tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post8518147848320356355..comments2023-12-23T04:56:29.702-05:00Comments on Ferule & Fescue: Competing for the middle-class jobFlaviahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17832765671541392835noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-20063273362094968672014-03-27T01:05:10.986-04:002014-03-27T01:05:10.986-04:00Great post and comments (especially your questions...Great post and comments (especially your questions above), Flavia. And yes, do look at the web site. I have seen advice around the web somewhere about "don't bother personalizing the letter--looking at the web site--etc.--because it makes you look desperate." No, it makes you look like a candidate who has a real interest in the job rather than someone who has papered the known world with applications. undinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05589384016564587214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-81294541320815058492014-03-26T14:07:01.822-04:002014-03-26T14:07:01.822-04:00I think one important intervention you make here i...I think one important intervention you make here in the current job market rage is: what makes a young scholar a successful graduate student, and post-doc applicant, and a prize winner - is not what gets you a job. There is more. I see so much on the web in which people point to their past accomplishments as the principle reason they ought to be employed in a t-t job now. And yet,having conducted many of those interviews, the vast majority of really accomplished graduate students and post-docs don't make the leap to being able to talk about the work that makes up 75-85% of our days as tenured and tenure-track people. Obviously they still wouldn't all have jobs, even if they all did this well, given the environment. But many seem mystified that the committee didn't just hire them on the spot on the strength of their cv's.Tenured Radicalhttp://chronicle.com/blognetwork/tenuredradical/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-27573669643360993282014-03-25T18:51:03.826-04:002014-03-25T18:51:03.826-04:00Anon:
Thanks for this. I definitely agree that gr...Anon:<br /><br />Thanks for this. I definitely agree that grad students should be as strategic as their program (and lives) permit when it comes to seeking out useful and varied teaching opportunities. I'd also recommend spelling out anything that isn't obvious on a CVs. If you've taught the same course five times, but you redesigned it with a different topic every time, list them as separate classes, specifying the topic. If your university has weird names for its grad student teachers that aren't immediately translatable, specify such things as for which courses you were the sole instructor, or which ones you designed, or your exact duties as a TA or grader or section leader. Committees read CVs fast in their initial screening, and if you don't have a comfortably long list of different courses taught, it pays to foreground as clearly as you can what you HAVE done. <br /><br />You and Cassandra and Susan have all mentioned the importance of perusing the website, and I heartily agree. The reality is that there's HUGE variation among schools even with the same teaching load and roughly similar student populations--and it's not unusual for a department with a heavier teaching load to have a more successful and impressive faculty, or a healthier community, than one with a somewhat lighter one. Some of this a candidate can only learn through the course of a campus visit, but a good sense can usually be gained by looking at the size of the department, the faculty profiles, and the curriculum. <br /><br />And to your last comment: agreed as well. Candidates should have something to say--ideally without even being asked--that indicates their interest in the specific institution. One of the places to do this is in the famous "do you have any questions for us" final question. Candidates sometimes agonize over this, worrying about coming up with smart questions, but in reality, anything that shows your genuine interest in the institution, and you're golden. My standby question has always been, "What do YOU like best about teaching a X College?" (followed by lots of affirmations and head-nodding and comments that that's exactly what I'm looking for too.) Or "Where would you like to see your department/college in five or ten years?" (And it never hurts to preface a question with some subtle flattery: "I see that all your faculty have very active research profiles--are there opportunities to share or talk about works in progress?" Or "it looks like you have an exciting range of interdisciplinary courses--what are the opportunities to propose new courses?") <br /><br />As with dating, so in an interview: being an interested and encouraging listener can often be a better way of selling yourself than talking or focusing solely on yourself--and you might learn more than you expect, too. (I've gotten two or three <i>terrible</i> answers to my softball, "what do YOU like best question" from hiring committees, who said exactly the kinds of things they'd pillory a candidate for saying. E.g., "well. . . the teaching load can't be beat!" or "it's great being so close to Boston!" Without a word about their students and sometimes no word about their colleagues. Flaviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17832765671541392835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-18676369697736546562014-03-25T16:39:58.366-04:002014-03-25T16:39:58.366-04:00Oh! I'm anon at 4:25. Be able to tell us why...Oh! I'm anon at 4:25. Be able to tell us why (and probably how) you'd like to make your career at our school. We'll ask. We probably have a chip on our shoulder because we're a teaching school (or middle class), and we worry that people see as a temporary job until the score the "real" job at the R1. We're located in a geographically desirable part of the country (well, for some people). I think this is okay to acknowledge. Quality of life matters. A lot. But don't lead with it! Or don't start and end your answer there! Say something about our institution, about work. This requires knowing something about our institution and imagining your work there. A few months ago we had one candidate say that s/he wanted to come to our school to work with grad students. We don't have grad students. Another said s/he wanted liked the religious commitment, which we haven't had in a long time. A little homework goes a long way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-56370581774610396592014-03-25T16:25:40.929-04:002014-03-25T16:25:40.929-04:00I teach at a middle-class SLAC. At least I think ...I teach at a middle-class SLAC. At least I <i>think</i> it's middle class: the faculty handbook makes it clear that teaching is most important, but scholarship does matter. My department doesn't require publications to hire someone, but we need candidates to be able to articulate their scholarly agenda. We need to know that they have plans and that their plan makes sense for us and for them.<br /><br />But how they talk about teaching is the most important. I think your point about being able to explain <i>how</i> one would teach a course is critical. The <i>what</i> is important, and I like it when people teach me about new/different texts, when they come up with reading lists I wouldn't myself just sitting around a table. But <i>what</i> is still less important than the <i>how</i>. Most academics aren't naturally good at this, in my experience. They have to learn and practice. A good friend of mine has said that all discussions of teaching should center on this construction: because I believe in ___, I do ___. I like that.<br /><br />The other bit of advice I'd add is that grad students should try to get as much teaching experience as they can while they're in grad school. I know. Everyone wants fellowships, for obvious reasons. But you'd be shocked (I am shocked) by how little teaching experience many grad students (in the humanities) have. Some candidates have taught only one or two classes on their own before going on the market. At a school like mine, where we really do care about excellent teaching, unless that candidate is ridiculously gifted as a teacher, that's probably not going to cut it. You need teaching experience to learn about teaching (from the inside), to improve teaching, and to talk about teaching. The reality of the job market is that most positions are at teaching schools. I get over-the-top angry at how some grad schools do not prepare their students for this reality. If the program or advisors aren't going to help candidates with this preparation, grad students should seek it out themselves. Maybe instead of being on fellowship six out of seven years, be on fellowship four or five.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-39247930462976099612014-03-24T23:37:04.588-04:002014-03-24T23:37:04.588-04:00Definitely helpful. I think my institution (an asp...Definitely helpful. I think my institution (an aspiring R1, so maybe wannabe-elite in its own mind, if not in fact) is a shade, but only a shade, different*: a research track record, and a clear research program, are essential, and so is a teaching track record, but maybe it could be a bit less extensive than you describe. In practice, though, as you point out above, most people the department hires (and I see this half from the inside, half from the outside -- I can see finalists' c.v.s and attend their talks, but can't participate in hiring discussions) are, in fact, quite experienced teachers, if only because that's how they've been supporting themselves while amassing the requisite publication record. On the other hand, if the department is not thinking about candidates' teaching experience, they should be; classes are getting bigger and bigger, and, even though the department tries to protect junior faculty from the worst of that, it's not entirely possible to do so (and will probably become less so). <br /><br />*Despite perhaps aspiring to a self-image slightly above the "middle class job," my university has the downside of being located in a very high cost of living area, which means that entry-level professors earn wages that barely allow them to live a middle-class lifestyle. For instance, even with savings for, or family help with, a downpayment, no one's going to buy a house on an assistant professor's salary alone around here. <br /><br />And I saw the pattern Fie describes a bit back when I was interviewing -- for instance, one department with several tenured faculty members, including the chair, who were M.A.s (A.B.D.s) with few or no publications made it clear that they'd want a book from me, even though there was no one in the department who could provide any mentorship for the publication process. I do think that kind of job might be one to avoid, or at least think very seriously before taking (what one does when a department changes requirements in midstream, I don't know). I approached the situation by being quite open about the noncanonical nature of my research interests, got some questions in response to my presentation that made it clear they weren't comfortable with that, and didn't get the job, which was probably just as well. Obviously, that's the sort of thing one can figure out by studying the department web site (or the college catalog, in my day). What you describe is quite different -- presumably a bit of research would pretty clearly reveal that recently-tenured faculty have active research programs. Contingent Cassandrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08161652083031423415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-16936056677842960182014-03-24T16:27:53.057-04:002014-03-24T16:27:53.057-04:00Thanks, MSI. I'm glad to hear it's useful....Thanks, MSI. I'm glad to hear it's useful.<br /><br />Dr. Cleveland:<br /><br />Yes, this is a useful reminder. Or put another way: students from big public universities, who have done a lot (and often greatly varied kinds) of teaching have one kind of advantage. Students from the most elite programs have another (both the name on their degree, but also, in many cases, more focused and aggressive mentoring when it comes to publishing, esp. in top venues). <br /><br />Their respective strengths make each group of job applicants appealing to some kinds of jobs--but many middle-class jobs *want it all.* And it's harder than ever for an applicant to have it all without a year or two, after the PhD, either to get full-time teaching experience or to publish or both.Flaviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17832765671541392835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-60087539344231236512014-03-23T22:34:53.729-04:002014-03-23T22:34:53.729-04:00I think for job-seekers from less-elite PhD instit...I think for job-seekers from less-elite PhD institutions, the emphasis of Flavia's advice gets turned around. <br /><br />You still need to be able to talk intelligently and persuasively about your teaching. (If you've taught a lot of classes but can't talk about them, that is not good.) But you also need to remember that even middle-class schools have serious research expectations.<br /><br />If the students at Top 20 programs are being told to go out with 2 articles, you really have to meet that standard, too. They get the benefit of the doubt on their scholarly "potential" because of their fancy diploma. You will never get credit for potential. You can only get credit for actual achievement, which means pointing to publications.Doctor Clevelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07326408523926507003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-45790037475124790112014-03-23T16:29:26.277-04:002014-03-23T16:29:26.277-04:00This is really useful for me. Thanks for this. I d...This is really useful for me. Thanks for this. I don't think that most people (among grad students, that is) are going on the job market with the expectation that their elite PhD and recs will land them anything. Some faculty might still assume this, but among us plebs, two articles by the time of graduation is the assumed requirement...for a good postdoc. Teaching experience remains a problem for the reasons you outline.Miss Self-Importanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04477849823290773026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-44159961588346803842014-03-23T16:20:37.115-04:002014-03-23T16:20:37.115-04:00CPP:
That could be one model, I suppose. I'm ...CPP:<br /><br />That could be one model, I suppose. I'm talking about a class that's still discussion-based, but is too big to be a seminar (so, anywhere from 25 to maybe 40 students, depending on the place, the level of the course, etc.). <br /><br />When I teach a class like this, I arrange the desks in a semi-circle (or two rings of semi-circles, if it's on the bigger side). Sometimes the course is one that involves mostly full-class discussions, where I do more guiding and shaping than I would in a seminar, but I don't lecture except for maybe a few minutes here & there, as the topic requires. In other classes, it might involve an even mix of full-class discussion and lots of group/pair work.Flaviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17832765671541392835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-57131110071447602202014-03-23T15:58:32.304-04:002014-03-23T15:58:32.304-04:00(Personally, I was completely unaware that classes...<i>(Personally, I was completely unaware that classes existed that weren't a) seminars, or b) lectures. What else was there?? Most of my teaching since then, as it turns out.)</i><br /><br />Are you referring to Socratic dialogue? It's neither a seminar discussion nor a lecture. Otherwise, I'm not sure what you mean. Comradde PhysioProffenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-79101719253527571462014-03-23T12:55:03.345-04:002014-03-23T12:55:03.345-04:00Susan:
Yes, I think a lot of this is applicable t...Susan:<br /><br />Yes, I think a lot of this is applicable to (at least some) R1s as well. As I note in my linked post, it's really hard to pretend that all institutions, even with the same profile or teaching load, are the same or looking for the same things!<br /><br />Fie:<br /><br />I'm sorry that you're at an institution with outsized research expectations relative to the support it gives--and I'm <i>especially</i> sorry that you're being subject to creeping research expectations. That's shitty.<br /><br />However, I'm not going to propose a label for the kind of institution that you're at, because the point of this post, and of my using the term "middle class," was simply to contrast such jobs with "elite" or "research" jobs--NOT to establish a detailed hierarchy or to suggest that anything that doesn't meet my loose criteria is in some objective way a bad job--any job at which one can build a personally satisfying life is a fantastic job! <br /><br />But again, I'm sorry that that isn't the case where you are.Flaviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17832765671541392835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-38918101669362472752014-03-23T09:45:53.218-04:002014-03-23T09:45:53.218-04:00Because the market is so competitive, my own schoo...Because the market is so competitive, my own school has upped the ante for tenure, making publication a unspoken, unwritten requirement. When you're teaching a 4/4, I think that it's unfair to pretend that your professors are at a more "middle class" position, such as you describe. (I wonder, what would you call a position like mine?) We have a terrible library. Almost every book I look at is through ILL. I do research, but I was told when I was hired that it wasn't necessary for tenure. A change in department chair changed the rules of the game -- he said, "Of course publication is required." I asked if it had been required for him. He said, "No, but things have changed in academia in the last ten years. Young scholars are expected to be doing these things." <br /><br />I am going to be fighting hard to get a proportional course load in light of research requirements. It probably won't work. I'll probably be left embittered and resentful. But I've got a back-up plan, and if I don't try, I will still be bitter and resentful. So might as well try. <br /><br />So what WOULD you call the 4/4 teaching-heavy university, not of the high caliber SLAC variety? Is that the equivalent of janitor work in academia?Fie upon this quiet life!https://www.blogger.com/profile/12047096700049201873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27054305.post-69131378465818005332014-03-22T19:35:22.862-04:002014-03-22T19:35:22.862-04:00Even at my R-1, I worry a lot about experience wit...Even at my R-1, I worry a lot about experience with the bread and butter course in a field. When we look at applicants, I want to know that they could teach whatever survey courses we think are part of the relevant field. Because if you won't teach the second semester of World History, who will? <br /><br />I'm also astonished at how often people fail to do what strikes me as basic research on the institution and the people there. If you're in a skype or conference interview, you should at least have looked at the website for the hiring unit. Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09716705206734059708noreply@blogger.com