American Job Rumors Aug 2008>
Please keep this to job rumors only or job discussions. Discussions of individual faculty, for whatever reason, are strongly discouraged.
posted by American and Comparative Jobs at 8/12/2008 06:07:00 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.
484 Comments:
When schools like PENN, Princeton etc.. have the open calls for several jobs in a particular field - what does this generally mean (if there is a standard answer)?
In the case of a department like Princeton's, they are looking for the best available athlete. In the case of a department like Penn's, they are looking to build in a specific direction, but they have multiple lines to do it with.
Do conference interviews make or break a potential hire?
Great question about conference interviews. I think they can break a hire, but not necessarily make a hire. They can get you in for an on campus interview though, if you shine.
I think in my time of hunting, I received many APSA interviews that were really informational, please apply, da da da. On the other hand, I had three that I think led to on campus interviews and two ended up ending in offers.
That said, my thought is that if you were to go and really really screw it up...massively...that it would be a break. Take it seriously, ask good questions, and be yourself.
Or (better) just don't go, and let your record speak for itself.
Per APSA interviews again - If a job posting says full consideration given to those who apply by "...." and the date is after APSA - does that mean (1) APSA interviews are useless; (2) those postings are less than truthful; (3) or they use APSA as an initial cutting point or (4) something different... Thanks
I would take that to mean: if you're a marginal candidate on paper and you apply in time to get an interview at APSA, you have a chance to shine and make it through to the shortlist. If you're a marginal candidate on paper and you apply after APSA, your chances are much worse.
In my experience universities use the APSA interview for two reasons: to see who is on the hiring horizon AND to generate interest, among the best candidates, in the department.
We've used informal APSA interviews for our searches the last few years (mid-level R1). The interviews can make a difference, but that difference cuts both ways. We've had people drop out of contention, and people move up on the list, depending on how the interview goes. In most cases, however, the interview won't vault someone over someone who is objectively more qualified. So, if you have a strong record (good school, good mentor, good research record), you shouldn't be too concerned about missing out on the APSA interviews. Perhaps the most useful thing to get out of it is the practice you get in talking to people about yourself. But like the job interview itself, it would be useful to get some feedback before APSA about your "talking points."
Regarding the periodic complaints that this blog should be for job discussion only:
It seems to me that this blog has morphed into a forum for general PS discussion, in addition to job rumors. Admin: How about a separate forum/sub-blog for general discussion? It seems to me that such a forum is much needed in our discipline--i.e., a place where free-wheeling, honest discussion of various issues can take place, due to the anonymous posts. At the same time, though, we want to preserve a job/rumor forum for those folks on the market, but without subjecting them to topics that they may have no interest in (yet).
It's a shame that by boycotting the NO meeting, you are also punnishing an economy that desperately needs you.
I'm thinking that was the thrust behind the decision to have the meeting in NOLA.
Given that no one seems to be posting job rumors, whats the harm in polite, reasoned discussion?
(Its a nice change from some of the other, even sanctioned, blogs (e.g., methods)
Seems like very few senior jobs. Anyone else have that impression? Or is it just too early?
When do most jobs post? Later summer? Early fall? What is the general trend?
This blog is dead. It was on Hospice last year, and now it officially in the cryptkeeper category. Good bye.
Move the discussion of the conference to the conference thread. All further discussion here (or on any other thread) will be deleted. Please post things to the proper thread and refrain form spaming/cross-posting.
Thanks,
The Po Po
Here's a rumor--Iowa will have a position open that they didn't expect.
You're referring to the Arthur Miller situation?
Are you slow?
Prof. Miller is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Whenever someone mentions a person by name, a bunch of people freak out in response. I think a better approach might be to ignore it, since people posting by name are probably primarily looking for a reaction.
Shouldn't you have written "Obama" between Hilton and Hitler?
What is this discussion about Iowa all about?
Behavior position at Iowa posted today:
http://www.higheredjobs.com/Faculty/details.cfm?JobCode=175330343
Is it true that Iowa did not have any funds to offer incoming graduate students this year? (comparative thread)
How is their faculty pay compared to other comparable universities (in rank and geographic area)?
Budget shortfall at UW and hiring freeze up in Seattle
Iowa's pay is low for a top 30 department though not as low for one ranked below 20. It's maybe slightly low given the cost of living but not that bad.
Iowa's pay is low for a top 30 department
I think the question is, how does Iowa's pay rank as a top-60 department.
SNAP! F-YOU, IOWA!!!111
Budget shortfall at UW or you don't want anyone else to apply for the job you want in Seattle
AM's salary is 125K at Iowa where the cost of living is not high. It is listed in the newspaper reports. I don't know if you would call that low.
People, really...are you going to take a job at Iowa "for the money?" It's a good department, and many of you reading this would be ecstatic to get an offer from them. With ethanol and what-not, your Maserati is going to FLY out there.
Heard from an Iowa grad student (so take it for what it is worth) at MWPSA that Iowa overcommitted to too many existing graduate students, leaving them short for new graduate students (which they funded, just not as many as usual). So a short term problem, they still have the same grad student budget but currently too many graduate students. Having talked to people at other programs, this seems like a common state school problem.
^^^
Yes, that's exactly what happened at Iowa. The university is cutting back on graduate student funding to increase faculty salaries. The department decided to admit very few graduate students for the upcoming year, because too many decided to come in the previous year.
I have seen AM''s salary listed as $117.5K and $123.5.
That suggests relatively low salaries at UI. After all, AM is the 13th most cited political scientist in his cohort (PS, January 2007), the 18th most cited comparativist, has published the 14th most cited article in the APSR (APSR, November 2006), and is among 12 members of the APSR Hall of Fame (PS March 1996).
I've heard other stories that make Iowa sound like the new University of Miami. AM isn't the only with the senior faculty problem there.
Can you explain the reference to Miami (I'm ignorant)?
How much do I have to pay to *not* have anyone explain the Miami reference.
:-)
Iowa would be a great place to work. (It certainly is higher ranked than than my current department.) There are some really strong faculty members there, grad students are good, life is generally pleasant. Yes, the AM problem is unfortunate, but that could have happened anywhere. Iowa City is a nice college town. It is a good place to raise a family. If I got an offer from there I'd go in a heartbeat.
We know you would like a job at Iowa, Scott.
The story behind the University of Miami's political science department?
Sum it simply: when you tenure the wrong people and drive away smart juniors, you're not left with a lot of good options.
I don't see the comparison b/t Miami and Iowa. Have they driven away good juniors and tenured bad seniors who are now running the department?
Before Miami's juniors left en masse, they were really badly treated by a few power hungry seniors with agendas.
I guess we will see if Iowa starts losing its good juniors.
That wasn't me, though I'd happily take a job there.
Who are some of Iowa's good juniors that we should observe to see if they leave?
Well, at least one recently-tenured Iowa faculty member was looking pretty hard for a different job a year or two ago, and only stayed due to a lack of offers, from what I heard.
(obeying the edict not to name names, and all that)
seriously, 8/16/2008 7:19 PM is uncool -- even if true, that post makes nobody better off.
congratulations. you win the "i'll anonymously pee in the punch" award. you can stop by and collect it anytime you want.
This discussion of Iowa seems odd. Is there situation different from other state schools (with the exception of the AM stuff). Not all the first year graduate students are funded (seems like something at all state schools) and they have some senior retention problems because of salary. Seems like that could describe most state schools.
And some well-known private institutions as well. Georgetown hardly funds everyone. Until very recently, neither did Columbia. Harvard only implemented universal 5-year funding packages for incoming PhD students within the last decade.
Losing mid-level and senior Americanists at Iowa has been a perennial occurrence for the last twenty years or so: Sam Patterson to OSU, Jim Stimson to Minnesota (and then UNC), Jack Wright to American (and the OSU), and Jim Lindsey to Brookings…. That is the part of the normal nature of faculty retention at research universities. I think what makes the appearance worse is that outside of Stimson and Miller they weren’t able to attract big names for mid-level hires (though Tom Rice and Caroline Tolbert were nice additions).
You can argue salaries are actually more competitive now and that fewer people have left recently. Full professor salaries at Iowa average six out of the ten public Big Ten schools (caveat: my figures are the Chronicle ones for the entire universities, not for departments) as opposed to the typical eight, ninth, or tenth place positions you might see twenty years ago.
The big problem is that Iowa will never be able to compete with schools like OSU or Illinois in terms of endowment, tuition revenue (Iowa is not going to have 40,000 students), aggregate state funding (unless the population increases in size by 500%), etc… You can have a nice career there. However the best mid-career people will have better opportunities to move elsewhere – though they may decide to stay for non-career related reasons.
Columbia's been funding most of its graduate students for well over a decade (and has been universally funding for at least eight years). I don't know where this myth about Columbia comes from, but I hear it a lot.
Columbia's been funding most of its graduate students for well over a decade (and has been universally funding for at least eight years). I don't know where this myth about Columbia comes from, but I hear it a lot.
Well, probably from the fact that 9 years ago (i.e., when most junior faculty would have been considering Columbia for grad school), Columbia did not fund everyone.
I was accepted to Columbia back in '01 with no funding... I went elsewhere.
I heard Miami is hosting a kegger at APSA - which is weird because they may not have more than 1 line and they are about to get merged into the international studies department - I guess the chair is going out with a bang!
Iowa has lost Shipan (to Michigan), Squire (to Missouri), Segura (to Washington), Matt and Sonja Golder (to FSU), Hall (to Oxford) in the last five years. And don't listen to the gard student funding level remaining the same - it has decreased university-wide. Each department gets less money now and has to put their applicants into a competitive pool with grad students from other depts. to get funding - it's brutal and unpredictable. And if you take out the salaries of Lewis-Beck, Miller, and one or two others, Iowa pays low. Assistants are getting starting offers in the 40s. Yes, 40s.
Iowa is poor. Got it. Can we move on now? How are things at TAMU? What is Ting up to?
The salary info for Iowa is wrong. I interviewed there a few years ago and the salary parameters we discussed we competitive with other public universities of similar rank (e.g. $60K+).
Hey 7:27 - Are you talking about political science offers in the
40s? I never had an offer from Iowa, but that is simply absurd. That can't be true. You must be confusing visiting (non-tenure track) faculty with tenure-track hires.
Yes, a few years ago I interviewed at a few small state schools and my offers from those schools ranged from $48k (very poor state) to $58k. Hard to believe Iowa offers are in the 40s.
While I know aren't supposed to be talking about individuals, the Des Moines Register has a salary database that includes Iowa professors.
http://data.desmoinesregister.com/results/index.php?info=State_Salaries
To be fair, it hasn't been updated for the 2008 fiscal year. However the assistant professors I know there were making $60K+ in 2007, according to the database.
The Iowa salaries for associates and most fulls look really, really low to me. Are salaries of those levels common in the second tier of the Big Ten and other state universities?
I did some research into this a while back... Iowa's salaries do indeed rank near the bottom among CIC universities (along with Purdue, and to a lesser extent Indiana) especially among the junior ranks. But as with anything else, such numbers need to be taken with a block or two of salt.
Indiana salaries are not especially low- I don't know about Iowa or Purdue. When I was considering an IU offer, I researched the salaries. The ranges by rank:
Full $100,000-$248,000
(2 fulls above 200,000)
Associate: $80,000-$85,000
Assistant: $68,500-$75,500
What senior people are on the move, or in the mix, this hiring season?
How about a constructive conversation about a topic:
What scholars would you enjoy co-authoring with, by subfield? And why?
Any idea who the Harris School might be targeting with their Endowed Chair positions?
From comparative blog:
Cornell did post but it was deleted. Same thing with Harvard. Strange.
What's going on? Schools are posting then deleting jobs?
"Schools are posting then deleting jobs?"
Perhaps someone managing e-jobs made mistakes by re-posting ads from last year. Those schools did not delete jobs.
The deadlines were fall 2008, with jobs to start in 2009.
Any sense of what Dartmouth is looking for? The ad specifies essentially every American subfield except political psychology and voting/elections. Is it really "best athlete" or do they have strong leanings in a particular direction?
Dartmouth wanted to hire a REP scholar last year, but only to fail.
so not to spark up the whole University of Miami conversation again, but their ad says they have generous research support yet at midwest I heard they used to basically have unlimited conference travel but now get about a thousand dollars a year and food no longer is reimbursed. I've also heard they have no research money to speak of -basically the rumor was the department got totally pwned by the provost and it's about to get swallowed by the international studies department
I see Princeton advertised a junior job in American -- does anyone know if Princeton will do a senior search this year?
Re 8/21/2008 12:46 PM:
Here is an even better reason for not going to Miami: ILP is there.
Holy George! Who is ILP?
Re Miami: I think most of the language in that ad is boilerplate that has been in it for several years.
Given that they fire juniors there, who wants to be the person to tell the chair that "you know the resources aren't that good anymore"?
2:22; I think that should read:
Holy George, who is ILP.
what is ILP? is that the pyramid scheme that was in the news?
UM ...pwned AND swallowed - man, that's gotta hurt
I know the discussion of the Iowa professor was halted but this seems very serious...
http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080822/NEWS01/808220321
That's terribly, terribly sad.
http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080823/NEWS01/808230347
Why do I feel like my time in Denver is going to be more fun than Boston?
cuz in denver all you have to do is get drunk and say "woohoo" with a bunch of people who already agree with you
"cuz in denver all you have to do is get drunk and say "woohoo" with a bunch of people who already agree with you."
Perestroikans do that in Boston (too).
"Perestroikans do that in Boston (too)."
Yeah, I enjoy MPSA about 10 times as much as APSA in large degree b/c of this. I guess it's a matter of taste. I don't try to tell them what their taste should be but man that is not reciprocated.
http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080824/NEWS01/80824001/1079
R.I.P.
"cuz in denver all you have to do is get drunk and say "woohoo" with a bunch of people who already agree with you"
and in Boston you'll do what exactly? get in an argument about ordered probit?
"cuz in denver all you have to do is get drunk and say "woohoo" with a bunch of people who already agree with you"
and in Boston you'll do what exactly? get in an argument about ordered probit?
Well... get drunk and argue about ordered probit...
probably.
Yes, people who use quantitative methods argue about ordered probit all the time. There has been a great deal written on ordered probit in political science over the last two years, so why not discuss it?
Beck and Katz. 2007. "What To Do and Not To Do With Ordered Dependent Variables." AJPS
Franklin. 2008. "The Ultimate Question in Political Science: Ordered Probit or OLS?" APSR
Stimson. 2008. "Are OLS Assumptions Really Violated with Four Ordered Outcomes?" JOP.
King. 2007. An Ordered Probit Theory of Political Science. Cambridge University Press.
Yawn.
Are you guys still talking?
Ha ha. Joke's on you; the last two APSRs have been WAY too skinny to fit any articles on ordered probit!
That is a good point. This APSA will be awesome with all the Perestroikians and weirdos and subversives off in Denver.
my grad school cohort had 2 people that got bullied and took early jobs, both regretted it very quickly and went back on the market the fall after arriving at Bully U and Bully State - worked out great for one,not so good for another - the point being, you shouldn't accept a job lightly - it's (I think) a bigger deal than staying in grad school one more year - the wrong job will make you miserable and you might get stuck
RE: 8/25/2008 5:11 AM
I've looked for these citations and can't find them. Can you give the full citations please?
Those papers no longer exist. They vanished mysteriously from the journals in which they were published. Their disappearance had been discussed in the paper "Prob(it)ing the Improbable: The Disorderly Departure of Discourse on Ordered Probit," in the March issue of The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics. However, I just looked at the IJPE site, and now that article, too, is gone. Very strange. Perhaps a conspiracy is unfolding. Here's the site:
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/
Apparently 8/26/2008 12:06 PM is Courtney Brown: writing about things that only he can see!
#100
Does anyone know of a ranking of top POLI SCI book publishers that's more recent than the 1999 “Ranking the Presses: Political Scientists' Evaluations of Publisher Quality” that appeared in PS?
On publishers: it varies by sub-field (and even by sub-sub-field, especially in comparative). So the answer is: it depends. In American, Cambridge, Chicago, Princeton are all excellent, and depending on what you're doing, so are Michigan, Harvard, and a few others (Oxford, Stanford).
[i]Apparently 8/26/2008 12:06 PM is Courtney Brown: writing about things that only he can see![/i]
Nah. Ol' Jack Burton can see things no one else can see every time he drinks Egg Shen's potion.
Stanford's IR job no longer appears on e-jobs. Does anyone know if it has been cancelled?
Dude, wrong blog.
The American book publisher question is an interesting one. Its a subject for which we need some hard evidence (warning: I have none!).
Of course books should be judged on their own merits, but especially across subfields, they seldom are.
I read a lot of good stuff on Cambridge, for instance. But they also publish a lot, probably more than anyone else. A lot of it is junk too. And the same goes for other big presses (e.g., Chicago).
Princeton seems to get consistently good stuff, but they publish much less. Yale seems to publish hardly anything. What was the last American politics book Harvard published?
And the reputations seem stable to me-- regardless of what the presses are actually doing.
I recall the former Michigan editor telling me that he was unhappy with his backlist and wanted to move the Press's focus. I thought Michigan had the strongest backlist for Am. Institutions of any press, but he didn't like it and wanted to change it.
Oxford still has a great reputation despite publishing hardly anything other than atheoretical "pop politics" type books. The last "must read" there might have been Poole and Rosenthal 10+ years ago.
Some smaller presses seem to be trying to build a reputation for themselves. I know that my Judicial friends think well of Kansas. The Race and Politics crew seems to respect Temple. But outside of their subfields, these presses don't seem very well known or respected.
For smaller presses, I might also add Temple for campaigns & elections, Texas A&M for presidency and Virginia for judicial.
As these last comments suggest, global rankings for book publishers (or journals) quickly lose value. There are some big presses with broad reputations across the discipline, but they are often uneven (CUP publishes a lot of junk along with the best, OUP has largely been absent from American politics). There are some smaller prestige presses with broad reputations (PUP, HUP, Chicago). After that, there are niche players with good local reputations but limited reputations with colleagues outside your subfield (Kansas, Virginia). After that are the distinctly lower quality presses -- CUP's junk w/o CUP's good stuff, or pure monographs. If you need to impress deans and distant colleagues, then there are some obvious suspects. Otherwise, you can just think about your bookshelf.
Speaking about university presses, I wonder what is the reputation of the University of Pennsylvania Press?
The only stuff from Penn I see on my (American behavior dominated) shelf is stuff from the Annenberg school. What else have they published in American?
This blog is like a bad porn site. You feel bad about yourself everytime you check back in to see if there is something new.
That is SO weird! I was checking my porn site today and thought...this is exactly like the American Job Rumors blog - nothing new.
Way to go. Hit the nail right on the head! Good thing we can post as anonymous ;)
Any good APSA rumors?
Overheard at APSA:
Miami's department is out of the business school, back in arts and sciences, but thinks they'll be subsumed by international studies sooner rather than later.
I also heard pretty much every job that's out there has been posted, so if you're holding out for something better, sorry.
UM is interviewing and holding a kegger (no kidding) but they're being absorbed by the international studies department - it's in process right now
UM poli sci department is joining international studies not being absorbed by INS. together they will make a greater pol sci (with an new fancy name like global politics or something of that sort). INS is just as crazy as pol sci--so don't expect any improvement
Go McCain!
Ballyhoo! Groseclose resigns?....
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ucla30-2008aug30,0,6489043.story
8/30/2008 12:45 AM
Resign? He ought to be congradulated.
That’s spelled "congratulated." UCLA grad?
Has Ting quit any committees out of protest?
All the UC's are corrupt.
I posted the original Q about ranking of presses.I did so to ID "objective" analyses that I could include with my tenure packet. There are people outside of Poli Sci that (1) will vote for/against me getting tenure and (2) they will wonder about the prestige of certain presses. I'm looking to provide them with information that's been published about presses, not people's opinions on the issue. But it seems that there is nothing beyond the source I mentioned in my previous email.
It it true that Rochester denied tenure to Valeria Sinclair Chapman? That seem odd to me.
It it true that Rochester denied tenure to Valeria Sinclair Chapman? That seem odd to me.
Valeria is up for tenure (for the first time) this year. So no, it is not true that Rochester has denied her tenure.
Here is the only other objective ranking of presses I've seen:
https://news.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crljournal/backissues2000b/july00/lewis.pdf
Good luck.
Try again:
https://news.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crljournal/backissues2000b/july00/lewis.pdf
OK, I don't know why I can't get the link to show up, but the citation is:
An Assessment of Publisher Quality
by Political Science Librarians
Janice S. Lewis
College and Research Libraries
July 2000
OK. Cut out the off topic. This is the prime rumor season. We DO have other things to talk about.
I keep hearing this is a down market (job supply). Has there been a comparison done between this year and the last few years at this time in terms of # of postings?
I did an APSA interview with UM and it was like the twilight zone. It was exactly like being interviewed by a bunch of drunken frat boys. They asked no questions about my research or teaching, all they did was talk about the beach, college football, and hot girls.
Good luck, dipshits.
Hmmmm.....Let's see here...
Beach, Girls, and Football....
That sounds absolutely terrible.
I might apply.
Back to rumors: who are the top people on the American job market this year?
I interviewed with three schools at APSA. I am back on the market this year. I had never been to such a cattle call before. I thought the process was fine and the style of the interviewers varied greatly. Several had me talk for most of the time and several took the lead to explain their program and then asked me questions. I hope it was not a waste of time.
i don't see what a discussion of "the top people" accomplishes beyond giving people a chance to anonymously put their elistist biases into action.
I'll save you the trouble: blah blah Stanford, blah blah blah Harvard, blah blah Berkeley, Princeton, Michigan, and Yale. Fill in the names as appropriate.
Since no other programs in the country produce quality PhDs, this discussion is now over. No point in talking about the "top people" since what you really mean is "top programs".
And the funny thing is that no one will check back in 7 years to see how many of the top people didn't amount to shit and that the schools who hired them on pedigree regret it.
10:10 AM here. Speaking as someone on the market not from a top program, let me assure you that the purpose of the question was not to hear about how great Michigan, Harvard and Berkley et. al. are, but rather to assess the competition. :)
Why can't the APSA ever get a comfortable placement room? Having been to several over the past decade, they have been routinely bad, with boston among the worst. Is it me or does it seem like both schools and candidates are taking these interviews more seriously? If true, I wonder what that means for job seekers, given that some schools still discourage their stdents from working the room.
Does anyone have a sense about the importance of getting a follow-up email after APSA from a school. How often would that translate into an interview?
How about the etiquette of sending thank you emails. Would these be seen as annoying or considerate?
6:27 here, and let me just agree on the awfulness of that room. It smelled like desperation and dry cleaning.
Something tells me that APSA could try a little harder to find a waiting area that was a little more comfortable for everyone involved.
Does anyone have a sense about the importance of getting a follow-up email after APSA from a school. How often would that translate into an interview?
How about the etiquette of sending thank you emails. Would these be seen as annoying or considerate?
9/01/2008 1:16 PM
-------------------------------
I wouldn't worry too much about not getting a follow up email. Academics are socially inept and often neglect such things, even if they have you high on their list. It would not hurt at all to send a follow-up email of your own. It shows that you are NOT socially inept and that you are genuinely interested in the position. That is useful information from our end (the employers).
re: 9/01/2008 12:25 PM
When you talk, I hear:
blah, blah, blah, poor me with my second tier degree. Blah, blah, blah, underplaced. blah, blah, blah, lots of second-rate publications.
Lots of people from top programs get top jobs, then produce top work and get tenure.
enough with frinkin' whining, people.
Did anyone actually hit up the Miami kegger? Any good stories?
enough with frinkin' whining, people.
Don't you pick on John Frink. That man has twice the science of your whole body in the tip of his amygdyla.
Where's your debigulator, you're so damn smart?
wow 553. elitist much?
to: 9/01/2008 7:03 PM
from: 9/01/2008 7:03 PM
sure am. better than being "underplaced"
It's just not fair that someone with a degree outside the top 20 can't get a job at an ivy league.
My degree is outside the top 20. I am at an ivy league.
don't know about the kegger, but the hillygus-penn-patty party rawked, TAMU style.
Really good departments will sometimes hire people from less than elite departments. The real problem is programs that want to be top programs but aren't. They often mistakenly equate pedigree with top talent. The best people from the best programs, on average, go to the best programs. The departments that try to build based on pedigree tend to get what is left over from the top programs, not what is the top of the best programs. Most often, that is not good enough to help a non-elite program become elite.
How could you be "underplaced", what with those co-authored papers your chair wrote and let you put your name on. Be careful, though, you can only milk that and the pedigree for so long.
Any textbook recommendations for Intro to American Government?
Regarding textbooks -- I'm a fan of the Fiorina et al. short edition. Relatively cheap and extraordinarily well-written. Students therefore buy it and sometimes crack it.
Lots of people like Lowi, Ginsburg and Shepsle for higher level students because it has lots of theory. If your students are like mine, it probably won't work though I used it for a while.
Bill Bianco and David Cannon are working on a new book that is comparable in quality and has a little more theory (yet remains accessible). It won't be available until the Spring. (Disclaimer -- I have a vested financial interest here, so take this last recommendation for what its worth.)
Fiorina and way too many other people, "America's New Democracy" (Penguin Academics edition). Inexpensive and readable, written from a behavior perspective. (I got paid to review this one a while back, but I'd recommend it even if I didn't.)
Kernell and Jacobson, if you either (a) have smart students or (b) are willing to work with average students to get them over the hump. Very light rat choice. (no payola)
Milkis and Landy (new edition, from Cambridge), if you have to do an APD-style book and (like me) are sick and tired of your textbook's civil liberties chapter. (no payola)
None of these are four-color jobs. I consider that a feature.
I've been meaning to look at the new version of Keeping the Republic (Barbour and Wright) but it hasn't happened yet. My dept is about to ditch its current text so hopefully I'll have a chance to look at it. And hopefully I can convince my colleagues we should all choose our own texts (although if I manage to inflict my choice on everyone else that is just as good from my perspective).
I recently reviewed a couple of OK four-color jobs (payola). Jillson wasn't bad, although a bit too APD/civicsy for my taste. Coleman, Goldstein, and Howell was decent (well, the two galley proof chapters they gave me) but really left no lasting impression on me, considering I just had to look up who the authors were.
While I was working on this, 10:48 posted. I liked Lowi, Ginsburg, and Shepsle when I looked at it (no payola) but I avoid hard-covers and it has the same disclaimer as K&J in terms of student abilities. In my dream job, LGS or K&J would be my primary text, but that ain't happening where I'm at now, although I do lecture based on a melange of K&J and Fiorina et al. I like Cannon's reader (Cannon, Coleman, and Mayer, "The Enduring Debate") so maybe Bianco and Cannon will be promising - I'll see about adding it to my review list. Who's the publisher?
Books to avoid: Janda, Berry, and Goldman; O'Connor and Sabato. JBG's only redeeming feature is that it isn't O'Connor and Sabato. Then again I might be happier with them if I hadn't been forced to use them. My basic rule: civics on steroids + four-color + themes = run for the hills. If Peltason and six other long-dead white males is also still in print, I'd avoid it too.
I've never reviewed any of the more ideological books (e.g. Swanstrom, Wilson) so I can't discuss those.
Didn't realize 10:48 was Scott. And I'm 11:14, in case the way-too-long-winded writing style didn't give me away.
Let me add one addendum to Chris' comments -- there is a soft cover version of Lowi, Ginsburg, and Shepsle.
My rule of thumb -- cheap, readable, least obnoxious sales rep usually equals good book for my students (I'm at SIU...you figure out what that means).
Wright/Barbour "keeping the republic" is an excellent all-around textbook for undergrads. No, I have no interest in its sale. I just use it and like it.
I tried Lowi-Ginsburg-Shepsle for the same class and the results were subpar. I'd agree that it is likely something to avoid unless you are confident that you have very high-quality students. Average (generic big state school) or below (Arizona State) students will struggle with it.
Our (Dave Canon and myself) forthcoming American Govt text is with Norton, and it will be available for Spring 09. I would be happy to send a .pdf of chapter 1 to anyone who'd like to have a look: wbianco (at) indiana.edu.
9:47 here.
Thanks so much for the recommendations and advice. I was leaning towards the Kernell and Jacobson, but, of course, I wasn't considering the students' abilities. I'll be checking out those other recommendations.
As someone who taught with K&J at different schools, I cannot emphasize enough how important student ability is.
As a grad student at a Top 10 undergrad institution, I was a TA for a big class that used K&J and it was well received. As a faculty member at the bottom of US News "Tier 1" list, I used K&J and it was way too hard. (I used the Fiorina the next year and it was pretty well received.)
You will be making your life miserable if you go with K&J and your students just are not at that level yet. (My CQ rep was pretty upfront about K&J being their "advanced" text and Keeping the Republic being their more standard text.) Having read through GLS, that book looks amazing for really top undergrads. But would make K&J look like a walk in the park for more typical students.
another reason to use Kernell & Jacobson is that the test bank and ancillary teaching guides are terrific - great slides, extra and so on
one of my cohort interviewed with UM and was appalled - the one interviewer was all stoked up about it but completely from the drunken frat guy perspective and the other interviewer seemed to be saying things like when you get a present and you say "oh how thoughtful you shouldn't have" because the present is awful. They were also very evasive on funding issues -
I interviewed with Miami at APSA and had the exact same experience described above - it was very peculiar
I'm sure a lot of you are thinking that the Miami interviewees are exaggerating, but.....seriously, it was that bad. Pull three drunken undergrad frat boys out of one of your classes and ask them to interview you. That will approximate the experience.
They actually said "hot girls," apparently assuming that I'm A) straight, B) 19 years old and C) partially retarded.
Um let their 3 rather new hires (Assistant Professor) do the interviewing at APSA? No one with a bit more seniority? Amazing. Don't worry when Pol Sci joins INS the average age will go up to 60 (although I can't say the mature level will rise).
one of my students on the market this year had a very similar experience with the APSA interview with U of Miami. My student felt like it was not somewhere for serious work adn left the interview stunned. Given the department's losses in recent years and the demeanor at the interview, that impression would seem to be correct.
Count me as another adviser who had a grad student interview at Miami, and who received an incredulous report about the nature of the interview.
"Let me add one addendum to Chris' comments -- there is a soft cover version of Lowi, Ginsburg, and Shepsle.
My rule of thumb -- cheap, readable, least obnoxious sales rep usually equals good book for my students (I'm at SIU...you figure out what that means).
So, what are we to figure out? That your colleage at SIU has a reader that goes with Lowi, Ginsburg & Shepsle?
"So, what are we to figure out? That your colleage at SIU has a reader that goes with Lowi, Ginsburg & Shepsle?"
Tobin Grant does have a book that matches well with that text, but that's not what I had in mind. My students need cheap, readable texts...surmise what you will about them accordingly.
You know, qually, you don't even count. I mean, if you disappeared forever it wouldn't make any difference. You may as well not even exist.
They actually said "hot girls," apparently assuming that I'm A) straight, B) 19 years old and C) partially retarded.
9/02/2008 5:11 PM
As a parent of a child with developmental disabilities, I take even greater offense to this post than the poster probably did with the interview. I thought academics were above making fun of those who are not "blessed" with their high degree of intellect. I guess not. Maybe he would have fit-in better down there than he'd like to admit.
The real October surprise: the new NRC rankings come out in late September. Some Dept reputations will get hurt, as I've been told the rankings have been distributed to the universities prior to the full public release. Disclosure: I've not seen the new ranlings. I can remember how important they were for all sorts of decisions when released almost 15 years ago. More than anything else it will create ammunition for and against candidates when the files are discussed in search cmts. Good luck to all!
Do we have a separate discussion threads for method job rumors, given that there are abnormally many openings in this field?
Why are there so may job openings in formal theory and/or quantitative methods? Is this a trend or simply a spike??
As someone who left Miami in the last few years, perhaps a primer on the department would be helpful.
In general, the statements I know to be true are those that describe specific historical events or the actions of senior faculty and Administration.
I am quite skeptical of the comments about APSA interviews made above, of allegations of unprofessional behavior by juniors more broadly (I know several of them quite well), and, in general, of negative comments about the juniors.
I have no idea whether claims about department mergers and resources are true.
Finally, I have a student who interviewed with Miami at APSA and was very impressed by them. I can also say historically, the juniors have been forthcoming (in interviews) about the problems the U faces.
I hope that some find this useful.
"skeptical of the comments" are we bringing back the UM conspiracy theories? did UM actually have a "kegger" - if so, maybe that lends some credence to these descriptions
Don't be bad mouthing keggers. That goes too far.
You load up, you party...
I attended the UM reception. There was no keg. I'm not sure where you got this information. Their reception was no different than any other reception at APSA. There was no beer pong either.
BTW, Im not from UM.
why in the world were you at their reception if you aren't at UM? Their head interviewing guy told people there would be a keg.
Im sorry, but there wasnt a keg there. I dont know what to tell you. I was there because I am with one of the three other departments that sponsored that reception. There was no keg, shots, or anything else. The bar was the same as every other bar at APSA. So sorry to dissapoint.
Who won the Fenno Prize this year?
Why didn't REP award prizes for books?
I don't think the people who were put off by the interviews said they went to the reception. I just think they were commenting on the interviews. How peculiar that members of the department - perhaps -feel the need to explain they did not have a keg. Time and hiring may reveal whether the interviews were sub-optimal or not.
"I can remember how important (NRC rankings) were for all sorts of decisions when released almost 15 years ago. More than anything else it will create ammunition for and against candidates when the files are discussed in search cmts."
--------------------------------
As an ABD, its hard not to have a somewhat morbid fascination with how these discussions actually go down. Do people really argue along the lines of: "Well, this candidate does have a good record and solid letters from respected people, but what we though all along was a Top 20 school turns out to be merely a Top 40 school, which is just unacceptable."
sadly the candidate culling process is more like sausage-making than you would hope. There is a great deal of randomness and ANY record can be assailed if someone doesn't want you to be the pick. So as an ABD, just relax. Control the things you can and try not to stress about the things you can't do anything about -
sadly the candidate culling process is more like sausage-making than you would hope. There is a great deal of randomness and ANY record can be assailed if someone doesn't want you to be the pick. So as an ABD, just relax. Control the things you can and try not to stress about the things you can't do anything about -
wow! I haven't checked this since before APSA - I'm one of the many who left Miami over the last few years and let me confirm that the juniors are first rate and professional. There are a few I don't really know, but the ones I do know are terrific colleagues. They may have simply done the best they can with what they have - and shame on the chair and the seniors for making junior faculty run the freaking department. The chair should divy up his salary to the juniors
RE NRC rankings: They will be used just like letters of rec, which are often read to find dirt on an undesirable candidate that other cmt members like. "School X isn't what it used to be" will be heard at meetings throughout this fall. That said, I agree, don’t worry about it as you can’t do anything and there will be a great deal of consistency even since 1994, so only a few depts will be negatively impacted.
Stanford for sure will take a fall in the NRC rankings. Too many ABDs riding on the coattails of big name faculty who have almost retired or jumped ship and having no original research of their own.
Betting Iowa will be lower than 25 this time -- even without accounting for the recent events.
Don't forget the other side: I see Florida State making a big jump up
1:49: Hmmmm...Josh Clinton, David Primo, David Lewis, Will Howell, Jenna Bednar, Mike Bailey, Rui DeFiguereido. Yeah, all slouches without "original research" in AP.
Oh for God's sake, get a freaking life people. Don't life Stanford PhDs? Don't think they have any original research of their own? There's an easy answer: don't hire them.
Until then, the rest of the discipline will wait with bated breath for your ground-breaking research.
4:13: Somehow I get the suspicion that the Stanford bad-mouther (1:49PM) is not a search committee member, but instead, a jealous ABD at a non-Stanford department.
I don't think the appraisal of ABDs works its way into NRC rankings in any fashion - or in any rankings - shows how important they are I suppose ...
There was a PS piece in 2001 by McCormick and Rice that ranked departments by the subsequent publication histories (journals only) of their Ph.D. graduates. Here are the top schools in that ranking and the weighted scores assigned to them based on 1994-1998 publications in five journals. The journals are APSR, AJPS, JOP, Polity and PRQ. Including the last two doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but at least they received a bit less weight than the others in the scoring system:
Michigan 51.99
Berkeley 40.65
Chicago 39.31
Rochester 38.66
Indiana 34.19
Yale 33.60
Iowa 32.15
Minnesota 31.63
Wisconsin 29.78
Stanford 29.65
North Carolina 26.13
Harvard 24.52
Princeton 23.40
Washington, St. Louis 23.23
Ohio State 21.51
Duke 19.83
UCLA 18.23
Michigan State 16.99
Colorado 16.59
Texas 16.28
There are many rankings that exists, but none carry the weight of the NRC.
5:36 P.M.: those data are unfortunately very old and really don't tell us much about the current state of graduate education
and they do not account for the quality of depts with top scholars that mostly pub books rather than articles; needs to be balanced with citation counts
Frankly, I don't understand why they include Polity in the same breath as APSR. I mean, would it have killed them to consider at least one big non-American journal (IO, WP, CP, CPS, PolTheory, etc.)? I say this as an Americanist, by the way.
That paper had an interesting approach in that it made at least some effort to track the scholarship of schools' graduates. That said, it could be both improved and updated. Including different journals would be nice, and wouldn't be too difficult. Including books would be nice, but would be considerably more challenging.
We have posted a job at Columbia for a Full professor in American.
That paper had an interesting approach in that it made at least some effort to track the scholarship of schools' graduates. That said, it could be both improved and updated. Including different journals would be nice, and wouldn't be too difficult. Including books would be nice, but would be considerably more challenging.
That's been done as well. I recall at least one article in PS that ranked Departments based on the number of citations, books, etc., from their faculty.
Look, these rankings are what they are. Why keep complaining that they do not include some component that you find important? Dept. quality is an unobserved trait. There are many ways to measure it. They all have their drawbacks. As long as we know how the measures are constructed, they tell us 'something' about the relative strength of departments. That 'something' will vary from ranking to ranking.
Why is it that a discussion of rankings almost immediately delves into a critique of said ranking?
<< Home