Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

Choosing a Dissertation Supervisor

A grad student writes:

How should one choose a supervisor? I'm a graduate student at a PGR rank 15 - 20 school, and starting to think seriously about dissertation topics. One consequence of our relative status is a very mixed placement record: some of our students get amazing jobs, but others struggle to get any interviews. I get the sense that choice of supervisor is a crucial factor in this.

I suppose one shouldn't have as chair someone who is just starting (less than 5 years post-PhD) in the profession. But what about the other end of the scale: would it be a bad call to have someone who is well known and produces great work, but who hasn't produced much in the past few years? What about a very famous philosopher who has become more of a 'public intellectual'? And how should one balance considerations of who would be a good adviser, pedagogically speaking, against who is more well-known in the profession?

I know that, in the end, one should go for the most interesting topic, and try to produce the best work one can - but I suppose that it can't hurt to stack the deck a little by taking such things into account.  Thanks very much for any thoughts!

Comments are open; submit your comment only once, it may take awhile to appear.

Publishing Philosophy While Outside the Academy; Getting Back Into Academia After Being Away

A reader writes:

I am a Visiting Assistant Professor who is weighing returning to a temporary position versus exploring other, non-academic career options.  I am still holding out, at least in the near term, for a permanent position, and I have been “close” to acquiring one in the past.  However, I am also concerned that I will be in the same position of uncertainty next year.

 

I was wondering if your readers could comment on the following questions.  First, is it more difficult to publish while not having an academic affiliation?  I am not necessarily concerned about the inevitable constraints on time another job would entail (regarding writing and research), but does the likelihood of acceptance diminish without an “edu” on your email?  Second, does taking a year or two break from academics severely reduce the likelihood of landing a job?  I realize PhDs tend to “stale” after time, but I’m wondering if a year or two break, especially in this economic climate, would be looked at as unfavorably as it would be in more normal times.

My take:  (1)  publication, at least with journals that run a legitimate peer review process, should not be harder; (2) hiring departments tend to be skeptical about people who have been away from philosophy, unless there is good evidence that they have remained intellectually engaged with the subject.  Comments are open for other perspectives; post only once; comments may take awhile to appear.

Acquiring Substantial Debt While in Grad School: How Much? How Common?

A PhD student at a top program writes:

I'm finishing up the 2nd year of a program that I expect to finish in 5 years total. I'm married; we've got a young child; and we'd like to have another in the next couple years. As an undergrad, I took out about $15,000 in student loans (which, as I understand things, is about average). But for each of my first 2 years of grad school, I've had to take out a HUGE loan. My wife is well educated and could work a full-time job, but if she were to do so, we'd have to pay for child care. Decent child care is absurdly expensive in this area (and extremely difficult to come by); and even if we could afford it, we'd rather avoid it (for personal reasons). So she works a part-time job, and stays at home during the days with our child. So it's looking like I'll have to take out yet another HUGE loan this summer (and, if conditions remain the same, the summer after that and the summer after that). And by the time I actually earn the Ph.D., we could be looking at student loan debt well into the six figures. I'm at a wonderful, highly-respected program, so I'm confident (relatively speaking) that I'll find a job. But then, from what I hear, my starting gross yearly income might be LESS THAN HALF of what I owe in student loans. I've always heard that student loan debt is "good debt," especially if you're in grad school, but that no longer makes me feel any better.

 

My questions are these: Is this anywhere close to normal (for other grad students similar situations - married, with children, etc.)?   Should I be thinking about possible new career paths, or will that sort of student loan debt be manageable as a philosopher? Any idea what sort of monthly payments I'll have to make?

 

I'd really, really appreciate hearing some advice, testimony, etc., from others around the discipline ... and I imagine that there are many other grad students that could benefit from such a discussion.

 

Comments are open; it is OK to post anonymously on this thread, but please include a real e-mail address (it won't appear).   Please post only once, as comments may take awhile to appear.

Choosing Between Graduate Study in a Philosophy Department vs. a History and Philosophy of Science Program?

Christopher Hitchcock, a distinguished philosopher of science at the California Institute of Technology and member of the PGR Advisory Board, has drafted, with input from some other philosophers of science on the Advisory Board (Craig Callender, Peter Godfrey-Smith, Alexander Rosenberg, and William Wimsatt), a very useful statement for students interested in philosophy of science and cognate fields and trying to decide about whether to pursue PhD studies in a philosophy program or a specialized program, such as "History and Philosophy of Science."  This advice will appear in the new PGR, but I thought it might be useful to flag it here for the benefit of interested students and their advisors:

Students interested in the philosophy of science, the history of science, and/or logic may face the choice of whether to pursue a graduate degree in a traditional philosophy department, or in a separate department of history and philosophy of science (HPS), or logic and philosophy of science (LPS). In the English-speaking world, the following schools have separate HPS or LPS departments:

USA:

University of Pittsburgh (HPS)

University of California, Irvine (LPS)

Indiana University (HPS)

UK

Cambridge University (HPS)

London School of Economics (LPS)

(Note: LSE has a department of philosophy, logic, and methodology of science, but no separate philosophy department.)

University of Leeds (HPS)

Canada

University of Toronto (Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology)

Australasia

University of Sydney (HPS)

University of Melbourne (HPS)

University of New South Wales (HPS)

 

Members of HPS and LPS departments were included together with philosophy faculty in the faculty lists used both for overall rankings, and for rankings in specialty areas.  (There are, of course, philosophy departments that are strong in philosophy of science that do not appear on this list because they do not have independent HPS or LPS programs. Prospective students should consult the relevant specialty rankings elsewhere in this report,)

 

In addition, a number of schools have interdisciplinary graduate programs in HPS or LPS that can be pursued from within the philosophy department (or other relevant department). These include Stanford University (HPS), University of California, Berkeley (LPS), University of Notre Dame (HPS), University of Chicago (HPS), University of California, San Diego (Science Studies Program, including HPS and also Sociology of Science), Duke University (History and Philosophy of Science, Medicine, and Technology), University of Washington, Seattle (HPS), Carnegie Mellon University (Program in Logic, Computation, and Methodology), Arizona State University (HPS; some of ASU’s philosophers are actually housed in the School of Life Sciences, rather than in the philosophy department) and Florida State University (HPS).  

 

Graduates of HPS and LPS programs who focus on philosophy of science will often be competing with graduates of philosophy departments for jobs in philosophy. Of course, students who are interested in pursuing graduate work in an HPS or LPS department should seek detailed information about the placement record of that department, just as they would for a philosophy department. Note also that departments may differ in where they place their students. Pittsburgh’s HPS department places most of its graduates in philosophy departments. Indiana’s HPS department frequently places graduates in the history of science in history departments. Carnegie Mellon places a number of its graduates from its program in Logic, Computation, and Methodology in departments of mathematics, computer science, and statistics.

 

Typically, students in an HPS or LPS graduate program will be able to take courses offered by the school’s philosophy department, and will have opportunities to interact with faculty in the philosophy department. (And likewise, philosophy students will have an opportunity to take HPS or LPS courses and interact with HPS or LPS faculty.) Prospective students would do well to inquire of current students to determine to what extent this actually occurs. Those who plan to make extensive use of a school’s philosophy department would do well to consider the overall quality of that department, as well as of the HPS or LPS department. Moreover, students in HPS or LPS programs who plan to do extensive study in another department, such as history, or some branch of science, should consider the quality of the relevant department.

 

One important difference between and HPS or LPS department and a philosophy department will be the curriculum and academic requirements. Students in an HPS program can be expected to take a number of courses in the history of science, and may also have to take qualifying exams in the history of science. (This may be less of an issue at British and Australian schools, that put less emphasis on graduate coursework.) Moreover, students in HPS and LPS programs are often encouraged to take courses in the sciences. Most philosophers who pursue research in the philosophy of science find that a solid education in science and its history provides them with a deeper appreciation of their field, as well as a wealth of case studies. Moreover, students in HPS programs will typically receive a good education in the history of philosophy, as this field overlaps importantly with the history of science. On the other hand, it may be harder for students in an HPS program to obtain a background in other central areas of philosophy, such as metaphysics and epistemology, philosophy of mind and language, or ethics and political philosophy. Students in HPS programs are usually well advised to try to learn about some of these areas from the school’s philosophy department, to help them compete effectively for jobs in philosophy. Students in an LPS program will obtain a strong background in formal logic, which can be helpful in the philosophy of science and mathematics, as well as in areas like philosophy of language. These students may find that it is harder to obtain a background in other areas of philosophy, such as the history of philosophy.

 

Another difference is that HPS and LPS departments are sometimes willing to admit students whose background in philosophy is less extensive than that which is required for most philosophy programs. This is not to say that students can be expected to be admitted to HPS or LPS departments if they have done poorly in philosophy courses. But if a student has a strong background in a relevant area, say history or some branch of science for an HPS program, or mathematics or computer science for an LPS program, this may partially compensate for a shortage of philosophy courses on one’s transcript. This can be a mixed blessing, however, as all graduates of HPS or LPS programs will eventually need acquire a solid grounding in philosophy to compete effectively in the philosophy job market. Obviously, this is less of a concern for those who plan to seek employment outside of philosophy.                        

"Advice to a Young Mathematician"

Varol Akman (Bilkent) calls my attention to this piece by an eminent British mathematician, Sir Michael Atiyah, which will, as Professor Akman notes, likely have resonance for philosophers as well.

Advice for Job Interviews

Tad Brennan (Cornell) calls my attention to this useful advice about job interviews at a  hiring convention.   As Professor Brennan writes:  "It's written by an historian, about the AHA, but the advice carries over directly.  There are a few things one could disagree with, but by and large I think it is very solid advice for people who are going to the APA for the first time."  I agree.

Smoking Habit a Liability on the Job Market?

A candidate on the teaching market writes:

I am a cigarette smoker (at least one pack a day), and it occurred to me that this fact, when known, very well could play a role in a hiring decision. I was wondering if you or your readers had any thoughts about this.

Please, if posted, refrain from using my name. I am actually trying to quit, but job-market stress is making it hard.

Interesting question, given how much norms about smoking have changed among professionals, including academics, over the past 25 years--and in the U.S. especially.  I'm opening comments.  Smokers with pertinent experience who would like to post anonymously may do so, though please include a real e-mail address (that won't appear).

Publishing in "Graduate" Journals?

A young philosopher in a post-doc position writes:

I'm a regular reader of your Leiter reports blog on the philosophy profession. I wonder if you might consider soliciting responses from readers on the subject of graduate journals, by which I mean not journals on the graduate experience, but philosophy journals whose aim is to disseminate the work of graduates and early career philosophers.

My university has recently started one up, but I have misgivings about it (because of this, please don't mention my name if you raise the topic of graduate blogs with your readership). The concern I have about these journals is that they invite the suspicion that they have lower standards than those which  prevail in the profession.

This suspicion simply stems from the fact that the qualifier 'graduate' suggests that they differ in some way from regular journals, and they don't differ in the interests of their authorship or readership, or in the topics, coverage and scope. They do have a restricted and more junior authorship. Youth and inexperience do not matter for publishing in regular journals because there contributions are completely anonymous, so the point of difference that naturally suggests itself is the quality of the work and the standards required for publication.

Whether or not the suspicion is justified, if it is widely shared, graduates should be discouraged from contributing to graduate journals because they risk 'wasting' their good paper ideas in a forum where they won't receive the credit they deserve.

I am inclined to think the suspicion is justified, and that it is a mistake--or in any case, a waste--for young philosophers to publish in such journals:  I don't think they're taken seriously or read.  I'm opening comments in case other philosophers have a different perspective on these journals.  Post only once, please, and non-anonymous comments strongly preferred, as usual.

Which AOS's and AOC's Are in Demand?

An undergraduate in Britain writes:

I am a final year undergraduate student at the University of [name omitted] in the UK and am currently looking in to graduate schools. One of the factors which I am considering is which departments are strong in AOSs and AOCs that are marketable. However to answer this question I need to know which AOSs and AOCs are marketable. I read your article in the Chronicle Careers ten years ago and found it very interesting--for example the fact that Applied Ethics has an almost one to one ration of jobs to candidates.

My question is this: Which AOSs and AOCs have the most favourable ratios of jobs to candidates? If there were a ranking these I would find that very useful. Is there a reliable way of finding out (are there surveys) or do we have to rely on anecdotal evidence?

Of course I understand that it is somewhat perverse to go to graduate school and then choose your field based on job prospects. However it still seems like the information would be useful. For example students who have more than one main interest and are not sure which they prefer, the information could tip the scale in one direction. Even more so if they are choosing between graduate schools based on their specialty rankings, years before they have to write their dissertations. Similarly it could be useful for choosing between equally attractive sounding courses at masters level, for AOCs.

Please do not feel obliged to give me a detailed answer or to post this on your blog. I would however very much appreciate it if you could at least point me in the direction of where I could find some answers to my question (perhaps it has been addressed before). For example, is Applied Ethics still so marketable (I really like Applied Ethics)? 

Comments are open; please post only once, comments may take awhile to appear.

Philosophy Job Market Wiki Has Come Back to Life for This Year

Here.

The Job Market and the Economy

As feared, bad news about the academic job market is trickling in from various sources.  In addition to some state universities cancelling advertised searches (I've heard of several confirmed cases on the law school teaching market, but I assume this also affects philosophy searches at the same universities), I know of one private university that had advertised multiple positions, including open rank, which may now only be able to make one junior appointment.   There is not a heck of a lot one can do under these circumstances, but, to the extent viable, do consider some of the advice here.  (I was at a conference this weekend talking to someone from a top private university who told me that it's very hard for their PhD students to delay defending because of strict funding limits.)  The apparent severity of the financial crisis now upon us makes it, I am sorry to say, unlikely that we are going to see a significant rebound in the academic job market in 09-10.   I find particularly ominous the remarks of my former Texas colleague Mark Yudof, now President of the University of California system and a savvy observer of public higher education, in the Times article linked above:

On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California proposed a midyear budget cut of $65.5 million for the University of California system — on top of the $48 million reduction already in the budget.

“Budget cuts mean that campuses won’t be able to fill faculty vacancies, that the student-faculty ratio rises, that students have lecturers instead of tenured professors,” said Mark G. Yudof, president of the California system. “Higher education is very labor intensive. We may be getting to the point where there will have to be some basic change in the model.”

But what might those changes be?  Much, much larger classes?  Fewer tenure-stream faculty, more adjuncts and lecturers on temporary contracts?  The full privatization of the elite state universities, so that they can charge tuition to sustain their faculties?  All of the above, one suspects.

UPDATE:  Even wealthy Harvard feels the strain.  (Thanks to A.P. Taylor for the link.)

Writing Samples in Job Applications: How Long?

A reader writes:

As a graduate student going on the market this year I find myself obsessively worrying about every aspect of my dossier.  One thing that has been a particular worry is the length of my writing sample.   I think, and have gotten comments from readers to the effect that, it’s a fine paper, in need of few changes.  But I’ve also gotten comments to the effect that, at 35 pages/twelve thousand five hundred words, it’s too long.  I thought I might turn to Leiter Reports for advice.  Is there a length for dossier papers which turns you off of a candidate when you are reviewing their file?  Does it depend merely on content?  Does it depend on the strength of the candidate’s file in general, and the sort of job she is applying for?  Ideally, philosophers across the spectrum of universities would apply.

I generally recommend not more than 25 pages, but what do readers think?  Signed comments strongly preferred, as usual.  Post only once; comments may take awhile to appear.

Job Placement Information on Departmental Websites

Colleagues in other fields are often impressed by how much information about job placement philosophy departments now make available on their web sites.  It was not always that way, alas.  About six years ago, I used the Update Service to the PGR--which reached several thousand philosophers--to suggest that departments be more forthcoming about this information, citing some models and indicating that in future editions of the PGR I would call attention to departments that were not providing such information, since that should surely be a warning to prospective students.  Departments, for the most part, reacted constructively and did the right thing, posting information about recent job placement on the web.  (One philosopher--a Kantian moral philosopher no less--objected to my "bullying" departments that perhaps preferred to keep the information secret.   There are, I suspect, many lessons to be learned about Kantian ethics from this example, but I'll save that for another day.)

Of course, the quality of information departments provide varies quite a bit in quality, reliability and informativeness.  I have mentioned, in the past, that the Michigan site is a real model of disclosure and detail, while the Texas site, among many others, is at the opposite end of the spectrum (even though, I should add, Texas job placement has improved markedly in recent years, but the site is both relatively uninformative and not entirely accurate).  It is in this context that I wanted to share an e-mail from philosopher Miriam Solomon at Temple University:

Recently, I compiled my department's placement statistics.

In doing so, I consulted the placement statistics that other departments have posted, and found considerable variability in reporting, which may lead to misleading comparisons.

For example, some departments just list those PhD graduates who have gone on to academic jobs and leave off the ones who dropped out; some departments omit those PhD graduates who "did not seek a job" or "went on the job market with geographic restrictions"; some departments list only the first placement, which may be temporary; some departments list job offers received and others job offers accepted; one department actually counts MD/PhDs as having "tenure-track"

jobs if they have a medical residency. In my opinion, the best information comes from those departments that list all their PhDs (by dissertation title) with full employment records.

May I propose that we have some standardization in compiling statistics here? If, as we recommend, students should take placement record into account in selecting graduate programs, we should provide them with the most usable, impartial, data as we can.

So what do readers think are model placement sites?  What information should be standard?  What presentation is most conducive to informing students while respecting the legitimate privacy interests of, for example, unsuccessful job seekers?  No anonymous postings; post only once.

Will Demographics Result in a Job Crunch in the Near Future?

A philosopher on the earlier thread about admissions posted a comment raising issues that deserve separate attention.  She writes:

I don't want to start a wave of paranoia, but I think it might be worth it for the profession to start some long term planning in grad admissions. It is my understanding that in about a decade (ie not long after the incoming grad class finishes their dissertations), the college age population is going to drop somewhat dramatically. The statistic I have heard floated is that this year's kindergarten class is the smallest since WWII. With about half as many students as are currently enrolled in college to teach, I suspect that universities will be cutting the number of faculty. What this likely means is no retirement replacements. Rather than create another situation like that of the late 80s and early 90s, the profession might well want to begin thinking now about how to handle these demographic changes. Grad admissions might be a clear area to strategize around. Another area might be the inclusion of philosophy into HS curricula (so there is a non-university arena for job-seekers). And while I never thought about these issues as a grad student (I didn't even know they existed), it might well be some handy information for grad students to have as they think about getting through their programs in a timely manner.

My impression of the demographics (at least for the US) is similar to this philosopher's.  References to data or trends, analyses of the implications of demographic shifts, and what the profession should be doing about all this are welcome in the comments.  Usual commenting rules apply:  post only once, non-anonymous preferred, etc.

How to Dance Your Way to a Job

Of all the advice for job-seekers we've discussed over the years, this is the most interesting!  Congratulations to Neil, esteemed former student and collaborator!

How to Best Prepare for Job Interviews at Schools with a Primary Emphasis on Teaching

A philosopher at a ranked PhD program writes:

I and some of my colleagues have the sense that we could do a better job helping our grads apply for jobs where the emphasis lies on teaching.  I would appreciate any advice from people who have served on Search Committees seeking to fill such jobs.  In particular, what are the elements of a really stand-out dossier, and a fantastic initial APA or phone interview?

Usual commenting rules apply, though as long as you have an e-mail that confirms your identity, it is not necessary to post your full name in the comments section.  Post only once please!  Comments may take awhile to appear.

Should a Philosophy Grad Student at a Non-Anglophone University Write His/Her Dissertation in English?

A graduate student at a German university writes:

I am a philosophy student at [a university in Germany] and will start with my PhD thesis soon. Because I am contemplating heavily whether I should write it in English or not, I have the following question for the philosophical community - and I guess/hope that it will be of great interest for many of the Leiter Reports' readers outside the English-speaking world:

"Imagine your philosophy department - in the English-speaking world - has a free postdoctoral position and it is up to you to decide who will get the job. Do you take into account a candidate who has published in, say, German, French or Spanish? Do you hold in esteem a paper in the, e.g., "Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung" at all? Has a candidate who has written (and published) his PhD thesis  in a foreign language any real chance to get the job? Thanks a lot for your comments!"

My guess is that a lot depends on the area of philosophy in which the student is writing.  While historians of philosophy are often actively engaged with scholarship in languages other than English, this seems to me, at least anecdotally, to be much more rare among those working in various contemporary fields, from philosophy of language to ethics to epistemology.  In consequence, a German student working in, say, philosophy of mind would probably encounter a very basic obstacle to being taken seriously in Anglophone departments, namely, the inability of most philosophers to read the work.  What do others think?  Usual rules on comments apply. 

Including Letters of Recommendation from Students in a Dossier?

A philosopher writes:

My colleagues and I are conducting a job search for a tenure-track position.  Several of the dossiers submitted to us have included letters of recommendation written by the job candidate's former students and speaking highly of the candidate's teaching ability.  This is a new phenomenon to us; we have conducted several searches in recent years and have never before encountered recommendation letters written by students.

Among my colleagues, opinion has been divided, with some feeling indifferent about the letters, and two feeling quite displeased about them.  (I suppose the negative reaction stems from worries about the job candidate cherry picking class favorites and soliciting letters from them, or even pressuring them into writing one.)

I wonder (a) how often your readers who have served on recent job search committees have encountered letters like this; and (b) what they have felt about such letters (did they hurt the candidate's chances, help them, or make no difference)?

My inclination is that it is a bad idea to include student letters of recommendation, since their probative value is extremely limited, certainly when compared to anonymous class evaluations.  What do readers think?

Publishing Advice for Graduate Students

Thom Brooks (Newcastle) has produced an updated version of his helpful guide, which we discussed last year (and Professor Brooks acknowledges the help he got from this feedback in the new version).   You can discuss the new version with him at his blog.

"How the APA Stole Christmas"

Here, courtesy of bioethicist Carl Elliott at Minnesota.

Philosophy Job Market Wiki

Judging from the wiki, and what I'm hearing locally, it's been a busy week for the scheduling of APA interviews--my guess is that will continue at least into the middle of next week.  (I can recall, many years ago, getting an interview call from a "top ten" department on Dec. 23!  Of course, that was a welcome call to receive, though it was the very last interview to be scheduled.)  Best of luck to all those on the job market!

Think of the Search for a Job as a "Marathon," Not a "Sprint"

Some useful advice for job seekers posted here.

Advice about Submitting Manuscripts to Publishers

A philosopher writes:

I noticed that an old thread about editorial practices of philosophy journals (delay, etc.) is generating new interests. I was wondering if you would consider creating a similar thread on editorial practices of philosophy book publishers. I am a young philosopher who recently sent a manuscript to an important press and who is curious about how things normally proceed. Are missed deadlines, emails that are not answered, etc. the norm in this domain? What is the usual amount of time it takes for a manuscript to be reviewed? Is sending the same manuscript to many publishers a big no-no?

Another philosopher writes:

A friend phoned me a bit earlier today to ask advice about correct practice in submitting book manuscripts/proposals to publishers.  I don't know if you think it appropriate to open this question on your blog or if you have time to give a personal reply, but if you can do either it would be greatly appreciated.  I'm not really sure what the expected behaviour is here for dealing with book publishers.

My friend works in cognitive science/philosophy of mind/philosophy of language/ linguistics.  He recently submitted a manuscript to a publisher, a publisher where he would like to be considered in good standing whether or not they publish his book.  He wanted to know if he could reasonably send the manuscript to other publishers while the first publisher goes through its review process.

I had two thoughts in response to this.

1.  As far as I know although it is clear that refereed journals have a strict expectation that an article will not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time, I am not aware of any similar expectation with regard to book manuscripts or proposals.

2.  It seems to me to be a bad idea to annoy a good publisher by telling them that one has agreed to publish a book with another publisher while the book was still under review at the original publisher.

I'm not sure which consideration should have more weight, or if there are other considerations I am overlooking.

Comments are open; I will try to weigh in myself when I have a chance.  My experience here is somewhat limited, because I have never had occasion to do "cold" submissions to presses, as opposed to solicited ones.  But I've heard various anecdotes, but it would probably be more useful for those with first-hand experience to offer their perspective.  Since I know a number of philosophy editors at major presses read this blog, I encourage them to comment as well about their expectations and procedures!

Job Placement from One Leading Department Over a Decade

Michigan, as I've noted in the past, presents unusually detailed and informative placement data on its website, which permits one to get a detailed picture of how the job market looks coming out of a top department.  I focus on Michigan only because the data is so thorough and because I have a good handle on where the graduates listed are teaching now (though the site is fairly up-to-date).  Michigan was also clearly a "top" department during the period I'm going to examine--uncontroversially top ten, perhaps top five for much of this time.  I have made a casual, but not systematic, study of the competition, and my conclusion is that only two top departments (Princeton and MIT) have, for this period, significantly better placement records than Michigan.  NYU and Rutgers seem to be developing stronger records at present. 

There were 46 graduates who earned the PhD between 1990 and 2000 at Michigan.   Of these, 9 do not presently have academic positions, and 3 others have non tenure-stream positions.  In other words, 1 out of 5 graduates of a top PhD program are not in an academic position, and about 1 out of 4 are either out of academia or in a non tenure-stream position.  That's the sobering news.

Now the more hopeful news.  About 41% of the graduates (19 philosophers) have tenure-stream (in many cases, now tenured) positions in PhD-granting departments.  (16 philosophers, about 35%, have tenure-stream positions in PGR-ranked PhD or MA-granting departments.)  About 9% of the graduates have jobs in excellent liberal arts colleges. 13% of the graduates during this period now teach in "top 20" philosophy departments, while 3 graduates (about 7%) teach at "top ten" departments.

Depending exactly on how one assesses various jobs, it's fair to say that 60% or more of the graduates during this period have excellent academic positions--at research universities or departments with a strong research orientation, or very good colleges, places with good students and reasonable teaching loads. 

Remember that these statistics are drawn strictly from those who completed the PhD (that's part of what makes the first set of figures so sobering).  Attrition rates vary quite a bit is my impression.  I started at Michigan in the fall of 1988, and of my class of nine, two never finished the degree.  But next year's class had a much higher attrition rate, over 50%.  But I am inclined to think the more meaningful stats concern those who finished the program.  It is one thing to spend a couple of years in grad school and then move on to something else.  It's another thing to invest six or seven or eight years in earning a PhD.  Students quite reasonably want to know:  what happens to me after all that effort?

UPDATE:  A couple of folks, in correspondence, suggested that perhaps those no longer in academia left voluntarily to do something they preferred.  In most (perhaps all) of these cases, the graduates were seeking academic employment, and failed to secure it.  What I am less sure about is whether or not some of these individuals had a "floor" for the kind of academic employment they would accept, such that they would prefer careers outside the academy to certain kinds of jobs within the academy.

Employed Philosophers with Search Experience: Step Up to the Plate!

There are many students seeking reasonable information about the hiring process on this thread:  post some (signed) answers!!!

How Do Departments Decide Whom to Interview at the APA?

A reader calls my attention to this posting which purports to be by a faculty member at a school ranked between 13 and 35 in the last PGR.  (It may well be by a faculty member, I have no real basis for judging.)  This anonymous faculty member writes:

I’m at a Leiterespectable department that has aspirations of being Leiterrific. Our deadline was last week, and we’ve received hundreds of applications. We’ll be holding a series of meetings over the next month to come up with a list of a dozen or so candidates that we want to interview at the APA. The first step is to rule out all but 50 or so of the applications. Each file will get looked at by more than one committee member. We’re responsible like that. But on what basis do you think that we will rule out all but 50 or so of the applications? I’ll give you a clue: it doesn’t involve reading any writing samples. It’s not that we’re not required to read any writing samples. Nor is it that some irresponsible committee members won’t read writing samples. It’s that we’re all encouraged not to read any part of any candidate's writing sample at this stage.

That’s right, boys and girls. I know you’ve been slaving away at your writing samples for months now. I just wanted to tell you that, if other departments are anything like ours, chances are that most of the departments that reject you will reject you without reading your work.

Unfortunately, the post does not specify the criteria the search committee does rely upon.  I take it that at most departments faced with several hundred applications, most dossiers are, in fact, put to one side without reading the written work.  But the sorting principles at this early stage are hardly unreasonable ones.  A minority of the dossiers are probably put to one side based on pedigree, i.e., they come from a department that the hiring department does not view as providing credible training in philosophy (that may or may not correspond to the PGR results, it depends on the hiring department, but there is probably some rough correlation).  For the remainder, members of the search committee will at least look at the CV, read the dissertation abstract, and, most importantly, read the letters of reference.  Assuming the CV and abstract make the candidate a good fit for the position, what the letters say and who they are from is probably most crucial at this stage, and will determine which dossiers will get detailed scrutiny in the final round (i.e., whose writing samples will be read with care).  Contrary to what the anonymous faculty member implies, the reason to work hard on your writing sample is because it will now play a huge role in deciding who among the, say, fifty candidates that get scrutinized will actually get one of the ten or fifteen interview slots at the APA.

The anonymous poster, above, is a bit too flip about all this, and makes it sound more unreasonable than it in fact is (maybe it is in fact quite unreasonable at that person's department, but I doubt it).  It's also worth emphasizing that the preceding may not characterize the hiring process at a liberal arts college or a university emphasizing undergraduate teaching and the like.  These programs will surely also be taking into account pedigree and letters, but the pedigree that matters may be the pedigree with which the department has had good experience, and, especially if it is a small department, there will be as much or greater interest in things like collegiality, responsibility, teaching competence, and so on, than simply research excellence, which tends to drive hiring at departments in research universities.

I am opening comments, subject to two ground rules:  (1)  those purporting to describe departmental hiring practices will have to post under their actual names, or the post will not be approved; (2) grad students and job seekers may post questions or comments anonymously, though these will be approved based on relevance and content.  Post only once; comments may take awhile to appear.

Philosophy Job Market Wiki for 07-08

It's up-and-running here. 

Preparing a Tenure File

A young philosopher in a tenure-stream position writes:

You have done many posts that help out graduate students.  I'm hoping that you can post a request for info on tenure applications, for the benefit of faculty coming up for tenure.

What kind of statement is a tenure committee looking for?  A narrative regarding one's research, teaching, and service to the university?  What are cardinal sins to avoid?  What must one include?  What are the dos and don'ts?  How differently do philosophy faculty and administrators interpret or evaluate the tenure file?

Comments are open.  No anonymous postings.  Please post only once.

How do philosophy departments evaluate the "teaching credentials" of candidates?

Michael Cholbi (Cal State, Pomona) has initiated an interesting discussion of the topic here.

Philosophy Job Market and Publishing Advice

A useful round-up of links here, courtesy of Aidan McGlynn.

Protecting Philosophical Ideas with Copyright?

I have opened a discussion on this subject at my law school blog in response to an inquiry from a philosophy graduate student.  One of my law colleagues, an expert on copyright, comments, and I am hoping other legal experts will weigh in.  Issues about the misappropriation of someone else's philosophical work or ideas often come up in informal conversation; faculty and students may find the discussion of the legal protections available of some value.

How to Reject a Rejection Letter

This is quite funny, in a dark humor kind of way.

What is an "Area of Competence"?

So everyone familiar with the philosophy job market knows that your CV is supposed to list your "Areas of Specialization" (AOS) and "Areas of Competence" (AOC), and most jobs in fact mention one or both of these qualifications with regard to the applicants they are soliciting.  AOS, I take it, is usually fairly clear:  it is the area in which you have written your dissertation and might include closely cognate areas in which you plan to publish and in which you can do graduate-level teaching.

But I find that, invariably, philosophers have very different views about how a candidate determines his or her AOC.  I usually tell students that the AOC comprises those areas where you are willing and able to do advanced or upper-level undergraduate teaching.  That can, of course, cast the net quite widely, so sometimes it is advisable to limit the list by putting more weight on willing or emphasizing areas that naturally complement the AOS or areas where the student has substantial coursework background.  A very long AOC list (say, six or seven different areas) can look like over-reaching by the candidate, and raise questions about superficiality and seriousness.  Or so it has seemed to me.

I imagine many philosophers and job candidates would fine it useful to hear how others view the "area of competence."  (I'm happy to hear thoughts about "AOS" as well.)  Please post only once; non-anonymous comments preferred; and, as usual, comments may take awhile to appear.

Which Journals Publish "Discussion Notes"?

David Velleman (NYU) forwards to me a query he received from an author who had submitted a "discussion"-style piece to Philosophers' Imprint, which (alas) does not publish discussion pieces.  The author wrote to Professor Velleman:

[I]t is actually quite difficult to find an appropriate place to send it to, as most journals these days are quite reluctant to publish discussion notes. Even Analysis, where the target article originally appeared, was not interested. The author of the target article, to whom I sent my paper for comment, seemed to agree with me that there were potentially issues with his arguments, which would need to be addressed. But how to make this public? Given the general inflation in publications in philosophy, it seems that space for "mere" discussion is disappearing. Can you recommend a journal to a junior philosopher looking for a publishing venue?

I'm sure others have the same question.  Answers, anyone?  As usual, non-anonymous posts strongly preferred.  Post only once; comments may take awhile to appear.

Negotiating a Job with Multiple Offers in Hand (Leiter)

A student on the job market who is in the enviable position of having multiple offers writes with some questions about what kind of negotiation is appropriate for a candidate in his/her situation. 

1. What sort of things can one negotiate about? (salary? sabbatical? teaching relief? benefits?)

2. How much money/time/etc. are we talking about here?

3. Who is my natural ally in this endeavor? Here is what it seems like to me:

   -- Other junior faculty at the institution would be willing to try to help (telling me what worked for them, etc.).

   -- The chair, to some degree. The chair wants to help me, but he (or she) needs to get along with the dean too.

   -- As far as I can tell, it is mainly the Dean that is trying to keep my salary as low as possible.

4. What sort of things would people find insulting? How might you step on people’s toes? It is a foreign enough project for me that I’m worried I’m going to make a faux pas.

5. (related) Are there risks to asking if there is anything they can do to improve the offer? I don’t want to alienate my future chair...

For purposes of discussion let us suppose that A is a top 10-15 PhD-granting department, while X is a PhD-granting program at a research university, but not in the very top ranks.  I set out some of my initial thoughts, below.  I have opened comments below and invite readers to concur, correct, or amplify, as seems appropriate.  I do not have a clear sense of whether non-research universities will negotiate about terms of employment, and so invite readers to comment on that in particular.  My comments shall be premised on the idea that we are talking about research universities, where I know such negotiation is common.

1.  Negotiation--but always approach it delicately!--seems to me appropriate in the following circumstances:  (a) you have offers from comparable departments and the terms (salary [taking some account of cost-of-living], teaching or other duties, research support) differ in significanct ways; or (b) you have an offer from A, and you want to negotiate with X in the spirit of getting X to offer you an inducement to join them.  These are the two best situations in which to raise questions about the terms of employment.  You could, of course, ask A to match X's terms, but, in general, I don't recommend it, and you had better be prepared to go to X at the end of the day if you go that route. 

2.  Topics for negotiation most commonly include salary (but bear in mind cost-of-living!), research leave, research and travel support, and (less often for a junior) teaching load.  (Perhaps most important for junior faculty is stability of your courses:  preparation is time-consuming, and it is very helpful to have a set of courses that you can repeat year after year while on tenure-track.)  If X has offered you 60K and A has made you an offer of 65K, it isn't crazy to see what X is willing to do on salary to get you to go to X over A.  If A and B--both top 10-15 departments let us suppose--have offered you 65K, but B gives you 3K per year for travel, and A guarantees only 1K, it seems quite fair (esp. if you prefer A!) to ask A if they can do better.  (Benefits are rarely, if ever, open to negotiation:  health, disability and life insurance, retirement plans, educational benefits, etc. are almost always set at a university-wide level:  no department or college will have control over them.)

3.  My inclination is to think that it is a bad idea to say, "Can you improve the offer?" in the abstract.  Be concrete.  If you have a spouse and a kid, it seems to me quite fair to say to A, "I am thrilled to have the opportunity to join your wonderful department, but X is offering so much more that I'm not sure I can support the family.  Is there any chance that you can offer a better salary?"  If you have the offer from A, but are thinking about X, it is not unreasonable, in the current market, to expect X to pay a bit of a premium--in salary, or support, or leave--to get you.

4.  Chairs do, indeed, serve under (and sometimes at the pleasure of) their Deans.  But any negotiation must start with the Chair.  Read the signals carefully!

Bear in mind that particular institutions, regardless of "prestige," may operate under all kinds of constraints.   Some may feel that they are so wonderful that they do not need to meet any outside offers.  Some may have a strong internal norm regarding equity of treatment:  why should you get more than the Asst Prof hired last year, who, as a matter of pure chance, didn't have an outside offer?  You may have received an offer on a divided vote, which means the department will not be at all disposed to cutting a special deal.  And so on.

Non-anonymous comments stand a much better chance of being approved; please post only once, as comments may take awhile to appear.

Should Faculty Up for Tenure Apply for Jobs Elsewhere? (Leiter)

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY TO ENCOURAGE MORE COMMENTS

A tenure-track faculty member at a good department recently wrote to me, reporting that a tenured colleague elsewhere thought "it was standard to go on the job market the year that one was up for tenure whatever one thought of one's chances":

His reasons [for saying this]: the unpleasantness of hanging around and the advantages of giving oneself more shots at the market if one gets denied tenure, the potential pressure on one's home institution created by an outside offer, and the general increase in visibility. He also claimed that one should apply only to roughly peer institutions to avoid indicating a lack of confidence. I have heard similar things from others. But I did just want to get your opinion. Does all the above sound right to you? One further question: should one only apply for tenured positions because applying for tenure-track positions also gives the wrong signal that one is not confident?

I am curious what philosophers with experience think about this.  My impression is that junior faculty up for tenure, especially though not exclusively at departments where tenure is often denied, do usually make a selective search that same year, applying for both tenure-track and tenured posts at "peer" departments in a very capacious sense of peer (e.g., someone up for tenure at one of the very top departments might apply for tenure-track jobs at any of the top 20-30 PhD-granting departments).  But I am not really confident that my impression is accurate.  Input from others would no doubt be helpful to many junior faculty who face this question.  Non-anonymous posts will be be preferred, as usual, though substantive and well-informed anonymous posts may also be approved.  Please post only once, as comments may take awhile to appear.  (As readers may have inferred from the dearth of postings lately, things are a bit hectic currently.)

Velleman on the Newcombe Competitions and How Philosophers Present Their Work (Leiter)

David Velleman (NYU) writes with the following interesting information about the Newcombes and the selection process; I would particularly urge graduate students and young philosophers to heed the points about presenting one's work to non-specialists.  Professor Velleman writes:

Having served on the final selection committee for the Newcombe Fellowships (though not in the most recent years of the competition), I'd like to add some background to your comments on the distribution of the awards.

The Newcombes were funded by an endowment from a nonacademic family, but the inspiration for them came from the philosopher Robert Adams, who was a friend and personal advisor to the family, having been (as I recall) a neighbor when he was young. Bob's role in the early years of the program may explain why it elicited more applications, and better applications, from philosophers than from students in other disciplines. To my knowledge, there has always been a philosopher on the final selection committee, but these days the vast majority of applications come from English, History, Anthropology, Politics, and so on.

In my experience, the applications from philosophers look weak by comparison. The very best applicants from other disciplines display truly stunning feats of scholarship, fieldwork, and intellectual synthesis; they write vivid and stimulating descriptions of their projects; and they can make the significance of those projects clear to nonspecialists. In my years on the committee, its membership was highly inter-disciplinary, but everyone could discuss the merits of all the applications -- except those from philosophers. When philosophical applications came under discussion, the other committee members would often turn to me and say, "Can you explain the point of this -- if there is one?" There were years when the committee said, in effect, "Well, we want to give some fellowships to philosophers -- tell us which ones." 

I'd like to be able to say that these remarks manifested a prejudice against philosophy, but they didn't. The other members of the committee were widely read, highly intelligent, and open-minded. The fact is that in the context of the entire appllicant pool, I too found the Philosophy applications unimpressive, sometimes embarrassingly so. I did my best to advocate for the philosophers, but it was an uphill climb, even in my own mind.

Now, part of the problem may be that graduate students in other disciplines have more experience writing grant applications. Anthropology students, for example, have to apply for funds to support their dissertation fieldwork, and the Anthroplogy applications were among the most impressive. But our applicants tended to do poor job of presenting themselves even when compared with the applicants in English, where grant opportunities are just as rare as in Philosophy.

Another part of the problem may be that doing original philosophy is simply harder than, for example, doing fieldwork in a region or archive that no one else has studied. Ph.D. candidates in Philosophy are understandably immature when compared with candidates in other fields.

Still, I have to attribute much of the problem to our discipline's indifference to making itself understood outside a fairly narrow region of academia. The Philosophy applicants came across as not having bothered to explain themselves. I managed to explain what they were up to, but the mere fact that I had to explain it, when the applicants from other disciplines had done their own explaining, put me at an obvious disadvantage as advocate for the Philosophy applications.

I don't know whether our insularity contributes to our underrepresentation among recipients of other national honors. I suspect that it does.

I wonder what others who have served on these kinds of selection committees think?  Non-anonymous comments will be very strongly preferred.

Some Observations on the Philosophy Job Market... (Leiter)

...from a young philosopher serving on his first search committee.  His post has comments open, so it might be interesting to hear whether others concur with his remarks.  (A lot [not all] of what he says strikes me as right on the money.)

A "Guide" for Graduate Students about Publishing (Leiter)

There is some interesting and thoughtful advice here in this short essay by Thom Brooks, a political philosopher at the University of Newcastle.  I'm not sure I agree with all of this (e.g., I don't think American grad students, at least, are well-advised to spend time writing book reviews--but the situation may be different in the UK), but it's worth a read.  I invite comments from readers on the general topic of publishing as a graduate student.  As usual, comments may take awhile to appear, so please only post once.

Advice for Academic Job Seekers

It's that time of year when students on the job market may want to check out the various threads archived under this category.  Now might also be an apt time to read this old post on "The Distribution of Philosophical Talent."

Best of luck to all job seekers! 

Advice for Philosophy Job Seekers

Brian Weatherson (Philosophy, Cornell) has some interesting thoughts.

Becoming a Law Professor

Useful discussion by Orin Kerr (Law, George Washington) and Randy Barnett (Law, BU) all collected here.

Philosophy Hiring

If you haven't looked at the comments here in a few days, you should, since there is much interesting discussion and good advice from a number of philosophers.

Hiring Practices at Less "Elite" Universities

Another philosophy graduate student writes: 

I read with interest the comments concerning gappy CV's and found it piqued when discussion turned to less elite universities.  I, as many graduate students, imagine that I will be headed for a school in the bottom 30-50 or below and would appreciate it if you'd be able to open up a post for comments that might cover these two questions:

1. How are hiring practices different from elite universities to more average ones?  i.e. how are things like time to Ph.D., adjuncting experience vs. publication, private sector work experience, involvement in "fringe" philosophical communities (e.g. a publication in a journal of theology, continental philosophy, etc.) weighed differently by these different schools?

2.  Does anyone have any advice on how to find a) non-elite universities that offer elite-university type positions, i.e. reasonable teaching schedules with time for research and b) how to get a job at one of these universities?

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear answers to these questions, and if you could post them somehow I'd (and I'm sure others) would appreciate it greatly.

One initial observation:  it may be useful to distinguish between those schools which grant the PhD (or other graduate degrees), and which are "research universities" or research-oriented (some of these are more "elite" than others, but my guess is they have a lot in common in terms of hiring practices); versus liberal arts colleges (which themselves divide in to the elite and less elite); and then other colleges and universities which may have undergraduate education as their primary mission, but themselves may vary in selectivity of admissions and the degree of emphasis they do or don't place on research.

Commenters should, of course, feel free to reject or modify these distinctions, as they deem relevant.

Philosophy Grad Student Seeking Advice: How Important is a "Continuous" CV?

A grad student writes with a question that probably affects other as well; here is her question (I've removed personal details):

From what you know about the philosophy job market, how important is it to have a continuous CV? If I am aiming at a tenure-track research position am I shooting myself in the leg by not going on this market straight after grad school? How much will it hurt me to be a visiting scholar or an adjunct for a couple of years, assuming I spend these years writing publishable papers?

My partner, also a philosopher, will be starting a tenure-track position next fall in a US university. Instead of going on the market in 2005 I could just be a visiting scholar at his department for a year or two and then having published a bit more I could hit the market. However, faculty at my department discourage this. There is, I am told, much prejudice against people who have gaps in their CVs. Nobody cares if you take 8 years to finish your PhD, they say, but people do care if you take 6 years and then hang out for another 2 doing  non-tenure-track things. Well, what if people know that [for visa reasons] the 8 year option was not open to me, will I still be penalized?

Another context in which a similar question may arise is if a philosopher was contemplating to have a baby first and then go on the market when the baby is one year old. Is this sort of behavior also punishable, so to speak? Of course, I don’t mean this question normatively, just as a matter of fact.

Comments are open; I invite philosophers to offer their advice, which will no doubt be of value to this student and others confronting comparable issues.

Advice for Academic Job Seekers

Those seeking teaching jobs in law or philosophy may want to review the items in this category, which many job seekers reported finding helpful last year. 

Best of luck to all job seekers during this stressful process!

What should law teaching candidates expect at the "meat market"?

The "meat market" is the annual hiring convention sponsored by the Association of American Law Schools; this year, it is the weekend after the U.S. election (which means most interview teams will either be very depressed or very relieved). One candidate on the teaching market (not a UT graduate) e-mails this morning with a good suggestion:

"Although I know we are all now preoccupied with the upcoming election, I was hoping that you might offer a post addressing what the interviewing committees typically look for in the 20 minute AALS 'meat market' interviews....Perhaps you could offer your insights (I've already read your helpful guide for Texas students), and then leave a comments section open for other law professors to participate?"

Here's what I wrote in the aforementioned on-line guide concerning the "meat market" interviews themselves:

"At the law-school hiring convention in November, try to attend the session (usually scheduled at the beginning of the conference) on interviewing: it may have useful advice. The typical interview proceeds as follows: (1) a couple of minutes of chit-chat when you enter (e.g. 'Did you have Doug Laycock?' 'So, how was it working for Vinson & Elkins in Houston?'); (2) a question either about (a) something you have written (e.g., a student note) or (b) a more open-ended question about your scholarly interests, plans, or research; depending on how effectively you respond, the ensuing discussion can last for the next 10-15 minutes; (3) perhaps some questions about what you would like to teach/what you are able to teach; and (4) 'Do you have any questions for us?' Some good questions to ask are: Is there a writing requirement for students at your school? Are there opportunities for faculty to work with students on independent studies? What sort of research support is available to faculty? Is there summer research support? Are there summer teaching opportunities? How often do you have colloquia with faculty from other schools? What are your school's goals over the next five years? What is the length of the tenure-track, and what are the expectations?

"For the better schools, question (2) is the make-or-break moment in the interview. If you can talk intelligently and clearly for 10-15 minutes about a research project or a scholarly interest, you will quickly become a standout candidate. (Usually, candidates present an outline or 'precis' of a project or thesis that they plan to develop in a job talk, if they are invited back to the school for further interviews. Be prepared to defend your 'precis' in some depth.) Far too many job candidates arrive at interviews having never thought seriously about scholarly issues related to law, and thus are completely unable to speak about any when asked. This is your moment to shine: you show the interviewers that you're serious about scholarship and a scholarly career (that you're not just tired of long hours at your law firm, and that you're not just looking for a 'cushy' academic post to retire into); you impress them with your clarity of thought and expression; you demonstrate your potential as a teacher by your effective communication of ideas and arguments. Ideally, you should rehearse this part of your job interview with faculty advisors prior to the hiring convention (though don't over-rehearse, or you're likely to sound wooden)."

Comments are open; no anonymous posts, please.

Advice for New Job Seekers on the Law Teaching Market

A prospective candidate for law teaching jobs this coming year writes to ask whether I would post advice on the law teaching job market for those new to it. In fact, I have a lengthy document on this subject at my homepage here. It is aimed at Texas students, but much of the information is of general applicability and interest. There is discussion of the mechanics of the job market, interviews, factors to consider and investigate in looking at schools, and the like. I gather, from correspondence, that many law students at other schools utilize this site, which confirms my impression that it will be of value to those not from UT. But any UT alums thinking about law teaching ought to get in touch with me ASAP! At this point, it is probably too late to begin preparations for this year's teaching market, but it is not too early to begin planning for next year. (Note: this latter point is UT-specific--unlike, as far as I can tell, every other top school in the country, we actually prepare detailed information on our candidates, including collecting references in advance, which we then share with hiring schools nationally. This takes time! Most top law schools just leave their grads at sea on the teaching market, unfortunately.)

Here's my basic advice in a nutshell:

(1) Of the 1,000-or-so resumes submitted to the AALS each year, at least 500, probably 700, are non-starters: the candidates are wasting their time.

(2) To not be wasting your time, you should have (a) a very strong academic record from strong academic institutions; (b) at least one post-law school publication; and (c) at least two recommenders who are established legal academics. Your recommenders ought to have agreed, in advance, to recommend you!

That's a slight over-simplification; for the details, see the site above.

More Advice for Academic Job Seekers (in Philosophy specifically): an addendum to Part I of this series

Philosopher Sean Kelly (Princeton) has called to my attention something important, namely, that the American Philosophical Association has issued an official policy statement on offers of employment here. Note, in particular, the APA's recommendation that:

"In normal circumstances, a prospective employee should have at least two weeks for consideration of a written offer from a properly authorized academic officer...."

Thanks to Professor Kelly for this pointer.

Earlier postings in this series are here.

Advice for Academic Job Seekers, Part II

(The first installment in this series is here.) Two questions: How do I prepare for a campus visit, and what information should I get from the school where I'm interviewing? Suppose my spouse/partner is also seeking an academic job. Is it appropriate to raise that issue with the schools interviewing me, and if so, when? What should I be looking for from these schools?

3. How do I prepare for a campus visit, and what information should I get from the school where I'm interviewing?

Law schools and philosophy departments have somewhat different norms on this score. Let's take law first.