|
Brown
Dec 20, 2013 15:22:49 GMT -5
Post by green on Dec 20, 2013 15:22:49 GMT -5
What's the situation the Brown junior jobs? Presumably there was some sort of deadline for these offers.
|
|
|
Brown
Dec 20, 2013 15:23:30 GMT -5
Post by green on Dec 20, 2013 15:23:30 GMT -5
*with* the Brown junior jobs, I meant...
|
|
|
Brown
Dec 21, 2013 10:14:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Insider on Dec 21, 2013 10:14:43 GMT -5
Offers out to junior candidates for orgs and spatial have flexible deadlines. Searches will fail if the offers are not accepted. A senior candidate has accepted the development position and a senior candidate has been offered the environment position.
|
|
|
Brown
Mar 27, 2014 8:04:06 GMT -5
Post by orgs position? on Mar 27, 2014 8:04:06 GMT -5
Does anyone know if the offer out for the orgs position was accepted?
|
|
|
Brown
Mar 28, 2014 18:18:15 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Insider on Mar 28, 2014 18:18:15 GMT -5
Offers were made to two candidates (sequentially) and both declined. The search failed and Brown will search again at the junior level next year to fill this vacancy.
|
|
|
Brown
Mar 28, 2014 18:19:12 GMT -5
Post by ? on Mar 28, 2014 18:19:12 GMT -5
I was wondering that myself, since I saw yesterday that a Visiting Assistant Professor in Sociology/Organizational Studies at Brown was posted in the ASA Job Bank.
|
|
arbitrariness job market.
Guest
|
Brown
Mar 28, 2014 21:52:20 GMT -5
Post by arbitrariness job market. on Mar 28, 2014 21:52:20 GMT -5
I know for a fact that several people who got jobs at "higher ranked" places applied to this job and didn't even make short lists here. Telling of how this is all a game.
|
|
|
Brown
Mar 29, 2014 21:01:27 GMT -5
Post by gamey smell on Mar 29, 2014 21:01:27 GMT -5
I know for a fact that several people who got jobs at "higher ranked" places applied to this job and didn't even make short lists here. Telling of how this is all a game. Wouldn't this be evidence of not being a game? If higher-ranked=best-candidate-ever-for-all-jobs-no-matter-the-locale was an actual rule, that would seem to imply a game. Games are rarely arbitrary, subjective or art.
|
|
|
Brown
Mar 30, 2014 10:20:32 GMT -5
Post by XTC on Mar 30, 2014 10:20:32 GMT -5
I know for a fact that several people who got jobs at "higher ranked" places applied to this job and didn't even make short lists here. Telling of how this is all a game. Yes, but it's more telling of how this is a very complicated game where there are multiple factors involved in why a candidate gets a job offer. If a hiring committee believes or knows that a candidate is likely to take an offer at a "higher ranked" institution, why even bother putting them on a short list? Also, institutions can rank the quality of candidates very differently, especially when you have a field as fragmented as ours. And, of course, the issue of "fit" (which is itself a complicated game) is extremely important. Just because a candidate got hired at a higher ranked institution does not necessarily mean that they were the most qualified person for the job at Brown. And on and on and on...
|
|
|
Brown
Apr 2, 2014 14:37:26 GMT -5
Post by hmmm on Apr 2, 2014 14:37:26 GMT -5
Yeah, well whatever factors they are weighing seem no better than random, as the last person hired for this position published zilch in four years and then left. Fact.
|
|