tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post8896539993074302688..comments2024-03-14T04:53:49.513-05:00Comments on FemaleScienceProfessor: UnchosenFemale Science Professorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15288567883197987690noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-59336650667111156452013-03-01T23:41:28.694-06:002013-03-01T23:41:28.694-06:00I have served on numerous search committees, and s...I have served on numerous search committees, and sadly the idea of 'fit' usually has a gender connotation that discriminates against women because the vast majority of the search committee are men (or entirely men). In my experience, the people doing this don't realize their bias, and they can't always explain why they chose the male candidate over the female for an interview. I have also seen this happen to older candidates and to a lesser extent, because of race. In fact, I have seen this happen to female candidates who had Nature publications, and yet that is ignored in favor of some unmeasurable marker for the male candidate. I do not think my experience is untypical. I have seen this behavior in 4 different major universities in the USA. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-13455005146141171972013-02-28T22:39:34.128-06:002013-02-28T22:39:34.128-06:00Most jobs are not at R1s (anyone sending out 100-...Most jobs are not at R1s (anyone sending out 100-200 letters is looking at many lower ranked places) and outside of that, maybe even there, set up costs are a huge issue.<br /><br />Make sure you tailor your project to the resources that will be available.<br /><br />Teaching loads also differ. Your letter should take this into account. EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-51677793852358737502013-02-28T14:28:43.537-06:002013-02-28T14:28:43.537-06:00I do resent being asked to send dozens of letters ...<i>I do resent being asked to send dozens of letters to places where it's obvious the applicant doesn't have a prayer.</i><br /><br />Obvious to whom? It's tough from the perspective of the applicant to get a good sense of what our chances are. Remember this is largely a black box to many of us. We don't get feed back other than getting an interview or not.<br /><br />Frank advice is tough to come by IME. I talk to plenty of TT folks in my area an no one wants to be the person to say "you're good but not that good". I practically had to drag an admission that funding is important out of my advisor. <br />Virtually everyone is told they're "competitive" and that things are very unpredictable. So why not apply for everything.<br /><br />There is this at times a weird discrepancy between advice given to candidates and how they are actually treated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-46985965804878049932013-02-28T12:25:31.109-06:002013-02-28T12:25:31.109-06:00@GMP: This is Anon 12:14. Fantastic that you are...@GMP: This is Anon 12:14. Fantastic that you are so magnanimous, but I do get annoyed when the applicant is applying for jobs that I know they won't get. I am fully committed to support the applicants, and I send letters wherever they want, but I do resent being asked to send dozens of letters to places where it's obvious the applicant doesn't have a prayer.<br /><br />@Anon 11:37: It doesn't look good when your advisor doesn't submit a letter at all. Late may be inconsequential or may mean the letter cannot be included, depending on how the deadline is dealt with. But people also should send gentle reminders to their letter writers of approaching deadlines. If you gave them a list 2 months ago, a lot of people will honestly forget -- it doesn't mean they don't care or think highly of you. It just means they are super busy and have other urgent things in between.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-23661144705163998792013-02-28T11:37:45.173-06:002013-02-28T11:37:45.173-06:00I wonder what it looks like when your postdoc advi...I wonder what it looks like when your postdoc advisor can't be bothered to write your letters on time. Anyone on hiring committees care to comment on this one?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-54614078379745561572013-02-27T17:51:56.145-06:002013-02-27T17:51:56.145-06:00God, I'm glad I decided against the tenure tra...God, I'm glad I decided against the tenure track years ago. I have a super job with good pay and stable employment at a university and the only thing I don't have is the ego-gratification of knowing I belong to the TT club. I don't miss it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-7877783387863436862013-02-27T13:42:08.534-06:002013-02-27T13:42:08.534-06:00Regarding what Anon at 12:14 wrote: I don't th...Regarding what Anon at 12:14 wrote: I don't think candidates should worry about irritating letter writers. When I agree to write a letter for someone, I assume I will write as many as they need and as often as they need, until the day they no longer have use for them (or one of us drops dead). Writing evaluation letters of all sorts is part of my job. Furthermore, recommendation letters show your commitment to support an individual and it is not an imposition. I think everyone is aware of how difficult it is to get a job, the last thing you want is for someone to hold back from applying broadly because they don't want to annoy letter writers. GMPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17872461021953583473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-69331814000960138732013-02-27T12:14:39.479-06:002013-02-27T12:14:39.479-06:00Beware that some of the statements made above are ...Beware that some of the statements made above are field-specific. In my field, having a manuscript listed as "submitted" to Nature or a peer-reviewed journal is considered to be virtually as good as a published paper, and may be included in the regular pub list on your CV. But not "in prep". Also, in my field, it does not make sense to apply to dozens and dozens of positions -- first, there aren't that many, and second, there really is no point applying to a place where it's pretty clear that you're not a great fit. That's a waste of time for everyone, and it will irritate your letter writers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-57567182868898131682013-02-27T10:28:56.710-06:002013-02-27T10:28:56.710-06:00"The truth is, son, it's a buyer's ma..."The truth is, son, it's a buyer's market<br />They can afford to pick and choose" -Billy BraggAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-75115834008976734672013-02-27T10:26:16.464-06:002013-02-27T10:26:16.464-06:00Warning: blunt statements ahead. Publication recor...Warning: blunt statements ahead. Publication record is just one element for a strong candidate. There are a lot of candidates with strong publication records. We get candidates through with dozens of papers, many in good journals. What else can you show us?<br /><br />Our department (at an R1) looks very carefully at "likelihood of funding". There are several aspects to this. Has the candidate demonstrated past ability to be funded, through graduate and/or postdoctoral fellowships? Is the candidate's proposed research a good obvious fit for one of the federal funding agencies? Are you bringing a project with you from your postdoc with preliminary data already collected (different expectations from different departments - so also a fit issue)? If their research proposal came to us in the grant review process, is it competitive for funding?<br /><br />If you go to 3-4 conferences a year, have you won young investigator research awards for your posters, or have you been selected for talks that demonstrate real excitement for you and your work within your (sub)-field? Do you have any other external metrics that the committee can point to that demonstrate that you are exceptional, not just good?<br /><br />Do you have evidence of a strong teaching record? At our R1, we are required to discuss this - a strong teaching record will not make up for a poor research record, but a poor teaching record will sink a good research proposal.<br /><br />One potential warning sign for me is that you say you are using the same references for faculty positions that you did for your postdoctoral applications. If your proposed faculty research projects are within the field of your postdoctoral research, then more recent evaluations of your potential within your chosen research field might be more appropriate. A non-advisor letter from your graduate career has to be pretty spectacular to make up for the recency bias. <br /><br />Your letters have to either say you are among the very best researchers that have come from your advisor's group, or your advisor has to be someone with a really strong history of successful proteges. If there are multiple postdocs on the search from your current lab, this can really count against you - because you are competing directly against your labmates for the openings in your subfield. Can your subfield support that?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-62191867160365063312013-02-26T19:06:19.658-06:002013-02-26T19:06:19.658-06:00Dear Anon who wrote to FSP,
To be clear (re: lett...Dear Anon who wrote to FSP,<br /><br />To be clear (re: letters), as someone else hinted at, it's not necessarily that one of your letter-writers doesn't think highly of you...but some people are not good letter writers. It's the difference between, "I most highly recommend X, as he/she is an excellent scientist who has an extremely bright future" and "I cannot possibly overstate how highly I recommend X. In my 30 years as a PI, he/she is quite simply the best scientist whom I have ever trained, and this includes several former trainees who are now Chairs of the top 5 Departments in my field. He/she is simply destined to be a star, and I can guarantee you will not find a more impressive person or scientist." You get the idea. Even if they think very highly of you, are they *good* at writing letters, per se? The first letter above should certainly get you a good postdoc position. But it might not get you that faculty interview...<br /><br />Re: numbers of schools to apply to, it's impossible to generalize these things across subfields of science. I'd ask other people in your subfield how many they applied to and how many interview they got. In my subfield, I applied to less than 15 and got 4 interviews (including one at a top 5 school, the rest top ~20), fwiw.<br /><br />Good luck!<br />Anon from 2/25/2013 11:21:00 PMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-49217433459684964672013-02-26T15:48:29.964-06:002013-02-26T15:48:29.964-06:0015 positions is not enough, period.
Last year I a...15 positions is not enough, period.<br /><br />Last year I applied to 105 places, got 6 invites for onsite interviews. Declined one invitation and interviewed in 5 places. Then I got 3 offers letters -- the other 2 places contacted me after I had accepted my current position.<br /><br />I had the luxury of choosing my best option and negotiating very good conditions, I am happy with my job.<br /><br />Summary: you to work hard for it, apply, apply, and then apply some more.<br /><br />Too many stars have to "align" for landing a successful position....<br /><br />I have a very good friend in top-ranked US university, he submitted 200+ applications.....got a great position with an awesome start-up....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-71339320594771482312013-02-26T12:59:45.301-06:002013-02-26T12:59:45.301-06:009:05 am anon:
15 positions? That's it? In my ...9:05 am anon:<br /><br />15 positions? That's it? In my experience, my interview invitation rate was around 10%. Offer rate was around 20%. As physioprof pointed out, you need to apply to "dozens and dozens" of jobs.<br /><br />None of the other commenters mentioned money. If you have two applicants with equivalent qualifications, I think naturally a committee would choose the one who has hir own funding over the one who doesn't. Having your own funding beforehand is definitely a plus.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-83527489978120986672013-02-26T09:05:28.111-06:002013-02-26T09:05:28.111-06:00Hi All,
I am the person who wrote to FSP about th...Hi All,<br /><br />I am the person who wrote to FSP about this. First of all, thank you all for the comments, I wanted to get an insider's view on the process and I definitely got it!<br /><br />I thought I'd clarify some of the points raised here as well as provide more information.<br /><br />1) Reference letters: this is a very good point, after all reference letters are the only part of your application that you cannot control! Still in my case I have asked these people for references before when applying for postdoctoral fellowships and I got all the ones I had applied for. So they must be pretty good... Still, will think about this again...<br /><br />2) What is a fancy university? In this case I really meant fancy! MIT, Harvard, Caltech, Princeton and a few other. Basically top 5-6 in the US. In my case I got my PhD from a foreign university that ranks in the top 25 in the World, but I wonder how many people actually know that...<br /><br />3) Infrastructure: that is a very good point, though it does not apply in my case. My research makes use of computer models, so all I need is to get access to a supercomputer, which is usually granted via NSF. The only money I would need is for consumables and to hire people<br /><br />4) I have applied to ~ 15 positions in the States. So I have enough statistics :) I have received 7-8 rejections so far, the other applications are still under review.<br /><br />5) Network: I do try to network as much as possible. I usually go to 3-4 big conferences per year and meet lot of people there. I also went to the career development seminars that are usually organised at these conferences.<br /><br />6) I got people from all levels (student to Prof) to read my application. That was really useful, because each of them spotted something different. Nobody spotted the "in prep" publications though :)<br /><br />All in all, based on your comments and FSP blog entry, it seems that t-t applications are a many-body problem with so many factors to take into account. I guess it's a matter of statistics, the more you apply the higher the chance that somebody notices you! <br /><br />Thanks again for the feedback, will make some changes to my application package for when I apply next time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-58867162717457550512013-02-25T23:21:53.478-06:002013-02-25T23:21:53.478-06:00What GMP said.
We are also having a search right ...What GMP said.<br /><br />We are also having a search right now, and of the 100++ candidates...it has been really difficult to decide who to interview, as the top ~30 are all absolutely stellar. So stellar that we ended up inviting 10 - and even choosing those 10 was difficult. At the end of the day, we had to somehow rank those top 30 as best we could based on fit for the Institution, the Department, etc etc.<br /><br />If you are in that top 30 pile, you will not get interviews everywhere you apply....but you ought to get interviews at some places (and not others). I know this answer may be frustrating in some ways, but look at it this way: it is possible that there is nothing 'wrong' with your application, but that it's just a very deep applicant field and that everyone needs to apply to more places to get x number of interviews.<br /><br />That being said, if you aren't getting interviews even with a large n of applications, and everything else about your application seems stellar, I'd think hard about who you've asked to write your letters. Letters can make a big difference to a search committee, and that's the one thing about your application that you don't directly control.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-2368570611924797722013-02-25T19:18:59.675-06:002013-02-25T19:18:59.675-06:00A reader asks the perennial painful questions abou...<i>A reader asks the perennial painful questions about why others were interviewed for a tenure-track faculty position and not them, despite their PhD from an excellent university and their apparently better* publication record compared to some being interviewed.</i><br /><br />If they are talking literally about a single position that they applied for, then this is a stupid fucken question. There are a million different reasons--or non-reasons--why one might not get invited to interview at any single particular institution one applied to. It is a fool's game to even worry about that. Applying for entry-level tenure-track faculty jobbes is a statistical process, and you need to apply for as many jobbes as possible. In the biomedical sciences, this means applying for dozens and dozens of jobbes.<br /><br />Now, if you are not getting *any* interviews at all after having applied for dozens and dozens of jobbes, while others are getting multiple interviews, then it makes sense to ask why.Comrade Physioprofhttp://freethoughtblogs.com/physioprofnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-42549614571103766382013-02-25T17:59:07.701-06:002013-02-25T17:59:07.701-06:00The whole thing, from writing grant proposals to i...The whole thing, from writing grant proposals to interviews (even once you get those) is one big tombola. Too many uncontrollable variables that could swing you either way and way too many excellent candidates in the pool. That's my honest (though a bit tired) summary of science after a draining year on the job market and interview trail.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-26011482928212016012013-02-25T15:09:25.568-06:002013-02-25T15:09:25.568-06:00No one mentioned "yeah, but we were really ho...No one mentioned "yeah, but we were really hoping for X Y or Z" where X Y and Z are combinations of gender and ethnicity?<br /><br />I've seen it go both ways: once with a tenure decision and at least once with a hire. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-39115245853886254862013-02-25T15:03:04.750-06:002013-02-25T15:03:04.750-06:00There can be so many factors that are not at all a...There can be so many factors that are not at all apparent to the applicant. For example, one year we passed over an outstanding applicant because we could not accommodate some of the infrastructure the applicant would need. As silly as it sounds, it is not always about the qualifications. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-74477297174723179442013-02-25T14:00:13.988-06:002013-02-25T14:00:13.988-06:00Letter writers can be weird. We've had cases w...Letter writers can be weird. We've had cases where promotion candidates get four stellar letters plus a lukewarm one with no discernible reason for the lack of enthusiasm for the candidate. This leaves us wondering if there is some basis for that or if it's just that the letter writer doesn't know how to write a proper one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-65863472251067767372013-02-25T13:43:18.743-06:002013-02-25T13:43:18.743-06:003838I think we need to define what is meant by &qu...3838I think we need to define what is meant by "fancy US university". <br /><br />My department favors graduates from top ten universities, but in every interview cycle we have people from the top 30, and we have reached well below that for some rather outstanding candidates.<br /><br />Now, top students tend to go to top universities so it shouldn't surprise anyone to see "fancy-US-universities" seemingly over-represented. <br /><br />In terms of not getting an interview, having been in search committees there are so many reasons why your number might not have come up, including the fact that some middle-of-the-pack places purposely take a pass on top candidates as they have a very low success ration attracting those.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-8233188854867038882013-02-25T12:47:00.732-06:002013-02-25T12:47:00.732-06:00Anonymous 12:07 -- Just don't list manuscripts...Anonymous 12:07 -- Just don't list manuscripts in preparation. You can describe works in progress in the research statement but the CV is not the place for listing imaginary papers. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-18304697696137584932013-02-25T12:45:47.856-06:002013-02-25T12:45:47.856-06:00That's a good point about the letters. Some pe...That's a good point about the letters. Some people just don't know how to write a convincing, supportive letter, even if they have a strong positive opinion about the candidate. We take into account the well known phenomenon of Americans using amazing adjectives and Europeans and others being more restrained in letters, but even considering this, some people are better letter writers than others, it's not fair to the candidate, and there's really not much that can be done about it except hope that hiring committees will blame the writer and not the candidate. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-86294458344108060582013-02-25T12:23:39.909-06:002013-02-25T12:23:39.909-06:00In my physics department, we look closely at the r...In my physics department, we look closely at the research proposal and look for a focus on science, as opposed to techniques. Or at least, if there's a really cool technique, we want to see evidence that the applicant is driven by science rather than just improving their technique. So we occasionally don't interview a candidate who has lots of top-notch publications if they seem too technique/application oriented without enough offsetting science.<br /><br />Of course, an engineering or applied physics department might well have the opposite opinion. And I think it's highly likely other physics departments might also disagree with us. My comments are more to show that one can have an outstanding publication record and creative research plans and get all the right advice from your mentors, and yet still not fit with the department.a physicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795655141660959996noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29059245.post-2624288520385827432013-02-25T12:07:43.610-06:002013-02-25T12:07:43.610-06:00As a related question (not knowing what this parti...As a related question (not knowing what this particular person's package looks like), I wonder if having too many publications in preparation looks bad rather than good - meaning, this person has the tendency to start things and then get distracted, which would not be a good attribute in an assistant professor who needs to know how to crank things out. Would this be less damning if you are not the first author on many of these (even adding some kind of statement like 'I contributed xyz experimentally' or something, to make it clear your part of the work is done?), or more damning because it still looks like you get involved in too many things?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com