Old Market Advice Dec. 15>
posted by American and Comparative Politics Job Blog at 2/13/2008 06:29:00 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.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Links
Previous Posts
- Old Comparative Job Rumors Dec. 15>
- Old American Job Rumors Dec. 15>
- Old American Job Rumors
- 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
Contributors
228 Comments:
Here is a question. A school where I had been invited last week for campus interview, now wants some information to do a background check. What do you make of this? Is it a standard procedure done for all invited candidates, or is it related to a potential offer? Thanks for comments.
i am at a school where we require background checks. originally, i understood the policy to be for all invited candidates, but now i have been told that it is just necessary for the chosen candidate to go through the process. the school you interviewed at might do them for all three candidates at the same time.
What kind of information are they requesting? I've heard that some places now routinely check your basic credentials (i.e., degrees and the like) but I've never heard of anything beyond that. I guess I should not be surprised, though.
How much do junior assistants (2-3 years out) who have held a faculty position before typically earn at a private, top 30 school?
(in terms of base salary)
According to AAUP, within the category of doctoral institutions, the percentailes (of salary) are as follows for assistant professors:
95th: 82,894
80th: 71,763
60th: 66,263
40th: 61,883
20th: 56,952
Therefore, the average assistant at the average school makes about $64,000. Hope that helps.
Does that include only political scientists, or other fields?
Thats all fields
I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean an assistant professor who is entering new, but has been out 2-3 years? If you mean that, at my top 30 LAC they earn around 65k.
If you mean out 2-3 years and THEN 2-3 at my institutions, around 70k.
If it's all fields, then you need to correct for the fact that most hard sciences, professional schools, and economics pay more than poli sci.
...and most humanities and arts pay less.
This is perhaps an odd question, but I'm interested nonetheless, so here goes: what is the market like overseas for American Politics scholars? I'm asking because my significant other has been making some noises about wanting to pursue a career in Europe when I'm done with my degree. Is this even feasible? I'm assuming Americanists are a sort of area studies scholar overseas, and so at most one per department, right? Also, where would one find info on such openings? Are they on APSAnet?
From what I can gather, UK would be an optimal choice with a French-speaking locale second. Any advice would be appreciated.
To clarify: UK first, French-speaking second is my partner's preference-- not anything I've heard from others. I'm not making statements about relative strength of university systems...
Are those salary numbers just for Arts & Sciences or also business, pharmacy/medical and law schools?
Don't forget Canada
To quote teh source:
"The salaries are reported in thousands of dollars and are rounded to the nearest hundred. They are adjusted to a nine-month work year. The figures cover full-time members of each institution's instructional staff, except those in medical schools."
how does one judge bewteen a good LAC and a research university
"Judge" in what sense? I think there are a few factors:
- The teaching load at most research universities is 2-2 or better. Even many "good" LACs (around the 25-50 USNWR mark) expect 2-3, 3-3 or higher. Probably harder to justify course releases for research at an LAC too.
- At the research university, you're probably going to have grad students to supervise. Most LACs will have honors thesis students to supervise and possibly internships too; being undergrad, they may need more handholding.
- Summer compensation is probably easier to come by at most research universities. Many LACs essentially shut down over the summer, so summer teaching money may be scarce.
- The students are probably better-or at least more engaged-at LACs than research schools. If you want to hole up in your office and do research when you're not teaching, an R1 is better; if you like engaging with students outside the classroom, the LAC is better.
- You will probably have smaller classes at the LAC, but more out-of-class time will be expected from you in terms of grading. (The dean will not be happy if you evaluate a 20-student class with three multiple-choice tests in a semester.) And you won't have a TA to help with grading either.
A few months back, earlier in the hiring cycle, there was much ado about particular departments sending e-mail solicitations to individual potential candidates, inviting them to apply for job openings in their departments--usually followed by a quick rejection once materials had been received. Now that the fall season is over, is anyone willing to name particular schools that have been engaging in this practice?
Notre Dame and Grinnell for me.
I got the Notre Dame one also. (Two years in a row.)
This is perhaps an odd question, but I'm interested nonetheless, so here goes: what is the market like overseas for American Politics scholars? I'm asking because my significant other has been making some noises about wanting to pursue a career in Europe when I'm done with my degree. Is this even feasible? I'm assuming Americanists are a sort of area studies scholar overseas, and so at most one per department, right? Also, where would one find info on such openings? Are they on APSAnet?
be appreciated.
This is absolutely possible. A friend is now at a university in the UK and absolutely loves it. (He also looked at jobs in Canada and Ireland.) I think there are multiple schools in the Netherlands that teach in English.
Also, it may be possible to get positions with universities that have programs abroad. Where to find these jobs is less clear to me. However, it is very possible to get a job abroad if that is what you want.
Grinnell as well.
how are offers usually made- by phone or email. what are some good questions.
probably by phone
Initial offers are usually made by phone. I would never say "yes" immediately. Express interest and enthusiasm, but nothing is fixed until you have the signed letter.
What questions? Standard stuff: how much travel allotment, my computer, summer salary, etc.
All depends on the offer.
Just keep in mind, now they want you and they don't want to dip into the well again. Don't be a jerk, but be confident.
Thank you for those hepful inputs. That helps. I received an email saying they would like to talk to me about the position. Am hoping it is a postive one. would they do that if it is a no.
RE the discussion of depts soliciting applications and responding with a prompt rejection: If the dept actually looks over the materials before passing on a candidate, it seems like a reasonable practice. If they are just engaged in some scheme to build the size of their pool for internal reporting purposes (I don't know why they'd do that) or if it is just their version of pulling the rug out from under gullible candidates (also unlikely)then it is a bad thing. But if it is a sincere attempt to get more information for their search, what's the complaint? You aren't required to send materials, after all.
It's quite normal and reasonable for departments to solicit applications. What's the big deal?
Unless the solicitation was deceptive ("we promise you an on-campus interview if you apply"), then I don't see how this is wrong.
In truth, this is just the flip side of candidates applying broadly to every job out their, even if they are really not a good fit for the position. Departments want the biggest and best candidate pool possible.
Re: 12/18/2007 12:01 PM
6:56 here--as a recipient of such solicitations, I initially thought that it was a reasonable practice. However, my doubts were raised about the sincerity of such solicitations given the immediacy of the rejection, only to receive an identical solicitation lauding the potential candidate's credentials the following year... followed by an equally prompt rejection in year two. I'm not sure what goes on behind the scenes, but you can probably see how someone might feel like they are getting needlessly jerked around with this.
I'm not sure where to post this, but I have an ethical question. I got an e-mail the other day from someone who had been given my writing sample from someone at a school that I applied to (but a different department). On the one hand, I'm glad someone thought enough of my work to pass it along, but on the other, I'm annoyed that they didn't ask my permission. It was a rough draft of a dissertation chapter, not even a conference paper. What would you do?
3:15:
I'd be thankful, though maybe I'm naive and/or not taking everything into consideration.
I'd stop sending rough drafts of dissertation chapters out in application packets if I was sensitive about their being distributed.
So what's your ethical dilemma?
to proprietary diss dude: if it isn't fit for public consumption, you shouldn't have sent it in the packet. In any event, you should thank them for their interest in your work (you're not likely to have THAT experience often - everyone balkanizes once they're out of grad school) and pass along a thanks for thinking of you to whoever sent it. You should be thrilled someone is helping you estgablish a name brand - and you should look up "dilemma"
3:15:
I'm with [12/18/2007 5:18 PM] on this one. Presumably they didn't circulate the chapter to make fun of your prose. You should be glad someone found it interesting/relevant and that your network just expanded by 1 (i.e., the person who received a copy of your diss chapter and [I'm guessing] emailed you about it).
Why is it that some people are so secretive with their research??? If your ideas are widely circulated early, all the easier to claim them as yours when someone else comes along with a similar paper. No one can really "steal" your big idea and get away with it, if your work has been widely (albiet, informally) circulated. I've come across students from certain grad programs that think this way (want no conference papers cited, nor redistributed, etd.), and it's always puzzled me.
Re: 3:15
Find out who your chapter went to and add that person to the network of scholars you are (hopefully) developing. You are at the point in your career when you need to start thinking about who will read your work, who will help you with your work, etc.. (Start thinking about this now, and you will be set come tenure time!)
Of course we all worry from time to time about someone 'borrowing' our ideas without attribution (easier to do if they see something in an unpublished stage) BUT most people don't do that. Most people will cite you and then they'll have your name in the back of their mind, associated with a particular topic. That can be really useful. Why don't you contact the person who received your diss chapter, and mention that since it's only a draft version, you would be particularly interested in her comments?
Where can I look up the salaries of professors in the University of California system? I want actual numbers for actual people, not averages for all departments or the salary scales. Thank you.
You won't easily find that online. You can find the official salary scales, which are for the most part meaningless (most are off scale in the UC system, especially at the better campus), or the best paid individuals (most of whom are in the Med Schools and/or administrators, with just a handful of PS Full Professors who are big stars).
advice please! i'm in the position of receiving multiple offers. any advice about how to approach this? on the one hand i have a preference. on the other, people talk about using this situation to negotiate better terms for pay and conditions. how should that be done though? i'm not trying to be mercenary, but recognize also that conditions established now will affect future benefits for some years to come.
what is a background check. what are some of the questions.
Is ur ss number valid
have you ever taken a drive with Ted Kennedy
The background check is not too intrusive:
http://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/SF86.pdf
um...how many phds does it take to explain "background check" ...is it where they check your background?...fer cryin' out loud
"Are you a terrorist? Yes/No--circle one.
I like you, do you like me? Yes/No--circle one.
No, seriously, are you a terrorist? Yes/No--circle one."
Re 8:33's multiple offers query. Keep each side informed of what the other is offering. Negotiate for salary, research fund, travel money, equipment, summer support. Try to get money that rolls over FYs. Don't get caught trying to mislead one dept or the other. Don't string a dept along if you are certain you aren't going there. Don't be greedy, but don't sell yourself short.
our university system requires background checks for all new faculty and staff. my understanding is that it is not about terrorism but about criminal activity. the state legislature is concerned that we will have criminals working in the school. i know it sounds a little far fetched but that is their rationale. as long as you have not committed any felonies, you should be fine!
Here is a recent article:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5392695.html
To all those negotiating offers right now:
Use a cost of living calculator, such as this one when negotiating salaries in different cities. It's amazing how large the differences are!
http://www.payscale.com/
Also, pay attention to whether the state has an income tax (some don't)
Per background check,
they are checking previous employments, degree etc. Apparantly, but some schools want to confirm the stuff you have written in your CV.
You should definitely check for income tax, but also compare other taxes. States without income taxes still raise revenue! Texas, for example, doesn't have income taxes but does have property taxes and state sales tax. If you're going to buy a house, this might hit you as hard as an income tax.
speaking of confirming information at CVs...
at one recent interview, I was asked to provide either the proofs or the letters from the editors confirming that my journal articles were indeed forthcoming... apparently, candidates in the past listed articles that were forthcoming that were in fact not...
also, I'm sitting on a hiring committee this year and one candidate listed his book chapter as forthcoming, which was news to me since I am also a contributor to the edited book and I know the editor is still shopping the book proposal (not even the manuscript, since it isn't written yet) around to university presses...
Anyone else experience these things?
Sadly I'm not surprised that people pad their CVs and put forthcoming pieces that aren't...
I know a person who put revise and resubmit when the verdict was really "completely change your theory and methods, send it back and we will consider it as a new submission."
Dishonest people will find any number of ways to scam the system.
I've saw a cv that listed "to be submitted in 2009"
and other articles that appeared yet to be written. So you have an idea of a paper and a title, great.
I want to know how the VISA gets converted in case of appointment of non US citizens. Do we have to pay for it or the school that hires you takes care of it
Could anyone tell me the pros and cons of joining a visisting asst prof position.
Pros: It's a paycheck that's more than your grad stipend. It's teaching experience (if you haven't had it before and schools you want to work at care about such things).
Cons: It's going to give you less time for research. I wouldn't take an appointment as a VAP unless your dissertation will definitely be done by the time you move to take the job. The compensation is lower ceteris paribus than the equivalent tenure-track job, and the teaching expectations will probably be higher. Being a VAP is (usually unfairly) perceived as a signal that you're a lower quality researcher, colleague, and teacher than if you had a TT position with the equivalent workload.
Regarding VISA question:
When universities hire non-US citizens or temporary residents, they would sponsor them for H1-B visa. They cover the expenses, but in some places the might require your contribution for expedited process, but this is rare.
After you get H1B and start to work, within 18 months you apply for green card, in which you cover all the expenses. For you to advance to that stage the position you got must have been nationally publicized. So, internal arrangements are just not adequate to trigger green card process. Most schools do not have any idea about it, so it is your job to know about it and guide them.
Here is U of Michigan webpage about hiring foreign nationals, one of the most comprehensive on the net:
http://www.internationalcenter.umich.edu/immig/hiring.html
Thank you for your answers concerning VISA. I was a little suprised when my contract letter said that I have to sponsor my on visa.
When I was first hired by a marginal research 1, my contract letter does not even mention my visa issues. But the school so far has taken care of every stage of my H-1b application/renewal and green card application. I assume the most state and private schools would do at least this, but it might vary.
Do years as visiting assistant professor in a college count towards tenure when you apply.
Some schools will, however, pay the attorney fees, application fees, etc. associated with a Green Card application. This is the case, for example, at the University of California.
If you are a foreign scholar, you have to be sure to get everything in writing--how much (if anything) the university will pay, whether they will pay for the expedited process, etc.
"Do years as visiting assistant professor in a college count towards tenure when you apply."
This varies. I interviewed at 8 schools after two years as a VAP and none of them were going to count my VAP time. In my opinion, this is a good thing because it gives you more time to publish with (hopefully) a lighter work load and some schools will count what you published as a VAP also.
speaking of not disclosing fully accurate information at CVs even for tenured faculty..
recently noticed that a newly tenured IR faculty at Cornell failed to list two coauthors for a joint journal article, which was later added separately to the CV as an extra article after being reprinted in an edited volume. another journal article was similarly manipulated on the cv after being reprinted. guess the tenure review committee at Cornell does not really mind this. interesting.
Recently noticed that a newly tenured IR faculty...
You complain about nondisclosure, yet you fault the faculty member for fully disclosing his/her multiple publications. Multiple editions count for something and they should certainly be on the CV separately. Maybe the faculty member forgot to name the co-authors. Its certainly no secret since its a published article, you asshat. I take it the tenure committee will actually go over the file and not only go off a CV.
A reprint is NOT a new article, dude. Respectable people only make a note of this, not listing them as SEPARATE articles in cvs. Anyway, the point is that flagrant CV obfuscation seems pretty prevalent, beyond the job market (even for people with tenure).
failing to list the co-authors is fraudulent. Hopefully the co-authors will not continue to collaborate with that, um, "asshat" - whatever that is ...
Good gravy, I hope you have a copy of the CV to back up these accusations. There are not very many newly tenured people at Cornell.
I like "assclown" better
Re: work permit applications. It is the employer's responsibility (technically) to apply for the permit on behalf of the employee. This would seem to imply paying the application fees as well, though not necessarily.
The biggest thing to be aware of is that many department chairs (or faculty in general) have little knowledge of how the H1-B application process works. The person you'll need to get in touch with (and have the department chair talk to as well) is whomever the university employs to handle visa applications. Since most major universities have plenty of foreign faculty, they should have someone in an "international affairs" office (or similar) who handles these applications. Just don't expect the department chair to know much about it, unless the department recently hired someone foreign.
I heard a very funny story at a christmas party that the chair at a notoriously problematic department sent out a rambling and paranoid email to the whole faculty about a mean but apparently accurate book review from something like 20 years ago and included an incoherent rebuttal - also from way back in the day. All this was prompted by the chair googling himself and discovering that the first few hits were these bad reviews. Should the junior faculty there let the job candidates in on what a whack job the chair is?
Let me guess: Miami.
I think I would tell job candidates if the chair is a nut - especially if the chair determines things like raises - of course, I would be on the market - which I might also disclose. isn't everyone there always on the market?
I would list a reprint as a tabbed secondary entry below the original article.
But having an article reprinted in another volume does count for something. So, for example, does a translation of a book into another language.
Forgetting coauthors is probably just neglectful. To accuse someone of outright falsification (and doing it in a blatantly non-anonymous manner as done above) is pretty cowardly.
There have been a slew of snide remarks about Miami on the blog (here and subfield forums). Could someone familiar with the department offer a bit of background (beyond sniping)? What are the main issues, are they being redressed (for instance if the department shifts to Arts & Sci), is current chair likely to stay long and/or improve matters, how separate poli sci and intl studies are, whether the rash of hiring now is a good sign ... They seem to have some good people (even if it sounds like others have left), but the vitriol is palpable in people's comments. Thanks!
No, let's just leave the sniping alone. Comments about particular departments always degenerates into name-calling.
Sorry to switch topic - but could anyone offer advice on giving my first "job talk" at a US university?
Are there any particular expectations to be met that wouldn't be obvious to someone coming from outside the American academic system?
Sorry to switch topic - but could anyone offer advice on giving my first "job talk" at a US university?
-------
My advice is to present on your dissertation or major work. Cut it up into parts to prepare. I had the following sections in my job talk:
Focus of the Study (main idea)
Research problem (why is this study needed)
Statement of Purpose (what is the question)
Summary of Research
Research subquestions (you might not have these)
Concluding Remarks (summarize)
Research agenda (point them to what you will do next).
Hey, I have a question. If you get an offer and the two-week deadline starts but during this time you bargain a bit with the university and then finally settle on a contract does the two-week deadline start anew?
Thanks for that 12:57.
Is it normal to give an overview of the dissertation, or can I focus on one particular issue in some depth?
only if the university is moronic.
give an overview but focus on the most interesting or best aspect of it - just sit back and think about what you would want to hear if you were in the audience instead of giving the talk. Don't use notes - you should be able to talk about your dissertation (after N years of thinking about it)without cue cards - don't call on graduate students first during the Q&A - look for grey hair if you aren't sure who is faculty and who is a grad student
4:21pm
I would say you can focus on one part of your dissertation. It all depends on what you puts in the best light, how long the university gives you to talk (I have seen 20 mins. to 45 mins.), type of school, etc.
Basically go with what you're most comfortable with.
I think the two week period starts from the day you receive a written contract in the mail. Until then, and "offer" is just words over the phone.
Format of Job talk:
1) The Puzzle
2) The Answer
3) Research Findings
4) Conclusions + future research on the topic
The key to the job talk is preparation. Practicing it as many times as you can is 90% of the battle. And of course give a practice job talk at your home department.
Say you had a choice between a good department in a not-so-prestigious university and a relatively weak department in a great university (both R1's), which would you choose? Would you go with the better department or the better university (all else being equal)? What are the pros and cons of each?
Interesting words about what an "offer" really is. I have an "offer" from a school and the contract is "in the mail". Do I continue interviewing until I get the hard contract? I trust the chair, but weird things happen and I have several more interviews that I will be canceling without a hard offer in hand. Is this wise?
Is it normal to get "credit" toward tenure in a job package? Could one request it?
go for the better department...keep interviewing...tenure "credit" doesn't matter - don't rush it, give yoruself mroe time to get a sufficient record and just go up early if you merit it...
What about differences between rank of subfields and departments? Would you go to a place with a better department or a more prestigious group of scholars within your subfiled, if you had to choose?
I wonder where 1/04/2008 10:37 PM is talking about. Maybe Penn?
1/04/2008 10:37 PM
All else equal? Is it ever? Does the better school have more resources? In a better city? Better place to live?
Does the good department in less good school mean you have lousy resources? Do people leave?
Too many other variables. All else equal, a better department. But things are seldom equal.
There are plenty of great universities with not very highly-ranked poli sci departments. Brown, Purdue, Penn, John's Hopkins, Vanderbilt, UVA, Tufts, Rutgers, all come to mind. On the other hand, FSU, Binghamton, UC Boulder, Indiana, have good departments in lower-ranked schools.
"Interesting words about what an "offer" really is. I have an "offer" from a school and the contract is "in the mail". Do I continue interviewing until I get the hard contract? I trust the chair, but weird things happen and I have several more interviews that I will be canceling without a hard offer in hand. Is this wise?"
I'm in the same position - I told the Chair and Dean that I am ready to accept their offer, but of course I will continue interviewing elsewhere until they get me the paperwork.
I think the best policy is to be upfront with the department re: interviewing elsewhere until the hard copy arrives.
I would disagree somewhat with the tenure advice. If you believe you are going to want to go up early for tenure (and congrats to those who do) then I would make damn sure that it can happen when discussing an offer.
Check to see what the university has written in its tenure policy. Also check with the department faculty and the dean/provost. Any one of them can make your life difficult or even stop the process from moving forward.
Also, remember that every department is different and some might not like a brash young scholar moving too quickly up the ranks. It rubs some people the wrong way and that happens a lot in our profession.
Finally, I have heard that it is harder to make a lateral move if you get tenure. Giving yourself the extra time to see if you like the place and if you want to move might not be a bad idea. Still tenure is much desired and not only gives you stability but also a salary increase!
Any consensus on re-sending an application when a department re-posts an ad months after an initial posting?
Resend. I don't think it will hurt and you have no idea what the first SC did with your application.
I wouldn't resend - I would contact the Chair about the status of your earlier application and why they reposted the ad.
re-send - you may have been overlooked the first time - last year at my former school (I moved this summer) we got over 400 apps for an ad. Some members of the committee were EXCEEDINGLY lazy so many files never got beyond a quick glance - we also had an admin that was very slow some something like 30 of the files never made it into the pile to be considered. Re-send - it's only postage and you have nothing to lose DON'T contact the chair (it's annoying, time consuming, etc and the chair may nto really have much to do with the intial veto or list construction)- just send in a new app
Yes, re-send. There is no harm in doing so. No one would hold it against you. Plus, your CV may look a bit better by now.
I disagree. As a chair, it's annoying to receive multiple copies of applications... but that's just my two cents
My experience in the market this year taught me two things:
1-Do not apply for schools which rank higher from or equal to your PhD institution. I have a sense that admission committees do not even consider applications from lower ranked institutions, regardless of the applicant's academic quality.
2-That might offend some: Do not apply to church-related institutions unless you are somewhat related to that circle. In my experience, these institutions take the best among them rather than the best available candidate. Needless to say that they would state in the websites that they are dedicated to perfection.
Hi,
On the public law board we have a question about the pending offer section on Wiki. Can any clear up the schools with pending offers (some have been on the list for more than two weeks)? Here is the list:
Buffalo: Owens (Wash U)-declined
Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo
Delaware
Emory: Clark (Princeton)
Hofstra
Michigan State: Owens (Wash U)--declined
Sonoma
Wagner: Wilson (Penn State; WVU PhD) -- declined.
Wyoming
11:48am
About your first point on the job market: "Do not apply for schools which rank higher from or equal to your PhD institution. I have a sense that admission committees do not even consider applications from lower ranked institutions, regardless of the applicant's academic quality."
I would like to know if others feel the same way. I tend to think this is true but can be overcome by publishing (ALOT).
1-Do not apply for schools which rank higher from or equal to your PhD institution. I have a sense that admission committees do not even consider applications from lower ranked institutions, regardless of the applicant's academic quality.
I don't agree. It doesn't hurt to try. It just costs you postage. Long-shots sometimes score.
If he'd followed your advice, Ryan Owens wouldn't be headed to Cambridge, MA.
if you have a good publishing record you always have a shot - publish and you'll be hot on the mkt, don't and you'll have to rely on surrogate proof of your merit and potential (such as pedigree)
We (ca. top-30 R1) care less and less about pedigree of the PhD, in my estimation, and consistently make really good hires. That includes of people who come from institutions ranked similarly to or lower than us.
I agree with the last poster. Apply.
In the long run, of course, the ranking of your PhD granting department matters less and less and your research productivity more and more.
It is true that schools generally hire from their own tier or higher, but it is a self-defeating strategy not to apply to "better" schools. I'm at a top-tier department, and we have both interviewed and hired from departments that are not generally thought of as comparable to our own, and there are still others who make it to the long short-list and get serious discussion in committee. Not the average candidate, but it happens.
"1-Do not apply for schools which rank higher from or equal to your PhD institution. I have a sense that admission committees do not even consider applications from lower ranked institutions, regardless of the applicant's academic quality."
Serving on a search committee this year, I must say that this idea is not always true. We're a top 20 program, and half of our short list and half of the candidates invited for job talks were from "lower ranked" schools. Perhaps this is true of the top 5, but it does not hold beyond that, in my experience.
"1-Do not apply for schools which rank higher from or equal to your PhD institution. I have a sense that admission committees do not even consider applications from lower ranked institutions, regardless of the applicant's academic quality."
Serving on a search committee this year, I must say that this idea is not always true. We're a top 20 program, and half of our short list and half of the candidates invited for job talks were from "lower ranked" schools. Perhaps this is true of the top 5, but it does not hold beyond that, in my experience.
While the probability of getting a job at a school on par or better with your PhD granting institution is low, it is non-zero. For example, look at the wiki. Moyer (UGA) at LSU; Owens (Wash U) at Harvard; Rouse (LSU) at Maryland; Boydstun (Penn State) at UC-Davis. (I admit that I am making assumptions regarding the 'rankings' of these schools, but at least some of them are clearly on par with one another).
I don't think that LSU is ranked as highly as UGA. UGA has very productive faculty.
As a UGA alum, I appreciate your opinion re LSU (and perhaps I was misguided by false humility, or maybe it was an abiding respect for Jim Garand) but it doesn't change my larger point re applying to similar or better schools.
I would also point out a simple cue for those on the market next year:
1) Some schools have a penchant for hiring very productive grad students regardless of pedigree. One cue for identifying these schools: look at the pedigree of their recent hires.
Also, for those MAs that are applying to PhD programs, note that some mentors do a good job of initially placing students at similar or better institutions. For example, Don Songer (at South Carolina) placed Stefanie Lindquist at UGA; Ken Meier at Wisconsin-Milwaukee was a classic example, initially placing people at places like Nebraska and Missouri.
This isn't advice, but replace "history" and "AHA" with "political science" and "APSA" in this article and it's a pretty damn good description of how completely sorry our discipline's hiring process is.
I want to revise my dissertation into a book, though publishing houses tend to discourage it. I wonder how much time usually elapses between sending a book prospectus and hearing from the editor. Thanks.
sending a book prospectus and hearing from the editor.
I hear back within a day.
Varies quite a bit, I think. And like job applications, I had publishers from whom I never heard back about a mailed-in book proposal. Depends importantly on whether you have already discussed the proposal with the editor and the proposal is going out for review, or whether the proposal itself is the first contact.
If you don't hear back within four to six weeks, I think it is appropriate to contact them and offer a follow-up conversation by phone.
does anyone EVER get published with unsolicited manuscripts being sent to academic publishers with whom the author has no pre-existing relationship or contact?
I have...and recently, too.
RE: Book proposal
As a novice, I wonder whether the book proposal should include references to existing literature in the footnote.
references to existing literature would be very good!
I have gotten a book contract on sending proposals out to publishers without prior contact. Walking up to them at APSA may also help. However, out of 10 or so proposals sent, I only got 2-3 nibbles.
"I have gotten a book contract on sending proposals out to publishers without prior contact. Walking up to them at APSA may also help. However, out of 10 or so proposals sent, I only got 2-3 nibbles."
does one need to send a sample chapter also along with the proposal? How important is the sample chapter at initial stages?
I recall that when I sent out my prospectus (which was based on mostly completed rewrite of my dissertation), the publishers had, um, guidelines to let you know what you send in. It would probably be a good idea to just check.
Also, personal contacts helped me. And not just ones I made, but references and endorsements of the project from better-known individuals who had worked with these presses before.
What I would suggest would be to contact the people you know who have published books in the past. Look at their proposals as a template. Generally a proposal will have a 2-3 page synopsis, marketability, specifications, an author bio, etc. Sending an introduction may also help, but I suspect that the prospectus is what gets read.
I sent out proposals on what became all my books without making prior contact with the editors. After stumbling through the process with the dissertation, however, I discovered this handy book: Robin Derricourt, An Author's Guide to Scholarly Publishing (Princeton, 1996).
You might also check out William Germano's "Getting It Published: A Guide for Scholars and Anyone Else Serious about Serious Books."
I would likewise recommend taking a look at the "Research" forum at the Chronicle of Higher Education. They seem to discuss a lot of issues relating to getting a book published.
Any recommendations on teaching/pedagogy books for a beginning Assistant Prof developing course syllabi and writing lectures?
As a new faculty member at a previous career stop, I was given a copy of _Mckeachie's Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers_ by Wilbert McKeachie and Marilla Svinicki. (It sits on my desk, unopened.)
My feeling is that the best template for your teaching is to think back on your own previous experiences, both as an undergrad and as a TA. In addition to being "smart," my bet would be that the best teachers that you had were fair (in terms of assignments, grades, etc.), approachable, creative (even in terms of assignments) and were able to share their enthusiasm for the course subject matter with the students.
I also think that your experiences as a grad student should give you some good ideas as to the nuts-and-bolts issues associated with teaching, including syllabi and lectures. Also, don't hesitate to solicit previous syllabi from your new department colleauges, or other people that you know who might have taught a similar course. They can give you a good feel for the expectations, workload requirements, and decent reading materials--especially if it is a class that is outide your particular area of expertise.
Oh, and I would add--do whatever you can to capture and maintain your students' interest in the lectures. Pictures in powerpoint, video clips, internet sites etc. etc. Kids these days are very visual, and nothing turns them off faster than an unending litany of black words projected on a white screen. Once they get turned-off, they don't attend as much, and if they're not attending, not only do they not do as well in the class (generally), but you also don't get the opportunity to "re-capture" their attention.
I found this book had practical and useful suggestions.
That's the same book.
I'm going to my first campus interview shortly and was wondering about the protocol for discussing a possible partner hire. Mine is for a T/T position and would like to know whether it is acceptable to raise the possibility of an adjunct hire for a partner (in a different discipline)? If so, with whom? The Dean?
My sense is that, if all you're asking for is an adjunct hire, the department will not be less favorably disposed toward you out of a fear that you will not come if offered the position. This is because adjuct positions are easy to come by/hard to fill. If it was my university, the other department would love to hire your spouse as an adjuct, given the difficulty of finding good adjuncts. You wouldn't believe some of the adjucts we have teaching our courses-another topic altogether.
Having said all this, I would just keep quiet about it until you get the offer. Once you have the offer, my hunch is the chair/Dean will be happy to get your spouse an adjunct position in the other department b/c it's something easily done. And once you have the offer, sh**, ask for a visiting position or spousal hire-all they can say is no and provide the adjunct.
Agreed. Do not mention your spouse unless asked (which is illegal anyway, but it happens 50% of the time). If you're asked, be non-committal and change the subject. The time for talking about spousal hires is AFTER the offer.
The exception, I think, is if you already have an offer in hand at another place and you want to communicate that arranging a spousal hire might make a difference for you. But even then, tread lightly.
or if you already have a job. I think if you already have a job, it pays to be much more open about these things. That way they know you are not just trying to get a raise, but are genuinely interested in the place.
or if you already have a job. I think if you already have a job, it pays to be much more open about these things. That way they know you are not just trying to get a raise, but are genuinely interested in the place.
-------------------------------
If they are interviewing you, doesn't it mean that they have internally concluded that you are not *only* interested in a raise? They know it's a possibility, but if they are using one of their slots to interview you, it must mean that they think there's a *reasonable* chance that you are actually interested in the job.
Schools aren't interested in interviewing folks whom they think are only on the market for a raise.
So it's not clear what you gain from being upfront about it before you get the offer.
Many thanks to all those who answered my question about negotiating for a partner hire as adjunct. You've spared me from making some schoolboy errors.
I don't think you should mention your family (spouse or otherwise) before getting an offer. Not only do you have to worry about prejudice based on sexuality and negative assumptions about your level of professional commitment, you have to worry that they'll see you as a greater risk because your spouse might throw negotiations off in one way or another. There's just no reason anyone needs to know about it at an early stage. Even if you want to gain information related to your family -- such as school stuff or a spouse's employment prospects -- you can talk to people who have no bearing on the hiring decision and aren't likely to talk to those who do (e.g., real-estate agents, university employment offices, etc.). If someone stupidly asks you whether you're married or have kids, just look at them innocently and say: "Oh, I was under the impression we weren't supposed to talk about stuff like that." If they still push the matter, you don't want the job.
The other thing to keep in mind is that once you do have that job and the spousal hire business comes up, make sure it comes up in the negotiation stage. Do not let wait until after you've accepted the offer and then announce that your spouse needs a position.
If someone stupidly asks you whether you're married or have kids, just look at them innocently and say: "Oh, I was under the impression we weren't supposed to talk about stuff like that." If they still push the matter, you don't want the job.
I agree that you shouldn't have to discuss family during a job interview, but be careful in how you respond to such questions. You don't want to come off as being overly stand-offish or legalistic (ie, "you can't ask me that question"); people might draw the inference that you're a bad colleague waiting to happen. It's probably better just to make a joke and move on (ie, "who wants to talk about kids when I've got so many interesting research projects" or something stupid like that).
A lot of older faculty may be ignorant about the rules and may ask family-related questions of out genuine interest or out of a desire to be helpful (ie, if you say you have kids, they'll tell you about the fantastic schools and little league programs).
1/24/2008 10:57 AM gives excellent advice. A better strategy to stand-offishness would be to answer quickly and plainly, and then immediately move to a new topic. A mental list of questions that you can ask anybody to change the subject is useful.
Although I never did, I always wanted to answer the spouse/family question (I wear a wedding ring, so it's obvious that I'm married) by saying very light-heartedly "My spouse is an employment law attorney." It's not true, but gets the point across. I never had the guts to actually follow through.
From an old faculty member: do recognize the opening when it's there, though. I generally mention the fact that I have kids when I am talking with job candidates and try to do so in a way that hints that it's a safe topic to discuss with me.
I don't claim a correlation of 1.0 but, in my department, there's a positive association between people with kids and their productivity. This could be unusual, I don't know. I do recall one of my friends with kids tell me how horrified he was when he realized there was this little thing that depended completely on him. Perhaps this gives him motiviation to do well in his career. Anyway, all of this is just to note how silly I think it is that search committees/departments worry about these things. It's not something that I observe in my department and I wonder if such a concern is a lot rarer than comments on this blog suggest.
I agree--as a newly-minted Ph.D. with two kids, I definitely feel more pressure to be productive (both in teaching and in publishing), not for my own sake, but for theirs as well. I am not particularly hesitant to tell anyone that I have a wife and kids, either, or that in the vast scheme of things I definitely make life choices and employment choices based upon what is best for my family.
...I am just hoping that this is NOT why I have yet to land a good T/T job.
In my department, the correlation between #of kids and productivity is negative.
I don't really care either way, but my point is that your department's experience might (or might not be) relevant in other departments
I am sure this depends a lot on whether the person with kids and T/T job is male or female.
I'd bet that the correlation between kids and productivity is very mildly negative. The reason being that there are some (female) scholars who have chosen not to have kids in order to further their career. Those small number of cases excepted, almost everybody else has kids, so it can't really explain differences in productivity.
But even if the correlation were strongly negative, we should never ask anybody to choose between having a family and having a decent career.
Kids can be time-consuming, yes. Being single and searching can take a lot of time and effort as well. There is also typically a higher consumption of alchohol, which is negatively correlated with productivity. That is, unless you are in the Rolling Stones. :)
Or unless you make your research *about* drinking.
Folks have talked about salary a lot. Here is a real honest to god salary database.
http://www.charlotte.com/universitypay/
It's only one system, of course, but still helpful. For instance, two full professors in the same subfield at UNC, both nationally prominent, and one makes 193k while one makes 119k.
Don't believe the hype on some of the salary postings.
Bear in mind that UNC has a reputation for quite often not being able to be competitive salary-wise with other top 20 Departments.
Really? Those salaries looked pretty good to me. Then again, I'm not at a Top 20, but still...
Here's a piece of unsolicited advice that I never thought that would be necessary to dole out:
If you say bad things about the department that has invited you in while meeting with the Dean at the school, the department will find out about it. Don't talk smack about the people who are deciding whether or not to hire you. It will DRAMATICALLY hurt your chances of getting hired.
Haha, great anecdote. That happened once to us with a candidate from an Ivy who clearly thought he was too good for us. Funnily enough, he ended up in a Dept. that with an "even" lower ranking than ours.
I'd say salaries at UNC are only slightly below what they are at other Depts. ranked 20 +/-5. Still, I've heard cost of living at Chapel Hill is not as low as some would think.
I think the NC salaries are fine--but they point out the huge variability in tenured professor salaries, and that the kinds of outlier salaries posted here are really outliers.
Not that surprising. One of those professors never had a tenured offer from Harvard and, furthermore, that professor needed his spouse to be taken care of.
Actually, those UNC salaries looked about right.
I have a third year review/tenure question rather than a job market question. A couple people have suggested that it is wise for me to include syllabi from others that assign my publications. While I agree this sounds like a good idea, tracking down syllabi from others that might assign me sounds like a lot of work. Conduct an exhaustive search would clearly interfere with my ability to get real work done.
Can people think of any cases where showing that work is being assigned in courses has made a real difference in third year review, tenure, or promotion to full? I would think that cites serve as an equivalent measure, but they may not be the case.
If including syllabi does make a difference, then I hope as a discipline we start a practice of sending copies to those folks whose work we assign. I probably will (at least to untenured folks).
I have never heard of such a thing. Are these senior people in your department? What does your chair say?
If you take a position at a liberal arts college or R2, can you mobilize your way up to an R1 if you publish like crazy? Or are you pretty much stuck there?
9:22 pm
Of course, it varies with the person's productivity. There are many stars who first started at good LACs which are like the R1s in many respects anyway. It might not be harder if you are at R2s, not necessarily because of your own talent, but perhaps due to excessive teaching loads, culture, lack of adequate research support etc. Again, there are exceptions.
9:22: You can, if you have the resources and time to publish your way out and don't let yourself get sidetracked into conforming to whatever the institutional expectations are for tenure & promotion (which will probably expect you to perform better on teaching and often indifferent to the quantity/quality of research beyond the bare minimum and "it got in a peer-reviewed journal"). Publish and build a professional network in your field and I think you can "escape."
Plenty of R2/LAC folks have moved into R1s in recent years. Winburn went from Western Kentucky to Mississippi for Fall 07; Dunaway goes from Sam Houston State to LSU in Fall 08; Reifler went Loyola-Chicago to Ga. State; Monroe is going from Pacific to UC-Merced. And that's just a lazy accounting of Americanists from memory and 30 seconds on the Wiki.
On the other hand, if you have a life outside the academy (spouse, 2.5 kids, friends who do not speak in academic jargon) you may quickly decide that being "underplaced" is just fine. It's mostly us sickos whose work is their life who worry about such things.
RE: 7.00am. Finding your stuff on syllabi isn't as hard as you think. Wrap your article title in quotes in google and include the word "syllabus." E.g. "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy" "syllabus" in google. Still, I find it a little odd that this would be a requirement.
This 7:00 AM again. The syllabi thing isn't a requirement, but a suggestion. I took it to mean "we'll consider any positive evidence you can present for yourself." So, the message is either "we like you" and/or "you are a borderline case and start thinking about what else you can add to your file." Given that I'm just in my second year, I take it more as the former. The google search suggestion is good, but will still completely miss syllabi that aren't posted online. (If I post mine, I do so on Blackboard because students are more likely to look there than they are on my website.)
At some schools, tenure or promotion to full requires the completely non-transparent standard of "making an impact" or being "known in the discipline." Peer reviewed publications are obviously the foundation of this, but having people read and cite your work is probably also important. I just wasn't sure if the syllabus suggestion is something other people do, and for folks who have voted on tenure (or full) I wanted to ask if they had ever seen it actually make a difference.
Again, it really was a suggestion or just something to consider--I like my department a lot and am not saying they are crazy/bad/unrealistic in their tenure file expectations. I genuinely think the tenured folks at my school want the untenured folks to succeed. That is not true everywhere.
Just realized that the journal thread is almost defunct now, so I am pasting this here:
who has the worst horror story in terms of the turnaround time with any political science journal for the 1st round of reviewing? the one i heard recently is nearly 1 year.
I'M 2 WEEKS AWAY FROM ONE YEAR MYSELF - SHOULD I SEND A BIRTHDAY CARD? SHOULDN'T THEY PUBLISH IT NOW OUT OF SHAME? I EMAILED AFTER 6 MONTHS, AGAIN 3 MONTHS LATER, AND WILL DO IT AGAIN IN ANOTHER WEEK - *SIGH*
sorry - Pacific to UC merced is at best a lateral - there's no department there yet
Wow, almost 1 year in waiting time for the first round!! What journals could they be? Why are people still submitting there?
UC Merced will have a PhD program in 5 years or less and has R1 resources behind it--this isn't a new CSU campus or the typical "hope-the-hyphen-transfers-some-street-cred" deal like UM-Flint. Pacific is a glorified liberal arts college. And I guarantee you Monroe got serious cash thrown his way to leave a job he just started in September. (Pacific's a GOOD glorified liberal arts college, and a place I'd rather work than UC Merced, but it isn't an R1 and UC Merced is, which is what the inquiry was about.)
this is crazy, the poli sci dept at UC Merced is NOT R1 level - they'll ahve a 4th rate phd program in 5 years MAYBE ...doesn't matter how much lipstick you smear on that pig
5:22: Do you even have a clue what "R1" means? It does not mean "top 10" or "top 100." It means research-oriented university with a range of doctoral programs. ALL of the established UCs are R1s. UC Merced will be one too; that's its institutional mission. It's not a massively elite status, and you can get R1 status without having a political science PhD (and there are R2s that have PhDs in political science or PA).
I'd also point out that as little as 10 years ago many people would have said the same thing about UC Davis. Not too long before that the same applied to UCSD. Throw money at senior people and you can build a top-ranked department in a hurry. Merced will do it too.
(And how is going from Pacific at a 3-3 load to Merced at likely a 2-2 or better with higher pay a "lateral move"?)
Merced is at 1-2 and may move to 1-1.
as little as 10 years ago many people would have said the same thing about UC Davis. Not too long before that the same applied to UCSD. Throw money at senior people and you can build a top-ranked department in a hurry. Merced will do it too.
Yes, but in Merced's case it's not just a department, it's an entire university that needs to be built.
In an era of squeezed budgets and perhaps better uses of money on other UC campuses.
Central Valley Republican influence with the legislature notwithstanding.
I was also wondering about UC-Merced & Mississippi as R1s...I was under the impression that both were R2s.
Monroe moved to Merced after only one year at Pacific, prior to which he was at MSU. So I don't think it's a particularly good example of someone "moving up". Merced is lucky to get Monroe.
First, R1 v. R2 v. R3 Carnegie distinction don't even exist anymore. That being said, Merced has the promise of being what an R1 classification represents. Look at the two people there now-Tom Hansford and Stephen Nicholson. Both left research oriented universities (South Carolina and Georgia State, I believe). Both have strong R1-level research records. But promise doesn't mean they are there yet. Merced is nowhere near the requisite number of PhD programs, let alone grant $$$.
"promise" of R1 and R1 are two different things - this was just self-promotion - enough about it
One must be very careful about taking forthcoming articles at face value. And one has to be even more careful about book chapters and books. There is a lot of misrepresentation, some of which may not be intentional. There is actually a case of a Big Ten Dept. granting tenure to an assistant professor mainly on the basis of an APSR "article" that never appeared.
I find it hard to believe that a department would grant someone tenure without first verifying their "forthcoming" piece.
I even heard a story of granting tenure without first finding out the possession of a PhD.
I even heard a story of granting tenure without first finding out the possession of a PhD.
2/09/2008 9:19 PM
--
what this at a Top 20?
To 9:11 pm.
Gary King was involved. And the journal editor was weak.
merced will move to a 1-1 if its student decides not to take 2 political science classes in one term. everyone is waiting on her decision.
How long ago was the tenure case in question?
Oh, geez, is that the EI incident? Don't believe everything you hear about that.
Could someone explain this tenure situation?
Why is this an informative item for you? Why do you care? Whatever the facts may be, it certainly it not applicable to you or the situation of anyone you know.
The lesson to aspiring junior faculty is that publications alone do not determine tenure. There are many aspects to the process.
To the uninitiated: Carnegie classifications are available at carnegiefoundation.org.
All UC schools are "RU/VH"
University of Mississippi and University of Southern Mississippi are both ranked "RU/H".
The rankings are explained here http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/index.asp?key=791 and are based in part on the number of PhDs awarded institution-wide, level of federal funds, federal funds per capita, and other measures.
The EI incident? Anyone care to share?
There are no faculty members with the initials "EI" at any Big Ten institution.
And yes, I was procrastinating that hard this morning.
EI doesn't refer to any person's initials.
EI means "ecological inference." Google is your friend.
Involuntary humor is the best.
** To the uninitiated: Carnegie classifications are available at carnegiefoundation.org.
All UC schools are "RU/VH"
University of Mississippi and University of Southern Mississippi are both ranked "RU/H".
The rankings are explained here http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications/index.asp?key=791 and are based in part on the number of PhDs awarded institution-wide, level of federal funds, federal funds per capita, and other measures.
2/11/2008 2:48 PM **
So? Merced isn't even ranked by Carnegie yet. What more evidence do you need, that while it has promise, it ain't there yet?
no kidding - astonishing anyone pimps merced publicly - it'll be the intellectual equivalent of a cc for at least 15 years - likely for the rest of time
so I have a journal horror story - we submitted our article to the Electronic Journal of Comparative Law 50 weeks ago. After 4 intermittent reminders from us to them (the first after 6 months) we just got a rejection with NO reviews. Shoddy stuff - the editorial team should step down
new schedule for MPSA is up
2/12/2008 12:23 PM
Well, that settles it. I'm never submitting something to the Electronic Journal of Comparative Law.
<< Home