When you are invited for a campus interview it is completely normal to be excited. Other people will congratulate you and be excited for you. Of course, it is a fantastic thing. What no one ever talks about are the downsides to interviewing. Namely, that it kills your productivity.
With my first job interview the problem was that I had to spend an enormous amount of time preparing my talk and google-stalking all the faculty to find out about their research and the school and whatnot. A solid two weeks before the interview was devoted to interview prep at the expense of all my other work.
This latest interview took up much less of my time on prep, as I only needed to tweak an existing job talk. However, interviewing means plane travel in the middle of winter with inconsiderate sick people coughing all over the place. This time I came home post-interview to discover I had inherited the germs expelled by the woman sitting next to me, thus dramatically reducing my ability to write manuscripts.
Productivity aside, the other hidden danger is caused by the fancy interview clothes one is forced to wear. 1) you look like an ass at the airport, travelling in a suit while everyone else is in jeans and sweatshirts. 2) Winter + dress shoes = increased likelihood of falling down and making a fool of yourself (yes, I did this). 3) Pencil skirt + getting in/out of a pick-up truck = looking like an idiot and possibly flashing people. Invest in a pant suit or nice trousers for your job talk, totally worth it.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Rejection Letters
'Tis now the time of year when the bevy of rejection letters arrives in ones mailbox. If you're a normal person anyway. I'm sure there is some superstar out there who is getting tons of job offers and has yet to feel the sting of rejection. I, however, am not that superstar and my inbox is amassing a collection of "I regret to inform you" emails.
And yet, I haven't been truly disappointed or upset by any of my rejections for job applications this year. Given the craptastic market and the stories I keep hearing about people not getting any interviews at all, I'm mostly happy that I got some interviews and that they are all at pretty good places. I recall finding the rejection from grad schools more hurtful, like they didn't think I was good enough to accept into their program (those bastards!). But I guess after years of rejection from funding agencies and journals (I'm looking at you Science, Nature, Nat Neurosci, PNAS, Psyc Sci, J Neurosci), I've gotten to a point where the rejection is just part of the job. I would, of course, prefer not to be rejected, but when the other15 13 (got two more emails) rejection letters I'm expecting show up in my inbox I will just shrug and move on.
I'm actually finding the rejection letters themselves really interesting. Although they all have the same basic info ("We don't want you!") every school has their own take on the rejection form letter. Some were very formal (Dear Dr. <LastName>), some were more casual (Dear <FirstName>), while some went full-on form-letter with a "Dear Applicant" or not using a salutation at all and just getting right to the rejection part. Some have cushioned the rejection nicely, "Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your application. I regret to inform you that you have not been chosen for further consideration for this position. Please know that this should not be considered a negative reflection on your work. The pool of candidates was large and the search committee was forced to make very difficult decisions. We wish you the very best in your career and future endeavors." Others were very short and to the point, "I am writing to share officially the news that the position has been filled. We wish you the best of luck and we thank you for your interest in University X."
With each new rejection letter I take a few moments to enjoy the language and psychology of it then I file it away in a folder and go about my business. I haven't yet gotten to the point where I feel the need to attempt this tactic:
And yet, I haven't been truly disappointed or upset by any of my rejections for job applications this year. Given the craptastic market and the stories I keep hearing about people not getting any interviews at all, I'm mostly happy that I got some interviews and that they are all at pretty good places. I recall finding the rejection from grad schools more hurtful, like they didn't think I was good enough to accept into their program (those bastards!). But I guess after years of rejection from funding agencies and journals (I'm looking at you Science, Nature, Nat Neurosci, PNAS, Psyc Sci, J Neurosci), I've gotten to a point where the rejection is just part of the job. I would, of course, prefer not to be rejected, but when the other
I'm actually finding the rejection letters themselves really interesting. Although they all have the same basic info ("We don't want you!") every school has their own take on the rejection form letter. Some were very formal (Dear Dr. <LastName>), some were more casual (Dear <FirstName>), while some went full-on form-letter with a "Dear Applicant" or not using a salutation at all and just getting right to the rejection part. Some have cushioned the rejection nicely, "Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your application. I regret to inform you that you have not been chosen for further consideration for this position. Please know that this should not be considered a negative reflection on your work. The pool of candidates was large and the search committee was forced to make very difficult decisions. We wish you the very best in your career and future endeavors." Others were very short and to the point, "I am writing to share officially the news that the position has been filled. We wish you the best of luck and we thank you for your interest in University X."
With each new rejection letter I take a few moments to enjoy the language and psychology of it then I file it away in a folder and go about my business. I haven't yet gotten to the point where I feel the need to attempt this tactic:
 |
| via Geeks Are Sexy |
Monday, January 30, 2012
An Overabundance of PhD's
Over the weekend I was catching up on some blog reading and I was quite happy to see this post on "The Professor Is In" about supply and demand for PhD's. Here is a snippet:
1) part of a department's budget comes from how many students they have. More grad students often means more money in the department coffers. I was pretty shocked when I found out that PhD students were worth twice as much money to the department as MA students... and then the 'fast-track' program to get students into the PhD without finishing their Master's made a whole lot more sense.
2) In my experience with individual faculty members it has been less about 'ego' when it comes to having many grad students and more about productivity and the ability to obtain funding. The (often misguided) idea is that having more grad students means you can get more research done and this will increase your odds of obtaining grants. It is typically the quality of the students and the quality of the student-supervisor relationship that matters much more than their sheer number. One superstar grad student paired with the right supervisor will likely accomplish much more than five good grad students paired with a sub-optimal supervisory match.
Anyone who has been on the job market in the past 5 years knows that there are far more PhD's graduating and needing jobs than there are academic jobs available. For some this is not a problem, they are excited to leave academia and move into the (typically much higher paying) world of industry. Most grad students, however, are accepted into PhD programs with the hope and promise of one day being tenured professors. Sadly, many will not get tenure-track faculty positions and will feel like they have to "settle" for a position other than the faculty position they were working towards for the better part of a decade. In my opinion, fixing this problem really requires that faculty are more thoughtful about which students they take on, everyone is realistic and honest about their job prospects, and students are taught about (and prepared for) jobs other than tenure-track faculty positions so that they know what their options are.
Never, ever, at any time, not even once, was there a discussion of the question: do these Ph.D. students we’re admitting have a reasonable chance of using their Ph.D.s for employment after leaving our program? That question was entirely irrelevant to our deliberations. The ultimate professional fate of the graduate students had absolutely no significance in their value to us as faculty. Instead, their value to us as faculty hinged on:A few points to add based on my own experiences:
- Our egos. The “best” (ie, most successful and famous) faculty members had the most students. The quantity of a faculty member’s Ph.D. students boosted the faculty member’s status vis-a-vis colleagues and conferred bragging rights.
- Our teaching needs. The department quite literally could not run without the teaching labor of the graduate students. In one of my departments the entire first, second, and third year language programs in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean (some 30,000 credit hours annually) were handled entirely by graduate students.
- Our legitimacy. A department without a Ph.D. program is a second-class department nationally and on campus. A department with a smaller Ph.D. program is a “lesser” department than one with a larger Ph.D. program. No faculty member would willingly work to reduce the size of the department’s graduate program, because it would reduce the status of the program, and thus the status of the faculty members associated with it. Ultimately, it would reduce the standing of those faculty members for things like raises and research funding.
1) part of a department's budget comes from how many students they have. More grad students often means more money in the department coffers. I was pretty shocked when I found out that PhD students were worth twice as much money to the department as MA students... and then the 'fast-track' program to get students into the PhD without finishing their Master's made a whole lot more sense.
2) In my experience with individual faculty members it has been less about 'ego' when it comes to having many grad students and more about productivity and the ability to obtain funding. The (often misguided) idea is that having more grad students means you can get more research done and this will increase your odds of obtaining grants. It is typically the quality of the students and the quality of the student-supervisor relationship that matters much more than their sheer number. One superstar grad student paired with the right supervisor will likely accomplish much more than five good grad students paired with a sub-optimal supervisory match.
Anyone who has been on the job market in the past 5 years knows that there are far more PhD's graduating and needing jobs than there are academic jobs available. For some this is not a problem, they are excited to leave academia and move into the (typically much higher paying) world of industry. Most grad students, however, are accepted into PhD programs with the hope and promise of one day being tenured professors. Sadly, many will not get tenure-track faculty positions and will feel like they have to "settle" for a position other than the faculty position they were working towards for the better part of a decade. In my opinion, fixing this problem really requires that faculty are more thoughtful about which students they take on, everyone is realistic and honest about their job prospects, and students are taught about (and prepared for) jobs other than tenure-track faculty positions so that they know what their options are.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Random Geekiness: 500th Visitor!
Checking out my blog stats this morning, I realized I'd hit a milestone. There have now been over 500 visitors to this here blog, 43% of which have returned for multiple visits! We've now had readers from 28 countries, and have hit all the good parts of Canada and the USA (there are some places in the middle that don't seem to like me, but I've got both coasts covered!).
As a thank you to my readers, I have decided to share with you links to some of my other favourite places on the web.
If you're looking for an academic position in psychology I recommend:
Some other blogs that I like to check out:
And some random fun things you can use to procrastinate:
Friday, January 6, 2012
Guest post: On the dire consequences of CV padding
In response to my earlier post on people misrepresenting themselves on their CVs, I received an entertaining rant from a colleague. I present it for you here in it's complete and uncensored form (i.e., if you are easily offended, maybe skip reading this):
The dire societal and professional consequences of misrepresentation/CV padding
The job market in academia is competitive. There is no getting around that fact. This has not stopped people from attempting to present themselves in a more favorable light by stretching the truth, or in some cases lies, on their CV’s. It comes off as harmless enough: a few panel discussions here, a course you never taught there, a thesis student who can’t seem to be located and who just happens to be the not-so-distant relative of the deposed king of Nigeria. It seems harmless, doesn’t it? They know they are qualified for the jobs, and if given enough time, they could most definitely achieve all these things. There just isn’t enough time and let’s face it, sometimes a delicious lie is more telling of one’s true character than a bland fact. Or the action of lying is more…the truth of…anyway...whatever.
CV-padding is rampant and harmful to you as a professional and to us as a professional society…to academia as a whole. This may not be evident if only for the justifications that people often provide (“It is mundane, common, and everybody does it. I am fully capable of the things I describe. These lies are more reflective of my true and as-yet-unrealized potential that will undoubtedly be unlocked once given the position and salary I am sure I deserve.”). Make no mistake it is dangerous. I will admit that things never seem dire or dangerous in the academic sphere, as we deal with intangibles, abstracts, and some baseline level of survivability and safety in our professional environment. But indulge me as I tell you a story of resume-padding in another time, and another place, where the consequences of such seemingly mundane treachery are fully realized.
Not long ago, or long ago, depending upon the state of affairs in that part of the world. I don’t know, I am a scientist. Let’s hedge our bets and say long ago. I don’t want to be a politically incorrect jerk here. Long ago, somewhere in Africa, or the Middle East, or maybe way southern Europe, not sure…was a land filled with sand and goats. And people. People who lived on the sand and off the goats. In this land lived a man with great ambition…a man named…Henry? Really? Ok, whatever. Henry was an ambitious man who sought to acquire many goats, as such was a status symbol in this particular time and place. Such a feat was not easy, as goats were scarce and widely desired, and only those most trusted as effective goat herders were granted ownership of these majestic beasts.
Henry had very little experience herding goats, but understood them to be wieldy and controllable animals. He knew it was well within his ability to maintain a herd of at least 11 goats, which was a very high number at this time in history, when math and counting were but nascent babes of the mind. Henry approached the village elders (who were pretty young, actually…life expectancy being what it was) in search of goat…um…deeds or titles of ownership. They made a simple request: “Demonstrate to us in a substantive way your ability to herd goats and you shall be entrusted with many tens of goats. If such is not possible, provide us with a record of this ability.”
Henry was at a loss, but only for a moment. He and many of his peers had rudimentary experience handling goats, as goats were customarily included as part of a dowry upon marrying a first cousin. Although Henry had not tracked and obtained this goat himself, he felt that by proxy, the goat that was obtained by his father-in-law (uncle), was obtained by himself.
Henry told the elders of his goat-having expertise and they were understandably impressed. They decided to grant Henry custody of all the village’s goats during their absence on an expedition in search of water (for this was a land of sand and goats, and not water).
Henry was granted the goats, who surprised him with their curious tendencies and wandering teeth. Henry was bitten by the alpha goat as the others fled. Henry could not give chase, as the alpha goat restrained him in an all-too-loving embrace.
Thus the villagers suffered, deprived of the meat and loving goats they so adored. They all died of starvation and loneliness. Henry was not put to death, as the punishment furnished by the horny alpha goat seemed adequate, and long-lasting.
So let this be a lesson. If you are willing to fabricate, inflate, or misrepresent information in your CV, you are probably the type of person who would marry their cousin. That, and you will eventually get fucked by a goat.
The dire societal and professional consequences of misrepresentation/CV padding
The job market in academia is competitive. There is no getting around that fact. This has not stopped people from attempting to present themselves in a more favorable light by stretching the truth, or in some cases lies, on their CV’s. It comes off as harmless enough: a few panel discussions here, a course you never taught there, a thesis student who can’t seem to be located and who just happens to be the not-so-distant relative of the deposed king of Nigeria. It seems harmless, doesn’t it? They know they are qualified for the jobs, and if given enough time, they could most definitely achieve all these things. There just isn’t enough time and let’s face it, sometimes a delicious lie is more telling of one’s true character than a bland fact. Or the action of lying is more…the truth of…anyway...whatever.
CV-padding is rampant and harmful to you as a professional and to us as a professional society…to academia as a whole. This may not be evident if only for the justifications that people often provide (“It is mundane, common, and everybody does it. I am fully capable of the things I describe. These lies are more reflective of my true and as-yet-unrealized potential that will undoubtedly be unlocked once given the position and salary I am sure I deserve.”). Make no mistake it is dangerous. I will admit that things never seem dire or dangerous in the academic sphere, as we deal with intangibles, abstracts, and some baseline level of survivability and safety in our professional environment. But indulge me as I tell you a story of resume-padding in another time, and another place, where the consequences of such seemingly mundane treachery are fully realized.
Not long ago, or long ago, depending upon the state of affairs in that part of the world. I don’t know, I am a scientist. Let’s hedge our bets and say long ago. I don’t want to be a politically incorrect jerk here. Long ago, somewhere in Africa, or the Middle East, or maybe way southern Europe, not sure…was a land filled with sand and goats. And people. People who lived on the sand and off the goats. In this land lived a man with great ambition…a man named…Henry? Really? Ok, whatever. Henry was an ambitious man who sought to acquire many goats, as such was a status symbol in this particular time and place. Such a feat was not easy, as goats were scarce and widely desired, and only those most trusted as effective goat herders were granted ownership of these majestic beasts.
Henry had very little experience herding goats, but understood them to be wieldy and controllable animals. He knew it was well within his ability to maintain a herd of at least 11 goats, which was a very high number at this time in history, when math and counting were but nascent babes of the mind. Henry approached the village elders (who were pretty young, actually…life expectancy being what it was) in search of goat…um…deeds or titles of ownership. They made a simple request: “Demonstrate to us in a substantive way your ability to herd goats and you shall be entrusted with many tens of goats. If such is not possible, provide us with a record of this ability.”
Henry was at a loss, but only for a moment. He and many of his peers had rudimentary experience handling goats, as goats were customarily included as part of a dowry upon marrying a first cousin. Although Henry had not tracked and obtained this goat himself, he felt that by proxy, the goat that was obtained by his father-in-law (uncle), was obtained by himself.
Henry told the elders of his goat-having expertise and they were understandably impressed. They decided to grant Henry custody of all the village’s goats during their absence on an expedition in search of water (for this was a land of sand and goats, and not water).
Henry was granted the goats, who surprised him with their curious tendencies and wandering teeth. Henry was bitten by the alpha goat as the others fled. Henry could not give chase, as the alpha goat restrained him in an all-too-loving embrace.
Thus the villagers suffered, deprived of the meat and loving goats they so adored. They all died of starvation and loneliness. Henry was not put to death, as the punishment furnished by the horny alpha goat seemed adequate, and long-lasting.
So let this be a lesson. If you are willing to fabricate, inflate, or misrepresent information in your CV, you are probably the type of person who would marry their cousin. That, and you will eventually get fucked by a goat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)