Read on Twitter
A few thoughts on reading and interpreting academic job advertisements.
(Note: this thread is not a "how to apply for academic jobs" thread.)
(Note: this thread is not a "how to apply for academic jobs" thread.)
Those on the academic job market are frequently dissuaded from applying for a job because the desired focus of specialty doesn& #39;t match their own. Some may consider this bad advice, but I urge you to apply for a job even if it is out of your speciality. Here& #39;s why:
Especially at smaller colleges, it is often the case that there& #39;s not agreement on the type of scholar that they need/want to hire. One person may think that they need a specialist in X, and another may think that they need a specialist in Y. As a case in point:
When I applied for the job that I currently have, it was advertised as "theology and world religions." I study early Christianity. When all of the dust from the search process settled, I was the one they picked. And I do not pretend to know the reasoning behind that.
These days I teach mostly courses in biblical studies, as well as a few here and there outside of my "area." My point: the job that I currently have was not advertised as a biblical studies job. It was advertised as a theology position. That changed during the search process.
I& #39;ve seen this happen a few times at the SLAC where I teach. We advertise a job in X area, and once applications start rolling in, we change the scope of the job. It& #39;s part of the process, at least at many smaller colleges.
The situation might be different at big R1s, especially for graduate programs, where they *do* in fact need to hire a specific type of scholar to direct graduate students in a field of study. I& #39;m speaking here to my experience at a SLAC.
Something else to keep in mind: stop hunting for the "inside candidate." It is often the case that when a job posts, there& #39;s a huge scuffle about the fact that "the job ad matches this or that adjunct who has been working there for 5 years." Think of it this way:
If you have a contingent faculty member who has been teaching a slate of classes for you for five years, and you are given a full-time position to fill, it makes a LOT of sense to describe the position in terms of the courses that this person has been teaching.
But the question is "who can we find to teach these courses?" The question is not necessarily "how can we make sure that we hire this person?" It sometimes is the latter, but not always.
Also consider the fact that the "inside candidate" may actually not be someone terribly well liked. The college still needs to fill those classes, and they might be looking for a change.
Bottom line: with "inside candidates," it is almost always tricky. Do not waste mental bandwidth trying to discover the circumstances behind why a job is described the way that it is.
One last thing and then I need more coffee: what do you do when a job ad indicates that "preference is given to X"? The "X" here could be a number of things: "baptist applicants," "senior scholars," "experience with online ed," etc.
The "preference is given to X" bits are mysterious. They are often added in the process of writing a job ad, and they are frequently there at the request of only one or two people (maybe a faculty member on the search committee, maybe the provost, or maybe even the president.)
Especially when you& #39;re dealing with religious institutions that actually have a religious identity, these clauses are taken seriously. But if they& #39;re taken **really** seriously, they& #39;re not going to say "preferred." They& #39;re going to say "required."
"Senior scholar preferred" means that those who control the purse strings have approved a salary whose level could be used to attract a senior, tenured scholar. That doesn& #39;t mean that this is who is going to apply, and it doesn& #39;t mean this is who they actually want to hire.
Bottom line: read job ads carefully. There are likely heated arguments and disagreements standing behind many of the words and clauses. If a job looks remotely interesting to you, then apply for it if you can.
Unless you lie about your qualifications (please don& #39;t lie), it is very unlikely that you are going to fool the search committee to the point where you end up teaching a plate of courses whose subject matters are completely foreign to you.
