banner
You are not using a standards compliant browser. Because of this you may notice minor glitches in the rendering of this page. Please upgrade to a compliant browser for optimal viewing:
Firefox
Internet Explorer 7
Safari (Mac and PC)
Post Archive
2014 (0)2011 (2)
January (2)

*sigh*
Friday, January 7, 2011

Update on crazy
Monday, January 3, 2011
2010 (45)
December (9)

In need of a break...
Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Finding the "Merry" in Christmas
Thursday, December 23, 2010

Down time
Wednesday, December 22, 2010

The pump and science juggling act
Monday, December 20, 2010

But I don't wanna go to work
Saturday, December 18, 2010

Rejections
Thursday, December 16, 2010

In reverse
Monday, December 13, 2010

Back in the lab, sort of...
Wednesday, December 8, 2010

12 months of blogging...easy enough
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
November (7)

Open letter to committee head
Tuesday, November 30, 2010

By popular demand - The Arrival
Wednesday, November 24, 2010

How to do it all
Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Cabin Fever
Friday, November 19, 2010

Donation reward - new pics!
Friday, November 12, 2010

Totally non-science news
Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Why am I doing this?
Saturday, November 6, 2010
October (12)

Bribe time
Thursday, October 28, 2010

On the market - what to do with a priority score
Wednesday, October 27, 2010

DonorsChoose - more projects to support
Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Oh, the guilt...
Monday, October 25, 2010

Priority Score Confusion
Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Working from home sucks; aka "Preeclampsia for Dummies"
Monday, October 18, 2010

Editor's choice
Thursday, October 14, 2010

Let the obsessing begin
Tuesday, October 12, 2010

DonorChoose - start giving!
Monday, October 11, 2010

Careful what I say...
Friday, October 8, 2010

To dance or teach...
Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Tailspin
Sunday, October 3, 2010
September (6)

Challenges at the bench
Monday, September 27, 2010

What am I really?
Monday, September 20, 2010

A double standard
Friday, September 17, 2010

The Little Lab Bench That Could
Saturday, September 11, 2010

What I'm glad I didn't know before...
Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Round Up: 8/29 - 9/4
Sunday, September 5, 2010
August (11)

Procrastinators beware...
Friday, August 27, 2010

You don't need no stinkin' permission
Monday, August 23, 2010

I'm still alive, just buried
Saturday, August 21, 2010

NanoKids!
Thursday, August 12, 2010

Dr. O's advice to new grad students
Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Open Letter
Monday, August 9, 2010

What you should know as a new TT faculty
Saturday, August 7, 2010

Tagged?!?
Friday, August 6, 2010

A little professionalism, please
Thursday, August 5, 2010

How picky is too picky?
Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Hello LabSpaces!
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Rate This Post
Total votes: 0
Blogger Profile

Dr. O

After a frustrating year on the tenure-track job hunt, my eyes are still on the prize, and I've learned that sheer will might be the most important quality required for this career track.

My posts are presented as opinion and commentary and do not represent the views of LabSpaces Productions, LLC, my employer, or my educational institution.

Blog RSS Feed
RSS Add to My Yahoo Add to Google
Recent Comments
Comment by Lab Mom in *sigh*

I'll miss you!  But I will definitely catch your other blog! . . .Read More
Jan 09, 2011, 1:53am
Comment by Dr Becca, Ph.D. in *sigh*

Updating my blogroll! See you (and Monkey!) back at blogspot! . . .Read More
Jan 07, 2011, 10:42pm
Comment by Suzy in *sigh*

I am looking forward to reading more about Monkey too. Take care! . . .Read More
Jan 07, 2011, 7:44pm
Awesome Stuff


Thursday, December 16, 2010

I've always heard most TT search committees don't bother contacting applicants with rejections, but that wasn't my experience last year. I received formal rejection letters, by snail- or e-mail, for approximately 75% of the applications that I sent out last year, and all but two of the remaining jobs informed me of the rejection when I requested an update in August. A few of the committees even updated me on the status of my application as it moved through the screening process. So it seems that, at least in my field, search committees are pretty forthcoming about TT applicant status. Undoubtedly, this is good information to have as I move forward with this year's search, for better or worse.

Last week, right on time, I received the first rejection letters for my current TT job search. I've received three so far, out of about 20 jobs for which I've applied. While it's disheartening to receive these rejections, I know this means that the search committees are meeting and triaging, and there's a chance that at least some of the committees have moved my application forward through this first screening. Additionally, the current rejection letters seem to be distinct from last year's, which were mostly vague, only stating that they had decided not to continue to pursue me as a candidate/applicant. This year, the rejection letters are providing a much more detailed account of the search - how many applications were received, how many were selected for further review, etc - as well as a statement of how impressive my application was. I'm not sure what this means. Is my application really that much more impressive this year? Or do the current search committees/chairs just want to make all their applicants "feel good" about their rejection? Did everyone receive this same "feel-good" letter? Or did the committee send out a letter that says "Sorry, but you suck" to those who were in no way competitive for the position?

The TT search remains a black box. Sure, I have networking connections that can give me clues as to how my application fared, but I'll never know the whole story. This is probably what makes the whole process so frustrating. I have no idea what the committees are looking for - sometimes they don't even know. All I can do is make my application as convincing as possible - examine the ad and departmental website thoroughly, talk to people familiar with the department about unspoken aspects of the search, address what they seem to care about most in my cover letter, make my CV and research (and teaching*) statement(s) as strong as possible, and cross my fingers as I send my packet out into cyberspace. It's a total crapshoot, but the only way to get into the game.

 

 

*Teaching statements are suddenly becoming a more common requirement this year, at least according to mine and others' experience (total anecdata of course). Still, only about half the jobs to which I applied requested a teaching statement in addition to the research summary.

This post has been viewed: 602 time(s)

Blog Comments

Dr Becca, Ph.D.
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Ugh, already? I feel like last year I didn't get them until Feb/March. Interesting that they're breaking down the stats a bit better--like you, my rejections in the past were just a quick "we have decided not to act further on your application."

Agreed, there's a certain level at which you just can't know. I think a lot of it will really have to do with how much of a void you'd be filling in the department, with respect to your research topic and perspective.

Good luck, Dr O! I've got my fingers crossed for you!


Gerty-Z
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

Bummer! :-(  Rejections always suck. I was always kind of glad that I got rejection letters (because at least I knew). But they were generally form letters, even if they did have a lot of information about the searh. As for teaching statements, we don't specifically ask for one but we do have some teaching requirements. So it can be a bonus to put something about teaching in your cover, apparently. I would not have guessed this but there are some folks that will use your "lack of enthusiasm" about teaching as a demerit. I find this ridiculous--if we care about teaching then ask for a teaching statement But I digress.

The good news: you are still in the running at ~85% of the places you applied!!


Dr. O
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike
@Becca - I received most of my rejections last year in the spring; I think these early ones are a result of being immediately triaged :( Luckily, 2 of the 3 were long shot jobs that I had little hope for.

@Gerty - I've actually included a short para about teaching/mentoring in my cover, which I vary based on whether the school is an undergrad/med school. Good to know this is a plus!
msphd

Guest Comment

Weird! My rejections have ALWAYS stated how many applications they received. Even when other places did not bother to send me a rejection letter at all, it was either "reject with statistics" or no response.

It is pretty early in the season. Usually the rejections continue through April.


Doctor Zen
The University of Texas-Pan American
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

msphd: Curiosity about size of applicant pool is understandable.

But in our search committee training, we are specifically told not to reveal the size of the applicant pool. The size of the applicant pool has nothing whatsoever to do with an applicant's qualifications for the job, reasons for rejection, etc.

 


Prof-like Substance
Rate Post:

Like 0 Dislike

It depends a lot on who is writing the letter. At some institutions, HR handles the rejections whereas at others it is done by the committee or committee Chair. Usually HR will give you the stats and nothing but the stats or do the "meh, sorry." approach. When the committee handles it, they tend to give a bit more feedback, but might not necessarily give you the stats. I have gotten both the best and worst (two sentences, three spelling mistakes) rejection letters from committee Chairs, so there is huge variability. Hang in there and wait for the ones that aren't rejections.

Comrade Physioprof

Guest Comment
"I'm not sure what this means."It doesn't mean shitte for dicke. These are boilerplate rejections letters sent out en masse by an admin flunkie in the department business office.
Add Comment?
Comments are closed 2 weeks after initial post.
Friends