|
|
Post by goodvibes on Jul 18, 2011 14:53:17 GMT -5
It seems that departments get bombarded with applications (like... chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/why-your-last-job-search-was-a-freakin-disaster/30972?sid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en ). My impression is that it's counterproductive to apply to jobs that seem like a stretch - bad for the applicant (wasted time/money), bad for the departments that get slammed with inappropriate applications, etc. Still, one hears tales of departments that said they were looking for someone specializing in X but who ended up hiring an expert in Y, and that seems to mean that one should apply a bit more broadly (and it also seems to mean that departments are bringing this chaos onto themselves!). What are people's strategies at the moment? To be very selective and careful? To throw one's materials at every department that sounds remotely interesting? To focus on the institutions you think you're qualified to apply to? Something in between? Personally I wonder if I'm being too selective... Curious to hear your opinions, plans, musings, advice  |
|
ohh
Full Member
Posts: 224
|
Post by ohh on Jul 18, 2011 14:58:18 GMT -5
I was on the job market 2 years ago and was not selective at all with my applications. The only short lists/interviews that I got were jobs that had a close fit to my research interests (and as posted in the job ad).
I've been a postdoc and am going to be on the market this year again. My strategy this year is to only apply to jobs that are a close fit.
My 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by hasajob on Jul 18, 2011 17:31:14 GMT -5
I think that for those who are ABD and/or without a job, they should be applying as broad as they can for departments that they would both
1) realistically accept an offer from, and
2) could see the department realistically considering them for the job with their specialty if no one was a good match in their preferred specialty.
That is, regarding #1, don't apply to jobs you have no intention of taking (4/4 if you're looking for R1, R1 if you're looking for SLAC only, etc.).
Regarding #2, if the ad states they are looking for a gender scholar, and you do race/ethnicity, you might be able to talk yourself into the job if the department didn't find a suitable gender scholar, as those specialties (race/gender) are in the same ballpark research and teaching-wise. If you do terrorism, however, I wouldn't bother wasting your time with a gender posting.
Also, if you currently have a job you're happy enough at, and are simply looking for a somewhat better position/salary, then I would be more selective.
|
|
yep
Junior Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by yep on Jul 19, 2011 9:20:59 GMT -5
I did about 50 applications last year and I was still encouraged to do more. There's no way that I can ensure a close fit with that many packets, so what I do is customize a few but apply broadly. (Probably less work because I went for research focused places only.)
It's a good strategy- the best ranked school where I got an interview was somewhere that was in my subfield, but got my generic letter. Another couple of places where I got interviews had been sent fairly customized letters. You can also demonstrate fit by which writing samples you are sending, if you have any variation in papers.
The reason why this is a good strategy is to some extent fit, but in other ways a law of averages. Plus this works well with timing - sometimes you've got time to work hard on a given packet, other times not, but in the latter case, you don't necessarily give up - just send your generic package. You can always do more research if you end up getting an interview.
|
|
|
|
Post by 3rd yr on Jul 19, 2011 9:30:38 GMT -5
Hi all,
I don't know why I still follow the rumor-mill. I got hooked 3 yrs ago and can't quit it! (I've already got a job--and love it--and I'm not looking for another).
My advice on selectivity would be to figure out the geographical limits of your partner/spouse. I applied widely, thinking it was better to have options and work out an agreement if offers came in. We'll, that strategy led to a lot of heated "conversations" with my partner that could have been avoided if we would have had some conversations earlier in the process.
If you want a TT job, you still need to apply almost anywhere. But if your partner absolutely wont live in a particular area of the country or type of environment (urban, rural, etc.) those are good things to know now. It will save headaches later.
|
|
crimey
Junior Member
Posts: 98
|
Post by crimey on Jul 19, 2011 14:35:25 GMT -5
I asked one of my professors about this this morning. His reply:
"Never turn down a job you haven't been offered."
|
|
|
|
Post by goodsense on Jul 19, 2011 15:15:45 GMT -5
I have a job, and agree with the last poster's professor's advice. I understand that applying to a lot of places can "waste" department's time, but let's be serious: why should YOU care about this? It's not like you get brownie points for being considerate of people's time.
Also, I don't agree with the geographic limitation advice. Let's say you got an offer that was in your dream geographic location- having another offer from another location (even if you don't think you'll take it) gives you bargaining power.
This is crude, calculating advice, but be warned: the market is not a cuddly place. This is the one and only time you can effectively look out for number one. Take any offers you can possibly get... that's my advice.
|
|
|
|
Post by meetoo on Jul 22, 2011 16:08:08 GMT -5
I was on the job market 2 years ago and was not selective at all with my applications. The only short lists/interviews that I got were jobs that had a close fit to my research interests (and as posted in the job ad). I've been a postdoc and am going to be on the market this year again. My strategy this year is to only apply to jobs that are a close fit. My 2 cents. Sub "crappy TT job" for "postdoc" and that's my situation. |
|
|
|
Post by aaaa on Jul 22, 2011 21:14:50 GMT -5
I absolutely agree with "has a job" that
1) realistically accept an offer from, and
2) could see the department realistically considering them for the job with their specialty if no one was a good match in their preferred specialty.
I am currently a post doc. A very good postdoc that I wasn't going to apply for originally. But a friend of mine was interested in it, talked to the person in charge and, after learning more about the position, thought I would be a great fit. And I was. But things in the ad were framed in a certain way that it wasn't obvious that I would fit in.
Some jobs are looking for people who match the description of the job to a t. Others are looking for anyone, but had to phrase the ad a specific way to get it approved by the university. The key here is that you'll never know which is which.
|
|
