In response to these two posts by PhysioProf and at Blue Lab Coats, I thought I'd write a little bit more about how I am limiting my job search and why I refuse to engage in broadcast spawning this time around. It's not merely geography (some would argue that a few of the places I've applied are in undesirable locations), and it's not institution snobbery (well, maybe just a tiny bit - I don't want to be stuck teaching Biology for Nonmajors for the rest of my life or having no time for research whatsoever).
1. I am not applying to jobs in places where my spouse refuses to live (there are very few, to be honest - he's being very good about that!) or could not get a job (this is a bigger problem than the desirability of the geographic location). For instance, I'm very intrigued by a job opening at this school, but what the hell would my husband do while I was there? We absolutely will not do long-distance and we cannot live on one salary (too much debt from grad school!). Both bloggers completely ignore the two-body problem! If I were "25 and single" it would be different... but if I were 25 and single then I'd still be a 2nd-year graduate student.
2. I am not applying to job descriptions that do not fit my work. People, I am a behavioral ecologist, working with wild populations, who uses genetic methods in the lab. I simply cannot apply to listings for Microbiologist, Plant Biologist, Physiologist, Genomics, Bioinformatics, Marine Biologist, etc. These are most of the listings. I am not applying to jobs that say you have to teach Human Anatomy. (1 - can't, 2- don't wanna.)
3. I am not applying to schools that appear to be unaccredited.
4. I am not applying to non-tenure-track jobs (except for the one in Europe because it looks really really cool).
5. I am not applying to Giant R1 Superstar Departments where I obviously do not have a chance in hell and they are probably going to hire a senior person who works with Drosophila because that's what they all do. Seriously, why bother? The thought of even trying to convince them to look at my application makes me want to throw up. At one of these departments, they received 600 applications last year. I am applying to a single R1 because it is just too perfect (for reasons I will not go into right now) but I don't really want to be at an R1.
6. I am not applying to jobs that do not even mention a research agenda in the job ad and have a very heavy teaching load. That is not what I want to do and there's just no way to even pretend to be enthusiastic about such a job.
7. And seriously, it does take time and energy to tailor each job application to each job. It is not just a couple of interchangeable sentences here and there - at least not in my applications this time around. I research their laboratory facilities and the possibilities for field work in the region and address exactly how I will utilize them and how I will offer possibilities for undergraduate research, for example. I look at other members of the department and think about how I would fit in. During the year of 41 job applications, I had the few interchangeable sentences - and it did not work.
And finally, I am in fact totally cool with another year in my postdoc, thank you very much.
Chocolate Chip Pancakes
3 days ago
28 comments:
You stick to your guns. Generic advice like 'apply everywhere' is just that: generic.
I felt this way last year when I absolutely refused to apply for anything that I knew was out of my league or rough geographical area. It was a huge gamble, I applied to one job, got one job and solved my two body permanently this summer when Dr R got a job at the same institution.
If you are single, and without any family commitments, then by all means, apply anywhere, but sometimes another year of postdoc is a good trade off for a better chance of getting a job you would actually stay in for more than 3 years.
"I am in fact totally cool with another year in my postdoc, thank you very much."
Yeah, I'm cool with that too :-)
Good on you for sticking to your guns, as KH said. Your resolve is admirable, and I think the level of effort you are putting into each application (rather than those swap-out sentences) is really going to pay off.
GOOD LUCK! :)
Good luck! I fall into the lovely trailing "spouse" category, so I am limiting my applications to a very specific geographic location. Very frustrating stuff.
You know, I think both those posts are kind of obnoxious. One, what business is it of theirs to comment on how you run your job search? Two, I completely agree with you on this. There is absolutely no point whatsoever in applying to jobs you know you do not want, for whatever reason. Just because someone else in your field has decided that there are *no* jobs they don't want, doesn't mean that you have to agree. Applying for something you know you won't take is a waste of your time and theirs, and it is quite a bit of effort to customize an application properly - you have to do all the research about the school to be able to change those few sentences (if those people are just plugging in "generic SLAC sentences" instead of "generic R1 sentences", then that's probably a reason they're not getting jobs!).
Grr. For some reason this really annoys me on your behalf!
Your last sentence is the key one. I think.
I was on the job market 2 years. The first I broadcast, netting two interviews at two very very very different unis. No offers, but that's OK because I was still ABD and the interviews taught me what sort of place I really wanted to be at.
Year 2, I was desperate. But pregnant. And there were no ads. I applied for ~10 jobs, got one interview, one offer... It's all you need. I'm at the sort of place that I thought I wanted. I like my job.
I'd been wondering here to comment on this minor fracas, and here you give me the perfect venue :).
When applying last year: I *didn't* rule out places based on strict two-body criteria (had I done that, there'd only be about three _good_ US locations!). However, we *did* rule out locations based on geography: nothing south of North Carolina, nothing colder than roughly CT. And also on school type.
Now, on the one hand that also left me with (I think) 27 applications - had the criteria left only 3 I might have reconsidered! - but on the other, I'm not sure that having an offer from SouthEastern Iowa College of NeuroAgriculture would have been a useful bargaining chip :).
Anyway - 27 applications netted ~10 interviews and 6 offers, and honestly I don't think that would have been functionally higher had I sent out 127 apps. I wouldn't stress it ;).
Now I'm irritated.
First, God save me from the heroes over there who Obviously know Exactly what's right for Every Single Person. That's fucking obnoxious. Of course you have reasons for your job search decisions and the fact that you need a follow-up post to defend something that was obvious and clear in the first place strikes me as ridiculous. Both of those posts left me seething and I don't think it's only because I'm overwhelmed and moody lately.
So I'll say this. I searched for over a year and carefully considered where to apply before actually doing so. My restrictions were based largely on geography - I wanted to be able to see my parents more as they get older. I wanted to play a role in my nieces lives. Happiness does not need to be exclusively defined by professional success. And while, yes, it was stressful to wait and hear about a couple jobs I desperately wanted, I ended up with something challenging, lucrative and in a spot that is positively perfect.
So you do what feels right to you. And if you ever have time to come visit with RL, I'll buy alcohol and rant about people who don't get it.
You know, I think both those posts are kind of obnoxious. One, what business is it of theirs to comment on how you run your job search?
Is this some kind of motherfucking joke!? Last I checked, this is a thing called a "blog", where people "post" about shit for the purpose of starting a "discussion", including "posting" on other "blogs" about the same "topic".
No, it's not a joke. There's a big motherfucking difference between saying, "Gee, it was really interesting to read Blogger X talk about their job search, because they're approaching it really differently from the way that I would, and here's why I'm approaching it differently," and saying, "OMG how the HELL can you restrict a job search, that's so idiotic, you have to apply for EVERYTHING!" Posting about the same topic does NOT have to mean dissing someone else's choices. Sheesh.
I mean, you're free to write whatever you like. And I'm free to consider it obnoxious.
Well, despite all of the controversy, I wish you the best. Nice that you are comfortable with your postdoc gig in the event that you have to wait it out another year. Options are good.
Makes total sense to me. Maybe because that's pretty close to our approach as well. I agree to trail, and LP applies only to places we both think are good ideas. We both appreciate the other's willingness to cooperate.
Generic advice isn't so generic when it is coming from people who have gotten jobs themselves and who sit on panels of people who run the job searches.
It's all well and good to say you will do things your own way. It's all well and good to think you're going to be different from everybody else. Just hope that it works out for you. Wanting to show everybody up doesn't mean jack if you end up unhappy and unsatisfied with where you landed. Anybody who doesn't want to take the advice offered on blogs and elsewhere about how to go about a job search can see how that works out for them. Please let us all know, so we can add your outlier data point to our datasets.
I had one of my PIs decide he knew the job for me. He didn't believe in the "blanket approach," and took that to mean anything more than 1-2 positions. The one he picked out for me was at an undergrad only institution--and my research plans require hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment (i.e. no-go). He also then refused to write me letters for all the places I applied to. He's a pretty big guy in my field, and he gave me very bad advice about finding a position, and nearly killed my ability (and confidence) to get a job at all. The days of boutique, mentor-gifted-perfect-position-handed-into-one's-lap are over in just about every field. Thus, again, that generic advice is actually generic enough that it really does apply to almost everyone looking for a faculty position.
I spent about a year and a half applying and getting no interviews, to the point where I was going to say screw it and go work at my husband's company. I finally got the job I have now, which is absolutely PERFECT for me, because I applied for a job that was described on sciencecareers.org as something pretty well outside the realm of my research plans and experience. I put the time into crafting that custom cover letter, and it paid off: they liked the look of me so much they created another position just for me even though they hired somebody else who "fit" the position they had advertised.
I took the advice, all various sides of it, and I would not be here doing something I am falling increasingly in love with if I hadn't. The point of applying to as many places as possible is to not limit yourself--and if you don't like people in the business "telling you what to do" and "how to live your life," well then kids, you might be in the wrong business. In academia, that kind of communication is usually called "mentoring" and is thought of as a positive thing.
I look at what I just wrote and... am not sure if it is even coherent, lol... but anyway my point is bloggers can say whatever they want, isn't it nice that the internet is a free country?
Advice from anyone is generic if that person doesn't actually know the person to whom they're giving it - I don't care how many jobs they've got/searches they've sat on.
Look, Brazen Hussy hasn't said anything that suggests she isn't aware that limiting her search might well limit her success. She hasn't suggested that somehow she's different from everyone else and will magically get all the jobs she's applied for. She's just said that for her (and no one else!), certain jobs are not worth applying for. She hasn't tried to show anyone up in any way.
FWIW (since anecdata seems to rule the day), in my second go-round on the job market I applied for 4 positions. And I got initial interviews with all of them, then 1 offer. Which was was fine, because they were the jobs I was interested in that and I'd have taken any of them. I actually thought about what I had to offer and what the schools had to offer and chose those 4 schools because their positions truly fit my qualifications and interests, and I truly fit their advertised needs. What would have been the purpose in applying for 15 additional jobs I wasn't interested in and which wouldn't have been interested in me? Besides being able to say I applied for everything?
What I don't understand is why people find the idea of limiting a search quite so threatening. Brazen Hussy has never said, EVERYONE should limit their search. So why does her post about her own choice to do so for herself send everyone into such a tizzy of saying she's WRONG!!!!!!!!!? I mean, if it's such a bad idea to limit a search, she's clearly not going to be competition for anyone else in the field!
Could it simply be that the idea that someone isn't willing to subordinate EVERYTHING in their life to getting an academic job is immensely threatening to those who are?
Look, I will not (beyond this final note) continue an argument on someone else's comment roll (although, hey, that would be quite exciting if it happened on mine and I wouldn't mind at all). BUT New Kid, you're kinda playing up to internet-fite stereotype here by assuming all the same things you're saying the people you reply to are assuming. Why do you assume any of us are threatened by someone doing things a different way? Why do you assume someone who gives (internet) advice is trying to boss someone else around from the root of their own insecurities? Why do you react so strongly to someone getting blunt, candid advice that they might be making a mistake? Like I said, in the world of academia (and real life for the most part), this advice is considered "mentoring," a positive thing. Mentoring doesn't always mean offering to hold and set up a Care Bears Tea Party.
And, just like advice can be given from any random direction on the internet, it can also thusly be ignored. So, she should feel free to ignore all advice from the internet and pat herself on the back when things work out her own way.
It's all well and good to say you will do things your own way. It's all well and good to think you're going to be different from everybody else.
Did I say any of that? Did I?? Seriously?
The truth, if anyone still cares, is that I am doing it exactly the way that the successful people in my field, people that I personally know, in real life, from my lab and my university, have done it. I am taking advice from my advisers, from my letter writers, from former postdocs in my lab, from faculty members, from books, Chronicle of Higher Ed columns, etc. And I'm suddenly supposed to listen to a couple of strangers in a different field from me on the internet?
People have indeed gotten into quite the tizzy over my choices in life, and I share New Kid's bafflement.
Since I'm no longer in academia, perhaps I'm misguided. But my understanding of mentoring, at least here in the business world, is that it involves an actual relationship between people, a relationship entered into intentionally and mutually, with at least some degree of respect and trust, not a bunch of crap on the blog of someone you have never met or have not sought out, whose ideas and experience may or may not be relevant or applicable.
Some people's lives must be awfully empty for them to get so worked up about some other blogger/academic's approach to the job market.
Agggh can't... help... replying again...
I was actually talking about the angry responses you got Dr. BH, saying things like "you can go your own way... go your own wayy-ayy-ayy" and "how dare they tell you what to do!". Your reasoning and rationale were perfectly relevant to yourself and your needs, and not internet-fite-ish. You indeed can listen or not listen to whoever you want.
I think the tizzy is more over the desire to make sure the wider, non-commenting job searching crowd takes your particular method with a grain of salt, and considers it as a probably less common, less safe way to go about it. So, you know, in other words, to tell as many other people what to do as possible, not just to pick on you as your commenters seem to have felt. :P
Why do you assume any of us are threatened by someone doing things a different way? Why do you assume someone who gives (internet) advice is trying to boss someone else around from the root of their own insecurities?
Because of the vehemence of the posts linked to in the original post here, which I found way out of proportion to BH's original post. Again, there's a big difference between saying, "You know, this is one way to approach things, but here are some reasons to reconsider," and saying, "EVERYONE has to apply to EVERYTHING or they're an idiot who will NEVER get a job!!!" The latter isn't what I consider mentoring.
Why do you react so strongly to someone getting blunt, candid advice that they might be making a mistake?
Let's see... because they didn't ASK for that advice? And because the "advice" didn't seem actually to consider that BH had thought long and hard about what she was doing and therefore didn't take seriously that she knew what was best for her? And because the "advice" reinforces a lot of ideas that I think actually harm people in academia and allow the awful academic job market to perpetuate itself?
And why are you over here making a big deal out of this? If I wanted to confront PhysioProf's/et al's posts, I'd have commented over there. Over here, I'm expressing support for BH.
I applied to 61 jobs when I was hunting 13 years ago. It was a bad time to be a post-doc looking. I had three phone interviews, one fly-to interview and was offered that one job, which I wanted. Much later I was offered one that I had wanted, but had been reduced to non-tenure track. So now I am teaching about 11 hours of lecture a week to a total of about 300 students (no TAs), have three grad students and two undergrads in my research lab, and find myself in the "fully diploid" ghetto in my department. I have tenure and like my students at least. And word verification is a bir=tch when you are dyslexic.
Arlenna, thank you for the clarification. I do appreciate it.
However, I really need to say this one more time: my job search method is NOT AT ALL uncommon in my field. I am not kidding or exaggerating when I say that this is how everyone I know has done their job searches - and they were successful. I am quite certain that it is a different game in microbiology and other areas of biology. And maybe other behavioral ecologists will disagree with me. But I'm not being a "maverick." (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
And let's be honest - to apply for everything is the knee-jerk reaction. How many people actually need to be told to do that? I have had to force myself to stop and consider and do this the way that I believe to be the right way for me. And I have not once offered advice on the "right way" to do a job search; I am simply telling my own story.
BTW, although I applied to ones outside my league, and outside a great fit, I did not apply to any that had NO research, were not tenure track, had NO teaching, or were in the Deep South. I have no tolerance for heat and both teaching and research were important to me. I had an American Cancer Society fellowship, 5 first author papers, and 3 meddle authors, all in good journals, JBC, MCB, J of V, and even Cell. ONE tenure track offer. It was not good.
Hmm... well this is all very interesting to me because it hits very close to home. I'm not a post doc, rather I'm a pre-doc looking for an internship in a field where last year there were 800+ more applicants than there were positions (for the 'top grade' position). I am middle aged and married with numerous needy pets and a husband who has his own particular requirements. It's not an easy set of factors to balance trying to find the perfect situation for everyone involved.
In my case the blanket approach is pretty much necessary to assure getting an interview and there is NO method that will ensure getting an offer. When I consider the expense both in money and in time removed from ongoing research/work involved in flying all over the nation interviewing I just can't see doing so in a place I would never consider living, where I would be separated from my husband, would have to give up my pets, or for a position that holds no interest for me. Sure the experience would be wonderful, but only justifiable if I won a big juicy lottery and had 28 hour days for working on my dissertation.
So I am doing very much the same thing you are, with very much the same fuss being made of my choices on all sides. I listen to my mentors and to my internet connections and so forth, and then I sit back and think what it is I need to be happy in my life.
I also think there is a box, and it is not required that we all stay within it. As a matter of fact, I think it's full to overflowing and far past time people discovered that there is a WHOLE WORLD of possibilities outside the damned carton!!!
Best of luck on your job search. :)
Sounds like a reasonable strategy, better to focus on what you want than waste time and energy on jobs you have no serious interest in anyway. Still scary, I'm sure.
BTW: Tag! You're it! ... when you're not writing awesome applications. ;)
I think Kim's comment over at DM's is kind of telling, about throwing out so many apps from people obviously "broadcasting" (although that's a different field) - yeah, stick to your guns. Best wishes on what you find; I'm sure it will be awesome!
be aware that the concept of "tenure" is a North American construct. Oz, NZ and the UK don't have it and I don't think Europe does - might not be a good basis to rule out jobs there... In Oz, NZ and the UK, you are given a permanent position - if you're good enough to get the job, then you're good enough to keep it. If you want to come back to North America, then you can use those positions to move directly into a tenured position (plenty do it). Also, those countries typically have only one person with the title Prof in a department, an associate prof here would be a lecturer there. I just would hate for you to write off great jobs for reasons that are really factors in other countries...
Perfectly reasonable post, and I wouldn't put too much stock in the stock PP response.
It does depend on the field, and I am coming to believe more and more than it is different for women.
My impression is that when men broadcast apply, they're covering their bases. When women do it we're "unfocused."
I think you're better off doing what you're doing, and this is what I'll do if I get to the point of applying again, since as you know I also tried the broadcasting approach before.
I just wish the whole process were, you know, systematic. It's scattershot and stupid the way it is now, and I think it needs a major overhaul, just like scientific publishing it is a holdover from another time and makes no sense anymore.
Anyway good luck and keep up the blogging.
Post a Comment