|
Post by dreamalittledream on Sept 21, 2011 9:09:05 GMT -5
Hi, I live in a metro area that has relatively limited opportunities for academic sociologists. A position was just announced at one of the local state universities, one that is teaching intensive (think 4-4 or 3-3, depending on the specific class being taught). Getting this position would be great. Not just in the sense that getting any job would be great, but in the specific sense that it would solve so many problems in my life if I didn't have to relocate my family, if I could stay in the city that I love, etc. More than teaching or research, staying in this area would be by far my top priority and my number 1 characteristic for my "dream job."
But here's the thing: I am worried about how to convey that I am serious about the position, that it is not just another job for me. Though I have teaching experience and good teaching credentials (teaching award, etc), I currently have a research postdoc and enough research on my CV that anyone reading a letter in which I claimed that a teaching position would be my preference would be rightly skeptical.
So, how do I go about showing them I am serious about this? Do I mention geographic preference? Or will that come across as being unable to say anything nice about the institution itself? How do I avoid sounding condescending while I let them know that I would be perfectly happy at a teaching intensive institution?
|
|
|
Post by me too on Sept 21, 2011 9:14:16 GMT -5
I too am currently in a research postdoc.
For the LAC apps I mention that:
1) I look forward to being in the classroom again 2) I think my research experience has taught me a lot and I'm ready to pass that along to my students
3) for staying in the area: you might want to say that you have good research connections at your current employer, which may be a benefit for collaborative work w/faculty at the teaching college or even allow some students some research experience.
|
|
|
Post by be honest on Sept 21, 2011 17:31:54 GMT -5
Why not just tell them you are eager (or it's "important to you") to remain permanently in this particular city? Don't fabricate some wishy washy story about research networks.
|
|
|
Post by top100program on Sept 21, 2011 17:56:21 GMT -5
I was on a hiring committee last year, and the chair had us look specifically for markers within applications to indicate that they genuinely wanted to be in the region and would stay there. (This was also one of the rare committees that looked for hints of dual hires in applications--the hope being that couples would stay at schools that could offer two positions).
I'm in a similar boat, now, too. I'm a visiting prof and an institution down the road is hiring. It's a good fit; I do not want to have to pay for another cross-country hike; and I genuinely like this area. So I just laid it out in my cover letter: "I love this area. It is awesome. I want to have this geographic region's babies." If that doesn't get me a job, I don't know what will....
|
|
|
Post by not lying on Sept 22, 2011 8:58:50 GMT -5
"Don't fabricate some wishy washy story about research networks."
It's not a fabrication. I really do have a lot of research that can still be done where I am, and people who want to continue working with me.
|
|
yep
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by yep on Sept 22, 2011 10:21:14 GMT -5
^Yes, I think this is a good approach, because from the CHE fora, it seems that some people get offended if you come off too strongly as "I love the region" vs. "I like your school and the region is great for me too." So if you aren't careful, you might be offending some departments, whereas you could write something that would be OK for both the region-lovers and the departments that fancy themselves to be serious researchers who happen to also be in a great region.
To illustrate the difference: if you gush too much about with California weather or Colorado skiing, they might think you are a lifestyle job searcher and not so serious. However, if mention how the area's top industry is an excellent fit for your research, and you have existing coauthors in the area, regular seminars to attend, etc. ...and family there, then that sounds about right.
|
|
|
Post by hmm on Sept 22, 2011 10:26:40 GMT -5
I think I kind of disagree a bit with yep. I hope I'm not wrong about this. "Gushing" is one thing, especially if you don't talk about why you're interested in specifics about the department or university. But talking about why it would be a great place to live doesn't seem inappropriate. It signals that you would be happy living there, which makes for a happier faculty member that won't want to leave at the first opportunity. Am I wrong about this?
|
|
yep
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by yep on Sept 22, 2011 11:26:38 GMT -5
I suggest you ask this question on the CHE fora, and see what people say - that would get you a broader range of answers to think about.
I believe the general concern is that if you talk too much about quality of life, they're going to think "oh great, another snowflake who's going to foist off all our committee work to go and hit the beach/pick up their kids/drive 2 hours to where their house is." (You see, a lot of different undesirable signals there to avoid.) To which I say, don't signal that in your application packet, when it's so easy to get rejected.
*Caveat: if the place is generally considered undesirable to academics and young people, such as in the rural South, urban Detroit, central Minnesota, then yes, you do want to gush about why you like the location, if you can do that convincingly. But don't gush if it's a great location and they know it - you're using valuable real estate in your cover letter to talk about location when you could talk about research/teaching.
|
|
|
Post by dreamalittledream on Sept 22, 2011 17:38:25 GMT -5
OP here.
Let me provide a bit more background as to why I ask this question: at my (admitedly) very status conscious PhD institution, I saw a candidate get "dinged" because when asked about why he wanted to work there, he heavily emphasized how great the city was, and how much his wife wanted to more there, but very little about the school itself. As a very status conscious place, this didn't play so well. Granted, this was a senior hire , so people were worried about his lack of interest in the institution itself as indicating either that the person was using this search to get a raise from their current employer or that this was sort of a "pre retirement" position for the person, who wanted to enjoy the weather, local attractions, etc.
So I was wondering if things like that are also true at teaching heavy state institutions (i.e., not the flagship state institutions). Places that aren't specifically known for anything, which makes it harder to single out the institution itself as a place you specially want to work in.
I've asked similar questions on the CHE forum, but wanted to hear the perspective of sociologists, especially those at similar institutions.
|
|
|
Post by be honest again on Sept 23, 2011 9:03:11 GMT -5
"Don't fabricate some wishy washy story about research networks." It's not a fabrication. I really do have a lot of research that can still be done where I am, and people who want to continue working with me. Hi, is this the original poster saying "it's not a fabrication"? I am the one who said "be honest." So if this is you (OP), and you feel that discussing research networks is the way to go, then do it. I meant that if location (not networks, as suggested by someone else) is your motivation, then just state it. Personally I think location is likely to be more compelling of a reason to stay, because as academics our research networks are pretty far-reaching, but it's hard to land a job in a specific area of preference. It's up to you, that's just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by again and again on Sept 23, 2011 9:08:16 GMT -5
oh, and I just wanted to clarify that I ("be honest") was suggesting, like, a few words, or a sentence max, not a gush. I think mentioning the research networks in addition is fine, now that I read your clarification (above). Good luck!
|
|
|
Post by two cents on Sept 23, 2011 9:29:03 GMT -5
I have been told that if the school is in a generally desirable location, not to mention location. If it's in a place others are not going to be particularly excited about, then mention location.
I'm an asst prof at an R1 in a fairly undesirable location. It has been my experience that the faculty here want you to gush about the school/dept, but if you also mention that the location is good for you, that's a plus, because we sometimes have a hard time recruiting because of where we are. But this is an R1. I'm not sure how this would work in a school with fewer big egos.
|
|
|
Post by interesting on Sept 23, 2011 9:38:26 GMT -5
That's really interesting, two cents. I've added a short sentence to several of my cover letters about how it would be a great place to live for my young, active family. They're mostly schools in small college towns with nice surroundings. Is that bad? Some people don't want to be in small college towns, but I'd absolutely love to, especially if it's in the midwest or northeast.
|
|
|
Post by careful on Sept 23, 2011 10:29:38 GMT -5
In telling the search cmte that you have a young active family you run a small risk of suggesting you'll be consumed with family activities. In the culture of small LACs there's usually an expectation of being very involved in campus life and the activities of students. I'd maybe indicate that your young active family is interested in being part of the fabric of the college community and that you all look forward to being involved in campus life.
|
|
|
Post by dreamalittledream on Sept 23, 2011 11:43:31 GMT -5
"Don't fabricate some wishy washy story about research networks." It's not a fabrication. I really do have a lot of research that can still be done where I am, and people who want to continue working with me. Hi, is this the original poster saying "it's not a fabrication"? I am the one who said "be honest." So if this is you (OP), and you feel that discussing research networks is the way to go, then do it. I meant that if location (not networks, as suggested by someone else) is your motivation, then just state it. Personally I think location is likely to be more compelling of a reason to stay, because as academics our research networks are pretty far-reaching, but it's hard to land a job in a specific area of preference. It's up to you, that's just my 2 cents. No, that is not me. I've only posted using the "dreamalittle..." name.
|
|