Looks like the two big Roman history gigs are out... I wonder if any ABDs are getting interviews at Princeton and if the "material culture" specification was really meaningful.
I think it is overwhelmingly likely that W&M already know whom they're hiring. But I think the poster above has misread the history of the searches there. Last year they were looking for a Hellenist from the beginning, for the job that's apparently being converted this year. I'm the person who posted earlier, interviewed with them last year, a Hellenist. And while they didn't hire me (obvs.), they were very kind, much more so than the vast, vast majority you'll encounter out there.
Confirmed, W&M had two job openings last year, so the jeer is unfounded. As for the TT job this year, the scuttlebutt I heard was that they really want a drama person (which also makes me feel marginally better about getting rejected, so I'm inclined to believe it), so perhaps it isn't just as simple as hiring the current VAP?
Of course, why they couldn't have just put their preference for a drama person in the job ad to begin with is another question entirely...
Re W&M, it's not that hard to get this right. A simple look at their faculty page shows four VAPs and a lecturer. One VAP is a Roman historian, whom they presumably hired in the Roman history search last year, and the lecturer is named in the job wiki last year as the philologist they hired.
Also time to lay off the W&M shame...the Greek philologist TT position has been in the works for quite some time. They'll surely hire a VAP, but does that really surprise anyone?
@1:05: there are actually two VAPs at W&M currently, but one's referred to as a "Lecturer" for some reason.
ETA: oh, there are actually five VAPs at W&M at the moment. Huh.
I just checked. W&M currently has 4 VAPs. Hard to say when each was brought on, but one does claim to be a Roman historian. Whether or not she was already prior to last year’s ad, I can’t say.
...the one school that IS very deserving of a jeer, however, is St. Mary’s College of Maryland. Last year they had an ad out for a T-T Roman Historian, but hired an Iron Age Philisitine archaeologist who was a tenured Dept. chair elsewhere. ...That is wrong on quite a few levels.
you can easily chair a PROGRAM as a junior faculty. this is not the same thing as a DEPARTMENT chair, whose duties would seem to be much more formal and laborious and require some seniority
So when a classicist is named or even inferred, discussion gets shut down but now it's an "Iron Age Philistine archaeologist" and it's fair game. Can we get any more cliche as classicists? Then there's the entire notion that someone slightly misspeaks the cultural language of classics (chapter vs. book in Vergil) and they're an idiot, but somehow thinking that "Iron Age Philistine archaeologist" is a specific profession is okay. Good grief. Yeah, classicists are SO interdisciplinary and wise to the academic world. Please. Someone stab classics with a fork and put it out of its misery.
True dat. I can name a half dozen Hellenists (in every sense) that have just happened to dig Philistine material culture at some point in their careers. As far as we know, this person has studied Latin since the age of 5. Yet somehow the philologist with next to zero training outside the languages almost always assumes they are imminently qualified to teach "civ" courses.
I read these comment and I feel like I'm watching a bunch of elementary or middle school students argue about what they know a discipline and study really is.
Get over yourselves. Learn more. Be more humble. So on and so forth (but seriously and not flippantly meant).
Exactly, let's stop abolishing at slavery. Let Classics live. Relax, find those other jobs, get that VAP position, then maybe you'll be in the inside candidate.
Sending good vibes to all my people out there soldiering through the workday at a job that will end in a few months, checking the wiki and email every ten minutes, hoping there will be another job when this one ends. This is hard, but we're doing it.
Let me formally apologize. There were around 15 T-T ancient history jobs posted last year. The St. Mary’s job, for which I did interview, was, contrary to my (flawed) memory, not specific to “Rome,” as many last year were. I believe that what has skewed my memory was that during that interview many questions were focused on teaching courses with regards to Rome—likely due to the fact that the retiring faculty member was a Roman historian.
Again, I want to humbly apologize for (as 4:49 points out) misremembering the formal job ad for St. Mary’s.
11:31 here: no, I was an early ABD last year and I will graduate this year. I just don't know what should I expect. also, how does VAP recruitment work? I assume there are interviews for that too?
@11:31 PM. I'm in your same position and am terrified even though I'm in a very good place this year (fellowship, so 0 teaching this year). For people in my department, a few years ago two people who graduated in the Spring got VAPs very last minute (don't remember when), but it was obvious that finishing definitely helped them. Last year, a person who graduated in the Fall got three interviews (one at a very good place!) and did manage to get a nice one year. I hope this helps, even though it's not directly my experience. I'm happy to hear from other people about how they got VAPs.
Almost all of the positions listed on the classics wiki (TT, postdoc, VAP) will at least have an initial interview at the meetings or by skype or phone. Some postdocs and VAPs also have campus visits, though not all (and in the case of my current VAP position there wasn't even an interview). VAPs will continue to be advertised into June; there's often a surge beginning in March as people leave jobs to take other jobs and need to be replaced on short notice by their former institutions. These will mostly be advertised through the usual channels, though it pays to put the word out to people you know at other schools to say you're looking for work.
As for how long to stay on the market, that varies for everyone. My own rule is that I will keep looking until either a) I can no longer afford to financially, or b) my significant other finds a job s/he does not care to leave. I am in my fifth year on the market, and have been lucky enough to find work in the form of postdocs and VAPs every year, save for a six month period when I was unemployed and burned through all of my savings. If I find something this year then I'll keep at it; if I don't I'll have to consider alternative professions. I'm not happy about that prospect, but I don't have any choice in the matter.
It’s very rare for an ABD to land a T-T gig. So don’t worry just yet. I was ABD last year and had two T-T interviews. One first round and one campus visit. The campus visit was at a Community College the other was at the annual meeting for a small 4-yr college. Then, in the later spring I picked up a one-year appointment.
Most people will say that your ABD year is often a “practice” year. The time when you can begin to prepare your CV, cover letter, and teaching philosophy statements and (hopefully) have an interview or two to get your feet wet, so to speak. But, it’s not too common to have almost all search committees (SCs) just flat out ignore all ABD applicants. This makes sense, because if you have 100-200 applicants for a job and need to narrow it down to a clean 10-20 for first round interviews it makes sense to eliminate the ABDs first. Why? Well, often times ABDs may not have adequate teaching experience and at some schools (even phenomenal ones) they maybe even have zero actual teaching experience. Second, and this is something that my advisor told me, is the worry that an ABD may not finish in time.
The second thing that a SC will often use to filter out applicant is lower pedigree. So, depending on from where your PhD is from often is a MAJOR thing for the SC to weigh. It goes without saying that folks from the Ivies and the par-Ivies are safe. If your degree isn’t from a school that you OFTEN see amongst sitting faculty in your field at most institutions, that’s a major challenge for you.
Also, check with your advisor about placement rates for your school and at what point they often received T-T jobs. 9/10 the folks getting a T-T job have bounced around from 2-3 VAP jobs across the country. Those are the strongest candidates.
Who else got their heart broken by the wiki yesterday? Guess it was too much to dream that I could hold a TT job and live within a 200-mile radius of my family...
When ABDs do get jobs, pedigree (HYPS) and clout of the advisor are often decisive. This is not to say that these folks aren't going to prove themselves fantastic scholars. But ABDs by definition haven't done anything (even finished a dissertation) which means other factors have to propel them through the process.
If you're ABD, odds are the job you'll get this year hasn't even been advertised yet. Also, if you care at all about where you live you're in the wrong line of work.
11:31 again. I was honestly not expecting to land a TT position, I was merely hoping to get an interview or two. My pedigree is fine and the dissertation basically done, that's why I got my hopes up. And yes, 12:14, I did get my heart broken yesterday and the day before and the day before.
Does anyone know what happened regarding the Roman History/Numismatist position at Michigan last year?
I know that they had TWO positions open for Ancient History (one in Classics and the one 1/2 in History and 1/2 in their Museum). From the little bit of rumor I heard (not substantiated) was that Michigan offered the post to scholar ‘x’ yet ‘x’ used it as leverage at their home institution.
...any more clarification on this would be deeply appreciated
Yes one position had been offered to a scholar, who then deferred it, taking a VAP at an Ivy and then turning down the Michigan position for a TT position at the Ivy. This is how Classics works.
In my "pedigree" institution, we've had a number of ABDs over the last 5 years land TT jobs. Some in R1s, some in LACs. Nearly all had around two journal articles / book chapters, big name supervisors, and had finished their dissertations. But in all instances a degree of luck came into play (top choice candidate dropped out), or the job they landed was the only interview / campus visit they got. Again, as has been said so much on here, it's really a crap shoot once you're being considered among the same level of qualified candidates. So if you don't win the lottery, having a VAP(s) or postdoc(s) under your belt, and/or a very well received publication, seems to increase your chances.
1:26 is mistaken about Michigan; what s/he is describing happened the year before with the ancient art/curatorial job, which is being re-advertised this year. The numismatics position, which was advertised last year, was accepted by a scholar whose home institution made a significant and ultimately successful counter offer. I understand that Michigan will re-advertise this position next year. As for the ancient history position, that was discussed earlier on this site by people who know more about it than I do.
Second, and this is something that my advisor told me, is the worry that an ABD may not finish in time.
Yes, exactly. If you are hired as a VAP and don't finish before the end of the summer, the embarrassed chair has to ask the dean to downgrade the VAP to a lecturer and hope that the dean doesn't just yank the position.
Why are SCs so skeptical about ABDs? I'm ABD. My dissertation is done and out with my committee, and has been since early October, but because of paperwork deadlines I have to defend in the spring semester instead of the fall. Did ABDs and their advisers lie for years about the 'doneness' of the dissertation, and SCs got burned for years, and now we have a custom of chucking out applications from ABDs, or at least viewing them with a lot of skepticism? I hope I don't sound too salty, I'm just curious about where the worry that an ABD might not finish in time comes from.
This isn't really worth a jeer, but when it is reported on the wiki that someone has received a rejection why is it that others feel the need to change that to "x2," "x3," etc.? Obviously, with each job getting around 100 applications, there will be around 90 rejections each time, so once we know that one person has been rejected then we all know that the committee has made its short list. You people are supposed to have PhD's or be close to obtaining one -- how can some of you not see that after the first rejection is posted on the wiki any indication that no, it was actually TWO people, no, wait THREE people, who didn't get interviews? I mean, there could not be a more useless piece of information in this universe than that six people received rejections from St. Olaf College and Rutgers.
Re SCs' reluctance to hire ABDs -- at my SLAC, if a SC wants to hire an ABD the Provost and President require us to write a memo describing, in great detail, precisely why that ABD was superior to any of the other applicants. NB: NOT just to the other people we interviewed at the convention or brought to campus, but to ANY of the other applicants. In other words, the admin. basically demands that we write up a multi-page report on the entire pool of applications we received and justify, in detail, why this one ABD rose to the top of the pile. The SC recommends a hire to the Provost and President, but they (the Pr. and Pr.) have to sign off on it, and can choose not to. So if an SC recommends an ABD, there remains the chance that the Prov. and Pres. might not agree with the SC's reasoning as recounted in the report, and might refuse to sign off on the hire (this did happen, once, though not to Classics). This raises the further possibility that by the time all this has happened, the second and third choices might have accepted jobs elsewhere. We are almost never allowed to bring out a fourth candidate, so the search would then be declared "failed."
When we arrange on campus visits, we have to "certify" our top six candidates, and we are not allowed to go further down the list than number 6, no matter what. A few years back a dept. here (not Classics, again, but I was the outside SC member so I know about this) had its two top-ranked candidates say "I've already accepted a job elsewhere." We invited nos. 3, 4, and 5. No. 4 also got another offer before the visit, and dropped out. No. 3 and 5 were not acceptable for various reasons -- really bad job talk in one, really awful teaching demo. in the other. We invited No. 6 and held our breath. S/he knocked it out of the park, did a super on-campus interview, was obviously going to be a great fit, and has been an excellent colleague here for some years now. But the point is, had No. 6 also said "I'm no longer available," or had s/he bombed the on-campus visit, we WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED to go to the person we had ranked No. 7. The admin. would have declared a "failed search" and we would have had to apply for the position again the next year.
Add to all that, that funding for new positions at SLACs is pretty cut-throat right now. Here, 16 depts. asked for new or replacement positions last year. Three, yes only three, were authorized. That means, of course, that no SC in its right mind would do *anything* to jeopardize the success of a search if it's lucky enough to get one authorized. Given the admin's animus against ABDs, an ABD would pretty much have to walk on water for an SC to risk trying to hire him/her.
I don't know how typical any of this is, but it's worth bearing in mind that SCs are very often bound in all sorts of ways by arcane institutional regulations and administrative preferences that applicants can have no knowledge of. I suspect that our administration is very far from the only one to look on ABDs with some disfavor.
Yes, a small part of me died yesterday. I'm one of those from a non-Ivy etc. school. Great teaching experience, service to school and profession, good publication record for the amount of teaching I had. Great letters from established colleagues and former chair. I fear that part of the application isn't even getting looked.
Left column records total number of AIA/SCS/AHA/CAA/CAMWS/MLA/Phone/Skype/etc. interviews : Right column counts total number of individuals with that number
what do people know about vandy? have all invitations for interviews gone out? is it still considered a desirable job in light of the fact that the dept of classics is now a "program" of med. studies?
I suspect that the wiki is not an accurate count of interviews because not everyone who gets an interview will add it to the wiki (perhaps they don't know about it, perhaps they don't care). Hard to imagine that Vandy only shortlisted 2 people or whatever.
Isn't every job desirable these days? It sucks, but if Vandy was the only job offered to me, I know I'd take it. I'd feel like I have to.
sure vandy is dysfunctional, but nashville is nice, smart students, good salaries. is it better than many TT positions and all VAPs? yes? is it 'good'? i dunno.
Dr. Karen Kelsky (aka The Professor Is In) is collecting anonymous stories of sexual harassment in academia here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeqWdpDxVRc-i8OiiClJPluIpjMlM41aUlU2E0rrQ4br_rQmA/viewform
I filled it out, and I know that this applies to at least some of the rest of you, unfortunately.
@10:37am I think it might be even more useful to contribute to the new Eidolon series about sexual harassment in our field: https://eidolon.pub/the-lost-library-dcac1adeb281
I would be very curious who got shortlisted for the Vanderbilt position in terms of their research. The job ad sounded pretty broad. I wanted it for sure.
Let me try to provide some better clarity about the various Michigan jobs from the past few years, with the caveat that I am not at Michigan and that this information includes some hearsay and speculation:
AY 2015-16: An ancient art/curatorial position was advertised this year. The successful candidate deferred for a year in order to take a visiting 1-year position at Yale. I was told by some who knows this candidate personally that this was because of a spouse at Yale. The following year the successful candidate received a permanent appointment at Yale.
AY 2016-17: Two jobs were advertised this year -- Roman history and classics/numismatics curator. The historian position was discussed here a few months back; apparently the successful candidate deferred for some reason. The successful candidate for the numismatics position ultimately chose to remain in Tübingen.
AY 2017-18: The ancient art/curatorial position from AY 2015-16 is being advertised a second time.
AY 2018-19: I am told that Michigan plans to re-advertise the classics/numismatics position next year.
@11:45 actually, the successful candidate in 2015-16 for the ancient art/curatorial position at Michigan in 2015-16 TURNED down the position to leave academia entirely. The candidate who eventually turned down the position for Yale was the alternate.
Everyone, be gentle on each other. Shit happens. People get sick, get married, get divorced, get their proposals rejected, have children, and a million other things. Cut your colleagues some slack.
Shit does happen. People also end up unemployed because they can't take post-docs/VAPs due to diss. not being ready in March of the year they are applying. So when someone gets a TT job and CANT finish, those who are either unemployed or in a heavier teaching job and DO finish (say in August or September) are resentful. We should all cut each other slack, but the system doesn't cut us any. Except when it does.
FWIW, I have an interview with Vanderbilt but saw no reason to update the counter. (I assume invitations generally go out on the same day and that only about a quarter of candidates update the wiki, since we know most longlists cover 10-12 people.) My research is on Greek history and archaeology, and I think the program they're building there sounds great.
Mediterranean Studies "broadly defined" and "studying and teaching the ancient world in comparative perspective across cultures, regions, and periods" sound great. I just hope to God they hire someone that does more than the Persian Wars. I'm skeptical it will mean more than hiring a lecturer that teaches Arabic down the road if the same ole folks are in charge...good luck to all at any rate.
He's probably not running the search, however, as director of the program. I'm guessing it's run by one of the more "classically-defined" classicists (yeah, it's pretty redundant). Call me a skeptic, but no matter how well-intentioned classicists might be to offer more than lip service to Mediterranean Studies, we aeither can't help ourselves or don't know enough to hire Mediterraneanists as defined by outside disciplines. Vanderbilt will almost invariably hire a Hellenist that dabbles in "Orientalism."
There is only one other tenured classicist working in the dept, as I understand it (and no junior TT faculty). So perhaps it is that person chairing the search, or perhaps someone from another dept.
No matter how good their hire's Greek might be, they had better not choose an "Iron Age Philistine" or there be pitchforks and torches at the ready judging by this forum...because it's more important to hire one more true blue Hellenist out of a pool of hundreds of underemployed Hellenists so we can add to hundreds of ladder track Hellenists already out there rather than bringing in an uncommon perspective. B/c god knows your dissertation-cum-tenure-book on Homer's left testicle will revolutionize classics and academia. So how are we confining ourselves to oblivion again?
You’re not 100% wrong but you’re also taking a rather obtuse approach to it.
Yes, we should broaden our horizons as classicists, not doubt (e.g., do we REALLY need any more dissertations or monographs on the Aeneid?). But... to think that someone whose speciality happens to be only tangentially related is a good fit in account of “thinking outside the box” can be just as damaging as maintains a hyper-narrow focus as to who may be qualified. For example, you *could* hire a vascular surgeon to fill an opening as a proctologist, arguing that “well, look, obviusojly the vascular surgeon went to med school and is capable of handling any field of medicine since they received board training.” But, is that an “appropriate” hire? Likely no. ...just the same, folks who are Latin philologists should *only* apply for what they are actually trained for—Latin philology. As such, to hire someone who has some kind of exotic speciality (e.g., archaeology of Caledonian Britain focusing on burial practices) really shouldn’t be hired (or even apply to for that matter) a position as a Roman historian. Yes, they can surely get by and be ok at it (as a vascular surgeon working as a proctologist could also), but let’s not make the silly mis-step of thinking that different is better.
When a school like Vand. has an opening for a a Hellenist, and especially since they’re a SMALL Dept, it makes far more sense to hire a traditional Hellenist rather than an academic curiousity that may be trending at the moment.
@12:08 what is a "traditional Hellenist" these days and according to what criteria? it strikes me that most Greek "philologists" in the US right now should probably more accurately be described as doing cultural studies via texts
Erm, I know this isn't going to go down well, but let me suggest that the ill effects of hiring an archaeologist to teach history might be less severe than hiring a vascular surgeon to perform colorectal procedures.
(1) Humanities training is more flexible than medical training. (2) Departmental needs in the humanities are more flexible than medical specialist needs in a hospital. (3) I don't recall ever hearing that somebody died by being taught history by an archaeologist.
*Full disclosure: I am neither Caledonian archaeologist nor Roman historian (nor a surgeon of any kind). But I do find all this boundary maintenance a little tiresome.
12:27: By traditional Hellenist, I mean one whose focus is textual and whose interests are the “greatest hits” of the Greek world (Homer, Thucydides, Sophocles, etc..).
12:33: it wasn’t a perfect analogy, but an analogy nonetheless. The takeaway is that IMO we ought to stop the deliberate blurring of lines all in the name of being progressive. Of course, each person will have their own limits as to what they see as an appropriate amount of blurring.
Spoken as a person who unwittingly (or perhaps knowingly) realizes that the present artificial boundaries that we internally keep in classics are inherently damaging to how we are perceived by the greater academic world (i.e. the elitist fact that our "classics" and "ancient history" are almost exclusively Greco-Roman classics and ancient history - make classics great again, and all that). Perhaps you justify it by saying it pragmatically preserves the system - inertial rationalization. I would be more open to allowing us down this road to irrelevance and destruction, but I'm particularly distraught by the perceived intent of the Vanderbilt ad, and presumably its new program. I'm guessing that this was an action "forced" upon the classicists at Vanderbilt by non-classicists with some good intentions and hopes that some form of classics will survive at their institution. If it ends up being business as usual, I fear that these outsiders will give up on classics as a lost cause as many other institutions have now done or will do. The choice is ours and we're failing miserably, wittingly or unwittingly. The end will come fast regardless of how many Facebook petitions are made.
Institution Name Vanderbilt University Position Rank Assistant Professor Area of Specialty Ancient Near East, Cultural History, Early Christianity, Early Islam, Early Medieval Studies, Interdisciplinary Studies, Judaism, Mediterranean Studies, Philosophy, Religion Additional Desirable Specialties InterdisciplinaryStudies GenderStudies DigitalHumanities AncientScience/Medicine AncientPhilosophy ClassicalArchaeology ClassicalArtHistory Mythology ClassicalReception AncientReligion LateAntiquity This position is Approved/Definite Our institution plans to conduct interviews at the Annual Meeting No Application Deadline November 15, 2017 Tenure-track Assistant Professor
Nashville, TN
Open Date: Oct 5, 2017
Close Date: Nov 15, 2017
The Program in Classical and Mediterranean Studies invites applications for a tenure-track Assistant Professor position starting fall 2018.
We seek an outstanding researcher and teacher of the ancient Greek world broadly defined. We welcome applications from scholars in related fields (history, material culture, language and literature, philosophy, religion) whose work interrogates or challenges traditional disciplinary boundaries. Competitive candidates are expected to be able to contribute across the curriculum by teaching Greek at all levels as well as courses in Mediterranean Studies and by developing courses in their own area of specialization. The successful candidate will enhance the growing, energetic community of a new program dedicated to studying and teaching the ancient world in comparative perspective across cultures, regions, and periods (https://as.vanderbilt.edu/classics/).
Qualifications: Ph.D. in hand by August 16, 2018, teaching experience, and evidence of professional achievement. Dossiers should include a cover letter that addresses research interests, scholarship, and teaching; a curriculum vitae; three letters of recommendation; and a writing sample (dissertation chapter, published paper, conference presentation) no more than 20 pages. Candidates should submit materials to http://apply.interfolio.com/45661 no later than November 15, 2017.
Yep, I see little hint that this was meant to be a "traditional Hellenist, I mean one whose focus is textual and whose interests are the “greatest hits” of the Greek world (Homer, Thucydides, Sophocles, etc..)." Yes, the classicists were allowed to stick in the old "teach Greek at all levels", but I'm betting the non-classicists didn't realize this is our disciplinary code for "non traditional Hellensits as defined internally by us need not apply." It might take years for them to realize once a traditional Hellenist is almost certainly hired, but we will only get so many chances at this and it's becoming clear, at least in my eyes, that our time is running out at all but the most elite institutions.
I'm curious about the academic background of those arguing that, essentially, we should all pick a lane and stick to it. Are you coming from an R1/Ivy perspective? Here are a few points from someone with experience at SLACs and an R1:
1) Small departments (2-4 people) need people who can teach in multiple areas. They might advertise a position for a Hellenist because they don't currently have anyone who wants to teach advanced Greek, but they might only have enough students to fill such a course once every other year. In this circumstance it makes perfect sense to me that they might also be interested in candidates whose primary specialty is not Greek philology, but archaeology/history, as well as those candidates who make use of Latin and Greek texts equally in their research, provided that they can demonstrate that they would be able to handle a class on Thucydides or Plato every once in a while. In the meantime they might be teaching mostly Latin classes, as well as courses on myth, history, gender and sexuality or whatever else.
2) A 200-level history class is not that hard to teach if you have any sort of broad training in Classics. A graduate-level history seminar is a different matter. If the program does not offer graduate classes, then they don't necessarily need someone who was trained specifically as a historian.
3) Specialties change over time. Someone might be hired as a Latinist and find themselves working primarily on Greek texts, or myth, or some aspect of history a decade or two later. A dissertation topic that seems too niche or a specialty that seems too trendy might be offset by an extensive teaching record and by conference presentations in a variety of other areas. Such a candidate might be more likely to handle the changing times and to incorporate new approaches in their scholarship and teaching as time goes on.
4) It's okay to be very narrow or very broad. We need both kinds of scholars in the field. The 'very narrow' people seem to me to be better suited to R1s and Ivies; the 'very broad' seem better suited for everything else.
Yep, I'm a Greek historian in a history department that served on a SC last year for our small classics department (<5). We would be considered R1 if not even quite as elite as Vandy. I was gobsmacked by not only how many "left testicle of Homer" dissertations were out there, but also by the fact they were often from University of Relatively Obscure State School. WTF, people? To my utter embarrassment, the SC even invited one of these University of Nondescript State School alums to campus. This is when I gave up hope on the stand alone status of our classics department, which has been under threat for some time.
Yes, the fundamental issue is that these Ph.D. programs even exist, but it's compounded by the fact that the faculty is staffed by Harvard, Berkeley, Princeton, etc. Ph.Ds that don't know how else to advice other than in the left-testicle-of-Homer style they produced and learned. Unfortunately, they ARE in "Kansas" evermore...
@2:23 I have taught everything and grown programs at a SLAC and that didn't get me any interviews to any of the recent SLAC jobs. Rather testicular Homerists seemed to do well.
I didn't get any word from Haverford either, I'm sure that means there will be no rejection email until March. Which is really when you need it of course . . .
Well. Quite a few schools who claim that they will hold interviews at the SCS/AIA apparently haven’t contacted anybody.
I understand that some will A) notify late or that B) it’s poasible that wiki members weren’t among the lucky few, but it seems like far too many are still unaccounted for.
If the rumor I heard about USC is correct, then none of us has a chance at that job (though, if I may note the one silver lining, it would mean an even better job would probably be opening up elsewhere a year or two from now).
@7:40 I think most will do so by mid-December, e.g. Holy Cross' (helpful) acknowledgement email gave mid-December as the time for interview notification.
On the flip side, someone apparently received a rejection from McMaster but I received neither a rejection nor an interview request. Has anyone gotten an interview notification from McM? If so, please share on the wiki and put the rest of us out of our misery!
I think 7:40 PM is pointing out that Friday was the (supposed) deadline for schools to notify the SCS of their shortlists in order to be guaranteed interview slots at the meeting. Typically, this deadline is pretty soft. I think we'll be seeing movement up until mid-December or so. And of course Case and Bard are planning to interview at the meeting and their deadlines are still upcoming.
@8:11 "(though, if I may note the one silver lining, it would mean an even better job would probably be opening up elsewhere a year or two from now)." This doesn't even make any sense, what are you talking about?
The reason I did not write more is that to do so would come close to violating FV's rule about not discussing individuals in our field. I decided to post my comment so that fellow applicants to USC would know that they should dampen their expectations of getting the job, as I have. Not give up, but dampen. Consider it a public service. ("The more you know...")
To which I will only add that my "silver lining" comment made perfect sense, but only if one solves the riddle. Which I will not be the one to do.
@9:16. I got one, too. (Sigh.) Mine said "the committee has now almost completed its short-list…", which implies that they're letting us off the hook before the final list is made, which I suppose has to come before actual invites are made.
9:33: The rumor about USC is that someone at a better institution will (allegedly) be taking up the job, thus opening up a position (perhaps) at said better institution. What don't you understand?
'Intel' is too strong a word. These are good guesses, based on knowledge of specific individuals at specific institutions. If you know the individuals in question, or if you know someone who knows them, then you can form a theory about what USC is trying to do. It is no more than a theory, yet it is fairly clear that more than one person has formulated it. On the whole I would say that an open-rank generalist position at USC is a long shot for nearly any candidate anyway, so as with any job it's best not to get one's hopes up, regardless of the rumors floating around.
Anyone who has been paying attention to USC's hiring practices over the last five years knows that the department has a spaghetti-against-the-wall approach. Almost every position begins with invitations to a select group of candidates to apply, and you can reasonably assume that USC (along with most of the other jobs you're applying to) has asked a few candidates to apply. That doesn't mean the position is closed or rigged. This rumor is nonsense.
Every department I've been associated with or have extensive knowledge about has been repeatedly described to me by theoretically reliable sources as dysfunctional. It's never been remotely true. Bullying by TT faculty is bad, whatever it means exactly, and rumors about such things deserve to be taken seriously.
But no one should listen to rumors about dysfunction, etc., from people who are not at the institution.
Such a blanket statement is not helpful. As I know from personal experience, one should use one's judgment when reading these claims about dysfunctionality, evaluating what is said and how well informed the poster seems to be, and also why it might have been said, and then deciding whether to believe it. FV has a history of a lot of false rumors, but there have also been many true ones, including some painfully true ones concerning certain departments and how they were treating junior faculty (and, in at least one prominent case, still are).
Yeah, there's not much logic to "dysfunctionality/abuse can only be true if it's disclosed from a person at said institution" in a forum that's anonymous.
1:51 here. I was not talking (just) about FV. These are things people say in real life too. My point is that, especially among graduate students but also faculty, there is a lot of gossip about how various departments are and that gossip is, in my experience, rarely true. I no longer pay attention when I am told, let alone read on here, that Dept X is "dysfunctional"--I don't know what it's even supposed to mean, and it has never been true when said about departments of which I have knowledge.
I would say that anonymous and vague claims like "toxic department" merit no attention from anyone. Rumors or reports about specific bad conduct are a different story, and should be taken seriously. I could have been clearer.
You are all, of course, free to avoid applying to departments based on reported dysfunction, but I would recommend against it. :)
@5:34, sure, that makes sense. But having come from a highly dysfunctional and toxic department, but not at liberty to discuss the hows or whys without revealing where it is and possibly jeopardizing one's career, doesn't mean that it should be dismissed or labeled untrue. Your situation is not the same for everyone. Some places really are terrible places to be a student and/or to work.
That being said, I wouldn't recommend letting a post such as the above re; Trinity (or similar complaints made in public elsewhere) stop one from applying there, were there actually a VAP posting.
@5:34 grad students etc are among the most marginalized at these institutions and thus must be looked to for reports about abuse and as gauges for progressive change. Try being a less dismissive of the very real systemic abuse that occurs in academe.
What some people don't get, too, is that what is a terribly abusive institution for one person may be a joyous place for another person. For every one person who is ignored, abused, and dismissed, there's another who is promoted, recommended, and lauded, and sometimes within the same institution, the same advisor, etc. Yet another reason to not dismiss rumors so readily - particularly when the reports come from grad students and contingent faculty, who otherwise are so often lacking a voice and representation.
@6:41, you make fair points. A related issue we haven't yet dealt with: people who have been or still are complicit in keeping harassers in their jobs. Some of the complicit are extremely senior, or very powerful. Perhaps a known harasser is gone from a given department, but those who kept him/her in place and allowed him/her to misbehave may still be in positions of authority. Should one hesitate to take a job at such a school? Is the market such that nobody has the luxury of considering that factor? Do you just sign on the dotted line and hope it doesn't happen to you? These are tough choices, perhaps especially for anyone who has already been traumatised by that kind of treatment in the past.
5:34 here. I just want to clarify (again) that I am not talking about someone with knowledge of a situation or a person or whatever sharing that information. I am talking about the very vague rumors of "dysfunction" or "toxicity" that go around, and seem (in my experience) to have no basis in reality. However, as 6:41 and 7:45 point out, it's also very much the case that people have different experiences. Mine (and in particular, I will say, as a male) at these places is not the same as everyone else's. I hadn't considered that in this context, and perhaps those rumors that never seemed to have any truth were all too accurate for others. Thanks for the discussion.
@11:27 and @12:55, @6:41/@7:45 here, and just wanted to say thanks as well - you both make good points. These are discussions that I hope we'll continue to have, including at the SCS this year.
@11.27. This is a tough one. Let me tell you a story that I heard when I was just appointed twenty years ago. There was a department (not Classics, thank gods!) that had a known 'lech' whose m.o. was to have his classes scheduled late in the afternoon and then female undergrads would be invited to his office under some pretense, where there would be (as far as I understand) seduction, harassment, or assault in some combination. His young female (untenured) colleagues got wind of this and set up a rota so that he was never in the department alone, and if a female student was in his office they would find some excuse for one or more of them to come to his office to get the key for x or advice about y. From the description I heard (second-hand, admittedly), they interrupted dozens of assaults over several years. Once they got tenure, they made a big enough stink that he was forced to retire. But here for me in raising the question of colleagues' complicity. What they did was to my way of thinking brave and praiseworthy. But from some points of view, similar actions could be treated as complicity. The grad student who warns a younger colleague to make sure only to visit Professor Lechorous in the mornings and to prepare an excuse to leave if he sits next to you rather than on the other side of the desk.
Throughout my BA, Post-Bac, MA, and PhD I’ve been at 4 different schools and have interacted with 4 different Classics Depts and 4 different History Depts (I do ancient history). What I can say if my experience is that ALL History Depts were phenomenal. The faculty got along with one another, we’re involved in collaborative projects across various disciplines and often worked (happily) with other Depts.
...But. ALL 4 Classics Depts were disasters. Now, to be clear, 2 schools were large flagship state Universities, one a premier Ivy, and one an elite state university that often ranks higher than most Ivies. ..I mention his to underscore that variety exists regarding all aspects of the faculty and admin. At one Classics Dept they hated each other so much that Prof ‘x’ would flat-out go on rants about how Prof ‘y’ is awful and how they (personally !!) are to blame for our class being locked—arguing that Prof ‘y’ is hiding somewhere laughing at us all. Yes. This really happened all the time there. At another school, Prof ‘z’ would be caught having sex with a grad student in his office in the middle of the day and see no repurcussions since it was “consensual.” That same Prof would also show up to class drunk and even passed out mid lecture on occasion. Again, no repercussion since Dr. Amazing-Latin-Philologist is too important to the Dept. And the third school, the hatred and factioning was so pronounced that even the most disinterested undergrads took notice. At school 4, the ENTIRE Dept, yes, all ca. 20 of the field’s most prestigious current scholars, held a meeting to discuss how to bury a massive sexual scandal that traces back for decades all because they didn’t want prospective grad students or other academics to think poorly of the school. As such, somehow, the story was kept out of local news and was even kept out of the student newspaper. Current grad students know all about it, but everyone has decided to never talk about it since the reverberations could really hurt junior scholars who studied under this Prof and who may be still using them to write letters for them. He silently retired and that’s (essentially) that.
Now, I’m not saying that ALL Classics Depts are particularly prone to this kind of thing, but in my personal experience such seems to be a warrantable stance. There does seem, to me, to be some kind of systemic problem with Classics that’s much broader than and runs much deeper than others.
How many people here who have received an email request for an interview saw activity on their Academia page in then days/weeks prior?
What I’m wondering is if a lack of visits from cities that correspond with my apps is indicative of not being looked at. Anyone here get an interview request from a school that never looked at your Academia page??
@ 12:01, it's about 50/50. For some schools, I see hits on my page about 1-2 weeks before interview requests. For others, I have 0 hits from the area and then get an interview. I've also had it go the other way-get hits from a school I've applied to and then, no interview. I think it's less reliable an indicator than I would like it to be.
Anon. 12:01, I have wondered the exact same thing, but since I have no interviews so far I can't provide useful information regarding your question. Though at least I do know that at none of these schools have search committee members been devouring my posted work like a plague of locusts and then deciding NOT to interview me.
Some people will look you up on academia.edu, some won't. And in my experience, hits do not necessarily translate to interviews or campus visits. A search led by a younger more tech savvy professor might look everyone up on social media, other won't.
Still, I think it is important to have a social media presence and a carefully curated page, either institutional or on a site like academia. Because it is one way that SCs will try to learn more about you (also, careful on Facebook, as they might learn more about you than you might wish them to know).
On disfunction at Classics departments: I think they have some aspects that may make them more prone to disfunction. They tend to be small, sometimes claustrobically so, and as such interpersonal gripes are magnified. Also, since most of Classics, aside from archeology and history involves literary studies, people can turn subjective disagreements about aesthetics into lifelong professional grudges. The fact that literary studies is heavily theorized also means that there are a lot of arbitrary fault lines based on who you favorite French theorist from the 1970s happens to be. Finally, in history departments few people share the same terrain: one person does Medieval monasteries, another does the Trans-Atlantic trade, and so no one is really in a position to critique anyone else. Everyone in classics has basically the same Baileywick of texts and period, which means they are in a position to vehemently disagree. And many departments have had sex scandals of late, but Classics departments are not immune.
@10:28, 11:27 here. I agree those are admirable actions; I wouldn't have called it complicit behavior, at least on my scale. I'm thinking of the deans, department chairs, heads of divisions who knew people like Geoff Marcy (Berkeley, astronomy) or Rohit Varma (USC, medical dean) were acting as they did, and did nothing for years. I understand that the behavior of a certain classicist at an east coast school was known in the administration -- but they did nothing. I recently learned that a harassing visitor in my own doctoral department years ago was known to the faculty and chair at the time, and they did nothing. It's all about power. People in positions of power should be held responsible when they know and don't act. People junior to harassers can't reasonably be expected to carry the can. Especially when their elders are too cowardly or self-serving to do so.
12:42 here. I briefly hesitated to name Marcy and Varma, but both have been extensively covered in major news outlets, and both cases have been resolved, accompanied by admission of wrongdoing. I understand the east-coast case is still pending? is that right? I've lost track of where it is.
The person in question has been removed from teaching, as was also reported in NYT a few weeks later, but I believe that there might still be an internal investigation going on. I do not believe there has been a public finding of guilt or admission of guilt (though, of course, actions can sometimes take the place of words).
I don't think we need to tiptoe around the fact that William Harris was accused of sexual harassment of a student and has stepped down from his position at Columbia. It's widely reported and factual.
So far as seeing Academia.edu as a barometer of sorts, I think that previous comments are spot on that younger and more tech savvy SC members likely use it.
What’s odd for me is that over the last week I’ve been visited by the same faculty member at the same school countless times. But, the city doesn’t make any sense to me (West Palm Beach, FL). I’ve applied to zero jobs in FL or the south for that matter. It may be possible that a SC member is on sabbatical or, more likely, it’s someone not associated with any SC.
...In the end, I think Academia.edu will eventually be an accurate barometer. But not for another 10-15 years or so, when many SCs are made up of profs from our generation.
@7:33, I've been visited by someone from West Palm Beach multiple times in the last month or so, too! It makes no sense; I haven't applied to any jobs in that region, don't know anyone there, and have no other connections to that part of Florida.
Academia.edu's Analytics page can be a weird place. Case in point, seven times in the past 48 hours someone in Velleneuve, France has looked at an article of mine, finding it via Wikipedia. That same article was looked at twice more in the past few hours by someone only identified as being in France, but most likely the same person, since he/she likewise found it through Wikipedia. Why he/she can't just download it once and for all is beyond me.
And for what it's worth, I also got a hit from West Palm Beach a bit over a week ago, and likewise didn't apply to anything there.
@8:40, if the person in question is who I think it is, he is currently incarcerated in a federal institution, so yes, it's been reported beyond the department.
@8:40, he was in phase retirement when he was officially charged. The Dept was concerned with protecting its reputation and (understandably) the future of recent PhDs and soon-to-be PhDs connected with him.
Even when I search his name and a few other key words all that’s out there is a 1/2 paragraph remark in a newspaper 2-3 hours away. Very odd. Nobody knows where he is now, whether incarcerated or not. It was covered up by the Dept unbelievably well. The odd thing is, when you do happen to discuss it with faculty or the older grad students they all immediately get nervous and look around and then whisper about it, al while trying to brush it off, and you always hear them say “such a nice guy, and it’s just so sad and tragic.
So, it seems as if it’s a fairly safe assumption that Professor “West Palm Beach” is SC member checking out applicants whilst on holiday in south Florida.
Speaking of which, I don’t but, are any other of the West-Palm-Beach-viewed folks paying members of Academia.edu and, therefore, able to see the institution that the viewer is associated with?? For me it’s blurred out.
Um, well, considering I gave up on the job market this year, if this person (not) in West Palm Beach wants to give me a job without me even applying, I'm all ears!
Servii here: we agree that the 'people and events in a major national newspaper' line is a good one to follow in this conversation. We'll monitor and see if we should adjust. But, we want to point people to Eidolon's 'Philomela’s Tapestry' project, which will (hopefully) have more reach in our disciplines than FV-based whisper campaigns would: https://eidolon.pub/the-lost-library-dcac1adeb281
Some updated general data to share with students who say they want to go to graduate school. According to self-reported data, a median of 40% of students who enter PhD programs complete them: https://www.humanitiesindicators.org/content/indicatordoc.aspx?i=51.
If we imagine that 1/3 of those who complete actually get a TT job, then 13% of those who start a PhD program end up as tenured professors.
@5:48, quite possibly your numbers are correct. The difficulty is that people drop out all along the way, for reasons that have nothing to do with the job market. People in my own department left because of illness of self, or spouse; desire to live only in one area; growing interest in another field; moving to more lucrative and more flexible fields for the 'trailing spouse'. An archaeologist decided he didn't like working in the summer in hot countries. A philologist decided he liked both the tech industry and living on the west coast. All these are perfectly respectable reasons. A better message to the very young is both that the job market is tough and also that their interests may change as they grow, and maybe professorship is not the best match for unrelated reasons.
How do interviews appear on the SCS calendar? Like will it just appear on the page where I click 'my calendar'? Or do I need to click into those timeslots?
I am not currently on a search committee, but have served on several recently. We were advised by HR not to google candidates because it could create unfair advantages or disadvantages (mostly disadvantage, I think: is this the same Joanna Smith whose ex posted revenge porn? but also think things like political activity). I think that they were concerned about both lawsuits and also the idea that googling tends to penalize women and underrepresented minorities more than others and therefore is contrary to promoting diversity. The basic idea was: judge the candidates by their applications, not by what you find on the internet. Obviously Academia is not a place where you would find this kind of potentially problematic information, but I followed HR and didn't look candidates up on the internet at all. So if you're not getting any Academia hits, it may not be just the age of the SC members; it may also be that the SC has been told not to look up information about candidates online.
As a younger person on an SC, I might google people, but academia is the very last place I'd go, since they might well know I'd been there!!
That said, when I was on the market, getting academia hits was an indicator that there was a pretty good chance (say, 70%) I'd get interviewed. But remember, just because one person on the SC finds you interesting, that doesn't mean the others will. I had my heart broken a few times when I got hits that did not turn into anything else.
I don't have an academia.edu account for philosophical reasons (including the ones that Sarah Bond outlines here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/drsarahbond/2017/01/23/dear-scholars-delete-your-account-at-academia-edu/#3498b02d628d), so I'm glad to hear that not all SCs use them to judge candidates.
At this point in my career I have so little respect for HR departments, both from personal experience and anecdotal, that if ever I serve on a search committee I will do what I believe to be best for the department, not what the technocrats tell me to do or not do.
That Sarah Bond column was a misguided one written by someone who already was in a tenure-track position AND has her own platforms for self-promotion, and therefore didn't take into account why people like us should most definitely have Academia.edu accounts.
Anyone without a tenure-track position who listens to her and therefore does not use the site both to follow colleagues and post one's work, to be blunt, is being foolish. Not to mention gullible, being persuaded to adopt the lofty principles of Bond's piece without thinking of the potentially lost opportunities to benefit one's career over both the short and long term.
You can call me foolish and gullible for sticking to my principles, and I can call you foolish and gullible for freely offering your labor to a shady for-profit entity. I guess we're even.
Anon. 12:29: Jeez. In case you hadn't noticed, they are offering all my freely given work freely to others. So what's the problem? They had an idea for a needed service and developed it, and have done an excellent job with it (useful features, no bugs, intuitive and simple design), and therefore have the perfect right to try to recoup their initial investment and then make a profit. That's how things work in America: someone has a good idea, raises the capital, and tries to make a go of it. And there's nothing shady about them -- perhaps some questionable attempts to make money a year or two ago that were abandoned, but as a current user of their site there is nothing untoward going on. Scholarship is freely shared, and evidently the Academia.edu people are making some amount of money through ad revenue (nothing wrong with that) and getting some percentage of users to pay for their premium service (which ideally would be part of the free service, but I can live without it, and am not going to stomp off to some other site over this).
I appreciate the various articles for dumping your academia.edu account, but three thoughts: 1) Those in contingent positions don't really have the luxury of limiting our exposure. Faculty web pages are often subpar; grad student pages even less so. 2) How does academia.edu really profit from me posting just the titles of my articles? 3) How is academia.edu's approach any different than the publisher who claims copyright and ownership of my article, does not allow me to share it electronically, and profits from journal subscriptions and book sales without paying me any kind of royalties?
Re: abuse and the fact that some places where people experience abuse are also places that are "joyous" for others: abusers usually get away with abuse by being selective about those whom they abuse. Thus, they're likely to treat *most* people well, and to focus their abuse on those who are poorly positioned to fight it.
@1:47: you're absolutely correct. and that's what makes it even more of a horrific experience for the person/people being abused: they are effectively silenced by those who say, "what problem? this place is fantastic!"
@2:13 totally. Just v disappointed to see all the comments in here about "pay no mind to such rumors, so many abusive places are great for many." Really reminds you of what puts the systemic in "systemic abuse": the unwitting complicity of so many with statements like that.
I'm with 1:38PM: I appreciate the various articles for dumping your academia.edu account, but three thoughts: 1) Those in contingent positions don't really have the luxury of limiting our exposure. Faculty web pages are often subpar; grad student pages even less so. 2) How does academia.edu really profit from me posting just the titles of my articles? 3) How is academia.edu's approach any different than the publisher who claims copyright and ownership of my article, does not allow me to share it electronically, and profits from journal subscriptions and book sales without paying me any kind of royalties? I bolded that last bit for effect: for-profit academic publishers are making literally billions of dollars a year off essentially free research and writing that our institutions pay us to do (or don't pay us to do, in many cases). I've been an Academia user almost since the site was born, never paid them a cent, and never will. But if they can somehow find a way to squeeze money out of my article and presentation titles and the odd thing that I've chosen to upload for free access to my colleagues around the world, then good for them. If they eventually lock me out by converting to a subscription based system, in the worst-case scenario they get to keep a list of titles of my published writing and my presentations, with the odd inaccessible thing that nobody would ever otherwise read. I'm infinitely more concerned with Facebook's and Google's use of my reams and reams of personal information, images, and connections. Academia only has information I've personally and intentionally uploaded into their system or connected to my account. Google, Microsoft, and to a lesser extent Facebook have an enormous volume of personal communication, business transaction, and web activity data, so if they ever decide they want to holiday in the Cayman Islands on my dime, I don't think there's any way I can stop them. Alright, back to my cave. Good luck to everyone on the market, you're not alone out there!
I think it’s far more damaging to have an accessible Facebook account than an Academia.edu page.
I have a lot of colleagues in my PhD program that have no problem at all posting very, very vocal and activist-y posts each and every day. In my opinion, one should keep their political thoughts close to their chest; you never know how a SC may internalize seeing that you’re an active BLM protestor who proudly displayed pics that you’re blocking traffic on a highway, e.g.
Even if a SC member agrees with your stance 100% they may interpret your methods as an indicator of your high potential to be a “problem” professor or that you may embarrass the Dept at a later date. Also, and don’t forget this possibility (even though many of us from our generation fail to accept this) that some academics may not be in favor of whatever it is you’re touting and protesting this week, even if they give zero indication that they don’t. Many conservative academics have to be “in the closet” so to speak regarding their politics.
So, my advice to everyone is very simple:
Keep your politics and activist-styled posts in FB only viewable to friends. Or better yet, just keep them to yourself.
I don’t say any of this to indicate that I disagree with a lot of what’s being advocated by protestors or activists, quite the opposite, but I personally hate a loudmouth who loves to preach about how they’re a moral/social crusader. And if I were on a SC, I’d immediately disregard an applicant who seems like, for lack of better words, a self-satisfied and smug douche.
Today my Academia.edu page got a hit from Vatican City, where someone now has a copy of one of my articles. I wonder if they would be willing to hire a nice Jewish boy from New York.
4,546 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 4546 Newer› Newest»Looks like the two big Roman history gigs are out... I wonder if any ABDs are getting interviews at Princeton and if the "material culture" specification was really meaningful.
i've tried going through the w&m faculty list and can't seem to find this pindar specialist?
I think it is overwhelmingly likely that W&M already know whom they're hiring. But I think the poster above has misread the history of the searches there. Last year they were looking for a Hellenist from the beginning, for the job that's apparently being converted this year. I'm the person who posted earlier, interviewed with them last year, a Hellenist. And while they didn't hire me (obvs.), they were very kind, much more so than the vast, vast majority you'll encounter out there.
Confirmed, W&M had two job openings last year, so the jeer is unfounded. As for the TT job this year, the scuttlebutt I heard was that they really want a drama person (which also makes me feel marginally better about getting rejected, so I'm inclined to believe it), so perhaps it isn't just as simple as hiring the current VAP?
Of course, why they couldn't have just put their preference for a drama person in the job ad to begin with is another question entirely...
@10:45,
I don’t believe that they did. They show one VAP and he’s a Greek philologist.
Re W&M, it's not that hard to get this right. A simple look at their faculty page shows four VAPs and a lecturer. One VAP is a Roman historian, whom they presumably hired in the Roman history search last year, and the lecturer is named in the job wiki last year as the philologist they hired.
Also time to lay off the W&M shame...the Greek philologist TT position has been in the works for quite some time. They'll surely hire a VAP, but does that really surprise anyone?
@1:05: there are actually two VAPs at W&M currently, but one's referred to as a "Lecturer" for some reason.
ETA: oh, there are actually five VAPs at W&M at the moment. Huh.
@1:05,
I just checked. W&M currently has 4 VAPs. Hard to say when each was brought on, but one does claim to be a Roman historian. Whether or not she was already prior to last year’s ad, I can’t say.
...the one school that IS very deserving of a jeer, however, is St. Mary’s College of Maryland. Last year they had an ad out for a T-T Roman Historian, but hired an Iron Age Philisitine archaeologist who was a tenured Dept. chair elsewhere. ...That is wrong on quite a few levels.
It was a totally different specialty than the advertised hire. Which does make it seem it was an inside job.
you can easily chair a PROGRAM as a junior faculty. this is not the same thing as a DEPARTMENT chair, whose duties would seem to be much more formal and laborious and require some seniority
This is the posting for that St. Mary's historian job, right? https://www.h-net.org/jobs/job_display.php?id=53852
It doesn't say anything about Rome.
So when a classicist is named or even inferred, discussion gets shut down but now it's an "Iron Age Philistine archaeologist" and it's fair game. Can we get any more cliche as classicists? Then there's the entire notion that someone slightly misspeaks the cultural language of classics (chapter vs. book in Vergil) and they're an idiot, but somehow thinking that "Iron Age Philistine archaeologist" is a specific profession is okay. Good grief. Yeah, classicists are SO interdisciplinary and wise to the academic world. Please. Someone stab classics with a fork and put it out of its misery.
"Bible scholar"
True dat. I can name a half dozen Hellenists (in every sense) that have just happened to dig Philistine material culture at some point in their careers. As far as we know, this person has studied Latin since the age of 5. Yet somehow the philologist with next to zero training outside the languages almost always assumes they are imminently qualified to teach "civ" courses.
I read these comment and I feel like I'm watching a bunch of elementary or middle school students argue about what they know a discipline and study really is.
Get over yourselves. Learn more. Be more humble. So on and so forth (but seriously and not flippantly meant).
More of an argument for abolishing Classics. History doesn't suck like this.
Abolish what?
Exactly, let's stop abolishing at slavery. Let Classics live. Relax, find those other jobs, get that VAP position, then maybe you'll be in the inside candidate.
Servius here: yes- we did some moderation, in the name of maintaining a climate of kindness and generosity to each other.
Sending good vibes to all my people out there soldiering through the workday at a job that will end in a few months, checking the wiki and email every ten minutes, hoping there will be another job when this one ends. This is hard, but we're doing it.
OP regarding the St. Mary’s job here.
Let me formally apologize. There were around 15 T-T ancient history jobs posted last year. The St. Mary’s job, for which I did interview, was, contrary to my (flawed) memory, not specific to “Rome,” as many last year were. I believe that what has skewed my memory was that during that interview many questions were focused on teaching courses with regards to Rome—likely due to the fact that the retiring faculty member was a Roman historian.
Again, I want to humbly apologize for (as 4:49 points out) misremembering the formal job ad for St. Mary’s.
for how many years should I try without getting even one interview?
@11:31,
Have you been a VAP or had any additional teaching/research experience over the years?
11:31 here: no, I was an early ABD last year and I will graduate this year. I just don't know what should I expect. also, how does VAP recruitment work? I assume there are interviews for that too?
@11:31 PM. I'm in your same position and am terrified even though I'm in a very good place this year (fellowship, so 0 teaching this year). For people in my department, a few years ago two people who graduated in the Spring got VAPs very last minute (don't remember when), but it was obvious that finishing definitely helped them. Last year, a person who graduated in the Fall got three interviews (one at a very good place!) and did manage to get a nice one year. I hope this helps, even though it's not directly my experience. I'm happy to hear from other people about how they got VAPs.
Almost all of the positions listed on the classics wiki (TT, postdoc, VAP) will at least have an initial interview at the meetings or by skype or phone. Some postdocs and VAPs also have campus visits, though not all (and in the case of my current VAP position there wasn't even an interview). VAPs will continue to be advertised into June; there's often a surge beginning in March as people leave jobs to take other jobs and need to be replaced on short notice by their former institutions. These will mostly be advertised through the usual channels, though it pays to put the word out to people you know at other schools to say you're looking for work.
As for how long to stay on the market, that varies for everyone. My own rule is that I will keep looking until either a) I can no longer afford to financially, or b) my significant other finds a job s/he does not care to leave. I am in my fifth year on the market, and have been lucky enough to find work in the form of postdocs and VAPs every year, save for a six month period when I was unemployed and burned through all of my savings. If I find something this year then I'll keep at it; if I don't I'll have to consider alternative professions. I'm not happy about that prospect, but I don't have any choice in the matter.
@11:31,
It’s very rare for an ABD to land a T-T gig. So don’t worry just yet. I was ABD last year and had two T-T interviews. One first round and one campus visit. The campus visit was at a Community College the other was at the annual meeting for a small 4-yr college. Then, in the later spring I picked up a one-year appointment.
Most people will say that your ABD year is often a “practice” year. The time when you can begin to prepare your CV, cover letter, and teaching philosophy statements and (hopefully) have an interview or two to get your feet wet, so to speak. But, it’s not too common to have almost all search committees (SCs) just flat out ignore all ABD applicants. This makes sense, because if you have 100-200 applicants for a job and need to narrow it down to a clean 10-20 for first round interviews it makes sense to eliminate the ABDs first. Why? Well, often times ABDs may not have adequate teaching experience and at some schools (even phenomenal ones) they maybe even have zero actual teaching experience. Second, and this is something that my advisor told me, is the worry that an ABD may not finish in time.
The second thing that a SC will often use to filter out applicant is lower pedigree. So, depending on from where your PhD is from often is a MAJOR thing for the SC to weigh. It goes without saying that folks from the Ivies and the par-Ivies are safe. If your degree isn’t from a school that you OFTEN see amongst sitting faculty in your field at most institutions, that’s a major challenge for you.
Also, check with your advisor about placement rates for your school and at what point they often received T-T jobs. 9/10 the folks getting a T-T job have bounced around from 2-3 VAP jobs across the country. Those are the strongest candidates.
Not too *UNcommon*
Sorry for the typo
Who else got their heart broken by the wiki yesterday? Guess it was too much to dream that I could hold a TT job and live within a 200-mile radius of my family...
When ABDs do get jobs, pedigree (HYPS) and clout of the advisor are often decisive. This is not to say that these folks aren't going to prove themselves fantastic scholars. But ABDs by definition haven't done anything (even finished a dissertation) which means other factors have to propel them through the process.
If you're ABD, odds are the job you'll get this year hasn't even been advertised yet. Also, if you care at all about where you live you're in the wrong line of work.
11:31 again. I was honestly not expecting to land a TT position, I was merely hoping to get an interview or two. My pedigree is fine and the dissertation basically done, that's why I got my hopes up. And yes, 12:14, I did get my heart broken yesterday and the day before and the day before.
Does anyone know what happened regarding the Roman History/Numismatist position at Michigan last year?
I know that they had TWO positions open for Ancient History (one in Classics and the one 1/2 in History and 1/2 in their Museum). From the little bit of rumor I heard (not substantiated) was that Michigan offered the post to scholar ‘x’ yet ‘x’ used it as leverage at their home institution.
...any more clarification on this would be deeply appreciated
Yes one position had been offered to a scholar, who then deferred it, taking a VAP at an Ivy and then turning down the Michigan position for a TT position at the Ivy. This is how Classics works.
@1:26 PM this is how hiring works, especially outside of academia.
outside of academia there are jobs
In my "pedigree" institution, we've had a number of ABDs over the last 5 years land TT jobs. Some in R1s, some in LACs. Nearly all had around two journal articles / book chapters, big name supervisors, and had finished their dissertations. But in all instances a degree of luck came into play (top choice candidate dropped out), or the job they landed was the only interview / campus visit they got. Again, as has been said so much on here, it's really a crap shoot once you're being considered among the same level of qualified candidates. So if you don't win the lottery, having a VAP(s) or postdoc(s) under your belt, and/or a very well received publication, seems to increase your chances.
1:26 is mistaken about Michigan; what s/he is describing happened the year before with the ancient art/curatorial job, which is being re-advertised this year. The numismatics position, which was advertised last year, was accepted by a scholar whose home institution made a significant and ultimately successful counter offer. I understand that Michigan will re-advertise this position next year. As for the ancient history position, that was discussed earlier on this site by people who know more about it than I do.
Second, and this is something that my advisor told me, is the worry that an ABD may not finish in time.
Yes, exactly. If you are hired as a VAP and don't finish before the end of the summer, the embarrassed chair has to ask the dean to downgrade the VAP to a lecturer and hope that the dean doesn't just yank the position.
Why are SCs so skeptical about ABDs? I'm ABD. My dissertation is done and out with my committee, and has been since early October, but because of paperwork deadlines I have to defend in the spring semester instead of the fall. Did ABDs and their advisers lie for years about the 'doneness' of the dissertation, and SCs got burned for years, and now we have a custom of chucking out applications from ABDs, or at least viewing them with a lot of skepticism? I hope I don't sound too salty, I'm just curious about where the worry that an ABD might not finish in time comes from.
Most ABDs aren't done with their dissertations in the fall, obviously.
@2:34,
Can you share what institution was successful at keeping the scholar offered the Michigan numismatic position?
This isn't really worth a jeer, but when it is reported on the wiki that someone has received a rejection why is it that others feel the need to change that to "x2," "x3," etc.? Obviously, with each job getting around 100 applications, there will be around 90 rejections each time, so once we know that one person has been rejected then we all know that the committee has made its short list. You people are supposed to have PhD's or be close to obtaining one -- how can some of you not see that after the first rejection is posted on the wiki any indication that no, it was actually TWO people, no, wait THREE people, who didn't get interviews? I mean, there could not be a more useless piece of information in this universe than that six people received rejections from St. Olaf College and Rutgers.
Re SCs' reluctance to hire ABDs -- at my SLAC, if a SC wants to hire an ABD the Provost and President require us to write a memo describing, in great detail, precisely why that ABD was superior to any of the other applicants. NB: NOT just to the other people we interviewed at the convention or brought to campus, but to ANY of the other applicants. In other words, the admin. basically demands that we write up a multi-page report on the entire pool of applications we received and justify, in detail, why this one ABD rose to the top of the pile. The SC recommends a hire to the Provost and President, but they (the Pr. and Pr.) have to sign off on it, and can choose not to. So if an SC recommends an ABD, there remains the chance that the Prov. and Pres. might not agree with the SC's reasoning as recounted in the report, and might refuse to sign off on the hire (this did happen, once, though not to Classics). This raises the further possibility that by the time all this has happened, the second and third choices might have accepted jobs elsewhere. We are almost never allowed to bring out a fourth candidate, so the search would then be declared "failed."
When we arrange on campus visits, we have to "certify" our top six candidates, and we are not allowed to go further down the list than number 6, no matter what. A few years back a dept. here (not Classics, again, but I was the outside SC member so I know about this) had its two top-ranked candidates say "I've already accepted a job elsewhere." We invited nos. 3, 4, and 5. No. 4 also got another offer before the visit, and dropped out. No. 3 and 5 were not acceptable for various reasons -- really bad job talk in one, really awful teaching demo. in the other. We invited No. 6 and held our breath. S/he knocked it out of the park, did a super on-campus interview, was obviously going to be a great fit, and has been an excellent colleague here for some years now. But the point is, had No. 6 also said "I'm no longer available," or had s/he bombed the on-campus visit, we WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED to go to the person we had ranked No. 7. The admin. would have declared a "failed search" and we would have had to apply for the position again the next year.
Add to all that, that funding for new positions at SLACs is pretty cut-throat right now. Here, 16 depts. asked for new or replacement positions last year. Three, yes only three, were authorized. That means, of course, that no SC in its right mind would do *anything* to jeopardize the success of a search if it's lucky enough to get one authorized. Given the admin's animus against ABDs, an ABD would pretty much have to walk on water for an SC to risk trying to hire him/her.
I don't know how typical any of this is, but it's worth bearing in mind that SCs are very often bound in all sorts of ways by arcane institutional regulations and administrative preferences that applicants can have no knowledge of. I suspect that our administration is very far from the only one to look on ABDs with some disfavor.
Yes, a small part of me died yesterday.
I'm one of those from a non-Ivy etc. school. Great teaching experience, service to school and profession, good publication record for the amount of teaching I had. Great letters from established colleagues and former chair.
I fear that part of the application isn't even getting looked.
. . . at.
and did I mention I'm a great teacher?
450:
I believe the numismatist whom Michigan sought to hire ultimately chose to remain at the University of Tübingen.
@1:29, I'm pretty sure that outside of academia you don't ever get to defer a job for an entire year, especially to take another job.
It seems extremely weird to defer a TT job for a VAP. Is that really what happened?
7:05, thank you so much for that. I had no idea.
Gotta love that extreme outlier...
Left column records total number of AIA/SCS/AHA/CAA/CAMWS/MLA/Phone/Skype/etc. interviews : Right column counts total number of individuals with that number
0 : Lots
1 : 19
2 : 05
3 : 00
4 : 02
5 : 00
6 : 00
7 : 00
8 : 01
9 : 00
10 : 00
11 : 00
12 : 00
13 : 00
14 : 00
15 : 00
16 : 00
17 : 00
18 : 00
19 : 00
20 : 00
21 : 00
22 : 00
23 : 00
24 : 00
25 : 00
I'm glad that the Case Western job well matches their VAP's field.
Congrats to the person with 8 interview requests thus far. Wow.
If that person is here, please tell us your secret(s)
what do people know about vandy? have all invitations for interviews gone out? is it still considered a desirable job in light of the fact that the dept of classics is now a "program" of med. studies?
I suspect that the wiki is not an accurate count of interviews because not everyone who gets an interview will add it to the wiki (perhaps they don't know about it, perhaps they don't care). Hard to imagine that Vandy only shortlisted 2 people or whatever.
Isn't every job desirable these days? It sucks, but if Vandy was the only job offered to me, I know I'd take it. I'd feel like I have to.
@9:43
Yes, very desirable. Vanderbilt is a great school. This could prove to be an interesting program (less so, of course, as I was not shortlisted)
sure vandy is dysfunctional, but nashville is nice, smart students, good salaries. is it better than many TT positions and all VAPs? yes? is it 'good'? i dunno.
*yes.
it is cool to do med studies but PLEASE spare us a new phd program. PARCE DOMINE POPULO TUO.
or is it just an m.a. program?
Dr. Karen Kelsky (aka The Professor Is In) is collecting anonymous stories of sexual harassment in academia here:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeqWdpDxVRc-i8OiiClJPluIpjMlM41aUlU2E0rrQ4br_rQmA/viewform
I filled it out, and I know that this applies to at least some of the rest of you, unfortunately.
@10:37am I think it might be even more useful to contribute to the new Eidolon series about sexual harassment in our field: https://eidolon.pub/the-lost-library-dcac1adeb281
I would be very curious who got shortlisted for the Vanderbilt position in terms of their research. The job ad sounded pretty broad. I wanted it for sure.
Let me try to provide some better clarity about the various Michigan jobs from the past few years, with the caveat that I am not at Michigan and that this information includes some hearsay and speculation:
AY 2015-16: An ancient art/curatorial position was advertised this year. The successful candidate deferred for a year in order to take a visiting 1-year position at Yale. I was told by some who knows this candidate personally that this was because of a spouse at Yale. The following year the successful candidate received a permanent appointment at Yale.
AY 2016-17: Two jobs were advertised this year -- Roman history and classics/numismatics curator. The historian position was discussed here a few months back; apparently the successful candidate deferred for some reason. The successful candidate for the numismatics position ultimately chose to remain in Tübingen.
AY 2017-18: The ancient art/curatorial position from AY 2015-16 is being advertised a second time.
AY 2018-19: I am told that Michigan plans to re-advertise the classics/numismatics position next year.
@11:45 actually, the successful candidate in 2015-16 for the ancient art/curatorial position at Michigan in 2015-16 TURNED down the position to leave academia entirely. The candidate who eventually turned down the position for Yale was the alternate.
Thanks for all the clarity on Michigan!
Everyone, be gentle on each other. Shit happens. People get sick, get married, get divorced, get their proposals rejected, have children, and a million other things. Cut your colleagues some slack.
Famae volent indeed: the Yale hire was not related to a spouse, which was another candidate. How many times is this going to be discussed?
Shit does happen. People also end up unemployed because they can't take post-docs/VAPs due to diss. not being ready in March of the year they are applying. So when someone gets a TT job and CANT finish, those who are either unemployed or in a heavier teaching job and DO finish (say in August or September) are resentful. We should all cut each other slack, but the system doesn't cut us any. Except when it does.
FWIW, I have an interview with Vanderbilt but saw no reason to update the counter. (I assume invitations generally go out on the same day and that only about a quarter of candidates update the wiki, since we know most longlists cover 10-12 people.) My research is on Greek history and archaeology, and I think the program they're building there sounds great.
Mediterranean Studies "broadly defined" and "studying and teaching the ancient world in comparative perspective across cultures, regions, and periods" sound great. I just hope to God they hire someone that does more than the Persian Wars. I'm skeptical it will mean more than hiring a lecturer that teaches Arabic down the road if the same ole folks are in charge...good luck to all at any rate.
The guy running the program is in archaeology, so material culture is probably a good thing from Vandy's perspective.
He's probably not running the search, however, as director of the program. I'm guessing it's run by one of the more "classically-defined" classicists (yeah, it's pretty redundant). Call me a skeptic, but no matter how well-intentioned classicists might be to offer more than lip service to Mediterranean Studies, we aeither can't help ourselves or don't know enough to hire Mediterraneanists as defined by outside disciplines. Vanderbilt will almost invariably hire a Hellenist that dabbles in "Orientalism."
There is only one other tenured classicist working in the dept, as I understand it (and no junior TT faculty). So perhaps it is that person chairing the search, or perhaps someone from another dept.
No matter how good their hire's Greek might be, they had better not choose an "Iron Age Philistine" or there be pitchforks and torches at the ready judging by this forum...because it's more important to hire one more true blue Hellenist out of a pool of hundreds of underemployed Hellenists so we can add to hundreds of ladder track Hellenists already out there rather than bringing in an uncommon perspective. B/c god knows your dissertation-cum-tenure-book on Homer's left testicle will revolutionize classics and academia. So how are we confining ourselves to oblivion again?
Servii, 12/3 at 12:25 appears to be describing a specific interview and person that Michigan hired; surely off-base per board rules.
servius here: @ 11.51, yes-- it is off-base, and has been removed.
@ 10:02,
You’re not 100% wrong but you’re also taking a rather obtuse approach to it.
Yes, we should broaden our horizons as classicists, not doubt (e.g., do we REALLY need any more dissertations or monographs on the Aeneid?). But... to think that someone whose speciality happens to be only tangentially related is a good fit in account of “thinking outside the box” can be just as damaging as maintains a hyper-narrow focus as to who may be qualified. For example, you *could* hire a vascular surgeon to fill an opening as a proctologist, arguing that “well, look, obviusojly the vascular surgeon went to med school and is capable of handling any field of medicine since they received board training.” But, is that an “appropriate” hire? Likely no. ...just the same, folks who are Latin philologists should *only* apply for what they are actually trained for—Latin philology. As such, to hire someone who has some kind of exotic speciality (e.g., archaeology of Caledonian Britain focusing on burial practices) really shouldn’t be hired (or even apply to for that matter) a position as a Roman historian. Yes, they can surely get by and be ok at it (as a vascular surgeon working as a proctologist could also), but let’s not make the silly mis-step of thinking that different is better.
When a school like Vand. has an opening for a a Hellenist, and especially since they’re a SMALL Dept, it makes far more sense to hire a traditional Hellenist rather than an academic curiousity that may be trending at the moment.
Forgive my typos—using phone not computer ^^
@12:08 what is a "traditional Hellenist" these days and according to what criteria? it strikes me that most Greek "philologists" in the US right now should probably more accurately be described as doing cultural studies via texts
Erm, I know this isn't going to go down well, but let me suggest that the ill effects of hiring an archaeologist to teach history might be less severe than hiring a vascular surgeon to perform colorectal procedures.
(1) Humanities training is more flexible than medical training. (2) Departmental needs in the humanities are more flexible than medical specialist needs in a hospital. (3) I don't recall ever hearing that somebody died by being taught history by an archaeologist.
*Full disclosure: I am neither Caledonian archaeologist nor Roman historian (nor a surgeon of any kind). But I do find all this boundary maintenance a little tiresome.
@12:33 agreed!
12:08 here..
12:27: By traditional Hellenist, I mean one whose focus is textual and whose interests are the “greatest hits” of the Greek world (Homer, Thucydides, Sophocles, etc..).
12:33: it wasn’t a perfect analogy, but an analogy nonetheless. The takeaway is that IMO we ought to stop the deliberate blurring of lines all in the name of being progressive. Of course, each person will have their own limits as to what they see as an appropriate amount of blurring.
Spoken as a person who unwittingly (or perhaps knowingly) realizes that the present artificial boundaries that we internally keep in classics are inherently damaging to how we are perceived by the greater academic world (i.e. the elitist fact that our "classics" and "ancient history" are almost exclusively Greco-Roman classics and ancient history - make classics great again, and all that). Perhaps you justify it by saying it pragmatically preserves the system - inertial rationalization. I would be more open to allowing us down this road to irrelevance and destruction, but I'm particularly distraught by the perceived intent of the Vanderbilt ad, and presumably its new program. I'm guessing that this was an action "forced" upon the classicists at Vanderbilt by non-classicists with some good intentions and hopes that some form of classics will survive at their institution. If it ends up being business as usual, I fear that these outsiders will give up on classics as a lost cause as many other institutions have now done or will do. The choice is ours and we're failing miserably, wittingly or unwittingly. The end will come fast regardless of how many Facebook petitions are made.
Yep, read the Vanderbilt ad, dude.
Institution Name
Vanderbilt University
Position Rank
Assistant Professor
Area of Specialty
Ancient Near East, Cultural History, Early Christianity, Early Islam, Early Medieval Studies, Interdisciplinary Studies, Judaism, Mediterranean Studies, Philosophy, Religion
Additional Desirable Specialties
InterdisciplinaryStudies
GenderStudies
DigitalHumanities
AncientScience/Medicine
AncientPhilosophy
ClassicalArchaeology
ClassicalArtHistory
Mythology
ClassicalReception
AncientReligion
LateAntiquity
This position is
Approved/Definite
Our institution plans to conduct interviews at the Annual Meeting
No
Application Deadline
November 15, 2017
Tenure-track Assistant Professor
Nashville, TN
Open Date: Oct 5, 2017
Close Date: Nov 15, 2017
The Program in Classical and Mediterranean Studies invites applications for a tenure-track Assistant Professor position starting fall 2018.
We seek an outstanding researcher and teacher of the ancient Greek world broadly defined. We welcome applications from scholars in related fields (history, material culture, language and literature, philosophy, religion) whose work interrogates or challenges traditional disciplinary boundaries. Competitive candidates are expected to be able to contribute across the curriculum by teaching Greek at all levels as well as courses in Mediterranean Studies and by developing courses in their own area of specialization. The successful candidate will enhance the growing, energetic community of a new program dedicated to studying and teaching the ancient world in comparative perspective across cultures, regions, and periods (https://as.vanderbilt.edu/classics/).
Qualifications: Ph.D. in hand by August 16, 2018, teaching experience, and evidence of professional achievement. Dossiers should include a cover letter that addresses research interests, scholarship, and teaching; a curriculum vitae; three letters of recommendation; and a writing sample (dissertation chapter, published paper, conference presentation) no more than 20 pages. Candidates should submit materials to http://apply.interfolio.com/45661 no later than November 15, 2017.
Yep, I see little hint that this was meant to be a "traditional Hellenist, I mean one whose focus is textual and whose interests are the “greatest hits” of the Greek world (Homer, Thucydides, Sophocles, etc..)." Yes, the classicists were allowed to stick in the old "teach Greek at all levels", but I'm betting the non-classicists didn't realize this is our disciplinary code for "non traditional Hellensits as defined internally by us need not apply." It might take years for them to realize once a traditional Hellenist is almost certainly hired, but we will only get so many chances at this and it's becoming clear, at least in my eyes, that our time is running out at all but the most elite institutions.
I'm curious about the academic background of those arguing that, essentially, we should all pick a lane and stick to it. Are you coming from an R1/Ivy perspective? Here are a few points from someone with experience at SLACs and an R1:
1) Small departments (2-4 people) need people who can teach in multiple areas. They might advertise a position for a Hellenist because they don't currently have anyone who wants to teach advanced Greek, but they might only have enough students to fill such a course once every other year. In this circumstance it makes perfect sense to me that they might also be interested in candidates whose primary specialty is not Greek philology, but archaeology/history, as well as those candidates who make use of Latin and Greek texts equally in their research, provided that they can demonstrate that they would be able to handle a class on Thucydides or Plato every once in a while. In the meantime they might be teaching mostly Latin classes, as well as courses on myth, history, gender and sexuality or whatever else.
2) A 200-level history class is not that hard to teach if you have any sort of broad training in Classics. A graduate-level history seminar is a different matter. If the program does not offer graduate classes, then they don't necessarily need someone who was trained specifically as a historian.
3) Specialties change over time. Someone might be hired as a Latinist and find themselves working primarily on Greek texts, or myth, or some aspect of history a decade or two later. A dissertation topic that seems too niche or a specialty that seems too trendy might be offset by an extensive teaching record and by conference presentations in a variety of other areas. Such a candidate might be more likely to handle the changing times and to incorporate new approaches in their scholarship and teaching as time goes on.
4) It's okay to be very narrow or very broad. We need both kinds of scholars in the field. The 'very narrow' people seem to me to be better suited to R1s and Ivies; the 'very broad' seem better suited for everything else.
Is the job market in classics actually any worse than other area or literary studies?
Yep, I'm a Greek historian in a history department that served on a SC last year for our small classics department (<5). We would be considered R1 if not even quite as elite as Vandy. I was gobsmacked by not only how many "left testicle of Homer" dissertations were out there, but also by the fact they were often from University of Relatively Obscure State School. WTF, people? To my utter embarrassment, the SC even invited one of these University of Nondescript State School alums to campus. This is when I gave up hope on the stand alone status of our classics department, which has been under threat for some time.
Yes, the fundamental issue is that these Ph.D. programs even exist, but it's compounded by the fact that the faculty is staffed by Harvard, Berkeley, Princeton, etc. Ph.Ds that don't know how else to advice other than in the left-testicle-of-Homer style they produced and learned. Unfortunately, they ARE in "Kansas" evermore...
@2:42, I might be missing something, but why exactly did it embarrass you that someone from a "relatively obscure state school" was brought to campus?
my dissertation breaks new ground by suggesting that Homer, in fact, only had a RIGHT testicle
No, that's Hitler. Easy mistake to make.
Does classics even have any testicles left? I was under the assumptions we were just cloning without genetic diversity?
@2.59. And Sulla (apparently)
and lance armstrong
And this guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_GK9ZTTy_o
(Well, a 50% chance it was the left one taken.)
I see that Haverford has sent out interview invitations--I haven't received one, nor have I received a rejection. What do I make of this?!
@2:23
I have taught everything and grown programs at a SLAC and that didn't get me any interviews to any of the recent SLAC jobs. Rather testicular Homerists seemed to do well.
@6:06 - It means they are not interviewing you. You may or may not ever receive a rejection.
@6:26
I didn't get any word from Haverford either, I'm sure that means there will be no rejection email until March. Which is really when you need it of course . . .
Well. Quite a few schools who claim that they will hold interviews at the SCS/AIA apparently haven’t contacted anybody.
I understand that some will A) notify late or that B) it’s poasible that wiki members weren’t among the lucky few, but it seems like far too many are still unaccounted for.
@7:40
Yes, and it's particularly irritating for those of us who are waiting to find out whether we need to book flights and a hotel.
anybody knows anything about USC?
If the rumor I heard about USC is correct, then none of us has a chance at that job (though, if I may note the one silver lining, it would mean an even better job would probably be opening up elsewhere a year or two from now).
can you say a little more about this rumor?
@7:40 I think most will do so by mid-December, e.g. Holy Cross' (helpful) acknowledgement email gave mid-December as the time for interview notification.
a job opening up at princeton u mean?
On the flip side, someone apparently received a rejection from McMaster but I received neither a rejection nor an interview request. Has anyone gotten an interview notification from McM? If so, please share on the wiki and put the rest of us out of our misery!
I think 7:40 PM is pointing out that Friday was the (supposed) deadline for schools to notify the SCS of their shortlists in order to be guaranteed interview slots at the meeting. Typically, this deadline is pretty soft. I think we'll be seeing movement up until mid-December or so. And of course Case and Bard are planning to interview at the meeting and their deadlines are still upcoming.
@8:11 "(though, if I may note the one silver lining, it would mean an even better job would probably be opening up elsewhere a year or two from now)."
This doesn't even make any sense, what are you talking about?
Et tu, Indiana? Numquid sum expers literarum latinarum?
Anon. 8:11 here.
The reason I did not write more is that to do so would come close to violating FV's rule about not discussing individuals in our field. I decided to post my comment so that fellow applicants to USC would know that they should dampen their expectations of getting the job, as I have. Not give up, but dampen. Consider it a public service. ("The more you know...")
To which I will only add that my "silver lining" comment made perfect sense, but only if one solves the riddle. Which I will not be the one to do.
@9:16. I got one, too. (Sigh.) Mine said "the committee has now almost completed its short-list…", which implies that they're letting us off the hook before the final list is made, which I suppose has to come before actual invites are made.
@9:54, you made perfect sense to me. We all know who USC is going to poach.
9:33: The rumor about USC is that someone at a better institution will (allegedly) be taking up the job, thus opening up a position (perhaps) at said better institution. What don't you understand?
really?! how do you all get this kind of intel???
'Intel' is too strong a word. These are good guesses, based on knowledge of specific individuals at specific institutions. If you know the individuals in question, or if you know someone who knows them, then you can form a theory about what USC is trying to do. It is no more than a theory, yet it is fairly clear that more than one person has formulated it. On the whole I would say that an open-rank generalist position at USC is a long shot for nearly any candidate anyway, so as with any job it's best not to get one's hopes up, regardless of the rumors floating around.
Tricks of the trade, my lad.
Gossip.
Apparently none of the USC hires last year actually started working there this Fall. They all had fellowships elsewhere.
@8:42 I'm not sure I follow... what does that mean for applicants for the open position this year?
Anyone who has been paying attention to USC's hiring practices over the last five years knows that the department has a spaghetti-against-the-wall approach. Almost every position begins with invitations to a select group of candidates to apply, and you can reasonably assume that USC (along with most of the other jobs you're applying to) has asked a few candidates to apply. That doesn't mean the position is closed or rigged. This rumor is nonsense.
There is a late TT Latin job coming out this week:
https://academicjobsonline.org/ajo/jobs/10583
Quick note as news of VAP openings reaches us: AVOID Trinity College (Hartford, CT). Bad record of treatment of visitors, toxic dept.
@11:11 i've heard to the contrary...
I'm sure Trinity is less toxic than unemployment
@11:26 the dept has been a mess for a long time and have heard recent accounts of unreprimanded bullying by tt faculty, etc
Ah, to have choices about which toxic line of academia to be in!
Hint: the entire field is abusive.
Every department I've been associated with or have extensive knowledge about has been repeatedly described to me by theoretically reliable sources as dysfunctional. It's never been remotely true. Bullying by TT faculty is bad, whatever it means exactly, and rumors about such things deserve to be taken seriously.
But no one should listen to rumors about dysfunction, etc., from people who are not at the institution.
@1:51 well said!
Such a blanket statement is not helpful. As I know from personal experience, one should use one's judgment when reading these claims about dysfunctionality, evaluating what is said and how well informed the poster seems to be, and also why it might have been said, and then deciding whether to believe it. FV has a history of a lot of false rumors, but there have also been many true ones, including some painfully true ones concerning certain departments and how they were treating junior faculty (and, in at least one prominent case, still are).
@11:11, is there a VAP position advertised at Trinity College or are your remarks in case a position arises?
Yeah, there's not much logic to "dysfunctionality/abuse can only be true if it's disclosed from a person at said institution" in a forum that's anonymous.
1:51 here. I was not talking (just) about FV. These are things people say in real life too. My point is that, especially among graduate students but also faculty, there is a lot of gossip about how various departments are and that gossip is, in my experience, rarely true. I no longer pay attention when I am told, let alone read on here, that Dept X is "dysfunctional"--I don't know what it's even supposed to mean, and it has never been true when said about departments of which I have knowledge.
I would say that anonymous and vague claims like "toxic department" merit no attention from anyone. Rumors or reports about specific bad conduct are a different story, and should be taken seriously. I could have been clearer.
You are all, of course, free to avoid applying to departments based on reported dysfunction, but I would recommend against it. :)
@5:34, sure, that makes sense. But having come from a highly dysfunctional and toxic department, but not at liberty to discuss the hows or whys without revealing where it is and possibly jeopardizing one's career, doesn't mean that it should be dismissed or labeled untrue. Your situation is not the same for everyone. Some places really are terrible places to be a student and/or to work.
That being said, I wouldn't recommend letting a post such as the above re; Trinity (or similar complaints made in public elsewhere) stop one from applying there, were there actually a VAP posting.
Does anyone know what holy cross's timeline for first round decisions is? I heard they sent out an email about it?
Hear, hear @6:41
@5:34 grad students etc are among the most marginalized at these institutions and thus must be looked to for reports about abuse and as gauges for progressive change. Try being a less dismissive of the very real systemic abuse that occurs in academe.
What some people don't get, too, is that what is a terribly abusive institution for one person may be a joyous place for another person. For every one person who is ignored, abused, and dismissed, there's another who is promoted, recommended, and lauded, and sometimes within the same institution, the same advisor, etc. Yet another reason to not dismiss rumors so readily - particularly when the reports come from grad students and contingent faculty, who otherwise are so often lacking a voice and representation.
re: Haverford (cf above), my impression is that they're likely to hire their internal candidate
@6:50pm - Did you not get the email? It said mid-December.
@6:41, you make fair points. A related issue we haven't yet dealt with: people who have been or still are complicit in keeping harassers in their jobs. Some of the complicit are extremely senior, or very powerful. Perhaps a known harasser is gone from a given department, but those who kept him/her in place and allowed him/her to misbehave may still be in positions of authority. Should one hesitate to take a job at such a school? Is the market such that nobody has the luxury of considering that factor? Do you just sign on the dotted line and hope it doesn't happen to you? These are tough choices, perhaps especially for anyone who has already been traumatised by that kind of treatment in the past.
5:34 here. I just want to clarify (again) that I am not talking about someone with knowledge of a situation or a person or whatever sharing that information. I am talking about the very vague rumors of "dysfunction" or "toxicity" that go around, and seem (in my experience) to have no basis in reality. However, as 6:41 and 7:45 point out, it's also very much the case that people have different experiences. Mine (and in particular, I will say, as a male) at these places is not the same as everyone else's. I hadn't considered that in this context, and perhaps those rumors that never seemed to have any truth were all too accurate for others. Thanks for the discussion.
@11:27 and @12:55, @6:41/@7:45 here, and just wanted to say thanks as well - you both make good points. These are discussions that I hope we'll continue to have, including at the SCS this year.
@11.27. This is a tough one. Let me tell you a story that I heard when I was just appointed twenty years ago. There was a department (not Classics, thank gods!) that had a known 'lech' whose m.o. was to have his classes scheduled late in the afternoon and then female undergrads would be invited to his office under some pretense, where there would be (as far as I understand) seduction, harassment, or assault in some combination. His young female (untenured) colleagues got wind of this and set up a rota so that he was never in the department alone, and if a female student was in his office they would find some excuse for one or more of them to come to his office to get the key for x or advice about y. From the description I heard (second-hand, admittedly), they interrupted dozens of assaults over several years. Once they got tenure, they made a big enough stink that he was forced to retire. But here for me in raising the question of colleagues' complicity. What they did was to my way of thinking brave and praiseworthy. But from some points of view, similar actions could be treated as complicity. The grad student who warns a younger colleague to make sure only to visit Professor Lechorous in the mornings and to prepare an excuse to leave if he sits next to you rather than on the other side of the desk.
10:28 continuing. (Sorry, I hit submit before completing my thought.) Could that not be treated as complicity?
Throughout my BA, Post-Bac, MA, and PhD I’ve been at 4 different schools and have interacted with 4 different Classics Depts and 4 different History Depts (I do ancient history). What I can say if my experience is that ALL History Depts were phenomenal. The faculty got along with one another, we’re involved in collaborative projects across various disciplines and often worked (happily) with other Depts.
...But. ALL 4 Classics Depts were disasters. Now, to be clear, 2 schools were large flagship state Universities, one a premier Ivy, and one an elite state university that often ranks higher than most Ivies. ..I mention his to underscore that variety exists regarding all aspects of the faculty and admin. At one Classics Dept they hated each other so much that Prof ‘x’ would flat-out go on rants about how Prof ‘y’ is awful and how they (personally !!) are to blame for our class being locked—arguing that Prof ‘y’ is hiding somewhere laughing at us all. Yes. This really happened all the time there. At another school, Prof ‘z’ would be caught having sex with a grad student in his office in the middle of the day and see no repurcussions since it was “consensual.” That same Prof would also show up to class drunk and even passed out mid lecture on occasion. Again, no repercussion since Dr. Amazing-Latin-Philologist is too important to the Dept. And the third school, the hatred and factioning was so pronounced that even the most disinterested undergrads took notice. At school 4, the ENTIRE Dept, yes, all ca. 20 of the field’s most prestigious current scholars, held a meeting to discuss how to bury a massive sexual scandal that traces back for decades all because they didn’t want prospective grad students or other academics to think poorly of the school. As such, somehow, the story was kept out of local news and was even kept out of the student newspaper. Current grad students know all about it, but everyone has decided to never talk about it since the reverberations could really hurt junior scholars who studied under this Prof and who may be still using them to write letters for them. He silently retired and that’s (essentially) that.
Now, I’m not saying that ALL Classics Depts are particularly prone to this kind of thing, but in my personal experience such seems to be a warrantable stance. There does seem, to me, to be some kind of systemic problem with Classics that’s much broader than and runs much deeper than others.
Sad stuff.
Quick Poll:
How many people here who have received an email request for an interview saw activity on their Academia page in then days/weeks prior?
What I’m wondering is if a lack of visits from cities that correspond with my apps is indicative of not being looked at. Anyone here get an interview request from a school that never looked at your Academia page??
@ 12:01, it's about 50/50. For some schools, I see hits on my page about 1-2 weeks before interview requests. For others, I have 0 hits from the area and then get an interview. I've also had it go the other way-get hits from a school I've applied to and then, no interview. I think it's less reliable an indicator than I would like it to be.
Anon. 12:01,
I have wondered the exact same thing, but since I have no interviews so far I can't provide useful information regarding your question. Though at least I do know that at none of these schools have search committee members been devouring my posted work like a plague of locusts and then deciding NOT to interview me.
Some people will look you up on academia.edu, some won't. And in my experience, hits do not necessarily translate to interviews or campus visits. A search led by a younger more tech savvy professor might look everyone up on social media, other won't.
Still, I think it is important to have a social media presence and a carefully curated page, either institutional or on a site like academia. Because it is one way that SCs will try to learn more about you (also, careful on Facebook, as they might learn more about you than you might wish them to know).
On disfunction at Classics departments: I think they have some aspects that may make them more prone to disfunction. They tend to be small, sometimes claustrobically so, and as such interpersonal gripes are magnified. Also, since most of Classics, aside from archeology and history involves literary studies, people can turn subjective disagreements about aesthetics into lifelong professional grudges. The fact that literary studies is heavily theorized also means that there are a lot of arbitrary fault lines based on who you favorite French theorist from the 1970s happens to be. Finally, in history departments few people share the same terrain: one person does Medieval monasteries, another does the Trans-Atlantic trade, and so no one is really in a position to critique anyone else. Everyone in classics has basically the same Baileywick of texts and period, which means they are in a position to vehemently disagree. And many departments have had sex scandals of late, but Classics departments are not immune.
@10:28, 11:27 here. I agree those are admirable actions; I wouldn't have called it complicit behavior, at least on my scale. I'm thinking of the deans, department chairs, heads of divisions who knew people like Geoff Marcy (Berkeley, astronomy) or Rohit Varma (USC, medical dean) were acting as they did, and did nothing for years. I understand that the behavior of a certain classicist at an east coast school was known in the administration -- but they did nothing. I recently learned that a harassing visitor in my own doctoral department years ago was known to the faculty and chair at the time, and they did nothing. It's all about power. People in positions of power should be held responsible when they know and don't act. People junior to harassers can't reasonably be expected to carry the can. Especially when their elders are too cowardly or self-serving to do so.
I think after there's been a story about it in the New York Times it's okay to say Harris's name.
We never used the name of a notoriously cruel individual who was busted for something far more heinous a few years back, as I recall.
To me this is different from our naming a colleague who has opted to become a public figure (such as Mary Beard).
12:42 here. I briefly hesitated to name Marcy and Varma, but both have been extensively covered in major news outlets, and both cases have been resolved, accompanied by admission of wrongdoing. I understand the east-coast case is still pending? is that right? I've lost track of where it is.
The person in question has been removed from teaching, as was also reported in NYT a few weeks later, but I believe that there might still be an internal investigation going on. I do not believe there has been a public finding of guilt or admission of guilt (though, of course, actions can sometimes take the place of words).
Did anyone hear from Randolph-Macon yet? Or have any information on that one?
I don't think we need to tiptoe around the fact that William Harris was accused of sexual harassment of a student and has stepped down from his position at Columbia. It's widely reported and factual.
11:55 here...
@3:19 and 5:35,
The scholar I’m referring to wasn’t Harris. The scholar I’m referring to had crimes that involved young boys.
So far as seeing Academia.edu as a barometer of sorts, I think that previous comments are spot on that younger and more tech savvy SC members likely use it.
What’s odd for me is that over the last week I’ve been visited by the same faculty member at the same school countless times. But, the city doesn’t make any sense to me (West Palm Beach, FL). I’ve applied to zero jobs in FL or the south for that matter. It may be possible that a SC member is on sabbatical or, more likely, it’s someone not associated with any SC.
...In the end, I think Academia.edu will eventually be an accurate barometer. But not for another 10-15 years or so, when many SCs are made up of profs from our generation.
@7:33, I've been visited by someone from West Palm Beach multiple times in the last month or so, too! It makes no sense; I haven't applied to any jobs in that region, don't know anyone there, and have no other connections to that part of Florida.
Academia.edu's Analytics page can be a weird place. Case in point, seven times in the past 48 hours someone in Velleneuve, France has looked at an article of mine, finding it via Wikipedia. That same article was looked at twice more in the past few hours by someone only identified as being in France, but most likely the same person, since he/she likewise found it through Wikipedia. Why he/she can't just download it once and for all is beyond me.
And for what it's worth, I also got a hit from West Palm Beach a bit over a week ago, and likewise didn't apply to anything there.
@6:42 PM
Has this person been reported beyond the department?
@8:40, if the person in question is who I think it is, he is currently incarcerated in a federal institution, so yes, it's been reported beyond the department.
11:55 again,
@8:40, he was in phase retirement when he was officially charged. The Dept was concerned with protecting its reputation and (understandably) the future of recent PhDs and soon-to-be PhDs connected with him.
Even when I search his name and a few other key words all that’s out there is a 1/2 paragraph remark in a newspaper 2-3 hours away. Very odd. Nobody knows where he is now, whether incarcerated or not. It was covered up by the Dept unbelievably well. The odd thing is, when you do happen to discuss it with faculty or the older grad students they all immediately get nervous and look around and then whisper about it, al while trying to brush it off, and you always hear them say “such a nice guy, and it’s just so sad and tragic.
So, it seems as if it’s a fairly safe assumption that Professor “West Palm Beach” is SC member checking out applicants whilst on holiday in south Florida.
Speaking of which, I don’t but, are any other of the West-Palm-Beach-viewed folks paying members of Academia.edu and, therefore, able to see the institution that the viewer is associated with?? For me it’s blurred out.
I refuse to believe there is anyone out there stupid or narcissistic enough to pay academia.edu a single red cent.
Also, the AI with an IP address in West Palm Beach is laughing its ass off at all of you.
West Palm Beach is, according to my Academia account, an undergraduate finance major at Vanderbilt.
Search committee member here. Some of us do know about VPNs, you know.
Um, well, considering I gave up on the job market this year, if this person (not) in West Palm Beach wants to give me a job without me even applying, I'm all ears!
Servii here: we agree that the 'people and events in a major national newspaper' line is a good one to follow in this conversation. We'll monitor and see if we should adjust. But, we want to point people to Eidolon's 'Philomela’s Tapestry' project, which will (hopefully) have more reach in our disciplines than FV-based whisper campaigns would: https://eidolon.pub/the-lost-library-dcac1adeb281
apparently (some) USC invites have gone out... what are the odds that they will be inviting more candidates today?
Some updated general data to share with students who say they want to go to graduate school. According to self-reported data, a median of 40% of students who enter PhD programs complete them: https://www.humanitiesindicators.org/content/indicatordoc.aspx?i=51.
If we imagine that 1/3 of those who complete actually get a TT job, then 13% of those who start a PhD program end up as tenured professors.
@5:48, quite possibly your numbers are correct. The difficulty is that people drop out all along the way, for reasons that have nothing to do with the job market. People in my own department left because of illness of self, or spouse; desire to live only in one area; growing interest in another field; moving to more lucrative and more flexible fields for the 'trailing spouse'. An archaeologist decided he didn't like working in the summer in hot countries. A philologist decided he liked both the tech industry and living on the west coast. All these are perfectly respectable reasons. A better message to the very young is both that the job market is tough and also that their interests may change as they grow, and maybe professorship is not the best match for unrelated reasons.
How do interviews appear on the SCS calendar? Like will it just appear on the page where I click 'my calendar'? Or do I need to click into those timeslots?
Re: Academia.edu:
I am not currently on a search committee, but have served on several recently. We were advised by HR not to google candidates because it could create unfair advantages or disadvantages (mostly disadvantage, I think: is this the same Joanna Smith whose ex posted revenge porn? but also think things like political activity). I think that they were concerned about both lawsuits and also the idea that googling tends to penalize women and underrepresented minorities more than others and therefore is contrary to promoting diversity. The basic idea was: judge the candidates by their applications, not by what you find on the internet. Obviously Academia is not a place where you would find this kind of potentially problematic information, but I followed HR and didn't look candidates up on the internet at all. So if you're not getting any Academia hits, it may not be just the age of the SC members; it may also be that the SC has been told not to look up information about candidates online.
As a younger person on an SC, I might google people, but academia is the very last place I'd go, since they might well know I'd been there!!
That said, when I was on the market, getting academia hits was an indicator that there was a pretty good chance (say, 70%) I'd get interviewed. But remember, just because one person on the SC finds you interesting, that doesn't mean the others will. I had my heart broken a few times when I got hits that did not turn into anything else.
I don't have an academia.edu account for philosophical reasons (including the ones that Sarah Bond outlines here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/drsarahbond/2017/01/23/dear-scholars-delete-your-account-at-academia-edu/#3498b02d628d), so I'm glad to hear that not all SCs use them to judge candidates.
At this point in my career I have so little respect for HR departments, both from personal experience and anecdotal, that if ever I serve on a search committee I will do what I believe to be best for the department, not what the technocrats tell me to do or not do.
That Sarah Bond column was a misguided one written by someone who already was in a tenure-track position AND has her own platforms for self-promotion, and therefore didn't take into account why people like us should most definitely have Academia.edu accounts.
Anyone without a tenure-track position who listens to her and therefore does not use the site both to follow colleagues and post one's work, to be blunt, is being foolish. Not to mention gullible, being persuaded to adopt the lofty principles of Bond's piece without thinking of the potentially lost opportunities to benefit one's career over both the short and long term.
You can call me foolish and gullible for sticking to my principles, and I can call you foolish and gullible for freely offering your labor to a shady for-profit entity. I guess we're even.
Anon. 12:29:
Jeez. In case you hadn't noticed, they are offering all my freely given work freely to others. So what's the problem? They had an idea for a needed service and developed it, and have done an excellent job with it (useful features, no bugs, intuitive and simple design), and therefore have the perfect right to try to recoup their initial investment and then make a profit. That's how things work in America: someone has a good idea, raises the capital, and tries to make a go of it. And there's nothing shady about them -- perhaps some questionable attempts to make money a year or two ago that were abandoned, but as a current user of their site there is nothing untoward going on. Scholarship is freely shared, and evidently the Academia.edu people are making some amount of money through ad revenue (nothing wrong with that) and getting some percentage of users to pay for their premium service (which ideally would be part of the free service, but I can live without it, and am not going to stomp off to some other site over this).
I've hardly been googled this fall and have two interviews lined up....are people maybe just not googling as much as we thought?
I appreciate the various articles for dumping your academia.edu account, but three thoughts:
1) Those in contingent positions don't really have the luxury of limiting our exposure. Faculty web pages are often subpar; grad student pages even less so.
2) How does academia.edu really profit from me posting just the titles of my articles?
3) How is academia.edu's approach any different than the publisher who claims copyright and ownership of my article, does not allow me to share it electronically, and profits from journal subscriptions and book sales without paying me any kind of royalties?
Re: abuse and the fact that some places where people experience abuse are also places that are "joyous" for others: abusers usually get away with abuse by being selective about those whom they abuse. Thus, they're likely to treat *most* people well, and to focus their abuse on those who are poorly positioned to fight it.
@1:47: you're absolutely correct. and that's what makes it even more of a horrific experience for the person/people being abused: they are effectively silenced by those who say, "what problem? this place is fantastic!"
@2:13 totally. Just v disappointed to see all the comments in here about "pay no mind to such rumors, so many abusive places are great for many." Really reminds you of what puts the systemic in "systemic abuse": the unwitting complicity of so many with statements like that.
I'm with 1:38PM:
I appreciate the various articles for dumping your academia.edu account, but three thoughts:
1) Those in contingent positions don't really have the luxury of limiting our exposure. Faculty web pages are often subpar; grad student pages even less so.
2) How does academia.edu really profit from me posting just the titles of my articles?
3) How is academia.edu's approach any different than the publisher who claims copyright and ownership of my article, does not allow me to share it electronically, and profits from journal subscriptions and book sales without paying me any kind of royalties?
I bolded that last bit for effect: for-profit academic publishers are making literally billions of dollars a year off essentially free research and writing that our institutions pay us to do (or don't pay us to do, in many cases). I've been an Academia user almost since the site was born, never paid them a cent, and never will. But if they can somehow find a way to squeeze money out of my article and presentation titles and the odd thing that I've chosen to upload for free access to my colleagues around the world, then good for them. If they eventually lock me out by converting to a subscription based system, in the worst-case scenario they get to keep a list of titles of my published writing and my presentations, with the odd inaccessible thing that nobody would ever otherwise read. I'm infinitely more concerned with Facebook's and Google's use of my reams and reams of personal information, images, and connections. Academia only has information I've personally and intentionally uploaded into their system or connected to my account. Google, Microsoft, and to a lesser extent Facebook have an enormous volume of personal communication, business transaction, and web activity data, so if they ever decide they want to holiday in the Cayman Islands on my dime, I don't think there's any way I can stop them. Alright, back to my cave. Good luck to everyone on the market, you're not alone out there!
I think it’s far more damaging to have an accessible Facebook account than an Academia.edu page.
I have a lot of colleagues in my PhD program that have no problem at all posting very, very vocal and activist-y posts each and every day. In my opinion, one should keep their political thoughts close to their chest; you never know how a SC may internalize seeing that you’re an active BLM protestor who proudly displayed pics that you’re blocking traffic on a highway, e.g.
Even if a SC member agrees with your stance 100% they may interpret your methods as an indicator of your high potential to be a “problem” professor or that you may embarrass the Dept at a later date. Also, and don’t forget this possibility (even though many of us from our generation fail to accept this) that some academics may not be in favor of whatever it is you’re touting and protesting this week, even if they give zero indication that they don’t. Many conservative academics have to be “in the closet” so to speak regarding their politics.
So, my advice to everyone is very simple:
Keep your politics and activist-styled posts in FB only viewable to friends. Or better yet, just keep them to yourself.
I don’t say any of this to indicate that I disagree with a lot of what’s being advocated by protestors or activists, quite the opposite, but I personally hate a loudmouth who loves to preach about how they’re a moral/social crusader. And if I were on a SC, I’d immediately disregard an applicant who seems like, for lack of better words, a self-satisfied and smug douche.
Today my Academia.edu page got a hit from Vatican City, where someone now has a copy of one of my articles. I wonder if they would be willing to hire a nice Jewish boy from New York.
Post a Comment