Old American Job Rumors
posted by American and Comparative Politics Job Blog at 11/03/2007 08:48:00 AM
American and Comparative Jobs
Hello bloggers! As requested, I have turned off comment moderation. But, if it becomes a personal free-for-all I will ask someone else to manage the blog because I do not have time to devote to continuously deleting comments.
Saturday, November 03, 2007
Links
Previous Posts
- Old Comparative Job Rumors--October 25th>
- Old Market Advice
- Old Methodology/Theory Debates
- Old American Job Rumors October 2007>
- Old Comparative Job Rumors
- Old American Job Rumors
- Old American Job Rumors
- Old "Methodology/Theory" Debates
- Old Comparative Job Rumors
- Old American Job Rumors
Contributors
918 Comments:
Firsties.
RE: Iowa, for which job? If you don't mind sharing.
11/02/2007 8:25 PM
NOP, but: Formal theory.
North Texas is contacting people to interview
Did someone get denied tenure at UNT?
Whom has South Carolina contacted for its judicial position? Someone earlier posted something about ballots being due by Friday.
Does anyone have any specifics on Oklahoma? Calls have been made?
Re Oklahoma:
Candidate list approved early last week. Calls have probably been made in the last 3 days. Anyone have a list?
Thanks for the Iowa information. Much obliged.
For those of you who do political communication, do any of you know of a similar blog that reports on jobs in communication (studies) departments?
UW has a race and ethnicity COMM job in their COMM department. But I don't know of any wiki or blog...
any info on jobs process at:
montana
montana state
charleston
colorado-denver
puget sound
northern arizona
?
what is johns hopkins doing?
Both Puget Sound and Montana State have scheduled on-campus interviews.
Has anyone heard about:
App State?
Charleston?
Tennessee?
Va Tech?
Tennessee is reported to have a long short list and Va Tech (Senior) has interviews and calling for the junior.
with a cv like his, shouldnt some like malhorta be a quick tenure case?
Who is Montana State interviewing?
Re: South Carolina- offer will be made.
Anonymous said...
Re: South Carolina- offer will be made.
11/04/2007 11:37 AM
Who did they even interview?
>Did someone get denied tenure at UNT?
Not this year. Two people are up.
Montana State is interviewing me.
App State's deadline is 11/15 I think, so I wouldn't expect to hear much, if anything, before Thanksgiving.
which Northern Arizona position? the deadline for the REP position was extended to Nov 1. I guess we should be hearing something soon from them
Wiki for communications:
http://wikihost.org/wikis/academe/wiki/communication_studies
A new game: share the names of 1-3 places you wish you'd gotten an interview at but now know you didn't and almost certainly won't. Maybe we can mutually commiserate. To play this game, you must have applied for the job and thought you were competitive (so your flyer on applying to Harvard doesn't count).
I'll start:
Auburn
Elon
Puget Sound
3 schools: georgia, maryland, and texas
Re 8:19
U of Colorado-Denver reposted their job on the chronicle site around October 17 or so. I am guessing that means an extended deadline.
7:43: It could also mean that EEO got on them for only advertising on eJobs, which may not meet their criteria for a truly open national search, since listings on eJobs are only available to APSA members.
Case in point: Ga State's listings showed up on either the Chronicle or HigherEdJobs after the review deadline had passed. (Feel free to sue on this basis if you applied after the deadline listed on eJobs and didn't get the job.)
Memphis, Elon, and Puget Sound
Memphis, Elon, and Puget Sound
Has Memphis made calls?
Thanks for the comm wiki
Puget Sound
Kent State
St. Johns
I actually don't know if the last two are interviewing yet, but I assume so.
What is going on with Michigan's American searches?
Any word on DePauw or Sewanee?
Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Memphis
Utah State has finished interviews.
Utah State has not finished interviews
The ads on posted later on the Chronicle site than on eJobs are likely a function of visa requirements. To get a work visa for new faculty hires, schools must submit a copy of the print version of the ad. I assume that when you buy a print ad at the Chronicle, they also put it on their online version.
I could be wrong, but I have friends on multiple schools who have had to deal with hassles related to this--including re-advertising a position with print ads to jump through a government hoop.
Memphis has scheduled interviews.
any word on Claremont McKenna?
The CU-Denver job was posted on the chronicle, on higheredjobs and on ejobs originally, so that is not the explanation for the re-post.
Wyoming is sending out emails asking if candidates are still available and interested in the American position because they are getting ready to move forward with the search.
Not clear if this is a second round set of campus invites or they are just now getting to the search (they do have 2 other searches).
Re: south carolina
south carolina did not interview ABDs they were looking to hire current asst. prof or assoc. profs. not abds.
sometimes places repost because they're concerned about their pool being small and don't want the search to fail
Wyoming had on campus interviews for the judicial job a few weeks ago.
South Carolina Upstate is scheduling phone interviews.
In response to an earlier post, UC Davis has not yet made any offers as interviews are not complete. The Chair of the Department at Davis was not pleased with the posting of interview schedule at Davis, invoking the confidential nature of the interview process and saying that it compromised certain individuals on the market; a fair concern.
However, Davis is a public institution and therefore job talks are public. In this business, people know when you are on the market so be prepared to explain yourself if there are those you don't want to know. I know this applies mostly to those of us already with positions but looking to leave or leveraging for our tenure review.
I can agree that posting offers is probably not a great idea until a candidate has accepted and those not chosen are formally notified. This is a professional courtesy and job candidates deserve this.
As a member of prior search committees and a job candidate too, I would feel bad to be notified via the Board that I did not get a job rather than from the Department. Anyone feel otherwise, and why?
Mah words be havin' it dat pizzies are startin' to hear 'bout da jizzy tizzies. Fo' all da pizzies wit no jizziy tizzies, keep yo heads up 'til da dizzy shoudt out you. Gots to git those Benjamins so you cin git dat bling-bling fo yo new pizzy caddy. Wordsie.
Having been in the position of learning someone else got the offer last year, and also finding out who else interviewed for positions, I actually liked getting the information.
I learned that search committees were lying to me when telling me that they had to wait for approval for an offer (though I understood why), which motivated me to continue applying to other jobs. I also knew in two cases that there was no way the person who got the first offer would take the job, given their # and quality of interviews as listed on the blogs.
In one of those cases, I got the second offer. I also thought it was useful to know that I got the second offer, because I felt like I might have more negotiating potential (I could have been wrong) for fear they would have to go back to the pool or even lose the line. In the end, I went with a different job, one that there was no information about on the blogs, but I still found the information useful.
I did already have a job, but my department was aware that I was on the market, so having the information out there did not hurt me.
To Mister 'Pizzy' or whoever you are,
Why, why, why do you continue to put us through this? I am pleading that you stick to normal English that we can all understand. Dare I speak on behalf of the forum that we have had enough with the 'jizzy tizzy' stuff. The first time it was mildly amusing, the second, I figured you liked the attention, and the third, well, I am willing to refer you to an appropriate therapist to help you deal with your alter-ago.
You are distracting from the forum, whether you mean to or not. I am sure you are a great pizzy, but please take your tizzies elsewhere!
Any advice for how to tell your Department you have an interview elsewhere?
In the past, I have simply said that I have a contact at such and such University and they invited me to discuss my research in part of their seminar series in their department...a bit misleading but has a hint of truth in it.
Then, when the offer comes through you say 'remember how that university invited me to give a talk in their seminar series? Well, they loved the talk so much they offered me a job!! Isn't that great?"
This comment has been removed by the author.
Re: 11/05/2007 4:51 PM
The jizzy-tizzy post you are referring to was not mine.
But hey -- message received. I'll stop posting. It's your blogosphere, I'm just livin' in it.
Too bad, actually, since I finally got some good new scoops on 'da JM.
Good luck to all da peeps this year.
-- Chill, out.
oh, snap!
For what it's worth, I'd rather know the maximum information possible about jobs at any given time; names aren't really that important to me, although they do lend some credibility to anonymous posts. Since most departments won't formally notify finalists until there's a signed offer letter, personally I'd rather get on with my life sooner rather than later. My experience with formal notifications is that they're mostly empty horseshit anyway... frankly I'd rather hear anonymously than some Dear John phone call from a search chair.
As for Chill... I'm not sure fake Ebonics is really all that appropriate a means of communicating, but I (and many others) appreciate the info, even though it's usually for jobs well out of my league. 4:25, on the other hand, was just content-free gibberish.
I agree with 5:27. I would rather hear on the forum that someone got a job offer at a university I interviewed at than wait 3-5 months for the bad news call from the search committee. It allows one to get on with their lives and search. I know I've waited and waited for months for a job I wanted REALLY bad only to not get it. I discounted other jobs as I waited for this one job to come through and it never did. It is similar to waiting for a school to call for an interview - at least if you find out on the forum that they are interviewing and they haven't called you, you can focus on other things.
Love a' Duck and Lawd above! i suppawt chill-e punk an' i appreciate 'is infawmashun. Da brief respite 'e provides from tight asses like da mug who told 'im ter stop posting. i dunt know why yew find i' so 'ard ter read 'is posts. Curz they 'ave con'ent!, innit unlike dis one. , innit.
Long live chill e!
What is wrong with you people?
chill e is da bomb all ya all foolz should wise up. shoot.
chill e: speak your mind...
Chilly don't leave us in the cold because of a few assholes. Surely you are not as thin skinned when it comes to your research.
Step up and take the whining in stride and know that most of us love ya.
To those new to the job rumor blogs this year I will repeat what I have posted at least once before in response to a complaint about chill's style.
Chill proved last year to be the best source for information--in terms of quantity and quality. Moreover, he is clearly well placed in the discipline and never has a disparaging word to say about others and does not leak info that would hurt people.
I am not on the market this year, but I still like knowing what is going on out there--and have somewhat maintained AJT as part of this interest. Chill, I hope you will reconsider and share your info. I understand if you don't.
Information does a world of good to folks who are trying to manage the extreme anxiety that goes with being on the job market. Not getting an interview, while discouraging, is easier than WAITING for an interview that is never going to come. At least it was for me.
Chill.e - please make good on your word and leave. Also, all you who support him, you should start a new blog and have at it - with your fake white-boy ebonics. Personally, I think it is all very racist - Who exactly are you mimicking because I don't know any political scientists who speak like that?
Typical political scientists...striving to remove the personality from everything.
How is Chill's presentation "distracting?" Are you unable to parse information from text?
And by the way, how do you know that Chill is not an African-American, eh?
It's called "style."
From what I saw at APSA a couple of months ago, it was quite apparent that very few of you have it.
What's a brother to do, Chill?
Style? I would love to see a conference presentation using that kind of style. It would be very interesting, to say the least. And, a heck of a lot more entertaining than 99.9% of the other ones!
Chill's style is akin to that possessed by either Seth Green or Jamie Kennedy in some of their finer work. Yes, that says a lot. But, he/she knows a lot more than we do about "da JM."
Also, I get the feeling -- from people who "know" who Chill is -- that we probably need Chill a lot more than Chill needs this blog.
A question for Chill - why are you compelled to post using the prose you do? Why not just simply post like everyone else, why does it have to involve words like 'jizzy' etc? If you want to contribute, great, but why do you have to be so different? If you have information to share, please do, but why can't you speak to us like fellow scholars rather than political science hood rats?
> why do you have to be so different?
Santa christ, are you serious?
Conform, MF'ers, conform!
I really find it fascinating that there is such a visceral reaction to chill. I am guessing that it represents a boomer/genX divide.
The playfulness and irony of chill combined with the highest quality info we get here seems just fine (and welcomed) by those raised on the Simpson's and who soak in every ounce of Colbert.
The older crowd finds it disconcerting either because they dislike the ebonics or it sets off some PC radar.
Chill those of us on the market love it and we need ya.
Speaking of famous posters... where is C.C. Banana?
Wiggity why do people get their knickers in a tiggity twist?
Sniggity Snoop is just riffin' off the style Das EFX ripped.
If the info is slamming,
like boulders to Bamm Bamm,
get off Chill E's tip
and stop with the liggity lip.
Dude, that sucked.
I think chill e sounds more like ali g than jamie kennedy.
and for the haters and conformists, if you don't like chill's interpretation of the english language then don't read it.
if i kan't spel and use badd, punktuashon wil i be: driven frum this blogg like chil e punk even if i tel u that SUNY-Albany haz made an offur?
Is the wiki down? Or is it just me?
Albany has made an offer? To whom?
is Dasfx really Ned Flanders?
What's going on at Johns Hopkins and Michigan?
I do wish chill e would come back. But does anyone else find it odd that he left so abruptly? Maybe there's something else going on here. could it be a chill-e-punk-gate?
any word on East Carolina, UNC-Greensboro, UNC-Charlotte or Kentucky?
Kentucky is conducting interviews now. I don't know anything about the Carolina schools though.
I'd think that Chill E's use of fake ebonizzle would mark him as at least 35 or 40.
Really informative people use LOLcat to disseminate their information, viz:
I'M IN UR ALBANY, EXTENDIN UR OFFERS
I CAN HAZ INTERVIEW AT [SCHOOL]?
INVISIBLE REJECTION LETTER
Harvard List
Matthew Platt (Ph.D. Candidate, University of Rochester)
Date of Full Day Visit, Wednesday, November 14th
Title of Job Talk: "The Normalization of Black Politics"
Location: CGIS South 030
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Neil Malhotra (Ph.D. Candidate, Stanford University)
Date of Full Day Visit, Monday, November 19th
Title of Job Talk: "Assigning Blame: Political Attributions and
Partisan Rationalization"
Location: CGIS South 030
Time: 4:00 p.m.
Tom Clark (Ph.D. Candidate, Princeton University)
Date of Full Day Visit, Wednesday, November 26th
Title of Job Talk: "The title of my talk will be "The
Politics of Judicial Independence: "Court-curbing and the Separation of
Powers"
Location: CGIS South 030
Time: 4:00 p.m.
Shanna Gardarian (Ph.D. Candidate, Princeton University)
Date of Full Day Visit, Wednesday, November 28th
Title of Job Talk: "The Fire Next Time: How Terrorism News Shapes
Foreign Policy Attitudes"
Location: CGIS South 030
Time: 2:00 p.m.
Julia Rabinovich (Ph.D. Candidate, Nortwester University)
Date of Full Day Visit,
Title of Job Talk: "Administrative Responsiveness to Public Opinion"
Location: "TBA
Time: TBA
Ryan Owens (Ph.D. Candidate, Washington University in St. Louis)
Date of Full Day Visit,
Title of Job Talk: "The Separation of Powers, Supreme Court Agenda
Setting, and Strategic Behavior"
Location: TBA
Time: TBA
Love Clark's title. Very meta.
Quotation marks not fully nested though.
Title of Job Talk: "The title of my talk will be "The Politics of Judicial Independence: "Court-curbing and the Separation of Powers" " "
\fixed
That INVICIBLE REJECTION LETTER comment cracks me up every time I read it.
Wow, I do have too many procrastination outlets....
What do the guidelines say about the time period for accepting an offer? And, how often do schools extend their deadlines for accepting or rejecting an offer?
9:22: The APSA guideline is 2 weeks after the written offer. Good luck getting anyone to honor it as an ABD.
How about an appropriate timeline for following up after the application deadline to see how the search is progressing? Also after a phone interview to see if they have moved on without you?
10:12: It is generally perceived to be inappropriate to ask about where the committee is in its decision making before the finalist stage. The only exception is if you're offer-in-hand elsewhere; even then, unless you've already had an interview, there's virtually no chance another department will accelerate its schedule to accommodate you.
If you're one of 100 applicants or a dozen phone interviews, I'd just go with the "two weeks" rule of thumb: if you haven't heard 2 weeks after the deadline or the phone interview, you didn't make the cut. If you get a call later saying you did make the next cut (i.e. an interview invitation) and alleging some sort of delay out of the department's hands, you can either take it at face value or not. I'd think they were probably lying, myself (i.e. their entire interview list got better offers and they're going back to the pool), but genuine, externally-imposed delays do sometimes happen.
Incidentally, the fast-and-loose ethics of search committees, and the black-hole of information that they are, is a big reason why the wiki and these boards are important. Even if you don't want to give up names (or your own name), for understandable reasons, "X is interviewing" is useful and valuable info to the other applicants... and I suspect you'd want to know if you were in their shoes, because chances are you are not going to get the interview in another search.
Rumor: Malhotra off the market....
I've heard that South Carolina is after Stacy Haynie from LSU. Anyone else pick that up, too, or have information?
IS IT CAN BE OFFER TIEM PLEEZ?
your info about south carolina is wrong.
I disagree with 9:27. Very few schools will play hardball on the 2 weeks deadline. The schools that hold that deadline firm typically want to move on the 2nd candidate. If you can express a reason why you need more than 2 weeks (e.g., I interviewed at X and they will tell me in a month; or, my spouse interviewed at Y, and will know in a month), most schools will extend the deadline for you. Departments want their new members to feel welcome and not like they were trapped or duped into coming.
Of course, don't abuse the department by keeping them hanging on for longer than you really need. We've been burned by people dragging their feet for months. We didn't want to move on the #2, but we lose credibility with the dean.
My current employer was very generous in letting me have extra time when I got a second offer at the end of my 2-week period even though I was an ABD. I think the key thing is to be up front with the school about why you are taking the time and to be reasonable with them; after all if it is an offer you are actually considering you will be in a long term relationship and want to get off on the right foot (as will they).
Anonymous said...
Rumor: Malhotra off the market....
11/07/2007 3:55 AM
I doubt it.
I was in a situation where I was asked to decide in less than 2 wks, i politely reminded them of the APSA standard and they caved. It's only fair. I think it is school-by-school whether you are allowed more than that and as 7:18 says, you have to be clear on why.
As for following up with a search committee, I think that there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with asking people where they are in the process. I always asked what their timeline was, which schools were very open about, and told them to tell me if anything changed and I would do the same. I don't think that you should put pressure on the committee, but what's the harm in asking? If I had a fly-out interview, I would call/email the search committee chair, if I had a phone interview, I'd email/call those that I had on the interview, and if I had no interview, I'd probably email the administrative person. It is ridiculous to imply that asking a simple question (Where are you in the decision process?) which has a huge impact on your life should be out of bounds.
are others having problems with the wiki?
8:11: Yep, looks like something is hosed.
8:04: My basic theory here is, why do anything that could encourage the search chair to 86 your file? If you have 2-3 dream jobs you're seriously interested in, maybe one contact is appropriate (even then, I'd couch it as "I wanted to make sure you got my complete file."). But I think there are enough curmudgeonly search chairs out there that contacts out of the blue might be counterproductive.
I MAED U A WIKI
but u broked it
But, 8:41, i just think it's ridiculous. In the real (i.e., business) world, it's a perfectly appropriate thing to do. and seriously, if a chair decided not to hire me because I dared to break the unwritten, archane, bizarre rules or academia, i'll go get a job somewhere else. I think we have to stand up against stupidity. Not that i'm advocating nagging the search committee, but a one-time phone call to a secretary or a search committee if you have interviewed is NOT unreasonable.
BU offer to Hopkins.
>> Anonymous said...
Rumor: Malhotra off the market....
I too have very good reasons to doubt this claim.
3:55 AM is incorrect. Malhotra has not accepted any position yet.
Our department "secretary" has spent the last seven weeks filing approximately 350 separate job applications for four different searches into folders and then filing the accompanying dossiers and individual letters with these applications. She has been making flyout arrangements for 3-4 candidates for each search and collating the scheduling of approximately 20 unruly and disorganized faculty members who are supposed to be meeting with these people. In the mean time, she's been dealing with her regular responsibilities. Please, please, please do NOT call her to ask about the status of your application and the timeline of the search. It's not all about you.
Has Penn had their talks yet?
To 10:12,
Typical academic response. So sorry your departmental coordinator is busy doing her job. When you are on the job market and your livelihood and future career is at stake, yes, it is all about you. Thinking otherwise is simply your arrogance of "I have a job and you don't." Poo on you.
Rules to live by for new ABDs:
1. Don't contact the chair unless you have a good reason.
2. "It's my dream job" is not a good reason. (You should have made this clear in your cover letter.)
3. "I asked for delivery confirmation and didn't receive it" is a good reason.
To 10:31,
Harassing their overworked department secretary only insures that you will be regarded as an ass by most people in most departments. This may not mean that you don't get the job--plenty of asses do--but it certainly won't help. If and when a department decides to interview you, you can be sure that you will hear about it. Until then, take a sedative and get over yourself.
--Not 10:12
Re: 10:35: Is "it's my dream job" even a credible signal in job applications? I could see a third party being able to make a credible case, but the applicant's burden of proof here would seem to be high (after all, letters are private, so I could make a "it's my dream job" statement in all of my applications).
and you should
Dear 10:44,
Not once did I suggest harassing anyone. A polite and friendly phone call (and i do mean ONE) is not / should not be outside the bounds of what is reasonable. If you have interviewed with the school, a polite phone call to an administrative assistant or to a search committee chair to find out what the status is should really not be viewed as harassment. NOr should anyone be viewed as being "an ass" - as you say - for a perfectly reasonable request.
cool your jets dude - if you are the 2nd choice, they have to wait on the 1st choice to resolve. The ONLY acceptable reason to inquire is if you have another offer with a timeline that can end your pursuit of the other job. RELAX - the department will call you as soon as they know anything.
I disagree. I think you should call today. Then when they say they have not made a decision, you should call again tomorrow.
By the way, this is a good strategy with editors too.
>> If you have interviewed with the school, a polite phone call to an administrative assistant or to a search committee chair to find out what the status is should really not be viewed as harassment.
The key point here is "if you have interviewed."
My view, as a search committee member at a top department, is that if you've interviewed with us, either on the phone or in person, it's fine to follow up by emailing me or other faculty with brief questions about our timeline.
But some people here have said it's ok to contact the department even if you haven't heard anything from them. To be blunt, if you haven't heard anything, you're not likely to get the job and if all applicants contact every school they apply to, then this makes life hell for the admins and committees.
The responsibility of admins and committees is to make good hiring decisions, not to serve as an information clearinghouse for applicants.
-Not 10:12 or 10:44
I have a list of PS editors' home phone numbers. Email me at someoneyoulovetohate@top10program.edu
"The responsibility of admins and committees is to make good hiring decisions, not to serve as an information clearinghouse for applicants."
Indeed. That's what this website is for... so start posting information already!
Any word on UMass?
"Any word on UMass?"
-- yep. it's still my favorite song by the Pixies.
any word when the wiki will be up and running?
Looks like it's back now.
Um...3:05, you're calling people unprofessional? That was quite the rant, far nastier in tone than anything prior in the exchange.
I understand that people seek information. That's understandable. But the reality is that it doesn't really gain you anything. If you are on the interview list, you'll be contacted.
But, if you're really itching to have more information, my suggestion is that, if at all possible, you seek it informally via one of your mentors. No one will hold it against you, or think less of you, if Professor X sends Professor Y an email casually asking about the state of the search (and perhaps including a plug for you).
3:05: For better or for worse, you're not going to win this argument. Departments aren't going to turn over screening to HR divisions that have the resources to handle the "what's up with my application" questions, and deans aren't going to duplicate HR functions by giving colleges or departments the resources to handle job applications properly.
Yes, empirical reality sucks. No, there really isn't any willpower to fix it, at least in our discipline; the AEA and law schools seem better organized discipline-wide to deal with this stuff, but we expend our resources fighting over panel allocations at APSA, the composition of the Executive Committee so nobody feels slighted, and page counts in the APSR instead.
has university of oregon starting interviewing for their judicial position?
someone must have accepted albany. i got a rejection letter today.
Not necessarily. It just means you're no longer under consideration.
3:05 was unprofessional but I have to say that there are such strong feelings from those on search committees about being contacted, and often their comments come across rather harshly. I think the following is fair to say:
1. Candidates want to know what is going on, especially for those jobs that really are dream jobs and being on the market causes a lot of anxiety. Candidates want to know - that their packet was received, that someone is considering it and in the process they lose their patience.
2. If a school wants you they will contact you. Inquiring about status does not get you an interview or make a school more interested in you. I think this contacting issue extends from the non-academic world where contacting an employer portrays an interest in a particular job, and that is what most of us grew up with - taking the advice of non-academic friends who tell you a basic of corporate interviewing is to show how interested you are in a job. However, academic jobs are driven by factors that do not exist in the non-academic world so contacting about status is probably not that helpful.
3. Committee members appear annoyed if you contact them for reasons outlined in 2. If I am a graduate of not so prestigious university, contacting Harvard about the job I applied for is simply creating work for individuals that are already busy. My interest is not enough to get me an interview, I need all these other factors to line up to get the call.
Obviously, the job market is stressful - candidates have a lot of anxiety and it is never pleasant to be on a search committee and to have to deliver bad news.
We need to take a step back and understand where the other party is coming from before we lose our patience and post negative things.
From the majority of comments on this blog from committee members, do not bother inquiring about status - it seems to annoy many people and I doubt that it is very helpful anyway. Assume if the call has not come through that a. it is never coming through or b. it is too early in the process.
Best of luck to everyone but really, let's try and encourage one another rather than beat each other up. A lot of the comments I think give great advice but it is the unnecessary digs that ruin it. For example, 10:12 was giving great advice and then in the end throws in "It's not all about you." This is just one example but when people can post anonymously, wow, they get mean. Why do we have to be so rude to each other? If I read this blog, I would be inclined to run away from any political scientist I ever met. Certainly, the posts on this forum do not reflect well on our profession.
I thought the University of Oregon's deadline for its Law job was Jan 1st of 2008?
A couple pieces of advice for graduate students going on the market in the future:
1) Pay for delivery confirmation if you are in the slightest bit neurotic. Your packet is the entire thing you can control about the process, ensuring that it arrived is worth the extra 75 cents.
2) Your file represents your work and you should feel ownership. Hopefully, schools are reading the file and deciding whether they think it is a good fit. It is really hard not to take rejection personally, since your body of work is an important reflection of you. But the composition of search committees is haphazard and preferences are idiosyncratic. A search committee may have nothing bad to say about your file, but feel another candidate is a better fit. Yes, it is personal, but you shouldn't take it personally.
3) Applying for jobs when you don't have one stinks and is stressful. Do anything you can to keep your sanity during the process. Exercise, eat well, and socialize with friends. Try to carve out a few hours each day when you force yourself to write. It is too easy to get sucked into depression and stop working for a few months.
4) Applying for jobs the first time around isn't fun. Being a professor is pretty cool once you land a job. It is worth it.
I second 6:20's reassurance that being a professor is worth the nightmarish job market experience. It took me several years to land a tenure-track job when I first came out of graduate school. As awful as it was, I would do it again to have the job I've got now.
To 6:20 and 6:30, thanks for the great advice and encouragement. The experience has not been pleasant for me and I got sucked into the depression of not working. I retain hope though.
7:26: Hang in there! It is a lousy experience. I am an advanced assistant (not in American) back on the job market (an issue of "fit" with my department), and while I hate being here again, it is easier than the first time around. All of which points to the fact that you are at the lowest point of the process. Trust me that it get better from here. I delayed my dissertation because it was so difficult to concentrate, so don't beat yourself over the head too much about that. Somehow I managed, and you will, too. Good luck!
Does someone know something I don't about the Oregon position? I did not think it was a law/judicial slot. The ejobs posting just reads "junior" in U.S. politics. Or is there another position?
Oregon has a posting for both an American job and a Public Law job and both have a 1/1/08 deadline.
10:12 and 11:23 -- When you have fielded 150 polite phone calls from 150 polite candidates who want to know what's going on with one of four individual searches IN ADDITION to doing all of the other work involved with managing the searches and all of the other regular work of keeping a mid-size department afloat and functioning, then come talk to me.
Our office manager works her tail off for not a whole lot of money. Would it be nice to have some assistance for her in the odd year when we're running N+2 searches? Yes, of course. Will the administration recognize this additional invisible administrative burden and cough up the dough? No way.
Most searches are pretty good about contacting the candidates they want to see. And if you have an exploding job offer and are on our short list, we might be able to massage our interview schedule. That is worthwhile information to convey by email to the search committee head. But if you are one of 150 applicants for one job that closed three weeks ago, please do not bother our office manager to ask if the committee has made the cut from 150 down to 20.
Obviously I won't know who is bugging our OM unless you are calling so frequently that she can actually remember you as a prime jerk and pest among the haze of everything else that's happening. So this isn't something that has any impact on your chances. But try just for one second to think about what you are doing from another person's perspective and what it means for that person's quality of life.
If we want you, you will hear from us. If you have a really good reason to need to know our time line, then ask. But if it's just anxiety or curiosity, can it and go to the gym.
"Obviously I won't know who is bugging our OM unless you are calling so frequently that she can actually remember you as a prime jerk and pest among the haze of everything else that's happening."
Remember that the office manager is the person who will also book your flight/hotel or handle your travel reimbursement. Do you really want them to be mad at you? :)
I understand where these committee members are coming from. Couldn't much of this be solved with a simple status page on the website somewhere. Something like:
10/15: Application Deadline
11/01: Interviews Scheduled
That would stop 90% of the calls. Or just post your interview list when it is set.
Many departments seem to want to keep everyone in the dark until an offer is accepted and then wonder why they are getting all these calls asking where they are in the process by antsy candidates.
My field of study (public administration), typically has about 15-20 applicants for any job opening. Yet, these search committees still keep applicants in the dark about where they're at in the process.
It seems that all types of search committees, regardless of the number of applicants, do a pretty bad job of providing information.
I know everyone's under time constraints and the committee wants to keep the pool open in case their preferred candidates back out. But still, some sort of better informative process needs to be established. A simple web-page update on the department's website takes only a few minutes to construct and update. And it would solve some of the ill-feelings out there toward search committees.
WVU has made an offer.
Crazy. It's almost as if some decentralized source of information, perhaps posted on the internet and allowing people to make anonymous comments, would make all the difference.
Hm.
I had been reading this, siding with the depts over the applicants. But 8:10 is absolutely right. In comparison to other industries, academics go out of their way to keep people in the dark and avoid providing basic courtesies. I interviewed for a job years ago and I *still* have not heard back. I *interviewed* for that job. An R1 school.
I had interviews at 4 R1 schools in the last two years. Got an email from the department chair at one, only because of pressure from friends who were in the department. Have still never heard back from any of the other three.
"I interviewed for a job years ago and I *still* have not heard back. I *interviewed* for that job. An R1 school."
See, I worked this to my advantage. I interviewed at an R1, didn't hear back, but I stated to the chair in my meeting with him that, having seen that my one-on-ones and talk went very, very well, I would presume that I was hired unless I heard otherwise.
Upon hearing nothing by April, I gave my landlord notice and put a down payment on a nice starter hom,e near the university. After showing up on campus the following September, there was the usual moderate confusion with respect to what my phone number was, which office was mine, and where the bathroom is, but that all worked out in the end. Aside from the occasional awkward introduction when one of my senior colleagues insists that "I don't work here," I love this place.
It's a difficult problem that department secretaries are overworked, but keeping people in the dark exacerbates the problem with job hunting in academia, makes the process more mysterious and stressful , and is overall harmful to candidates AND schools. A post on the website? An email message to all of those who applied? Academia should take some lessons from the business world. I realize that it's not all about ME (being a polite caller) but it's also not all about YOU (as the department). Meeting somewhere in the middle is the responsible thing to do. Let's not perpetuate the problem. I won't call if you agree to send out an email or a mass mail letter (as many departments have done) telling me that my application is no longer considered. Less work on both sides.
hey wasn't michael j fox in that movie?
Banana: Did they give you the Penske file to work on? I do hope you took the smaller office.
I have seen searches where candidates were interviewed and either 1) offers were made and rejected or 2) no offers were made. In both of those situations, we went back to the pool. Those searches took a long time to wrap up.
So, we should have informed all 150 applicants when we had the first short list, when we had interviews, when the search failed the first time, when we had the second short list, when we had the second interviews, and when the candidate accepted?
Um, no. And even if you want to do mass email merges or web page posts, someone has to do that work. It's no big deal, but any one additional task is no big deal until you have 50 single little individual extra tasks to do.
What business regularly fields 150 applicants for each position and calls or contacts each applicant every time there is a development in the search? I know law firms don't work that way.
The departments I've worked with have notified candidates by mail when the position is filled, or occasionally when candidates were being interviewed. And I always respond politely and fairly openly to email queries. But I think it's unreasonable to expect constant communication and information from a department because you have applied for a job there.
I am not sure I agree with much of what has been said about the length to which departments should go to inform people about the process and where they are in it.
I completely agree with the advise about calling and checking in. DONT unless you have an exploding offer.
I don't think that departments need to update everyone with where they are in the process. It creates unnecessary "hand-wringing". So many things can happen. Like going for the top candidates, not gettting them, and then coming back for more. Just because there are interviews, doesn't mean that it is over...and in PA especially, that is not true.
I do, however, think it is really horrible that some departments never send a "thanks but no thanks" letter to people. I think it should be done for every applicant as a courtesy. For it not to happen with someone who interviewed is extremely rude.
Departments, remember this: how you treat an applicant who doesn't make it reflects upon you and your school. You may want that person later in their career...as a chair, as a director, or as a faculty member. You may want their students. You may want their friends. They may become collaborators. And in my case, became friends I see at conferences and even a writer for my tenure file.
I guess this goes both ways. Don't be an asshole!
Well, yes 10:07...we are asking that a web-page be constructed. Note that the web-page does not have to have 150 names, it should only have the names of the people currently being considered, or at the very least just state "the search committee has selected 5 applicants for interviews". Doing that takes minutes, literally.
And your law firm argument is somewhat spurious. I know of law firms and businesses that send out rejection letters within a week after an applicant applies. At least in those cases, the applicant knows where they stand and can move on.
Really, this type of communication to the applicants should be a no-brainer for search committees.
Those law firms and businesses have much better support staff than the typical academic department.
Having observed the process unfold in an interdisciplinary department, I can assure you that this lack of communication (from Dept to candidates) is not unique to political science, even the failure to inform interviewees after an offer has been extended to (and accepted by) someone else.
In a related (and weirder) example, I turned down a job years ago and apparently this was not relayed to the administration by the department, as the following fall I began receiving a constant stream of employment-related materials from the university's HR people. I was even "announced" as a new hire on a university-wide list of new faculty.
If only that stream of material had included a monthly paycheck. Alas...
how much of this should really be in the market advice blog?
10:49: Heh. I've been invited to a bunch of functions for a university's spousal welcoming committee for a job I turned down last year... apparently the fact my address isn't in the same state as the university wasn't much of a signal that I wasn't coming. (Or nobody ever turns down that university's jobs... which is a truly frightening thought given the place that it was.)
univ. of southern california has scheduled job talks
I think some posters are idealizing the business world's tender-hearted and considerate handling of job applicants. I think the phrase "don't call us, we'll call you" originated there, not in academia.
11:10: Yeah, but in the business world you don't apply for a job 12+ months before the expected start date either. So at least the anxiety is a bit more compressed.
a friend of mine was in a visiting position somewhere last year and applied for a TT job there. this friend was not informed during the search process that his/her application was no longer being considered, and to this day has never been informed! all the while s/he continued to pass the search committee members in the hall on a regular basis. and this is at a place that is generally quite congenial. my point is that part of the reason search committees don't communicate with applicants who they've rejected is that it is never fun to deliver bad news. no wonder academics don't have much of a reputation for our social graces.
Um, no. And even if you want to do mass email merges or web page posts, someone has to do that work. It's no big deal, but any one additional task is no big deal until you have 50 single little individual extra tasks to do.
How much time does it take to create a space on an existing webpage that says:
Hiring Updates:
November 1st: Long-short list notified
November 7th: Scheduling interviews
November 15th: Offer made
Highlight, then hit Ctrl+C, then hit Ctrl+V on the department website.
BU offer to Lerman.
11:56: Sure? Wiki reports an offer to Hopkins already.
11:31: It's actually even easier than that:
1. Type "americanandcomparativejobs.blogspot.com" in the URL bar of your browser.
2. Click on "American Job Rumors" or "Comparative Job Rumors" or "Methods Job Rumors" as appropriate.
3. Scroll to the bottom.
4. Click on "post a comment."
5. Edit the following statement accordingly: "(X) has [made a short list/scheduled interviews/made an offer]."
6. Fill out the little "word verification" thingy.
7. Click on "Anonymous."
8. Click on "Publish your comment."
Sewanee has scheduled interviews.
Rejection letters today from Elon and SUNY Albany claim both have concluded their searches with hires.
What is going on with Nebraska? Are they going to move on a list anytime soon???
I can confirm that Utah State is NOT done interviewing, as was posted earlier this week. Not even close.
Ansolabehere to Harvard.
Harvard move:
>>>>>Dear All,
Nancy Rosenblum has just announced to the faculty that Steve Ansolabehere (Senor American search) has accepted our offer and will be joining us next year. His field, broadly speaking, is elections and public opinion. He's coming from MIT.
Nebraska's deadline was yesterday, so it may be a little while before they move.
Is there anymore news on Wyoming? Any ideas whether they contacted everyone in the pool to find out if they were still available, or just a shorter list? Has anyone heard anything since the email? It was a brief ray of hope on a job I thought was already gone...
wyoming has made an offer for their judicial position.
Losing Steve A. is a big loss for MIT. There's no one out there who they could get who would be comparable.
Does this suggest that Jim Snyder might jump to Harvard too?
any idea who is SDSU brining in for judicial
Any offers out of Wash U yet?
What's been happening at NYU? They are all hush-hush after all the chatter about candidates last year.
who is sdsu brining in for their judicial?
The WIKI reports that the Albany job has been accepted. Who? I see no reason to hide this fact at this point.
5:03: I posted the info to the wiki (based on the comment at 1:27). Maybe someone at Albany or the person who got the job can answer, but the letter apparently didn't say.
UPenn made an offer.
To whom? Why the secrecy?
Has UC-Davis made any offers?
Regarding Wyoming, I was asking about the American/behavior position and the emails that went out earlier this week.
I hope the person who got the judicial offer is pleased, though;)
On Wyoming's behavior job, all I have recently is a "your file is complete" email (after a "your file isn't complete" email).
are we sure USC calls for on-campus interviews are for American Institutions Position?
"are we sure USC calls for on-campus interviews are for American Institutions Position?"
Yes!
Albany letter does NOT say that the search has concluded with a hire. But they're getting close.
the Albany letter says "...I regret to inform you that we have offered the position to another applicant."
They're backward inducting.
Re: 2:50 and 6:41
That's what happens when someone changes the dates and a few other details on last year's rejection letter and sends it out again this year.
USC is american institutions and they'll be moving quickly
I think it is a basic courtesy to personally contact anyone who was invited for a campus visit and say "thanks but not thanks." It is usually no more than 4 or 5 people for any given search. Have some class people.
Agreed. I once had to contact a department and make sure I wasn't going to be offered the job after a flyout. Their reaction was, "No one called you." No, they didn't.
Funny now, not so much at the time.
This happens to people at all ranks. I know of candidates for endowed chairs who were never called after they interviewed.
Is this a "JOB" Rumor Blog or a BITCH session I can't figure out which one it is!!!! Hey tell you what stop bitchin and go back to work on that dissertation or APSR article both of which could enhance your career opportunities greatly
We always send letters to all applicants when our position is filled. Generally, we try to get these out once we've created a short list (everyone not on the short list gets contacted).
In searches that I personally chair, we contact everyone who has made our short list BEFORE interviews. Even if you're not eventually interviewed, I think it's a courtesy and a compliment to get to the short list. Wondering what people think about this?
And everyone who is interviewed, a personal contact when an offer has been made. I let them know if they are still above/below the line, and do they want to remain active.
Finally, a letter lets them know an offer has been accepted. I try, but can't guarantee a personal phone call or email to each one.
One caveat for those who have interviewed and heard through the grapevine that an offer has been made: no contact may mean you are still "above the line." I hope a school might tell you that, but many operate on the principle that "second best" is an insult. I personally don't agree.
Paul - that is above and beyond. Frankly I don't expect anything if I don't get an interview. If I do, and don't get the job, an email from the search chair or department chair is nice - even (as in some cases) the reason given is a blatant lie (i.e. 'we didn't need another Congress person' when the hire was a Congress person...)
I think contacting short-listers is a wonderful idea. In my time on the job market, several universities did this for me. While it can, on the one hand, create a bit of false hope, it was really useful in my first year on the market to know I made a couple of short lists.
My second year on the market, it was really useful to get the short list information, in addition to some interviews, because I got a clear sense of the line between schools where I was a competitive candidates, and schools where I wasn't quite a good enough candidate. This gave me some motivation to work hard to try to publish my way into a bit better position down the road.
So, Paul, it is great that you do this and I would encourage other committees to do so.
U of Colorado Denver is scheduling telephone interviews for the last week of November.
Sometimes there are confidentiality agreements during a job search. Committee members cannot reveal details to anyone until a job offer is formally accepted. This can take several weeks depending on the negotiations between the school and the chosen candidate.
On Albany -- Contracts 101: the formation of a contract requires two things, an offer and an acceptance.
Why is University of Oregon's closing date so late (Jan 1)?
<< Home