The Professor means well, but the advice he's giving just makes me feel even more like a loser than I already do. Ever since it's been clear I wasn't getting a tenure-tracked job this year, he's been telling me--repeatedly--what I "need to do" to get job. His advice? He says my research is what's going to get me a job. So what I "need" to do is get a really sweet research postdoc. That way, I'll have all this time to move my work forward, so I can crank out more and better papers. Then I'll get a job.
I bet I would have a better shot at more jobs if I spent all of next year working on nothing but my research. Okay, but almost all of the research postdocs I applied for have already told me to fuck off. For most of them, I never even had a shot.
The Professor's telling me what I need to do, and I have to tell him I've already failed. He's trying to help me out, and I fucked up his advice before he could even give it. God, that feels like shit.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
61 comments:
Sure, a postdoc would be sweet.
Speaking of which -- WTF's with the teaching postdoc at UBC that just appeared on the wiki? The deadline was March 7th, and I just received an acknowledgement of my application today (the 12th), yet according to the wiki an offer already went out yesterday. What's next, a PFO before the deadline?
This might be your Professor's attempt to address his own failings. As Socrates would maintain, there are no bad students, just bad teachers; so the Prof may be taking your bad luck on the market personally and is now scrambling to give you after-the-fact advice that really does you no good now...but it helps ease his conscience that he's actually trying to do something that helps your situation.
So the moral is: Don't feel too bad. The Prof is a person like anyone else and, while he's trying to be helpful, may really just be trying to help his own damn self.
I hate the fact that in general, all of the advice one gets as a grad student in many depts, comes from people who graduated from top-ranked programs and is thus, to a large extent, poorly aimed if well intended. That fact is, if they are teaching in your program, then they were never in your program (unless your program is Princeton or NYU or Stanford...etc), and they have little to no idea how, specifically, to advise people in your position. This is particularly true of junior faculty because they don't yet have the requisite years of watching the struggles of your colleagues, and even truer of senior faculty, who cannot even the recall the hardships of being junior faculty, let alone Job Market Rejects from the Age of Leiter.
The UBC thing is strange. Maybe the postdoc went to an inside candidate (and the entire search was a sham)? Maybe UBC just moves quickly? Maybe things just move faster in the spring market in general. Don't know...I'm new at this.
I'm confused about one of the Cal State Long Beach jobs. I saw it listed on some site (not in the JFP) a little while ago, so I applied. I was quickly rejected via this pathetic PFO; then I saw (on the wiki) that the job was advertised in the Fall and someone had already accepted the job. They advertised for a job that was already taken?
I kind of appreciate the speech my advisor gave me. He told me that the job market sucks, but if you keep working at it, publish, teach, etc, you'll eventually get a good job. Or you won't. And if that happens, you'll just have to accept it and figure out what to do next.
Wow, the comment about the UBC fellowship was true... an offer was made on 3/11 (according to the Wiki).
Damn. The one thing I thought I had a shot at (I have some friends at UBC), and it appears that it was fixed from the start.
Thanks UBC, thanks a lot.
can somebody please post the infamous Long Beach PFO? I feel like I'm the only one who hasn't read the last Harry Potter book or something.
as far as I can tell, the UBC thing went to someone from Madison (that's where the IP is registered, at least) -- so maybe not an inside job. Maybe they're fast -- but four days? And why send out acknowledgements after the fact??
This blog makes me feel better about not getting into a Ph.D. program, even though the I've wanted to become a philosophy professor since I finished my first year of university. I mean, if I can't clear this first hurdle, then what chance do I have of actually getting a job? Although I know some people who have made it into top programs after a second year of applications, I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble at this point.
I'm not sure how many other people have said this, but I'm guessing a lot. Anyway, I'll say it anyway: it is quite possible--I would guess likely--that you can get a VAP/adjunct position somewhere. It sucks that you won't have security, and it sucks that you'll have to go on the market again, but spend your summer or what's left of this semester getting a publication out. I know a guy who went on the job market six times before he got a TT job (at a good place) and it was the publication that moved him onwards. I know you've heard it a million times, and I doubt that it helps at this point, but it increases your chances so much to go from 0 to 1 publications.
UBC was not fixed. However, they did not do interviews and hired solely on the basis of dossiers. That is how they were able to move so quickly.
Guess I should have taken that March 7th deadline seriously despite the caveat it had.
For the record, I did have one publication in a good journal, but didn't get any APA interviews. Oh, and I defended before the APA. I really suck. Publications, like everything else, increase the odds, but they aren't the cure all. My below-30 program (ah, that's your problem, the crowd whispers) hired someone ABD, no publications, from another below-30 program. "All things being equal"--that never obtains in the job market.
6:39 -- is that inside information? Four days seems awfully fast, especially in the middle of term. I'm assuming there were more than a couple of dozen dossiers to review.
I endorse 4:37's advice. Don't worry too much about disappointing your advisor--excessive worry of that kind will paralyze you, guaranteed. One of the most difficult things about moving from grad student to (prospective and then actual) faculty member is shifting one's attitude from that of student (protege, supplicant) to that of colleague (peer, at least in a general professional sense, if not regarding institutional pedigree/affiliation). 4:37 is encouraging you gently to make that shift. I think you need to make it to succeed at what you want to do. You already have all the tools you need to do make the shift--you have experience teaching, writing, interacting with academic peers. It is easy to sneer at people for what seems like a sense of entitlement, but the fact is that you need to feel entitled, at least a little bit, to catapult yourself into the role of potential colleague. This does not mean that you should not try to learn from from disappointment or defeat. But you have to have faith in yourself, independent of others' approval, and you have to hold on to your will to determine what you want to do and what you need to do to do it, and to your will to do those things you determine you need to do.
Totally off-topic here, but stick your toungue out if you find this funny: http://philosophy.rutgers.edu/FACSTAFF/BIOS/CV/temkin.pdf
I mean, 'Offers for Visiting Appointments--unable to accept' is a little gratuitous, but 'Invited to apply for (but declined to pursue)' is in a whole league of its own as far as CV sub-headings go.
"I saw it listed on some site (not in the JFP) a little while ago, so I applied."
I think sometimes HR drones advertise jobs on general lists independently of departments. That could be what happened.
On a similar note, I got an email acknowledging an application for which the deadline was March 15, which said they planned on initial interviews in late February and early March. Unfortunately there are some people you just can't beat to death with screwdrivers (or is that just me?)
Wait, is this as hilariously self-undermining as it seems?
The one thing I thought I had a shot at (I have some friends at UBC), and it appears that it was fixed from the start.
"I thought the fix was on my side!"
If your professor is worth anything shouldn't s/he be able to get you a postdoc or VAP with a phone call?
mr. zero:
First this email came from CSU Long Beach:
Dear applicant,
Please find attached the letter of acknowledgment for the
History of Philosophy position you applied for. Thank you.
("Dear Applicant"!?)
It turned out, though, that there was no attachment.
Later in the day: same email, except the word "acknowledgment" had been changed to "regret."
The attachment? A poorly scanned letter, which read as follows:
Dear Applicant,
Thank you very kindly for applying for our tenure-track position in [area]. The position has now been filled. I regret that we were unable to match your talents with our hiring needs at this time, but we were very impressed with your application and were grateful for the opportunity to review the fruits of your research.
Best wishes in your job search.
[etc.]
And he lists "Who's Who" books on his CV!
Aren't 95% of those things vanity presses (a.k.a. huge scams to take advantage of people with status anxiety)?
On the UBC thing and Canadian positions in general: I've heard that Canadian departments like to hire Canadian Ph.D.s, and some of the ads even say this, but I wonder how strong this bias is? Is it a waste of time for us gun-toting americans to even apply for these positions?
The ads for many positions at Canadian universities will say that preference is given to Canadian citizens -- that's required by immigration law. But since 'preference' is fairly vague, it doesn't amount to much of a restriction in practice -- i guess it could serve as a tie-breaker, but in general, departments like to hire the best qualified candidate they can get.
Anyone know who got the UBC offer? I'm amazed at the speed -- a Friday deadline and a Tuesday offer seems incredible.
hi all - one of my colleagues drew me to this blog. here is some information...for what it's worth i'm not sure what to make of it myself: I applied for the UBC one-year/three-year in value theory the day it came out in the JFP (March 28th deadline). I got an offer from them this Monday (3/10) without an interview, and I accepted. The last thing worth mentioning, I guess, is that I'm American, not Canadian.
Bonjour Wendell Gee,
Sure, all Canadian ads say "Canadians" first. But apply even if you aren't Canadian. This year my school hired 2 Americans. And there are 4 other Americans who have been hired here in the past 6 years.
Also, if you look at the University of Toronto Department of Philosophy, very few of their recent hires are Canadian.
So bonne chance!
It's definitely not a waste of time to apply to Canadian schools. My dept has placed two people at Canadian schools in the last two years. My understanding is that the law mandates giving some sort of priority to Canadian applicants, but that in practice schools can hire whoever they feel is the best applicant.
On the four day UBC turnaround -- I have zero knowledge of anything that went on at UBC in particular, but I *can* tell you that search committees usually get started well ahead of the deadline. The files start coming in; you start reading them. Winnowing the pile. (This doesn't mean that having your file come in later puts you at any real disadvantage.)
So the work was probably not all done in 4 days.
Yeah, I heard that bit about Canadian positions, so as an American I don't think I would apply for one unless it exactly fit my AOS.
It seems to me that no one (at least who I've met) is a specialist when it comes to the academic job market. Professors, and graduate students -- especially graduate students, may talk like they know how things really are, but what they know is their own experience (and that may be extensive or limited). They may be tempted to overgeneralize from that experience.
In the end, I think we all have to piece together from the various anecdotes we hear (and blogs and books we read) what the score is, but no one I know has got this figured out. Some skepticism is warranted...
Come on, lay off the Rutgers Prof. The dude clearly has enough awesome stuff to warrant some silly stuff. Plus, his track record at Rutgers for getting ethicists good TT jobs is pretty stellar . I would invoke some glass-house-stone-throwing thing but I suppose most of us may in fact be homeless rock chuckers (or at most be renting glass studio apartments.)
So just cool it on the anonymous folk naming names shit. Part petty..Part pathetic...All cop.
10:10 -- Congratulations, though now I'm even more confused. UBC has a couple of job postings at the moment: a 1 year (renewable) position in Value Theory /CogSci/or History and a 1 year (renewable) teaching postdoc (AOS open). The deadline for the first is March 28, and for the second was March 7th -- are you saying you applied for the first and got hired before the deadline? Or did you apply for the first and get offered the second, four days after its deadline??
Why not just list the impressive stuff, then? Look at this guy get all excited about other people who've held a chair HE DIDN'T EVEN APPLY FOR:
"University of Glasgow Chair in Moral Philosophy (previous chairholders
include Francis Hutcheson, Adam Smith and Thomas Reid!)"
WTF, dude. Exclamation points in a CV? Why not just say, "I shat my pants when I found out these awesome people thought I was awesome, too!" It might be more subtle.
Re: getting Canadian jobs:
Being Canadian doesn't seem to help at all, as I didn't get a single callback from any of the Canadian jobs I applied for, and I'm a Canadian citizen with a PhD from (what I thought was) a highly ranked department.
The Rutgers guy deserves to be laughed at. My favourite part is where he mentions the 'invited but declined to pursue' chair at Glasgow and then says "previous chairholders include Francis Hutcheson, Adam Smith, and Thomas Reid!"
Oh, and yeah, that exclamation mark is his.
Sometimes extended CVs like that may have been put together for tenure review or to advance to full professor. In that case, it is in one's self-interest to "pile on" (given my a priori assumptions about what looks good to a committee reviewing such applications).
"So just cool it on the anonymous folk naming names shit. Part petty."
Wait, you mean we shouldn't do petty stuff? Dude, that's all I've got left, don't take it away from me.
Let's say the Rutgers dude is the shit-not my field, but I'll grant you that at least for the sake of argument. Judging by his CV, he's also a jackwad. A lot of people are both. You seem to think that he's earned the right to be a jackwad, but I say call a rose a rose.
The Canadian thing varies a lot from department to Department. Some don't seem to pay attention to it at all while others not only look at only Canadians, but also show as strong preference for Canadians coming out of Canadian Ph.D. programs.
Chances are, if you've heard of the school before, its going to be in the former category.
I got the Value Theory/Cog Sci one (yes, 18 days before the deadline)...sorry. The lesson, I guess, is: apply early. Best of luck to you all! Don't get down. Not too long ago a very famous member of my department said to me that just when things look their worst, you'll get something out of nowhere!
oh, and DO apply for stuff outside your primary AOS. this is the same dude who got the UBC job in Value Theory/cog sci....my primary AOS is social-political, my secondary AOS is ethics/value theory, and my minor was cog sci.
I'd like to add that I don't think it's unfair (at all) for schools to hire someone before the deadline. SOME deadlines say "Apply before X for full consideration", but most do not. A deadline is just that -- the very LAST moment you can apply. Remember, this is in many respects just like any other job. If you apply early and they really like you, there's no reason for them to delay!! I applied for this position on the very day it was posted, and I think it helped me out. In contrast, I have a good friend and colleague (I'm at a "leiteriffic" department) who applied to ALL of his jobs at the last moment so he could fine tune his writing sample, and he hasn't done great on the market. The lesson again is: apply early. I think it can only help you...
oh, and thanks for the congrats! (I didn't mean to ignore it!) trust me i know how much this whole process beats the life out of you......
As another Canadian, from a top dept. with a number of pubs, etc.: Being a Canadian might give you a bit of an edge at those jobs, but it's no guarantee. I didn't get a single bite -- not even a nibble -- from any of the Canadian places I applied to. No APA interviews, no phone interviews, nothin'. (Not even a PFO...)
Maybe all my apps got lost in the post?
Someone can be a really good philosopher and a narcissistic asshole. I'm sure you all know that! The guy in question happens to be an extreme example. (I'm qualified to judge on both counts, since it's my field and I've met him.)
Why should Anon 2:09 AM et al. "lay off"? It's on a cv, it's on the web, for god's sake. There are no mitigating circumstances. It's laughable and deserves ridicule.
It's not just disingenuous of UBC to make an offer (long) before their own deadline -- it violates their own regulations. The purpose of the deadline is to ensure that an adequate amount of time has been allowed for applications to arrive -- that's required to satisfy the employment equity condition that is also included in all UBC ads.
That's nothing against the person who got the offer -- but the department should stick to the university's own regulations.
More worrying, though, is the thought that they hiring process went "Look, Rutgers! Screw the rest!". How can we compete for jobs if our applications aren't even received?
While a quick or early turnaround of the UBC sort might seem inexcusable in November, it seems fine at this point in the game.
Most candidates should already have their applications and letters ready from October and November, so these late ads often get a larger percentage of pre-deadline applications than October postings do.
Also, while departments don't worry that someone will have already taken a job elsewhere if they don't call bey early December, as things stand now, candidates are settling in to positions each day, and the longer they wait, the more likely it is that a candidate they would have wanted will have accepted a position elsewhere.
Congratulations to you who got the visiting gig at UBC. That seems like a nice job.
But I must second some of the complaints about the department there. That's unethical. No doubt there are some people right now applying for the position, still well before the deadline. At the very least they should make their hiring procedures clear.
"Sometimes extended CVs like that may have been put together for tenure review or to advance to full professor. In that case, it is in one's self-interest to "pile on". "
Yep. I wouldn't put this kind of stuff on the cv I have on my web page, but I would put it on the cv I use for internal purposes. For better or for worse, it's just the kind of stuff my dean finds impressive. You would be surprised at what an "invitation to apply" from Yale or Oxford can do in a salary negotiation.
Unfortunately, the UBC situation is far from unique, though it is an extreme example. I was phoned by a school that wanted to interview me and I was told that I was on their final interview list of six candidates. I later noticed that the call took place two days before the deadline in the JFP ad. (and it is hard to believe that any applications that arrived that week would have been considered either).
While this is hardly as bad as UBC actually making an offer before their application deadline, it is a reminder that many schools make their decisions early on. So, better apply as early as possible to maximize your chances!
I have no appreciation for the c.v. you linked, but you folks here (2:09, 8:43, 1:15, 1:41, and echo) have truly dug to the slimy bottom of the barrel of your own nastiness. You have compounded your own blinders - the ones that prevent you from seeing some basic realities of your own graduate records, or why you don't spark any interest on the job market - by pointing at the blinders of others. The difference is that you remain behind the screen of anonymity for your pettiness, resentment, and ill temper, while outing that of others. You deserve your pain.
Unfortunately, the UBC situation is far from unique, though it is an extreme example. I was phoned by a school that wanted to interview me and I was told that I was on their final interview list of six candidates. I later noticed that the call took place two days before the deadline in the JFP ad. (and it is hard to believe that any applications that arrived that week would have been considered either).
While this is hardly as bad as UBC actually making an offer before their application deadline, it is a reminder that many schools make their decisions early on. So, better apply as early as possible to maximize your chances!
I suspect that many VAP and non-permanent jobs are not trying to get the absolute best candidate; they're only trying to get a candidate that meets some threshhold (not that the standards aren't still extremely high). As mentioned, this makes sense given that people are snapping up jobs when they're offered at this point. So getting that app in early really would help for those jobs.
I don't think it's unfair, unless they explicitly say in the ad that you will receive full consideration as long as you apply by a certain date (as I think some of the fall TT ads did). It's just good business practice when you've got a temporary spot to fill and you need to hire someone with certain qualifications.
Anon 8:05, god, it's almost too perfect. There you are, behind the screen of anonymity, excoriating others for their criticism of others from behind the screen of anonymity, and you don't even see the irony!
It's a beautiful, beautiful thing, and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for serving as a paradigm of hypocrisy that would be trite and implausible if someone merely invented you as a classroom example.
Actually, UBC has been advertising multiple jobs, and the first ethics job (the one filled) had a deadline of FEB 1. The second (deadline March 28) hasn't been filled yet. These are in addition to the post-doc.
Stating a deadline does not constitute a promise to give full consideration to every application received before that deadline. 9:53 made a good point that the job market is competitive, so the best applicants may be snapped up sooner rather than later. It wouldn't make sense, then, for departments to handicap themselves by waiting until all apps are received before deciding on a short list or even extending an offer to someone they already think they'll want.
And "rewarding" early candidates for their prompt application makes sense, if that's an indicator of interest. Or maybe it indicates desperation -- either way, the candidate may be seen as more interested than some slacker who waits until the deadline to send in an app.
Finally, there's the possibility that the job ad was not a real search but merely a required formality, i.e., if the dept already has a hire in mind. But this isn't to say that some superstar candidate couldn't sneak in to steal the job away from the presumptive favorite.
I think it is strange to believe that interviewing, etc. gets you to the absolute best candidate. Isn't this the point of the sociology literature that shows that interviewing can lead you away from the best candidate?
Also, frankly, it is insulting that people think there must be something wrong, as opposed to right, about a candidate selected without interview. It is conceivable that some dossiers are just that much better than others. How do you think departments make short lists? Is making a short list before interviewing a everybody some sort of error in hiring? If not, what is wrong with a short list of one? Further, being timely in your applications can say something good about you.
12:23 -- you can check the regulations on job advertisements and deadlines for yourself: there are specific requirements at UBC about how widely and for how long a position must be advertised before an offer can be made.
As an earlier comment pointed out, UBC has a bunch of positions, so maybe there is just some general confusion about which position was filled.
Responding to March 14, 2008 12:23 PM:
It wouldn't make sense, then, for departments to handicap themselves by waiting until all apps are received before deciding on a short list or even extending an offer to someone they already think they'll want.
Departmental self-interest is surely not the only consideration here. And even if it were, this still makes little sense. The best candidate might not apply as soon as the ad is listed, for any number of reasons.
And "rewarding" early candidates for their prompt application makes sense, if that's an indicator of interest. Or maybe it indicates desperation -- either way, the candidate may be seen as more interested than some slacker who waits until the deadline to send in an app.
The first bit seems quite right. There is no reason not to take the receipt date of one's application into account. The latter bit is silly: no one is defending those who submit applications late or even those who squeak in at the last minute. 3/28 is still two weeks away!
Finally, there's the possibility that the job ad was not a real search but merely a required formality, i.e., if the dept already has a hire in mind. But this isn't to say that some superstar candidate couldn't sneak in to steal the job away from the presumptive favorite.
It's one thing for a school to have a presumptive favorite. But are the applications going to be considered or not? If not, then this practice seems just wrong: it's a sham and a waste of applicants' time. What I find upsetting about (what seems to be) UBC's procedures is that a lot of applications are simply not going to be considered, despite following the advertisement's guidelines in good faith.
Anon 1:15 here.
"You have compounded your own blinders - the ones that prevent you from seeing some basic realities of your own graduate records, or why you don't spark any interest on the job market - by pointing at the blinders of others"
Don't assume, fellow anon, that everyone who reads or comments here is a desperate, failed graduate student. I'm just a voyeur, and I don't think my arrogance or lack of self-reflection could ever extend to my putting together a CV like the one under discussion, let alone putting it on the web. Senior scholars who have been full professors at two excellent departments (if I'm recalling the details right -- I don't want to look at that document again) don't need to brag to deans or T&P committees. It's just shameless, egoistic self-promotion without any particular aim and it deserves mockery. Not for the sake of public humiliation, since it's unlikely that said senior scholar would ever look at this or would care and since it's impossible for him to come to harm because of it thanks to his status. Rather, as deterrence for the jackwads-to-be in the audience whose inclinations might run this way.
And for my part, I wouldn't be complaining if I went on the market without a PhD in hand, without much teaching experience, without good pubs, and without top letters and failed to land a T-T job two years in a row. Basic fact: there are way more PhDs than good jobs. If you're so clearly in the bottom 50%, can't you point out the absurdities of the job market, which do exist and are a hassle, with the tiniest dose of humor or, god forbid, self-deprecation?
Hello all: This is the individual who received and accepted the UBC offer. I need to clear up a serious mistake on my part. The post that I was offered and accepted was the ethics/meta-ethics position, which had a 2/1/08 deadline, not the Value Theory post. I offer my sincerest apologies to all -- particularly UBC, and the Department of Philosophy at UBC -- for this unintentional mistake.
Just to be clear - Perhaps the 2:49 p.m. anonymous post was written before seeing the 11:53 post, but UBC HAS NOT FILLED THE MARCH 28th DEADLINE job, NOR HAS ANY OFFER BEEN MADE FOR That job. The 11:53 post has it right. There has been confusion even by the person who was offered the other job (deadline Feb. 1)
There is no inside candidate, and we are not ignoring any files. A decision won't be made until April. Please consider applying if you haven't already.
- UBC Prof with insider knowledge
I apologize to UBC. I did qualify my claim ("What I find upsetting about (what seems to be) UBC's procedures"), but in hindsight that doesn't seem sufficient.
This isn't to retract my disagreement with the comment to which I was responding, however.
2:49 p.m.
Re the Rutgers CV: I told the guy in question about this discussion, and he said "Shit! That CV was meant only for the dean."
As for some of the character assassination above, let me balance it with the following. When I was on the job market, more than a decade ago, I remember wandering aimlessly around an Eastern APA smoker, feeling like crap. The guy in question came up to me and sat down with me for a few minutes. I'd interviewed with his then-university, but it hadn't gone especially well. Although we'd only just met, he could tell that I wasn't feeling good, and said something along the lines of "You know, even if things don't work out this year, I can tell that in the long run you're going to do great." Things didn't work out that year, but in the long run things have gone fine. I've never forgotten the kindness.
To Anon 1:50p: Thanks for sharing that information and your story. Sometimes a little more info changes a whole picture.
Thanks for clearing that up, UBC Prof with Insider Knowledge (BTW, whatever happened to Inside Man?)
Apropos of UBC's many hirings this season -- is the four day turn around on the teaching postdoc true? Anyone have inside information on this?
Nothing wrong with being fast -- but that's FAST.
Post a Comment