Is geography the key determinant in terms of getting a job?

[geograph]

N of 1 and all, but it seems to me that at least in my case the main determinant of my success on the market is geographic location.

I have received either interviews of offers at (unranked) R1s, elite SLACs, R2s and master comprehensives in cities with less than, say, 500k people. At the same time, I've been rejected from regionals, community colleges, etc. at any major city. Anyone having a similar experience? I can imagine sociologists being more likely to prefer cosmopolitan areas than other disciplines, but it has honestly been surprising to me how I can go from getting interest from R1s and SLACs in small towns to no bites from anyone in larger cities.

[Pool]

Apologies in advance if this sounds insulting...

Perhaps the size and or the quality of the applicant pool is significantly different in these two cases. If hotshots are less willing to move to a less cosmopolitan area, and if they don't even apply, that makes it easier for the rest of us to stand out for those searches. If so, that's one argument for applying widely.

[geograph]

Not insulting at all.

And yes, to some extent I expected that to be the case, but I didn't imagine it to be that extreme. Friends in other disciplines haven't experienced that either, which is why I posted it here. In a sense, it makes sense that sociologists place a higher premium on living in cosmopolitan areas than other disciplines.

[3rd variables]

If lower-ranked schools are rejecting you but higher-ranked ones aren't, it's likely the lower ones don't want to "waste their time" on you because they think you won't accept.

[geograph]

Rank isn't the key predictor here, and I am sorry if I gave that impression. Every institution in big cities, from regionals and community colleges to SLACs and R1s, has rejected me. Meanwhile, I've had several opportunities, ranging from regionals to elite SLACs and unranked R1s, in small towns. In my particular case, the only thing that seems to predict how much of a chance I will have is location. It might be just me, hence the thread to see if anyone else experienced the same.

[Pool]

It's easy to imagine a scenario where a small change in the pool results in very different outcomes.

Suppose that you would get ranked 12th out of 200 candidates for a metro job. You're on the cusp, but you don't break into that top ten shortlist for phone/Skype interviews, LORs, etc. You don't know you're in the top twenty, and you just don't get a sense that you're even in the running.

Now suppose that a more out-of-the-way school has nearly the same pool, and they came up with identical rankings. But this time, five of those top ten candidates didn't even bother to apply. Now you're ranked seventh, and you have made the shortlist, and you have a chance to make them take an even closer look.

If this type of scenario plays out for six or seven different metro/non institutions, you would easily get the situation you describe. Take hope from the fact that you're getting interested looks from the less cosmopolitan areas. It means you're doing something right. Once you've made it into those higher tiers, a bunch of random factors start coming into play (ones that you can't control), but eventually things will work out in your favor.

[runner]

Nov 9, 2015 14:02:53 GMT -5 Pool said:

It's easy to imagine a scenario where a small change in the pool results in very different outcomes.

Suppose that you would get ranked 12th out of 200 candidates for a metro job. You're on the cusp, but you don't break into that top ten shortlist for phone/Skype interviews, LORs, etc. You don't know you're in the top twenty, and you just don't get a sense that you're even in the running.

Now suppose that a more out-of-the-way school has nearly the same pool, and they came up with identical rankings. But this time, five of those top ten candidates didn't even bother to apply. Now you're ranked seventh, and you have made the shortlist, and you have a chance to make them take an even closer look.

If this type of scenario plays out for six or seven different metro/non institutions, you would easily get the situation you describe. Take hope from the fact that you're getting interested looks from the less cosmopolitan areas. It means you're doing something right. Once you've made it into those higher tiers, a bunch of random factors start coming into play (ones that you can't control), but eventually things will work out in your favor.

this was good until the last phrase. can we please stop promoting this lie. NO, for perhaps the majority of job market candidates, it is NOT TRUE that "eventually things will work out in your favor." great job getting nibbles; hope you get the job you want; many of us won't.

[Pool]

Sorry, runner. I know this is a frustrating process. Best wishes.

[some guesses]

I wonder if your research and background seems like a better fit for campuses in rural areas or small towns. Or perhaps you show great range in the type of classes you can teach (smaller schools in rural areas require profs to teach across the curriculum)

[geograph]

The latter may certainly be it (I have taught 9 different courses, some multiple times).

[runner]

Nov 16, 2015 22:28:33 GMT -5 Pool said:

Sorry, runner. I know this is a frustrating process. Best wishes.

Thanks! I do appreciate that. But it's really so not about me. It's about a saturated and systematically de-funded market. All the best wishes don't help people get jobs