|
|
Post by ... on Apr 30, 2014 10:49:44 GMT -5
Has anyone heard anything at all about this position?
|
|
|
|
Post by *Womp* *Womp* on May 5, 2014 14:55:56 GMT -5
I just got my Dear John from them. While the letter was not nearly as icy as some can get, I did find the line "Our final decision was, inevitably, influenced by the unique needs of the department" a little annoying given the positions were advertised as open searches. If you have 'unique needs', you should spell them out so prospective job seekers don't waste their time applying to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agreed on May 9, 2014 8:12:17 GMT -5
I received a Dear John letter from them and had a similar reaction. Nonetheless, I also agree that the letter wasn't nearly as icy (or odd) as some.
|
|
|
|
Post by SC Member on May 9, 2014 15:12:20 GMT -5
Having served on Search Committees, I just wanted to add that such unique needs are often legit and evolve over the course of a search.
In my own university, we've advertised pretty (though not entirely) open searches. Then, after the add is out, a colleague announces they are leaving.... or is taking on a new administrative role (and therefore not teaching anymore). The gap that is left becomes the department's need, even if we didn't realize that 3 months ago when we wrote the ad. I've seen it happen.
So, don't assume that they're just screwing with you by having a need and not communicating it.
|
|
|
|
Post by *Womp* *Womp* on May 9, 2014 16:47:46 GMT -5
I don't think they were screwing with me, but I think they could of took the extra time to sit down and talk about what they were looking for to arrive at some baseline criteria for a candidate instead of just doing an open search. I can't imagine it would had been that much more work. This is a VAP, so it would probably be used to cover someone on leave or who has retired. Surely they could just look for someone studying in a similar area. A little extra work on their part would be a big time saver for those of us applying
|
|
