might be possible. Look for smaller organizations that may be less likely to follow a systemitized hiring process.
BUT, as I've said before also, I would not recommend giving up on classics. Certainly, not just because you believe that there are limited options left in classics. Now, it may be true that there are limited options in classics, but you know how to be competitive for them.
What you need to avoid is desperation or, worse, appearing that you are seeking other options because you failed as a classicist. What employer is going to want to engage someone who worked toward a goal for, say, 6-10 years, did not succeed, and now needs to find something else to do?
"What employer is going to want to engage someone who worked toward a goal for, say, 6-10 years, did not succeed, and now needs to find something else to do?"
But...but...that's what happened.
BUT, as I've said before also, I would not recommend giving up on classics. Certainly, not just because you believe that there are limited options left in classics. Now, it may be true that there are limited options in classics, but you know how to be competitive for them.
thanks, Fallen, for the thoughts. but we mere mortals have to, you know, eat and such. and the scraps leftover after the t-t slots are offered to the flavor of the moment or the latest tenure refugee from a slightly better university don't cut it. there are quite a lot of pigs here and the trough is pretty meager. oh, and all of those folks who need to retire are busy slurping up more than their fair share of the gruel.
unless Fallen Classicist wants to reveal how he/she/it pays the bills, I call bullshit on his/her/its 'pep talk'. keep the classics fires burning? as if.
this disaffected job seeker in classics is getting off the merry-go-round for good and just wants to say, by way of venting, what a horrible, soul crushing, logic-defying experience it has been to be in the classics biz. once the external, bleeding wounds heal, I really don't think I'll miss this crap - but I will always wonder why this field is so fracked up. good luck to those who continue to follow the thread to try and escape the Labyrinth. who would have thought that teaching some language and culture would make one so embittered?
I am so fucking with you, 8:48.
I understand that, for the classics job seeker, especially at this time of year, things are not good, that there are a decidedly limited number of opportunities, etc. I am in no way trying to minimize that.
My point, rather, is to offer some view, of the risks--and opportunities--that may present themselves beyond the world of the academy, because, really, that's the world I live in now.
When I say "don't give up on classics" I mean to say that there are some jobs in classics, like there are some jobs for which classicists are qualified in, say, banking or nonprofit administration. And, if you are looking for a job, it's not the best idea to ignore a sector of jobs for which you are qualified, even if you are actively seeking other opportunities at the same time.
Now, when you apply for jobs outside classics, when you interview, you will be asked about why you are not seeking a job in classics. You NEED a good answer to this question, an answer that is positive and does not just say "I'm running away from the academy" or, worse, "I flunked out of the academy," or, even worse, "I'm just doing this until I can find my way back to the academy."
"things are not good"
Indeed, in three months, I won't be able to feed my child.
Let's hear why Classics matters.
Is Classics more fucked up than other academic fields?
I suspect that it is, but I'm not sure why. Any opinions?
I empathize completely with 10:35 PM and hope it works out. I am genuinely happy I do not have a child b/c in 3 months' time I do not know how I will feed myself. no joke.
Is Classics more fucked up than other academic fields?
I suspect that it is, but I'm not sure why. Any opinions?
I think that it seems as though it is because our familiarity with it is much more intimate than with other fields.
I also think that a lot of what seems fucked up about it is the sudden, sharp constriction of demand for labor, with no corresponding reduction in supply, that began with the recession and that the academic job market hasn't recovered from any more than the broader labor market has. A field that seems fine when you have a 50% shot of finding a job in it in 2007 seems like an irremediably fucked up one when you have a 20% shot in 2010 (I am pulling these percentages out of my ass but they are just given exempli gratia). All of a sudden people who could till recently count on finding a job sooner or later could no longer count on that, and it happened overnight, even though the quality of the job seekers had not changed. Nor had the field of Classics changed overnight, nor had the humanities in general. What changed overnight was the economy.
There may be all kinds of things that are fucked up about Classics, but the thing that most job seekers are currently experiencing as fucked up about it isn't inherent to Classics but is the consequence of a very specific historical event that caused massive unemployment that nobody except the unemployed apparently feels any urgency about remedying.
"it happened overnight, even though the quality of the job seekers had not changed. Nor had the field of Classics changed overnight, nor had the humanities in general. What changed overnight was the economy."
No, the world changed and classics as a culturally dependent exercise hasn't aged nearly as well as most disciplines despite being among the most vulnerable. It was asking a lot, but a previous generation needed tremendous foresight and guts to recalibrate for a new, global audience. Instead, we're still stuck with the Cleavers calling the shots, training and hiring more Cleavers while academia sees us as living fossils. Some would defend it as loyalty and steadiness while others see stagnation and ossification. Whatever the case, we're screwed regardless of the economy. Don't blame the earthquake. Blame the architects for building on fill.
classics as a culturally dependent exercise hasn't aged nearly as well as most disciplines despite being among the most vulnerable.
Are you under the impression that other fields of the humanities have weathered the storm well?
Bueller?
It's not a culturally dependent exercise. It is a human activity that is creative of culture.
Or is it a culture that is creative of human activity that is creative of culture?
And, if we could learn not to talk like douchebags, would that be creative of an environment that might not be so hostile to our discipline?
So apparently you now have to be an assistant professor to become an assistant professor. Sweet.
2:13, you seem to know something that I could be bitter about. Mind sharing?
One of many, many ways the Classics job market reflects economic trends more generally,
from the New York Times.
Yep. It amazes me how ubiquitous shameless exploitation of candidates is, in every field. I've been applying outside of Classics as well as for yet another year of VAPs, and one of the civilian jobs wanted all applicants to do a week of work for free so that the employer could evaluate how well they did the job. This for a low-paying job that literally anyone with some high school education could do. Our field's requirement that candidates shell out $1,000 for the APA for one or two first-round interviews is similarly absurd. Especially since so many searches end up failing.
I was a finalist for a certain job this year. I am currently a VAP and have a book in print. But one of my fellow finalists -- who had not yet landed a TT job -- also had one book in print and *another* forthcoming! And the third finalist already had a TT job, had a book out, and was getting close to tenure!! What does that say about the state of our field?
What does that say about the state of our field?
Buyer's market. Hiring institutions can have extremely demanding criteria and still find people who fit them, because there are a lot of job-seekers but only a few jobs.
It says I should get the fuck out and stay out.
Seneca said it best: exi. And doing so in his sense would certainly be one way of doing it in mine.
2:13 is picking up on the fact that according to Lady Fama at least four T-T jobs this year have gone to candidates looking to leave other T-T jobs that they already have. It is a sea of lateral moves.
Post a Comment