I know that it may vary, but what is typical for the number of campus visitors for a T-T job ? Is it 3 99% of the time, or is it more a 50/50 thing to be only 2 or 4 ?
Schools differ on this. I have been involved in searches that have been 2, 3 or 4. My sense is that 50-75% do 3, while 10% or so do 4 and the rest do 2. There is no sure formula for which school/department does what and sometimes a search that started out aiming for 3 campus invitations goes to 4
Also, regarding interview #s... Can you guess the number invited based on the number of slots? E.g. does four open time slots indicate three interviewees?
I imagine that the number is higher if there happens to be an inside candidate, right? I mean, if it is normal to have 3 (and the budget exists to invite 3), but you also have an inside applicant then the 4th candidate is a 'freebie' for the Dept? ...Not sure if this would make it so that an outside candidate juuuust falls into that campus visit list and really lucks out, or that the inside guy is a courtesy "visit" from the start and the SC felt "well, what's the harm in having our VAP be a 4th (free) visit ?"
...Let me say that I'm ABD here, so I have really no real world insight to offer and my impressions of things may be off. Not sure how much an 'inside hire' affects the numbers for campus visits.
In general the number of finalists invited to campus is determined before the start of the search, i.e. before an inside candidate may be formally identified as a viable finalist. Of course there are many different sorts of inside candidates, but the insider will generally be one of three finalists invited to campus and not an extra one.
Disagree slightly with 11:48. At two different institutions that I've been a member of (one a SLAC, one an R1) it was considered collegial to include the VAP in the running if they were in the top 10 of the interviews, since their "visit" was free, and then there would be 4 total "invited" candidates, which would reduce the chance of a failed search. At one institution the VAP did not end up getting the TT, at the other institution the VAP did.
In my many, many years of experience normal is about $40,000-$45,000. Some are as low as 30, others, depending on costs of the city, etc, can go closer to 60 but they are few and far between. You'll be only *slightly* better off financially than when you were as a grad student.
Add to this, you will have to elect a health insurance plan and you will have to sign up for a 401k even though you are only temporary faculty. At the end of the day, expect to lose about 25-30% of you check to taxes... so, maybe one really isn't *that* much better off than a grad student. Ugh.
Some schools will let you receive that over 9 months, others won't allow it and will make you receive 12 monthly checks.
The big difference in cover letter? For a VAP, stress ONLY what they want to see. If they're looking for a teaching workhorse to do a 4-4 load of Latin 101s, don't talk about your love of teaching Greek pottery; don't dwell on your research; don't act as if you're any more important to them OTHER THAN FILLING THE SPOT THAT THEY WANT FILLED. A lot of people spend too much time trying to "sell themselves" as well-rounded Classicists and serious scholars. Don't do this unless that's what they want for a VAP--which, of course, nobody does.
Concerning letters, VAPs are usually hired to fill an existing gap, and often to teach courses that are already on the books, if not scheduled. So it is key to emphasize that one can hit the ground running as a teacher. Research rarely, if ever, comes up.
I disagree with the above. There is a lot of variation among departments, but some VAP committees (especially at prestigious SLACs) are looking for promising scholarship. They see their VAP as a stepping stone to a tenure-track job and want to support young scholars--they are thinking of what they can do for you as well as what you can do for them. So for example, Amherst holds campus visits for temporary positions and expects a scholarly job talk as well as a teaching demo. Bottom line: I think it's important to know the department you're applying to and read the ad carefully.
The above comment strikes me as optimistic. I have interviewed for a number of VAP positions, at a range of institutions, and NOT ONCE was I asked about my research. The committee was only concerned with my ability to teach the courses they needed and my potential to utilize other campus resources to do so. But I do very much agree with the advance about knowing the department and reading the ad carefully.
Just to explicitly back up 20:39, the VAP I held at Georgetown required a job talk and my application process dealt fairly heavily with my research. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's unusual, but it's not nonexistent. In terms of cover letter, however, I completely agree with others that you should emphasize teaching. I used my research to explain what sort of courses I could teach and how I would put my own spin on them - keep it teaching-focused, but signal you have an active research agenda for schools that care about such.
To echo Zach-I taught at an elite SLAC and the process did focus on my research. I gave a research talk and it was discussed during my interviews. 20:39 is entirely right.
So this actually makes me view this site with some suspicion. While I acknowledge the goodwill and generosity of so many on this site, couldn't it be that there is an overrepresention of those who are in cushier situations pre and post job? I doubt the person with the 4-4 load in CUNY with a overwhelming number of first gen and SOC under their care is posting much even if they wish to do so. It pretty much encapsulates what so acutely ails our discipline.
I'm with you, 7 January 2020 at 13:15: I just wanted to chime in and echo your appreciation for the goodwill and generosity of so many, along with your suspicion that we may be getting a skewed perspective (or many of those) thanks to factors that aren't always especially obvious. It's still nice to get real people's real ideas about how things (sometimes) really work out there, which is why I come back once in a while.
It's entirely possible that the NF2019 population is biased in all kinds of ways, this particular thread is not great evidence of that. Someone made a broadly correct generalization. The principal exception to that generalization is at elite SLACs. People from those schools chimed in to make that point (but NOT to dispute the basic validity of the original claim). Why would the 4-4 at CUNY feel the need to join in? [Side note: except for unanonymous Zach, we don't really know that the others with SLAC experience are in fact at such schools now.]
The real takeaway here is this: not all universities are the same, and there are lots of different jobs called 'professor.' Part of your success at the campus visit stage is anticipating correctly what each type of institution does, what its students need, and pitching yourself as the ideal person to fit that role. This is way more difficult at the ABD stage, and favors people who have grown up in academia and have access to this kind of assumed knowledge. But I've seen it be the deciding factor in lots of searches.
What's wrong with it? It normalizes and amplifies elite voices which is the gigantic wart in the cultural blindspot of academia and especially classics. All the hate you see from the general populace largely stems from the fact that they see it in HD yet so few of us do.
Duh, normalizing and amplifying elite voices is our profession in a nutshell. If you're just figuring this out, you're in big trouble my friend. I suggest a U-turn asap.
Since this search is being run through an art history department, I am guessing that interviews may not take place until February, when the CAA meeting takes place (even though interviews may not happen at the meeting, that is the traditional timing for such things). But this is only a guess!
I looked at their previous three searches and they all had earlier deadlines, some by two months, and interviews and campus visits were done early in the cycle (end of year/start of new year). This one seems later for whatever reason, perhaps late approval.
I didn't see the Temple job listed on either the Art History or Archaeology job wikis, so I don't have any insight. It was due a month ago, but because of the holidays, I bet it will be take a little longer than usual for interview requests. My assumption is that they've probably met to finalize their short list and they'll make interview requests very soon, if they haven't already.
So, it seems that the History Wiki (usually not as accurate or as complete as the Classics Wiki) has someone commenting that Western New England University has sent out requests for letters as of Jan. 23.
Two people have commented that this makes no sense since letters were requested back when applications were due. I honestly don't recall.
Does anyone here have any more insight into this ?
How would you like to be rejected? Not everyone agrees, but complaints on the Wiki have helped me helped our search committees not add insult to injury. Lately I've seen some incredulity about the use of snail mail that seems like a new complaint, and I want to check in about possible shifting expectations. Here's roughly what we do: (1) applied, not interviewed: emailed a form rejection from HR's application system (most are sent out when we set the interview list) (2) interviewed: snail mail, more personalized letter signed by search chair (most are sent when search is complete, but sometimes a few are sent right after interviews if we are sure-sure someone is no longer in the running) (3) on campus visitors: very personalized email when search is complete, followed by snail mail to make it "official"
I would say that speed and professionalism are the most important issues for me. I'd be find with 1 and 3, but annoyed if I did a first round interview and had to wait weeks for a snail mail letter. That being said, often times applying for jobs just feels like shouting into the void, so the bar is generally pretty low here.
One kind of post-conference interview rejection I hate is the one that reads like it's personalized, but when one thinks about it a little proves to be a generic rejection that's cleverly worded to appear personal. I can understand why there isn't time to personalize rejections, and much prefer one that says something impersonal than something that isn't really as tailored as it seems (e.g., "We were impressed with your accomplishments"). Of course, personalizing is the best, but then truly make it personal with at least one reference that can only apply to the recipient.
I can't imagine why you would use snail mail at any point. It is just a slower and less reliable means of conveying information. Job candidates want to hear their fate ASAP, so email is ideal. I know some people think phone calls are more personal after a campus visit, but I personally prefer email so you are not forced into the awkward situation of handling disappointing news politely/professionally in real time.
Post-interview rejections: please just send us an email at the same time that campus invites go out. I don't care if it is impersonal. Our interaction lasted for 1 hour max. What I HATE is when a committee says in the interview that they will notify BOTH successful and unsuccessful interviewees, but do not follow through on this--and we have to find out through the wiki (assuming the wiki is correct). Those who interviewed for one school this year will know who I'm talking about... actually, why don't you notify unsuccessful people first? Now that would be an idea...
Two for each position is in keeping with UCLA's practice over the last few years. They have only invited a third person where the department couldn't pick one of the first two.
yeah I mean the first round of campus interviews. for one of the recent hires, after bringing in people for a first round of campus interviews, they brought in another finalist who then got the job
for all recent searches there have been either 3 or 4 people brought to campus initially
The job closed 11/15; then was moved forward to close 12/15. I assume because up to late November only one obscure job site listed the ad, so they probably have a shitty HR Dept that doesn't know how to advertise listings and had to move the closing date forward and post it to more sites so that they could have a reasonable amount of applicants.
Being said, it's been a good amount of time so I'm hoping that someone here might know something.
Is it particularly bad to be an Assistant Prof somewhere and apply for other T-T jobs ?
I understand that if one is presently T-T at a low-tier private school in northwest bumfuck and you apply for a T-T at an Ivy it's not an issue, obviously, but I'm more curious about those that are less clear.
In short, is one's chances higher/lower to get a T-T job if you already have one elsewhere or are you seen as a flighty douche that will jump ship for (slightly) greener pastures once it comes along ?
...hypothetically, say you get a T-T job this year at a shit school in Idaho. You accept it, because, well, it's a fucking T-T job. But, you desire to live in the Northeast (home) and in a larger city. Next year a variety of jobs at other schools appear that are in the NE and are in larger cities. You apply. Will SCs see you in a better/worse light being in year-one of a T-T job elsewhere ?
Looking at past years on the Wiki you will see that many successful candidates come from T-T jobs at a range of institutions. In general a SC will look favorably on one already having a T-T job.
why the hate towards Idaho? It can be dull and flat, but in parts the beauty is more staggering than anything you can find east of the Rockies. Out of Boise you can get to anywhere on the west coast in a couple hours. Hell, on a prof's salary, you could buy a ranch...
Other fun facts: there's a significant Basque population in Idaho, a former governor is named "Butch Otter"
If you're in Idaho right now and you don't like, you have a small soul
For me, Idaho is more attractive than the northeast, but we all have areas of the country we'd be happier to live in than others. It is not abnormal for people to apply out after a couple of years, most often at the three year mark or fifth/sixth year (which are usually the point of major reviews and contract renewals). There are any number of reasons, and normally search committees aren't necessarily worried about repeat jumpers. The job market is so awful that often times people will stay somewhere they don't love just to avoid moving yet again.
Having been on the occasional Committee To Hire The Next Big Thing, my impression is that most people involved in the hiring process don't kneejerk judge applicants looking to move from one TT to another. But those people with "real" or "permanent" jobs need to convince the interviewing committee that they have reasons for wanting to move that go beyond "me need job." Grad students and people who are precariously employed get a free pass on this point, but a TT applicant has to convince the committee that they actually understand the hiring institution and its context, and (this is even trickier) that they'd actually take the job if offered. We all know about plenty of people who applied just to leverage themselves into a better offer from their home institution, and we don't want to be used as a bargaining chip in your HR process - there are too many good candidates out there for us to waste our time on someone who isn't a real ("real") applicant. If you're trying to get out of Idaho to be closer to "home" or family or whatever else, say that - while talking up the hiring institution and all its people and practices and context and anything else you can think of. If you're trying to get out of Idaho because the grass is always greener, I'd suggest that the grass can be greener in Idaho too. And some people bring the parched grass wherever they go...
For the sake of my peace of mind, would anyone mind posting how long it took to hear back after a Skype interview? I had one Friday late afternoon and am getting itchy. I suppose hearing a range of responses might make me feel better?
Depending on the nature and timing of the search, one can expect a response any time from the week following the interview to eight weeks hence. Usually Skype interviews are all scheduled close together, but sometimes they are not. Sometimes the search committee doesn't meet for two weeks because of schedule conflicts. Sometimes additional institutional vetting is required. In general, the later in the academic year it is the faster the searches go (out of necessity), but there are no rules.
At my institution, we have to get several layers of institutional approval for our shortlist before we can contact anybody following Skype "conversations." (We're not even allowed to call them Skype "interviews" because everything that's officially an interview requires vetting by all the higher-ups.) So that means that when we do a search there's a time-lag between the completion of the Skypes and the notification of people who are being brought to campus that can be as long as two weeks. Hang in there.
And sorry on behalf of search committees - we know waiting sucks, and we would like to be able to follow up with you sooner, but are often hamstrung by the policies of our administrations.
I had a Zoom interview last Thursday (1/30) and as of the following Monday the SC already reached out for campus visits.
At some schools the admin/HR had already approved the 12-15 Skype interviews and implicit in that is that the SC can have free rein to select for themselves the 3-4 campus invites. Admin/HR only gets brought back into the loop when the SC makes an choice of which guy will get the job offer. Of course, not all schools function like this but some do.
In general, it's about the average to see a 1-2 week gap in between Skype interview and campus visit requests.
For another job this year I had my Skype interview 12/16 and was asked to come for a campus visit on 12/19. ...Not sure how typical the rapid sort of response time is or not (this is the first year I've had any, let alone a few, campus visits) but the 1-2 week thing seems to be the norm via the Wiki
Some of my experiences: I have had a campus visit request several hours after the interview... two weeks later... three weeks later. It varies, very much so, because of the admin, the timeline they are following, scheduling, and more. That's why the wiki is (mostly) helpful.
Thanks everyone. Last year I had a campus invite 48 hrs after the Skype. This year, am 6 days off a Skype interview (though the recc letters were due two days after) and am trying to talk myself off a ledge here. It's my dream job.
I heard it was offered but has not been accepted yet. Given that, my guess would be it's a person who has either (1) multiple offers or (2) a current TT appointment and is trying to negotiate something along the lines of better salary/perks, a spousal hire, or similar.
I assume the new hire referenced/linked above is the promotion of a VAP to TT without a full search that people are talking about below (and on the other thread). The Roman Arch position does seem to have gone through a full search (that perhaps will result in an inside/VAP hire, but I don't think that's clear yet). I'm not sure why Indiana is hiring a Homerist when they already have one, unless that person is jumping ship after this year.
14:07 - the rumor is that 2 faculty are leaving Indiana, including the Homerist, so that could be why they hired their current VAP without running a search.
Wtf is up with Seton Hall? Did they really schedule interviews without consulting the finalists on their schedules? That search seems really, really mismanaged based on the wiki.
Would be curious to know whether they were really looking for Latin Verse, or whether they just selected a random specialization when they posted the SCS ad.
Is it possible/legal for a department to create a TT position and immediately offer it to a VAP in their department without advertising the position or interviewing other people for it?
If it's a targeted hire or an opportunity hire, then I'd think yes. Something similar is happening at my department at the moment. No job ad, no application process, no interviews.
There should be more if this. The VAP presumably was vetted at initial hire and then proved themselves over a year. This is much more indicative than a dog and pony show process that has little to do with how one will perform over the long haul. It's like looking for a marathon runner by taking the one who has the best 100m time. It's stupid and favors those with the most coaching (and money increasingly).
Agree 100%. What creeps me out is the self-indulgent, ass kissery affair that we've made it in order to join a sad elite club that is elite only by virtue of its exclusivity. Do your job and stop waving your ass in front of faces.
What is interesting is that Indiana had an accomplished female VAP in Greek lit for several years before this who was not promoted. And an accomplished female VAP in Latin lit who was similarly not promoted last year when they were hiring for Latin--instead, they hired their own former PhD who just happens to have a penis. Coincidence? Perhaps.
@14:13 I don't know the history or details of which you speak, so I withhold judgment, but if what you say is true, then it is indeed interesting (read: disconcerting).
You're catching on to how Classics has worked? It's just harder to hide now with social media and modern networking. Do you think Paideia would have been outed a generation ago? I doubt it. Perhaps some whispers here and there and even an "investigation" by the APA if absolutely necessary but undoubtedly followed by...acquittal!
Has anyone encountered blatant lies on this wiki? Asking for a friend (me). The more I speak with colleagues also in the running for certain positions, the more I hear that they avoid this wiki because of false info.
I don't think I've ever seen a blatant lie, but I have seen errors. Sometimes people transpose numbers when entering a date, and that's caused a furor. In a few cases, I've seen instances where people are filling out the wiki based on secondhand info and put in the wrong name. Sometimes searches run slowly or things happen and people get interviews weeks after others have been notified.
Did anyone else get a random email from Cincinnati that their application was now under review, even though the Wiki shows that they interviewed at the SCS?
Agreed re: Cincinnati. Their H.R. computer system is terrible.
Does anyone else remember how a few years ago if you applied for a faculty position you would start getting occasinal e-mails about other opportunities on campus of a non-academic nature? I finally had enough and wrote the head of H.R., who was surprised to learn about this, and the practice soon stopped. So they've gotten better in that respect, but today's e-mail was plain stupid.
7:57, you seem to be one of those people who just loves to hear the sound of their voice, even if it's in writing. If you had received one of those e-mails you would have known just how irrelevant those job postings were, and would not have such a dumbass reaction. Unless you seriously think that people who fail to get a VAP want to learn about become a groundskeeper, administrative assistant, etc. at that university.
What does the community think of public announcements of getting a t-t position (e.g. on social media)? I'm thinking of how I've seen different people approach it in very different ways this year and in previous years: some trumpet it to the skies (which can seem arrogant, but also justified--because it is an achievement, albeit one that is partly the product of luck); others quietly tell their friends and colleagues in private, and go about their business. Is one way preferable? The latter seems much more sensitive to all of one's friends and colleagues who did not get a job (or that job)...
When I finally, finally got a TT job after four years on the market, I only told people whom I was close enough to to personally contact. I think the trumpeting on social media thing is really tasteless, given how many of our friends and colleagues are descending into abject desperation and depression this time of year, and given how luck-based success actually is. People will find out anyway, and fast.
does anyone... have any information re: Cincinnati? (my understanding: SCS interviews happened, they brought in 3 finalists, then that weird email from their HR)
I heard Cincinnati has extended an offer, but it has not been accepted yet; the Greek Art job at U British Columbia has also been offered and nearly accepted (by a Canadian).
Someone posted on the wiki a couple days ago (the same day as your post) that they have a campus visit for Valpo and that they got the invite on 2/13. I interviewed there and haven't heard anything yet, so I can't verify. I thought I nailed the interview so I'm not sure what to think now.
Does anyone know what Texas is looking for in the Assoc/Full search? Or is this merely university HR having to post a fake ad in order to sponsor a visa vel sim.?
Should the Oxford CCC position go under senior jobs? I'm not as familiar with UK academic rankings/titles, but that's what it sounds like to me from the position description (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gU4zL0c5NR8J:https://www.ccc.ox.ac.uk/Vacancies/v/137/+&cd=2).
I would be skeptical about that characterization. Surely "Lecturer" at Oxford is more equivalent to Assistant Professor in the American system. Although the ad does not mention it specifically, the new hire will be replacing Nikolaos Papazarkadas, temporarily there from Berkeley. Big shoes to fill, indeed. I suspect 10:56 is correct in their inclination that this listing belongs in the senior hire section, in which I would also suggest the Amsterdam ancient history position be placed.
It's not uncommon for campus visits to be far apart, depending on the scheduling needs of the candidates and the search committees. I'm surprised the Emory talks are as close together as they are.
Remember: they also have to make two offers. That can create all sorts of dynamics. I am surprised that Duke was able to make offers (i.e. come to agreement) so quickly.
I'm faculty at a large state university and our dept (history) is holding two searches this year. All of the campus vistors were ABDs. Now, sure, things are quite different for certain sub-fields of history where there is a near 1:1 ratio of jobs and candidates, but for all them to be ABDs is still rather shocking to those of us that don't fall in those sub-fields.
...Also, there are about 7-8 TT jobs on the Wiki that show names and info, all of which are VAPs somewhere nice and all have a PhD from the same few schools (Brown, UPenn, and Berkeley). I suspect that those that are red and do not list names are those who are a bit nervous to share their info for fear of being attacked as being "only an ABD" or from a "sub-par school like Ohio State" as things like that are (sadly) often said on the various editions of FV that have existed.
Still, it's nice to see some sensible hires that suggest the basic tenets of inclusion are finally getting through to us. Washington, for one, nailed it in my opinion. Representation is huge even at a basic existential level and their hire will go above and beyond at an institution where a quarter of its student body will benefit from a heightened sense of belonging and empathy.
Probably too little too late for us as a discipline but small joys and victories.
If we classified classics by the evolution of television, we might have moved from b/w iconoscopes to RCA color. Yeah, we're still in the 50s.
For a discipline that dissects cultural texts with surgical precision, we're pretty tone deaf and color blind when it comes to seeing, understanding, and empathizing with worlds outside our own, which is obscenely white bread at the present.
Someone keeps on changing jobs on the Wiki to red without adding any info as to why -- PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. It makes the Wiki less consistent and if you aren't going to vouch for that info, then don't change it.
I understand your frustration. I would just add that perhaps the editor in question had an interview, found out that an offer was made, but doesn't know who go the job--hence the change to red without other info. Is that not reasonable? Honest question.
I don't understand the frustration. It's always been done like this afaik. Why the OCD control? There are rare cases of abuse when people are guessing, but 95% of the time it's accurate information whether we know the details.
Old guy here. We've always erred on the side of presenting info here. The only thing frowned upon, and I think it's only happened a couple times in over a decade, is the outing of individual people by name who have accepted jobs but have not had the time to sort things out at their old institutions. Since it wasn't the applicants it must have been overzealous members of the new institutions.
Another old guy here, 11:18. I'm the one who, in response to those outings, recommended the informal policy that no one post a name (other than his/her own) until 2-3 weeks had gone by, in order to make sure that the new hires could tell colleagues, friends, etc. That still remains the law of the land, I've been glad to see, though since I can't find a written reference to it on the wiki I guess it has become one of those "unwritten laws" that Antigone was always going on about.
Yeah, posting names requires discretion. It's usually done by the successful applicant or if there's a public announcement somewhere.
Changing a red back to orange b/c "proof" wasn't provided? I think that's silly. If you have better info, sure change it back. Otherwise, let it play out.
Some years back we asked if hearing info from a reliable source was good enough to pass along here and I believe we agreed it was.
I assume that some of this frustration is coming from applicants who hope they're still in the running for a job. I'm sorry to say that successful candidates know they're successful long before anyone else knows, meaning that if you haven't heard anything that's unfortunately not a good sign.
Spot on, 6:00. The harsh reality. The four unsuccessful campus visits I had before landing my job were way more difficult to get past than the dozen or so applications that ended at the SCS. It didn't help that after such close interactions where you play everything out with the department, rejections came through generic robo emails from HR. It's why for the two searches I've now chaired I've made it a point to call the other finalists to explain what's happened. I'm at a state school where things are fairly regimented so I don't buy the "official process" that people hide behind to ghost unsuccessful finalists. It's totally shitty and awkward.
Thanks for saying this, 14:37. I have most appreciated the phone call approach in the past (as an applicant), and now as faculty (but yet to be on a search committee), I also intend on calling, wherever possible, unsuccessful finalists, and writing individualized emails to the long list.
I don't think anyone over the age of 50 has any real idea what goes into apps today no matter how many they now read from their present perch. My smallish but well regarded dept has saved all previous applications from the past 50 years and the differences are stark.
For one, there were always under 50 applications and sometimes far less. The cover letters were all under a page and pretty generic. CVs were several pages with virtually no candidates past a postdoc and many still abd. And they were doing this the comfort of their grad programs or cushy postdocs! While some are still fortunate to apply from such situations, the vast majority are years out toiling through terrible VAPs at best. Stop the I walked barefoot ten miles over glass bullshit, boomers, and do your fucking jobs with a modicum of grace and diligence...or get the hell out.
For what it's worth, and others obviously have other preferences, but I much prefer a personal email to a personal phone call for communicating bad news. The personal phone call requires candidates to be polite and professional on the spot in a moment of intense disappointment. I'd rather have privacy.
Regardless, the professional thing to do is to make a call. You'll invariably run into each other at the SCS and the gatekeepers should be the one taking the lead in normalizing relationships. You know, wear big boy/girl pants. What the search process has taught me is that academics in general should not be running searches. Most don't have the time or professionalism to do so. It's like forcing every academic to take a turn as dean. The only reason why it's not total disaster is academia's glut of overqualified candidates.
Didn't click your link but I'm increasingly of the feeling that we've overblown the personalization of apps to the point that it's much easier to game the system if you have the resources. Others have replied that it correctly rewards those who obsess and have the skills to write meticulously crafted letters , statements, etc but it's too much now. I see less and less correlation between applications and successful academic careers. I see instead the increased homogeneity of classics.
I think the SCS should expand it's involvement even further. Candidates are already assigned numbers. They should all enter their basic information into the same portal to ease evaluation and filter out biases and bs. Programs should be able to filter and search their applicant pool. Letters should be sent to this portal but only after a long list is made. The entire system would standardize the process and reduce redundancies and wasted effort for all while making it a fairer and more humane process overall. Rather than using Mellon or whatever funding to sponsor one more conference or whatever that will be forgotten after a year, fund the implementation of this system.
Whatever the merits of this in terms of equity or not-wasting-people's-time, it's impossible. Hiring departments answer not to the SCS but to their respective institutions. Even if SCS could come up with the funding to offer this (I doubt there's actually that much fungible money lying around), departments would still be constrained to use whatever system local HR requires.
Asking purely out of curiosity: I've heard that coronavirus fears have affected campus visits for some prospective grad students this spring. Has anyone heard of the same for job candidates?
The hour is late for universities on the prevalent semester schedule. All the paperwork and planning for courses need to be finalized and submitted asap.
In my experience, VAP searches can continue into June. As noted above, courses are often already scheduled by then, but in such cases the VAP simply teaches whatever is already on the books.
lol @ 8:12. As far as administrative deadlines are concerned, people usually know exactly how far these can be pushed, and precisely where. Time pressure isn't really going to be a thing, there, I don't think.
why do you think it is "more legitimate" for someone to write "job offered and accepted" when changing it to red, rather than just changing it to red? Same for other items... if someone is going to lie, they're going to lie.
Dude, 19:52, you've got issues. As others have stated, changing the color w/o any other information is still information. It's the way it's been done for over a decade. If it's wrong and you know it, you can change it back. If someone knows more, they can add details. Stop being an OCD a-hole denigrating people providing INFO in the wiki comments.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect some corroborating information, or at least some specificity when changing the color: in the past, people have added details such as the date when they received a request, or whether they heard it by word of mouth -- to qualify the reliability of the info. Posting a link, as someone did in response to the above poster, is all the better. I think some of you are just lazy, but we are all trying to allay each other's anxiety and providing as much info as possible is better than vague color changes that could simply be the work of one angry troll. Color changes are not info. (I do realize, however, that nothing is verifiable on the wiki unless backed up by external announcement though).
You're a privileged ass, undoubtedly one of those who think all the people on assistance that is socially branded as welfare (so not corporate bailouts and tax cuts) should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and just work harder.
There are extenuating circumstances that often prevent details from being revealed. In the earlier days of the wiki, people begged to be mercifully let in from their cone of silence that those not chosen for a job are placed. Color changes are undoubtedly information, even though your OCD predilections scream otherwise. There's been years of precedent on here and numerous voices much more experienced than you that have now chimed in. The wiki has been a good constant as FV/NF goes through it's ups and down. This is a result of years of community consensus, not one jerk calling people lazy and idiots for not following their OCD desires.
Why are you so angry about this? And what qualifies you to pontificate on this issue? Sounds like someone is bitter... BTW I am actually a Bernie Sanders supporter from a low socio-economic marginalized community. So throw your assumptions out the window.
It's called quality control. There have been instances, even this year (Durham), of people posting false information, which could have ramifications in the non-online world. A color change might be mercy, but it can also be misinformation. Get a grip you A-hole and stop griping about people asking others to provide a bit of detail...
Quality control isn't really possible on a site like that. Verifiable, publicly posted information is, by definition, available to everyone. The wiki, on the other hand, is for unverifiable, secondhand, and other gray area information that is not public, the cost of which is a degree of inaccuracy and a great deal of vagueness. There has been incorrect information on the wiki for as long as I have been visiting it (longer than I care to admit). It can be frustrating, but it causes no real harm and rarely stays up for long. I agree that more detail is better than less, but any information is better than none.
Dude's not gonna listen to your reasoning. He's like that one U of M guy on Twitter who thinks his shit don't stink bc he spends all his time on philological minutiae and gets applauded for it despite a horrifyingly narrow worldview.
Sometimes more info may be impossible, like if the poster is a faculty member in the department. I think we just have to take it on faith that changes are true until/unless they're revealed not to be.
Ok, but look, in the last 24 hours, if anyone has been looking at the wiki, someone/some people (?) have added and deleted three different names against three different jobs. What do we do about that? I guess nothing. In the end, the wiki is an imperfect platform for disseminating info, but I can't think of any better ones out there.
So in the process of confessing (if anonymously) to vandalizing the wiki, someone wrote in the history notes "Changed Winnipeg and Kenyon back to previous state - since the latest editor provided no information for the change in color. DO NOT DO THIS YOU IDIOTS." I'm genuinely a little puzzled by what exactly he(?) means. The colors have pretty well-defined meanings. Is the complaint that the same information (e.g. job offered and accepted) isn't redundantly written out? Or that supplemental information like date or identity (which aren't required and which might well be unavailable or ethically problematic) hasn't been added?
Yeah, look at the recent discussions above. There have been multiple attempts at explanation from a number of veterans to this person and he won't listen to reason. After it was explained that it was a decision arrived at by community, color changes are in fact information, and crowd sourcing is the nature of wikis, he is still unilaterally trying to impose his will by ignoring the facts and saying his individual will somehow trumps all while accusing others of imposing their own will. It's totally baffling and I'm guessing an extreme millennial special snowflake thing?
The self-righteous name calling, smug obtuseness, and inflated sense of enlightenment that believes the imposition of one's opinions is both justice and charity? Def a Bernie bro.
Perhaps this is a bit of a self-centered and out of touch question at the moment, but are there thoughts, opinions, or insights about how the present situation will affect current VAP searches, some of which are still weeks away from the beginning of the review process?
I'm also concerned about this, especially with talk of an imminent recession. I don't have any insights, but I'm hoping that a lot of VAP searches will continue, just at a delayed time. It seems that interview requests are still coming out, perhaps just not on the committee's original timeline. I'd think that committees are still planning on hiring, but the focus right now is on the transition to online delivery of classes.
Generally VAP searches should be safe, especially for this round. VAPs are replacements or short-term bandaids with no long term commitment in the eyes of administration which makes budgeting relatively easy and predictable.
On the other hand, now is the time when TT searches get approved for next year. The baseline has been grim for a decade but what few positions exist can now be delayed or extinguished, which is the goal of many administrators in order to cull lines or in effect transfer them to depts considered more vital. I've already heard of two lines now DOI. How much of this was affected by the pandemic is difficult to say but it at least provides cover for administrators.
So in the short term not much should change. It could very well be the death blow for a number of struggling/small programs however as the long term is gamed out.
A related question: Have committees for TT jobs either canceled searches that had already gotten underway, or otherwise been slow to move the hiring process forward?
On a search committee: We converted campus visits to Zoom interviews and changed some of the components of the interview (notably the teaching part). I will say that our admin has been extremely supportive thus far.
I have a campus "visit" scheduled for early next week. It is going forward remotely but I still don't know what they want me to do. Am I teaching a remote class? Just doing the job talk? No idea.
I also know at least one candidate was able to visit in person before all the madness descended, so I can't imagine how this will be equitable.
TT or VAP? For a VAP rules are looser so it could certainly fly. For a TT search, I don't see how they could get such different processes approved in 2020 but I'm sure some institutions could ram it through especially if private. I don't believe you could at my institution.
I mean, think about it counterfactually... What else are they supposed to do? Make the first candidate do a virtual visit too, I suppose, could be one solution...
I know of one candidate who couldn't fly for a visit this semester due to medical reasons -- they still got the job, even after doing the talk and teaching demo by skype. It's possible -- though I completely understand the concerns about equity. Surely most committees would be hyper-cognizant of the disadvantage faced by the remaining candidates.
I see on the wiki that the same person is listed as having accepted both a VAP and a TT position. I'm guessing someone's information is incorrect here?
Sometimes an institution will allow its new hire to take a (prestigious) fellowship or visiting position before beginning the TT job. It has definitely happened before.
This may be the wrong thread for this, but how bad is it at Cincinnati? They just hire a new junior Latinist (congratulations to her?) to replace the previous junior Latinist who jumped ship at the earliest possible chance, and now one of their other Latinists is heading to Duke. You have to wonder when they don't seem able to retain faculty.
I know that it may vary, but what is typical for the number of campus visitors for a T-T job ? Is it 3 99% of the time, or is it more a 50/50 thing to be only 2 or 4 ?
ReplyDeleteAny insight and experience would be helpful.
Schools differ on this. I have been involved in searches that have been 2, 3 or 4. My sense is that 50-75% do 3, while 10% or so do 4 and the rest do 2. There is no sure formula for which school/department does what and sometimes a search that started out aiming for 3 campus invitations goes to 4
DeleteAlso, regarding interview #s... Can you guess the number invited based on the number of slots? E.g. does four open time slots indicate three interviewees?
DeleteI imagine that the number is higher if there happens to be an inside candidate, right? I mean, if it is normal to have 3 (and the budget exists to invite 3), but you also have an inside applicant then the 4th candidate is a 'freebie' for the Dept? ...Not sure if this would make it so that an outside candidate juuuust falls into that campus visit list and really lucks out, or that the inside guy is a courtesy "visit" from the start and the SC felt "well, what's the harm in having our VAP be a 4th (free) visit ?"
ReplyDelete...Let me say that I'm ABD here, so I have really no real world insight to offer and my impressions of things may be off. Not sure how much an 'inside hire' affects the numbers for campus visits.
In general the number of finalists invited to campus is determined before the start of the search, i.e. before an inside candidate may be formally identified as a viable finalist. Of course there are many different sorts of inside candidates, but the insider will generally be one of three finalists invited to campus and not an extra one.
DeleteDisagree slightly with 11:48. At two different institutions that I've been a member of (one a SLAC, one an R1) it was considered collegial to include the VAP in the running if they were in the top 10 of the interviews, since their "visit" was free, and then there would be 4 total "invited" candidates, which would reduce the chance of a failed search. At one institution the VAP did not end up getting the TT, at the other institution the VAP did.
DeleteHow much do VAPs usually pay? Also, how do cover letters for VAPs differ from TT cover letters?
ReplyDeleteIn my many, many years of experience normal is about $40,000-$45,000. Some are as low as 30, others, depending on costs of the city, etc, can go closer to 60 but they are few and far between. You'll be only *slightly* better off financially than when you were as a grad student.
DeleteAdd to this, you will have to elect a health insurance plan and you will have to sign up for a 401k even though you are only temporary faculty. At the end of the day, expect to lose about 25-30% of you check to taxes... so, maybe one really isn't *that* much better off than a grad student. Ugh.
Some schools will let you receive that over 9 months, others won't allow it and will make you receive 12 monthly checks.
The big difference in cover letter? For a VAP, stress ONLY what they want to see. If they're looking for a teaching workhorse to do a 4-4 load of Latin 101s, don't talk about your love of teaching Greek pottery; don't dwell on your research; don't act as if you're any more important to them OTHER THAN FILLING THE SPOT THAT THEY WANT FILLED. A lot of people spend too much time trying to "sell themselves" as well-rounded Classicists and serious scholars. Don't do this unless that's what they want for a VAP--which, of course, nobody does.
Concerning letters, VAPs are usually hired to fill an existing gap, and often to teach courses that are already on the books, if not scheduled. So it is key to emphasize that one can hit the ground running as a teacher. Research rarely, if ever, comes up.
DeleteI disagree with the above. There is a lot of variation among departments, but some VAP committees (especially at prestigious SLACs) are looking for promising scholarship. They see their VAP as a stepping stone to a tenure-track job and want to support young scholars--they are thinking of what they can do for you as well as what you can do for them. So for example, Amherst holds campus visits for temporary positions and expects a scholarly job talk as well as a teaching demo. Bottom line: I think it's important to know the department you're applying to and read the ad carefully.
DeleteThe above comment strikes me as optimistic. I have interviewed for a number of VAP positions, at a range of institutions, and NOT ONCE was I asked about my research. The committee was only concerned with my ability to teach the courses they needed and my potential to utilize other campus resources to do so. But I do very much agree with the advance about knowing the department and reading the ad carefully.
DeleteJust to explicitly back up 20:39, the VAP I held at Georgetown required a job talk and my application process dealt fairly heavily with my research. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's unusual, but it's not nonexistent. In terms of cover letter, however, I completely agree with others that you should emphasize teaching. I used my research to explain what sort of courses I could teach and how I would put my own spin on them - keep it teaching-focused, but signal you have an active research agenda for schools that care about such.
DeleteGood luck!
To echo Zach-I taught at an elite SLAC and the process did focus on my research. I gave a research talk and it was discussed during my interviews. 20:39 is entirely right.
DeleteSo this actually makes me view this site with some suspicion. While I acknowledge the goodwill and generosity of so many on this site, couldn't it be that there is an overrepresention of those who are in cushier situations pre and post job? I doubt the person with the 4-4 load in CUNY with a overwhelming number of first gen and SOC under their care is posting much even if they wish to do so. It pretty much encapsulates what so acutely ails our discipline.
DeleteI'm with you, 7 January 2020 at 13:15: I just wanted to chime in and echo your appreciation for the goodwill and generosity of so many, along with your suspicion that we may be getting a skewed perspective (or many of those) thanks to factors that aren't always especially obvious. It's still nice to get real people's real ideas about how things (sometimes) really work out there, which is why I come back once in a while.
DeleteCould someone please confirm what sort of materials the University of Birmingham application requires? CV and cover letter at this stage, or more?
ReplyDeleteIt's entirely possible that the NF2019 population is biased in all kinds of ways, this particular thread is not great evidence of that. Someone made a broadly correct generalization. The principal exception to that generalization is at elite SLACs. People from those schools chimed in to make that point (but NOT to dispute the basic validity of the original claim). Why would the 4-4 at CUNY feel the need to join in?
ReplyDelete[Side note: except for unanonymous Zach, we don't really know that the others with SLAC experience are in fact at such schools now.]
The real takeaway here is this: not all universities are the same, and there are lots of different jobs called 'professor.' Part of your success at the campus visit stage is anticipating correctly what each type of institution does, what its students need, and pitching yourself as the ideal person to fit that role. This is way more difficult at the ABD stage, and favors people who have grown up in academia and have access to this kind of assumed knowledge. But I've seen it be the deciding factor in lots of searches.
DeleteWhat's wrong with it? It normalizes and amplifies elite voices which is the gigantic wart in the cultural blindspot of academia and especially classics. All the hate you see from the general populace largely stems from the fact that they see it in HD yet so few of us do.
DeleteDuh, normalizing and amplifying elite voices is our profession in a nutshell. If you're just figuring this out, you're in big trouble my friend. I suggest a U-turn asap.
DeleteDoes anyone have any updates about the status of the Carleton University search?
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know about this too... it's getting pretty late in the season. The SC acknowledged my application with a nice email, but nothing since.
DeleteOr any updates on the Temple University search?
ReplyDeletePerhaps on the Art History wiki?
DeleteSince this search is being run through an art history department, I am guessing that interviews may not take place until February, when the CAA meeting takes place (even though interviews may not happen at the meeting, that is the traditional timing for such things). But this is only a guess!
DeleteI looked at their previous three searches and they all had earlier deadlines, some by two months, and interviews and campus visits were done early in the cycle (end of year/start of new year). This one seems later for whatever reason, perhaps late approval.
DeleteI didn't see the Temple job listed on either the Art History or Archaeology job wikis, so I don't have any insight. It was due a month ago, but because of the holidays, I bet it will be take a little longer than usual for interview requests. My assumption is that they've probably met to finalize their short list and they'll make interview requests very soon, if they haven't already.
DeleteThey just contacted earlier this afternoon.
DeleteSheesh, does anyone give a shit about art history and a mediterranean position here. Begone, head to the art history wiki.
DeleteUgh, this place and classics by proxy is terrible.
DeleteI love the way people hate-contribute to this site. If it's so terrible, you don't have to read it (and you REALLY don't have to post).
DeleteDo you even read Horace, bro?
DeleteI interviewed with them via Skype last week.
DeleteSo, it seems that the History Wiki (usually not as accurate or as complete as the Classics Wiki) has someone commenting that Western New England University has sent out requests for letters as of Jan. 23.
ReplyDeleteTwo people have commented that this makes no sense since letters were requested back when applications were due. I honestly don't recall.
Does anyone here have any more insight into this ?
How would you like to be rejected? Not everyone agrees, but complaints on the Wiki have helped me helped our search committees not add insult to injury. Lately I've seen some incredulity about the use of snail mail that seems like a new complaint, and I want to check in about possible shifting expectations. Here's roughly what we do:
ReplyDelete(1) applied, not interviewed: emailed a form rejection from HR's application system (most are sent out when we set the interview list)
(2) interviewed: snail mail, more personalized letter signed by search chair (most are sent when search is complete, but sometimes a few are sent right after interviews if we are sure-sure someone is no longer in the running)
(3) on campus visitors: very personalized email when search is complete, followed by snail mail to make it "official"
I would say that speed and professionalism are the most important issues for me. I'd be find with 1 and 3, but annoyed if I did a first round interview and had to wait weeks for a snail mail letter. That being said, often times applying for jobs just feels like shouting into the void, so the bar is generally pretty low here.
DeleteI fully agree with the above comments: speed and professionalism are most important, and the more personalized the rejection, the better.
DeleteOne kind of post-conference interview rejection I hate is the one that reads like it's personalized, but when one thinks about it a little proves to be a generic rejection that's cleverly worded to appear personal. I can understand why there isn't time to personalize rejections, and much prefer one that says something impersonal than something that isn't really as tailored as it seems (e.g., "We were impressed with your accomplishments"). Of course, personalizing is the best, but then truly make it personal with at least one reference that can only apply to the recipient.
DeleteI can't imagine why you would use snail mail at any point. It is just a slower and less reliable means of conveying information. Job candidates want to hear their fate ASAP, so email is ideal. I know some people think phone calls are more personal after a campus visit, but I personally prefer email so you are not forced into the awkward situation of handling disappointing news politely/professionally in real time.
DeletePost-interview rejections: please just send us an email at the same time that campus invites go out. I don't care if it is impersonal. Our interaction lasted for 1 hour max. What I HATE is when a committee says in the interview that they will notify BOTH successful and unsuccessful interviewees, but do not follow through on this--and we have to find out through the wiki (assuming the wiki is correct). Those who interviewed for one school this year will know who I'm talking about... actually, why don't you notify unsuccessful people first? Now that would be an idea...
ReplyDeleteHow common is it that for an open rank search there are only two finalists? I was looking at the UCLA's job talks and could see only two candidates.
ReplyDeletethere are more than two
Deletewho? I only saw Woolf and Mignone
Deletesorry, I'm thinking about the Greek lit search and can see only two, but also their website is trash, so I might be missing something.
DeleteTwo for each position is in keeping with UCLA's practice over the last few years. They have only invited a third person where the department couldn't pick one of the first two.
Deleteum, no, this is just false. For all recent searches there have been more than 2 people for the first round of interviews.
DeleteWe're talking about campus visits, not first round interviews.
Deleteyeah I mean the first round of campus interviews. for one of the recent hires, after bringing in people for a first round of campus interviews, they brought in another finalist who then got the job
Deletefor all recent searches there have been either 3 or 4 people brought to campus initially
Anyone have any info on Western New England ?
ReplyDeleteThe job closed 11/15; then was moved forward to close 12/15. I assume because up to late November only one obscure job site listed the ad, so they probably have a shitty HR Dept that doesn't know how to advertise listings and had to move the closing date forward and post it to more sites so that they could have a reasonable amount of applicants.
Being said, it's been a good amount of time so I'm hoping that someone here might know something.
Is this code for Williams College or someplace near the NY state line?
Deletelol look at the actual wiki... it's the name of a university.
DeleteIt's a fair question, though! I hadn't heard of it before this year.
DeleteI thought Western New England is now to be viewed as a 19th-century construct.
DeleteLol.
DeleteIs it particularly bad to be an Assistant Prof somewhere and apply for other T-T jobs ?
ReplyDeleteI understand that if one is presently T-T at a low-tier private school in northwest bumfuck and you apply for a T-T at an Ivy it's not an issue, obviously, but I'm more curious about those that are less clear.
In short, is one's chances higher/lower to get a T-T job if you already have one elsewhere or are you seen as a flighty douche that will jump ship for (slightly) greener pastures once it comes along ?
...hypothetically, say you get a T-T job this year at a shit school in Idaho. You accept it, because, well, it's a fucking T-T job. But, you desire to live in the Northeast (home) and in a larger city. Next year a variety of jobs at other schools appear that are in the NE and are in larger cities. You apply. Will SCs see you in a better/worse light being in year-one of a T-T job elsewhere ?
Ah, millennials. The apple does not fall far from the boomer tree.
DeleteWho the fuck wants to spend ~30+ place years in Idaho. Get out if you can, people jump ship all the time.
DeleteLooking at past years on the Wiki you will see that many successful candidates come from T-T jobs at a range of institutions. In general a SC will look favorably on one already having a T-T job.
Deletewhy the hate towards Idaho? It can be dull and flat, but in parts the beauty is more staggering than anything you can find east of the Rockies. Out of Boise you can get to anywhere on the west coast in a couple hours. Hell, on a prof's salary, you could buy a ranch...
DeleteOther fun facts: there's a significant Basque population in Idaho, a former governor is named "Butch Otter"
If you're in Idaho right now and you don't like, you have a small soul
6:03, there's no short supply on NF.
DeleteFor me, Idaho is more attractive than the northeast, but we all have areas of the country we'd be happier to live in than others. It is not abnormal for people to apply out after a couple of years, most often at the three year mark or fifth/sixth year (which are usually the point of major reviews and contract renewals). There are any number of reasons, and normally search committees aren't necessarily worried about repeat jumpers. The job market is so awful that often times people will stay somewhere they don't love just to avoid moving yet again.
DeleteHaving been on the occasional Committee To Hire The Next Big Thing, my impression is that most people involved in the hiring process don't kneejerk judge applicants looking to move from one TT to another. But those people with "real" or "permanent" jobs need to convince the interviewing committee that they have reasons for wanting to move that go beyond "me need job." Grad students and people who are precariously employed get a free pass on this point, but a TT applicant has to convince the committee that they actually understand the hiring institution and its context, and (this is even trickier) that they'd actually take the job if offered. We all know about plenty of people who applied just to leverage themselves into a better offer from their home institution, and we don't want to be used as a bargaining chip in your HR process - there are too many good candidates out there for us to waste our time on someone who isn't a real ("real") applicant. If you're trying to get out of Idaho to be closer to "home" or family or whatever else, say that - while talking up the hiring institution and all its people and practices and context and anything else you can think of. If you're trying to get out of Idaho because the grass is always greener, I'd suggest that the grass can be greener in Idaho too. And some people bring the parched grass wherever they go...
DeleteFor the sake of my peace of mind, would anyone mind posting how long it took to hear back after a Skype interview? I had one Friday late afternoon and am getting itchy. I suppose hearing a range of responses might make me feel better?
ReplyDeleteDepending on the nature and timing of the search, one can expect a response any time from the week following the interview to eight weeks hence. Usually Skype interviews are all scheduled close together, but sometimes they are not. Sometimes the search committee doesn't meet for two weeks because of schedule conflicts. Sometimes additional institutional vetting is required. In general, the later in the academic year it is the faster the searches go (out of necessity), but there are no rules.
DeleteI had one first week of December. Still waiting.
DeleteAt my institution, we have to get several layers of institutional approval for our shortlist before we can contact anybody following Skype "conversations." (We're not even allowed to call them Skype "interviews" because everything that's officially an interview requires vetting by all the higher-ups.) So that means that when we do a search there's a time-lag between the completion of the Skypes and the notification of people who are being brought to campus that can be as long as two weeks. Hang in there.
DeleteAnd sorry on behalf of search committees - we know waiting sucks, and we would like to be able to follow up with you sooner, but are often hamstrung by the policies of our administrations.
I had a Zoom interview last Thursday (1/30) and as of the following Monday the SC already reached out for campus visits.
DeleteAt some schools the admin/HR had already approved the 12-15 Skype interviews and implicit in that is that the SC can have free rein to select for themselves the 3-4 campus invites. Admin/HR only gets brought back into the loop when the SC makes an choice of which guy will get the job offer. Of course, not all schools function like this but some do.
In general, it's about the average to see a 1-2 week gap in between Skype interview and campus visit requests.
19:04 again.
DeleteFor another job this year I had my Skype interview 12/16 and was asked to come for a campus visit on 12/19. ...Not sure how typical the rapid sort of response time is or not (this is the first year I've had any, let alone a few, campus visits) but the 1-2 week thing seems to be the norm via the Wiki
Some of my experiences:
ReplyDeleteI have had a campus visit request several hours after the interview... two weeks later... three weeks later. It varies, very much so, because of the admin, the timeline they are following, scheduling, and more. That's why the wiki is (mostly) helpful.
Thanks everyone. Last year I had a campus invite 48 hrs after the Skype. This year, am 6 days off a Skype interview (though the recc letters were due two days after) and am trying to talk myself off a ledge here. It's my dream job.
ReplyDeleteis the IU roman archaeology position filled? The job wiki indicated so this morning but someone seems to have changed it back to being unfilled?
ReplyDeleteI would be shocked if it's not an inside hire of their current VAP
DeleteIt's not their current VAP, at least from what I heard ...
DeleteI heard it was a current VAP - but not the one one would suspect!
DeleteI heard it was offered but has not been accepted yet. Given that, my guess would be it's a person who has either (1) multiple offers or (2) a current TT appointment and is trying to negotiate something along the lines of better salary/perks, a spousal hire, or similar.
Deletehttps://www.classics.upenn.edu/news/bill-beck-clst-indiana-university
DeleteThat's a pretty sweet deal! Good for him.
Are we talking about this position for an Assistant Professor in Roman Art and Archaeology? Isn't this like a completely different specialization?
DeleteI assume the new hire referenced/linked above is the promotion of a VAP to TT without a full search that people are talking about below (and on the other thread). The Roman Arch position does seem to have gone through a full search (that perhaps will result in an inside/VAP hire, but I don't think that's clear yet). I'm not sure why Indiana is hiring a Homerist when they already have one, unless that person is jumping ship after this year.
Delete14:07 - the rumor is that 2 faculty are leaving Indiana, including the Homerist, so that could be why they hired their current VAP without running a search.
DeleteWtf is up with Seton Hall? Did they really schedule interviews without consulting the finalists on their schedules? That search seems really, really mismanaged based on the wiki.
ReplyDeleteWould be curious to know whether they were really looking for Latin Verse, or whether they just selected a random specialization when they posted the SCS ad.
DeleteI got an interview and can confirm that yes they did schedule interviews without checking with us first.
DeleteIs it possible/legal for a department to create a TT position and immediately offer it to a VAP in their department without advertising the position or interviewing other people for it?
ReplyDeleteI think it probably depends on the state and institution, but yes this is generally possible under a target of opportunity hire.
DeleteIf it's a targeted hire or an opportunity hire, then I'd think yes. Something similar is happening at my department at the moment. No job ad, no application process, no interviews.
DeleteYes. I have known that to happen, including at R1's.
DeleteThere should be more if this. The VAP presumably was vetted at initial hire and then proved themselves over a year. This is much more indicative than a dog and pony show process that has little to do with how one will perform over the long haul. It's like looking for a marathon runner by taking the one who has the best 100m time. It's stupid and favors those with the most coaching (and money increasingly).
Deleteagree with 10:22
DeleteAgree 100%. What creeps me out is the self-indulgent, ass kissery affair that we've made it in order to join a sad elite club that is elite only by virtue of its exclusivity. Do your job and stop waving your ass in front of faces.
DeleteYeah, the entire process is about making oneself look as shiny as possible for magpies.
DeleteHonestly, kudos to Indiana for hiring their VAP. It's humane and he's smart and accomplished.
DeleteWhat is interesting is that Indiana had an accomplished female VAP in Greek lit for several years before this who was not promoted. And an accomplished female VAP in Latin lit who was similarly not promoted last year when they were hiring for Latin--instead, they hired their own former PhD who just happens to have a penis. Coincidence? Perhaps.
DeleteWhat do you expect from Caucasious Studies in this age of MCGA?
Delete@14:13
DeleteI don't know the history or details of which you speak, so I withhold judgment, but if what you say is true, then it is indeed interesting (read: disconcerting).
You're catching on to how Classics has worked? It's just harder to hide now with social media and modern networking. Do you think Paideia would have been outed a generation ago? I doubt it. Perhaps some whispers here and there and even an "investigation" by the APA if absolutely necessary but undoubtedly followed by...acquittal!
DeleteWondering if any Temple U Zoom interview candidates have heard a follow up?
ReplyDeleteYes, received campus invite.
ReplyDeleteCan I ask when you got it?
DeleteSorry I missed this: first week of February
DeleteHas anyone encountered blatant lies on this wiki? Asking for a friend (me). The more I speak with colleagues also in the running for certain positions, the more I hear that they avoid this wiki because of false info.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I've ever seen a blatant lie, but I have seen errors. Sometimes people transpose numbers when entering a date, and that's caused a furor. In a few cases, I've seen instances where people are filling out the wiki based on secondhand info and put in the wrong name. Sometimes searches run slowly or things happen and people get interviews weeks after others have been notified.
DeleteDid anyone else get a random email from Cincinnati that their application was now under review, even though the Wiki shows that they interviewed at the SCS?
ReplyDeleteYep. Cincy's HR system is a joke.
DeleteMe too. Salt on wounds.
DeleteAgreed re: Cincinnati. Their H.R. computer system is terrible.
DeleteDoes anyone else remember how a few years ago if you applied for a faculty position you would start getting occasinal e-mails about other opportunities on campus of a non-academic nature? I finally had enough and wrote the head of H.R., who was surprised to learn about this, and the practice soon stopped. So they've gotten better in that respect, but today's e-mail was plain stupid.
For any finalists, it likely indicates that they have concluded their search...
DeleteE-mails about non-academic job opportunities? Oh, the horror! How dare they insult your fragile little ego like that!
DeleteIf memory serves, they included even janitorial positions, which on the one hand seems absurd, but on the other seems...prescient?
Delete7:57, you seem to be one of those people who just loves to hear the sound of their voice, even if it's in writing. If you had received one of those e-mails you would have known just how irrelevant those job postings were, and would not have such a dumbass reaction. Unless you seriously think that people who fail to get a VAP want to learn about become a groundskeeper, administrative assistant, etc. at that university.
DeleteWhat does the community think of public announcements of getting a t-t position (e.g. on social media)? I'm thinking of how I've seen different people approach it in very different ways this year and in previous years: some trumpet it to the skies (which can seem arrogant, but also justified--because it is an achievement, albeit one that is partly the product of luck); others quietly tell their friends and colleagues in private, and go about their business. Is one way preferable? The latter seems much more sensitive to all of one's friends and colleagues who did not get a job (or that job)...
ReplyDeleteI'm an eternal failure and don't mind others posting that they accepted a TT position. It's a nice confirmation to the largely unconfirmed wiki.
DeleteWhen I finally, finally got a TT job after four years on the market, I only told people whom I was close enough to to personally contact. I think the trumpeting on social media thing is really tasteless, given how many of our friends and colleagues are descending into abject desperation and depression this time of year, and given how luck-based success actually is. People will find out anyway, and fast.
DeleteAnyone have any word on Kenyon College after their online interviews? Thanks!!!
ReplyDeleteNo word yet
Deletedoes anyone... have any information re: Cincinnati? (my understanding: SCS interviews happened, they brought in 3 finalists, then that weird email from their HR)
ReplyDeleteI heard Cincinnati has extended an offer, but it has not been accepted yet; the Greek Art job at U British Columbia has also been offered and nearly accepted (by a Canadian).
ReplyDeleteAny info on the UMass Boston Latin job?
ReplyDeleteAny news on valpo?
ReplyDeleteSomeone posted on the wiki a couple days ago (the same day as your post) that they have a campus visit for Valpo and that they got the invite on 2/13. I interviewed there and haven't heard anything yet, so I can't verify. I thought I nailed the interview so I'm not sure what to think now.
DeleteAny word about the Utah history job?
ReplyDeleteWe're at the quiet, secretive stage of campus visits which can be complicated. No news is usually bad news.
ReplyDeleteVery true.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know what Texas is looking for in the Assoc/Full search? Or is this merely university HR having to post a fake ad in order to sponsor a visa vel sim.?
ReplyDeleteIt is a real search. Several retirements underway, so it could go in a number of different directions. But probably not an archaeologist.
Delete"It is a real search...But probably not an archaeologist."
DeleteEvery generalist search in the history of classics.
How dare they abbreviate GreekOrRomanLiteratureOrLanguageOrHhistoryOrPhilosophy as "generalist"?
DeleteBut seriously, it's a replacement hire and none of the archaeolgists are retiring.
Yeah, there are ten philologists for every historian or archaeologist in classics. I see your GRE Math score didn't hold you back.
DeleteShould the Oxford CCC position go under senior jobs? I'm not as familiar with UK academic rankings/titles, but that's what it sounds like to me from the position description (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gU4zL0c5NR8J:https://www.ccc.ox.ac.uk/Vacancies/v/137/+&cd=2).
ReplyDelete'Associate Professor' at Oxford is equivalent to Assistant Professor in the USA. Looks like an open rank search.
DeleteI would be skeptical about that characterization. Surely "Lecturer" at Oxford is more equivalent to Assistant Professor in the American system. Although the ad does not mention it specifically, the new hire will be replacing Nikolaos Papazarkadas, temporarily there from Berkeley. Big shoes to fill, indeed. I suspect 10:56 is correct in their inclination that this listing belongs in the senior hire section, in which I would also suggest the Amsterdam ancient history position be placed.
DeleteAnyone know what's happening at Emory? Did they bring in a fifth candidate?
ReplyDeleteWhy would they bring a fifth one?
DeleteThere was a fifth talk on the calendar two weeks after the last of the original four. "Why" is the question.
DeleteIt's not uncommon for campus visits to be far apart, depending on the scheduling needs of the candidates and the search committees. I'm surprised the Emory talks are as close together as they are.
DeleteMaybe the committee is still meeting. There may be an offer on the table, but the first candidate doesn't always take that offer. Hang in there!
DeleteRemember: they also have to make two offers. That can create all sorts of dynamics. I am surprised that Duke was able to make offers (i.e. come to agreement) so quickly.
DeleteThat was pretty striking. Maybe they were able to give each of multiple factions their own hire or something.
Deleteany details about haverford job?
ReplyDeleteInteresting that ABDs don't seem to be getting jobs this year--so far.
ReplyDeleteI'm faculty at a large state university and our dept (history) is holding two searches this year. All of the campus vistors were ABDs. Now, sure, things are quite different for certain sub-fields of history where there is a near 1:1 ratio of jobs and candidates, but for all them to be ABDs is still rather shocking to those of us that don't fall in those sub-fields.
Delete...Also, there are about 7-8 TT jobs on the Wiki that show names and info, all of which are VAPs somewhere nice and all have a PhD from the same few schools (Brown, UPenn, and Berkeley). I suspect that those that are red and do not list names are those who are a bit nervous to share their info for fear of being attacked as being "only an ABD" or from a "sub-par school like Ohio State" as things like that are (sadly) often said on the various editions of FV that have existed.
I think 9:55 nailed it.
DeleteStill, it's nice to see some sensible hires that suggest the basic tenets of inclusion are finally getting through to us. Washington, for one, nailed it in my opinion. Representation is huge even at a basic existential level and their hire will go above and beyond at an institution where a quarter of its student body will benefit from a heightened sense of belonging and empathy.
Probably too little too late for us as a discipline but small joys and victories.
*Nancy Pelosi golf clap*
DeleteIf we classified classics by the evolution of television, we might have moved from b/w iconoscopes to RCA color. Yeah, we're still in the 50s.
For a discipline that dissects cultural texts with surgical precision, we're pretty tone deaf and color blind when it comes to seeing, understanding, and empathizing with worlds outside our own, which is obscenely white bread at the present.
Someone keeps on changing jobs on the Wiki to red without adding any info as to why -- PLEASE DON'T DO THAT. It makes the Wiki less consistent and if you aren't going to vouch for that info, then don't change it.
ReplyDeleteIf you're referring to the Utah job, it has been filled. I'm not sure who got it though.
DeleteI understand your frustration. I would just add that perhaps the editor in question had an interview, found out that an offer was made, but doesn't know who go the job--hence the change to red without other info. Is that not reasonable? Honest question.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the frustration. It's always been done like this afaik. Why the OCD control? There are rare cases of abuse when people are guessing, but 95% of the time it's accurate information whether we know the details.
DeleteOld guy here. We've always erred on the side of presenting info here. The only thing frowned upon, and I think it's only happened a couple times in over a decade, is the outing of individual people by name who have accepted jobs but have not had the time to sort things out at their old institutions. Since it wasn't the applicants it must have been overzealous members of the new institutions.
DeleteAnother old guy here, 11:18. I'm the one who, in response to those outings, recommended the informal policy that no one post a name (other than his/her own) until 2-3 weeks had gone by, in order to make sure that the new hires could tell colleagues, friends, etc. That still remains the law of the land, I've been glad to see, though since I can't find a written reference to it on the wiki I guess it has become one of those "unwritten laws" that Antigone was always going on about.
DeleteYeah, posting names requires discretion. It's usually done by the successful applicant or if there's a public announcement somewhere.
DeleteChanging a red back to orange b/c "proof" wasn't provided? I think that's silly. If you have better info, sure change it back. Otherwise, let it play out.
Some years back we asked if hearing info from a reliable source was good enough to pass along here and I believe we agreed it was.
I assume that some of this frustration is coming from applicants who hope they're still in the running for a job. I'm sorry to say that successful candidates know they're successful long before anyone else knows, meaning that if you haven't heard anything that's unfortunately not a good sign.
DeleteSpot on, 6:00. The harsh reality. The four unsuccessful campus visits I had before landing my job were way more difficult to get past than the dozen or so applications that ended at the SCS. It didn't help that after such close interactions where you play everything out with the department, rejections came through generic robo emails from HR. It's why for the two searches I've now chaired I've made it a point to call the other finalists to explain what's happened. I'm at a state school where things are fairly regimented so I don't buy the "official process" that people hide behind to ghost unsuccessful finalists. It's totally shitty and awkward.
DeleteThanks for saying this, 14:37. I have most appreciated the phone call approach in the past (as an applicant), and now as faculty (but yet to be on a search committee), I also intend on calling, wherever possible, unsuccessful finalists, and writing individualized emails to the long list.
DeleteI don't think anyone over the age of 50 has any real idea what goes into apps today no matter how many they now read from their present perch. My smallish but well regarded dept has saved all previous applications from the past 50 years and the differences are stark.
DeleteFor one, there were always under 50 applications and sometimes far less. The cover letters were all under a page and pretty generic. CVs were several pages with virtually no candidates past a postdoc and many still abd. And they were doing this the comfort of their grad programs or cushy postdocs! While some are still fortunate to apply from such situations, the vast majority are years out toiling through terrible VAPs at best. Stop the I walked barefoot ten miles over glass bullshit, boomers, and do your fucking jobs with a modicum of grace and diligence...or get the hell out.
For what it's worth, and others obviously have other preferences, but I much prefer a personal email to a personal phone call for communicating bad news. The personal phone call requires candidates to be polite and professional on the spot in a moment of intense disappointment. I'd rather have privacy.
DeleteRegardless, the professional thing to do is to make a call. You'll invariably run into each other at the SCS and the gatekeepers should be the one taking the lead in normalizing relationships. You know, wear big boy/girl pants. What the search process has taught me is that academics in general should not be running searches. Most don't have the time or professionalism to do so. It's like forcing every academic to take a turn as dean. The only reason why it's not total disaster is academia's glut of overqualified candidates.
DeleteSome interesting comments on use of professional editing services for academic job applications (outside of Classics but still relevant):
ReplyDeletehttp://psychjobsearch.wikidot.com/forum/t-1378287/has-anyone-used-karen-kelsky
Didn't click your link but I'm increasingly of the feeling that we've overblown the personalization of apps to the point that it's much easier to game the system if you have the resources. Others have replied that it correctly rewards those who obsess and have the skills to write meticulously crafted letters , statements, etc but it's too much now. I see less and less correlation between applications and successful academic careers. I see instead the increased homogeneity of classics.
DeleteI think the SCS should expand it's involvement even further. Candidates are already assigned numbers. They should all enter their basic information into the same portal to ease evaluation and filter out biases and bs. Programs should be able to filter and search their applicant pool. Letters should be sent to this portal but only after a long list is made. The entire system would standardize the process and reduce redundancies and wasted effort for all while making it a fairer and more humane process overall. Rather than using Mellon or whatever funding to sponsor one more conference or whatever that will be forgotten after a year, fund the implementation of this system.
Whatever the merits of this in terms of equity or not-wasting-people's-time, it's impossible. Hiring departments answer not to the SCS but to their respective institutions. Even if SCS could come up with the funding to offer this (I doubt there's actually that much fungible money lying around), departments would still be constrained to use whatever system local HR requires.
DeleteAsking purely out of curiosity: I've heard that coronavirus fears have affected campus visits for some prospective grad students this spring. Has anyone heard of the same for job candidates?
ReplyDeleteMaybe VAP searches which are happening now. TT visits started after Thanksgiving and wrapped up before March with some rare exceptions.
DeleteThe hour is late for universities on the prevalent semester schedule. All the paperwork and planning for courses need to be finalized and submitted asap.
DeleteIn my experience, VAP searches can continue into June. As noted above, courses are often already scheduled by then, but in such cases the VAP simply teaches whatever is already on the books.
Deletelol @ 8:12. As far as administrative deadlines are concerned, people usually know exactly how far these can be pushed, and precisely where. Time pressure isn't really going to be a thing, there, I don't think.
ReplyDeleteWhy did someone move Winnipeg to "orange" status without providing any info? No interviews had even been reported...
ReplyDeleteUgh, here we go again...
Deletewhy do you think it is "more legitimate" for someone to write "job offered and accepted" when changing it to red, rather than just changing it to red? Same for other items... if someone is going to lie, they're going to lie.
DeleteDude, 19:52, you've got issues. As others have stated, changing the color w/o any other information is still information. It's the way it's been done for over a decade. If it's wrong and you know it, you can change it back. If someone knows more, they can add details. Stop being an OCD a-hole denigrating people providing INFO in the wiki comments.
DeleteWinnipeg sent an initial confirmation to applicants saying there would be no first-round interviews but they would move directly to campus visits.
DeleteI don't think it's unreasonable to expect some corroborating information, or at least some specificity when changing the color: in the past, people have added details such as the date when they received a request, or whether they heard it by word of mouth -- to qualify the reliability of the info. Posting a link, as someone did in response to the above poster, is all the better. I think some of you are just lazy, but we are all trying to allay each other's anxiety and providing as much info as possible is better than vague color changes that could simply be the work of one angry troll. Color changes are not info. (I do realize, however, that nothing is verifiable on the wiki unless backed up by external announcement though).
DeleteYou're a privileged ass, undoubtedly one of those who think all the people on assistance that is socially branded as welfare (so not corporate bailouts and tax cuts) should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and just work harder.
DeleteThere are extenuating circumstances that often prevent details from being revealed. In the earlier days of the wiki, people begged to be mercifully let in from their cone of silence that those not chosen for a job are placed. Color changes are undoubtedly information, even though your OCD predilections scream otherwise. There's been years of precedent on here and numerous voices much more experienced than you that have now chimed in. The wiki has been a good constant as FV/NF goes through it's ups and down. This is a result of years of community consensus, not one jerk calling people lazy and idiots for not following their OCD desires.
Now STFU. You're wasting our time.
Why are you so angry about this? And what qualifies you to pontificate on this issue? Sounds like someone is bitter... BTW I am actually a Bernie Sanders supporter from a low socio-economic marginalized community. So throw your assumptions out the window.
DeleteIt's called quality control. There have been instances, even this year (Durham), of people posting false information, which could have ramifications in the non-online world. A color change might be mercy, but it can also be misinformation. Get a grip you A-hole and stop griping about people asking others to provide a bit of detail...
Quality control isn't really possible on a site like that. Verifiable, publicly posted information is, by definition, available to everyone. The wiki, on the other hand, is for unverifiable, secondhand, and other gray area information that is not public, the cost of which is a degree of inaccuracy and a great deal of vagueness. There has been incorrect information on the wiki for as long as I have been visiting it (longer than I care to admit). It can be frustrating, but it causes no real harm and rarely stays up for long. I agree that more detail is better than less, but any information is better than none.
DeleteDude's not gonna listen to your reasoning. He's like that one U of M guy on Twitter who thinks his shit don't stink bc he spends all his time on philological minutiae and gets applauded for it despite a horrifyingly narrow worldview.
DeleteSometimes more info may be impossible, like if the poster is a faculty member in the department. I think we just have to take it on faith that changes are true until/unless they're revealed not to be.
DeleteSo...like every other wiki. Does this guy go on Wikipedia and passive aggressively reprimand contributors in the update history?
Delete@12:50 you've pretty much described all classicists to a degree but especially those popular on social media.
Delete19:22 is right; I've been in exactly this position.
ReplyDeleteOk, but look, in the last 24 hours, if anyone has been looking at the wiki, someone/some people (?) have added and deleted three different names against three different jobs. What do we do about that? I guess nothing. In the end, the wiki is an imperfect platform for disseminating info, but I can't think of any better ones out there.
ReplyDeleteEasy.. Just put the hire's name and school *ALSO* in the description of the Wiki edit. You can't delete that shit.
DeleteSo in the process of confessing (if anonymously) to vandalizing the wiki, someone wrote in the history notes "Changed Winnipeg and Kenyon back to previous state - since the latest editor provided no information for the change in color. DO NOT DO THIS YOU IDIOTS." I'm genuinely a little puzzled by what exactly he(?) means. The colors have pretty well-defined meanings. Is the complaint that the same information (e.g. job offered and accepted) isn't redundantly written out? Or that supplemental information like date or identity (which aren't required and which might well be unavailable or ethically problematic) hasn't been added?
ReplyDeleteYeah, look at the recent discussions above. There have been multiple attempts at explanation from a number of veterans to this person and he won't listen to reason. After it was explained that it was a decision arrived at by community, color changes are in fact information, and crowd sourcing is the nature of wikis, he is still unilaterally trying to impose his will by ignoring the facts and saying his individual will somehow trumps all while accusing others of imposing their own will. It's totally baffling and I'm guessing an extreme millennial special snowflake thing?
DeleteHe's a Bernie bro. Nuff said.
Delete7:57, meet your future dept chair, lol
DeleteThe self-righteous name calling, smug obtuseness, and inflated sense of enlightenment that believes the imposition of one's opinions is both justice and charity? Def a Bernie bro.
DeletePerhaps this is a bit of a self-centered and out of touch question at the moment, but are there thoughts, opinions, or insights about how the present situation will affect current VAP searches, some of which are still weeks away from the beginning of the review process?
ReplyDeleteI'm also concerned about this, especially with talk of an imminent recession. I don't have any insights, but I'm hoping that a lot of VAP searches will continue, just at a delayed time. It seems that interview requests are still coming out, perhaps just not on the committee's original timeline. I'd think that committees are still planning on hiring, but the focus right now is on the transition to online delivery of classes.
DeleteGenerally VAP searches should be safe, especially for this round. VAPs are replacements or short-term bandaids with no long term commitment in the eyes of administration which makes budgeting relatively easy and predictable.
DeleteOn the other hand, now is the time when TT searches get approved for next year. The baseline has been grim for a decade but what few positions exist can now be delayed or extinguished, which is the goal of many administrators in order to cull lines or in effect transfer them to depts considered more vital. I've already heard of two lines now DOI. How much of this was affected by the pandemic is difficult to say but it at least provides cover for administrators.
So in the short term not much should change. It could very well be the death blow for a number of struggling/small programs however as the long term is gamed out.
A related question: Have committees for TT jobs either canceled searches that had already gotten underway, or otherwise been slow to move the hiring process forward?
ReplyDeleteOn a search committee: We converted campus visits to Zoom interviews and changed some of the components of the interview (notably the teaching part). I will say that our admin has been extremely supportive thus far.
DeleteI have a campus "visit" scheduled for early next week. It is going forward remotely but I still don't know what they want me to do. Am I teaching a remote class? Just doing the job talk? No idea.
ReplyDeleteI also know at least one candidate was able to visit in person before all the madness descended, so I can't imagine how this will be equitable.
TT or VAP? For a VAP rules are looser so it could certainly fly. For a TT search, I don't see how they could get such different processes approved in 2020 but I'm sure some institutions could ram it through especially if private. I don't believe you could at my institution.
DeleteI mean, think about it counterfactually... What else are they supposed to do? Make the first candidate do a virtual visit too, I suppose, could be one solution...
DeleteI know of one candidate who couldn't fly for a visit this semester due to medical reasons -- they still got the job, even after doing the talk and teaching demo by skype. It's possible -- though I completely understand the concerns about equity. Surely most committees would be hyper-cognizant of the disadvantage faced by the remaining candidates.
DeleteWe would likely have to cancel a TT search.
DeleteSince VAPs and temporary positions have been brought into the conversation, has anyone heard from Oberlin regarding interviews for their VAP/postdoc?
ReplyDeleteHaven't heard anything either
DeleteSeems like Columbia, Michigan and Penn are doing really well this year....
ReplyDeleteI see on the wiki that the same person is listed as having accepted both a VAP and a TT position. I'm guessing someone's information is incorrect here?
ReplyDeleteSometimes an institution will allow its new hire to take a (prestigious) fellowship or visiting position before beginning the TT job. It has definitely happened before.
DeleteThis may be the wrong thread for this, but how bad is it at Cincinnati? They just hire a new junior Latinist (congratulations to her?) to replace the previous junior Latinist who jumped ship at the earliest possible chance, and now one of their other Latinists is heading to Duke. You have to wonder when they don't seem able to retain faculty.
ReplyDelete