The academic blogosphere is abuzz with the news about the job posting from Colorado State University which specifies that the department is looking for a candidate with a PhD “awarded between 2010 and time of appointment“. This sounds very offensive to people who graduated in 2007-9 and haven’t been able to find a tenure-track position because of the recession.
However, after being on a few job search committees, I suspect that this job listing doesn’t aim to exclude people just because they happened to get their PhD in 2009 rather than in 2010. Rather, this might be an attempt to avoid being inundated with applications from housewives who left their careers 10-15 years ago because they had deluded themselves into thinking that their husbands’ success and money had anything to do with them. After those husbands dump them, housewives often try to revive their careers and start applying for positions. However, the years they spent out of work make them incapable of behaving themselves with any degree of propriety. After reading cover letters by housewives narrating in detail the story of their divorce and heaping abuse on the “bastard” of a husband (once again, this is an application for a job in academia) and leafing through letters of recommendation from women who recommended the applicant for a professorial position on the basis of giving birth at the same time as she did and knowing her as a very good person and a nice neighbor, I think any method is good enough to prevent them from applying altogether.
And then there is always that mentally unstable person that each department has as a follower and who applies with mile-long cover letters for absolutely any position offered at this department (from the secretary to the departmental chair.) Our department has a long-distance stalker of this kind.
Clarissa's Blog 
Curious. I have always assumed that the primary purpose of such ads was to filter out people who had been denied tenure, often for reasons of departmental politics, not because of lack of productivity.
LikeLike
We never ask anybody if they were denied tenure. I think it’s against the rules to ask that.
LikeLike
True, but if the person received a Ph. D. five or six years ago, it is a pretty good bet, and this ad blocks them.
LikeLike
David Bellamy is right on!
LikeLike
“I have always assumed that the primary purpose of such ads was to filter out people who had been denied tenure, often for reasons of departmental politics, not because of lack of productivity.”
David Bellamy is right on!!
LikeLike
I’ve been on search committees at 3 different universities and not a single time was whether anybody had been denied tenure even mentioned in the discussions.
LikeLike
Or this….
LikeLike
What annoys me is that no matter what happens – absolutely no matter what – everybody immediately decides that academics are vile animals who are doing things for vile reasons. In reality, however, there might be very simple practical reasons for what academics do. I repeat that every job search brings dozens of applications from weirdos. Sifting through their insanity is not enjoyable. This is why I find it understandable that people might look for ways to protect themselves from that.
LikeLike
Why not go second-guess some other profession for a change? I hear that truck drivers, pilots and dentists haven’t been second-guessed in forever.
Why is it always educators? Huh? Huh?
LikeLike
I still think it’s unfortunate that searches are being filtered in this way. I know many strong candidates who don’t yet have tenure track jobs that received their PhD’s in 2007/2008/2009. They all have great publishing records and teaching experience: but the bottom fell out on them. It really isn’t their fault that they aren’t yet in tenure track positions. All searches attract weirdo candidates. It takes about 20 seconds to figure out that someone is a nutbar. You notice that they received their PhD in the early 80’s, that their cover letters is insane, you chuckle and move on to the next one. I don’t think the solution is to write ads that exclude people who received their PhD in 2007. Those of us who are lucky enough to serve on search committees should have a bit of compasson for those candidates that first went on the market just as it was collapsing.
LikeLike
Don’t you think this request might be completely because of the economy and they are just trying to make sure that they only get “fresh from PhD” applicants (which would get the lowest professorial starting salary) rather than someone with more experience who might ask for more money if he/she got an offer?
LikeLike
I think this is also possible, Pika.
LikeLike
That school is a weird place and has a weird administration.
LikeLike
They also have William Gray.
LikeLike
Yo, cool it with the woman hatin, academia.
LikeLike
I’d like to have a few drinks, too. 🙂
LikeLike
Clarrissa, you are surprisingly on point tonight
LikeLike
So a 2009 applicants has a good chance to be a “weirdo”?
LikeLike
I have already explained about people who persecute my department in this post. Do you have a better way of weeding them out? Remember that we are not allowed by law to say, “brainless housewives need not apply.”
LikeLike
I agree, but this would apply to 2007-2009 candidates????
LikeLike
If they had said, “people who graduated before 2000 need not apply”, the reaction would have been the same. This is not about this specific job search or this specific university. This is about the climate of hatred against the intellect and against academia that is being promoted everywhere.
Every single week there is some completely invented “scandal” where academics are attributed every evil action under the sun. This is all done on purpose to destroy higher education. And we are buying into it! We need solidarity among academics. We need to support each other and not nitpick each other’s decisions.
LikeLike
So a 2009 applicant has a good chance to be a “weirdo”?
LikeLike
I graduated in 2009, so let’s all relax. But if I were discriminated against for this reason, I wouldn’t blame the departments. I would blame idiots who send in applications for jobs they cannot possibly perform.
LikeLike
You’re a angry weirdo but not because of your graduating year! 😉
LikeLike
Okay, you’re only a mean weirdo! 😉
LikeLike
I’m both mean and angry! 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
Right now, clearly!
LikeLike
“If they had said, “people who graduated before 2000 need not apply”, the reaction would have been the same.”
But at least, a 2000-ceiling is a better way to dismiss bad candidates.
LikeLike
Some academics are insane and some academics are brightful people…like everywhere else!
LikeLike
But everywhere else is not getting even 1% of criticism that academia gets. Where are articles and blog posts about idiot bankers, irresponsible doctors, hapless cooks, corrupt psychiatrists, careless bus drivers? Why are the academics always the target of all criticism?
Think about it.
LikeLike
Well, people also hate lawyers.
LikeLike
And when is the last time you read passionate denunciation of lawyers for writing their briefs in a wrong color or whatever?
LikeLike
It is for filing suits (that they are hired to file), having to work with the law as it is written and not always having the power to get what the client sees (or what is, more broadly) justice, and so on. It is true, one doesn’t get the NYT op-eds, but one does get a lot of model legislation about limiting lawsuits; I do not listen to right wing radio but I do converse with a lot of right wingers and the evils of lawyers are a stock theme. I think, though, that it isn’t exactly the same situation since right now, what they are trying to dismantle is the education system.
LikeLike
I know that trial lawyers always vote Democrat, no matter how much money they make. 🙂
LikeLike
Friends don’t let friends use “Democrat” as an adjective or adverb.
LikeLike
I’m criticizing (nay, lambasting) ColoState on this not because this is the kind of shit academia pulls, but because this is the kind of shit HR pulls.
LikeLike
I do think bankers, the wealthy “Fat Cats” and such get trashed on a ton too.. but I will agree that teachers get their fair share of criticism.
Not sure if you are really looking for a reason why, but if you are there are two which make sense to me 1) Everybody was a student for a long ass time so they think they know a lot about teaching (not true necessarily, but not ENTIRELY untrue)
2) Its a public (aka big scary, wart-filled, GOVERNMENT job). I only tease with the rhetoric, but since schools are mainly publicly funded there is no “marketplace” which determines winners and losers. As a result, people like to criticize teachers for the “monopoly” they have on teaching.
On another note, what do you think of the Chicago teacher boycott? I may need to put this in the “ask clarissa” section (which i was the inspiration for 🙂 ), but the largest sticking point seems to be how much standardized test scoresmatter for compensating and firing teachers. Would love to hear your thoughts!
LikeLike
” Its a public (aka big scary, wart-filled, GOVERNMENT job).”
– Last week everybody descended on a professor from Harvard because, obviously, everybody knows how to do his job better than he does. No, this isn’t an anti-government thing. This is a very direct assault on the life of the intellect. Stupid people are easy to dupe, and that’s all there is to this.
LikeLike
And… no longer on point. Damn. People aren’t all idiots just because they aren’t part of the (racist) academic system.
LikeLike
“People aren’t all idiots just because they aren’t part of the (racist) academic system.”
– Of course. Who’s arguing?
LikeLike
“People aren’t all idiots just because they aren’t part of the (racist) academic system.”
@Sarah Dalton: how is the academic system racist? I would say that higher education is probably one of the _least_ racist (and _least_ sexist ) institutions in the country. In fact, critical race theory (which has fueled almost all racial equality movements) began in academia. I am not arguing higher education is perfect. But our society as a whole is racist and that sadly but inevitably gets reflected in the university; but it’s also undeniable that universities and academics are considerably less racist than society at large. If we are ever going to achieve racial equality, it will be _because_ of higher education not in spite of it.
LikeLike
“it’s also undeniable that universities and academics are considerably less racist than society at large. If we are ever going to achieve racial equality, it will be _because_ of higher education not in spite of it.”
– I agree. Although racism is definitely still very present (as a reflection of society at large, as you say.) My university normally doesn’t exploit people by taking them on in Visiting positions but the only person who was brought in for a VP was a Native American. She was also the only Native American professor we have. 😦
LikeLike
Great… just what I need to cheer me up. I have just heard this afternoon that my current position will yet again be a VAP next year. Since I graduated in 2010 I still have one year to find a TT job. So I guess I will have to apply everywhere this academic year and stop being so picky. I cannot afford being picky with my already outdated 2 years-old diploma.
I had a bad day too, as you can see!
LikeLike
It isn’t like you want to go to Colorado anyways, right? The place is a dump.
When are they finally going to transform that VAP into a TT? This is getting very repetitive.
LikeLike
Never. To transform that VAP position into a TT would have made sense, but for reasons too tedious to explain it is not going to happen. So I can stay here forever as VAP en residence or I will have to make sacrifices and apply for TT jobs elsewhere, if it is not too late that is. You know the story, and you are probably as tired as I am to hear it. Not a good day, I tell you.
LikeLike
OK, I give up. Can someone translate “VAP” into plain English?
LikeLike
Visiting Assistant Professor. The existence of this endlessly renewed position allows to keep people out of a tenure-track for decades. 😦 This is a very sad situation for my talented friend. 😦
LikeLike
Oh, OK, thank you. The thing that confused me is that a lot of places I am aware of will let someone hold a Visiting Assistant Professor position for a maximum of two or maybe three years. I don’t know anyone who has had one long term.
LikeLike
I should have written what VAP means. My visiting position is a one year contract. The VAP position is offered every year, I applied for that position three time already, and since colleagues in the VAP searhc committee are happy with me they keep offering me the position. Of course I am very stupid to keep “renewing” this position, as nobody it his/her right mind would want to be VAP for more than three years.
LikeLike
“Of course I am very stupid to keep “renewing” this position, as nobody it his/her right mind would want to be VAP for more than three years.”
– You know that’s not true. You are talented and brilliant and you are doing what you have to do. It’s not like you had any other choice here. I still hope your university will wake up and transform this position into a TT.
LikeLike
Thank you thank you thank you. It is really childish of me (and unlike me in fact), but I need to be constantly reassured that I made a professional decision that somehow makes sense.
LikeLike
“Thank you thank you thank you. It is really childish of me (and unlike me in fact), but I need to be constantly reassured that I made a professional decision that somehow makes sense.”
– Look, since you are not a sociopath, you cannot compartmentalize things completely in your brain. If you sacrificed being with your wife and son even for the best job in the world, you wouldn’t have enjoyed that job because your personal misery would have poisoned it. What you are doing right now is an attempt to preserve your sanity and it absolutely is the right thing to do.
LikeLike
The only good news is that I have started to write everyday (even only 30 minutes) and it can see wonderful results. I am almost done rewriting an article that I have left on my to-do list for over a year now. Also, I teach El Lazarillo tomorrow, and that will cheer me up.
LikeLike
Academics don’t get any more than their share of the free floating hostility around.
LikeLike
I’m still waiting for actual examples of any other profession that gets dumped on this much and this often.
LikeLike
Lawyers. Seriously.
LikeLike
@Bellamy, yes, they are doing it. VAPs are on a soft money budget line so you get the expertise of a TT assistant or even associate prof. but do not have to give raises and they are expendable (from an admin p.o.v.) and from yours, you get the job covered even if admin does not offer a hard money line. It can last decades.
LikeLike
Re lawyers: clients go on and on, lawyer was working on law but not on justice. Well most do not have luxury of cases going to higher courts so law can be challenged on behalf of justice. Son dos cosas y no una, por desgracia, claro, pero es así).
Your regular editorial writer or policy wank: they are “ambulance chasers” and others, just out to get your money.
All of these people do not realize what it actually is to come up against a legal system, and the denunciation of lawyers is like the denunciation of professors: it is a learned profession so it must be the case that anyone can do it well without training; the training just gets you into a useless elite, blah blah.
What that is really about: attack on learned professions which are seen as subversive and evil, when not “mandarin” and evil.
LikeLike
“What that is really about: attack on learned professions which are seen as subversive and evil, when not “mandarin” and evil.”
– Good point.
LikeLike
I guess my point is that, if I were on a search committee, and based on my experience and the experience of other colleagues, I would read every cover letter carefully, even the craziest one, out of respect, and I would not discriminate based on the year a candidate received hir diploma. Colorado State U did something wrong and it reflects badly on its reputation.
LikeLike
Also, and correct me if I am wrong, I believe that this form of discrimination based on the year a candidate receive a diploma is linked with a phenomenon I have observed among colleagues: the difficulty to find a new TT job when you have been on a TT at another institution for a couple of years. TT positions for experienced VAP or Assistant Professors, or even Associate Professors are not easy to find. It seems to me that when you are on a TT at University X more and more you will have to stay at University X forever.
LikeLike
“It seems to me that when you are on a TT at University X more and more you will have to stay at University X forever.”
– My colleague didn’t finish her TT at another university. When she came to us, she was accepted for a fast-track TT based on her previous record and has already been awarded tenure. She is a very brilliant person who amply deserves it. I think this all happens on a very individual basis depending on what the department needs and what the individual person can contribute.
LikeLike
“But everywhere else is not getting even 1% of criticism that academia gets. Where are articles and blog posts about idiot bankers, irresponsible doctors, hapless cooks, corrupt psychiatrists, careless bus drivers? Why are the academics always the target of all criticism?”
I completely agree that academics have been the target of constant criticism. As Matt says above, it’s partially linked to an all around “anti-teacher” sentiment in this country– but it’s also more than that. We are seeing a remarkable backlash against intellectuals in the US. Political candidates have to play it down when they are smart (like Obama or Hillary Clinton) and when they seem like dunderheads (like Bush), Americans lap it up. But I guess I see the Colorado State ad as _part_ of the anti intellectual movement. Like I said up thread, it’s incredibly easy to spot wackadoo applications so I have a hard time believing the ad was crafted in order to filter out unfavorable candidates. When I read the ad, I actually thought the “post 2010 stipulation” was an administrative addition. Administrators love applicants fresh out of PhD programs because they are cheap and the most easily “moldable.” Candidates with experience require more money and are often more suspicious of administrative agendas. I agree that we shouldn’t constantly second guess academics and I certainly don’t think anyone should interfere with Co. State’s job search but I suspect that the ad didn’t necessarily reflect the values of the faculty.
LikeLike
My first reading of the ad was that they are trying to weed out adjuncts, postdocs, and others who are currently in temporary positions. So those people who graduated in 2008-09, couldn’t get TT jobs due to the economic situation.
In my field there is definitely a bias against people who take up such temporary positions for a while, no matter what their reason may be (family or otherwise). It is common for a search committee to be suspicious of the candidate who has done two postdocs but has an excellent record otherwise, and wonder why they were a postdoc for so long. My first impression was that this is a similar phenomenon.
LikeLike
Even if the motive behind the discriminatory policy is one you agree with (filtering out candidates who are incompetent due to housewifery) can you at least see the ends as not justifying the means?
Also, if you’re such a campaigner against housewifery, why block its exits? OK, so s/he’s not ready to hit the ground running. But without some kind of transition role available in the J.O.B. market, there is an economic incentive to stay “in the life.” Counterproductive, no?
LikeLike
“Even if the motive behind the discriminatory policy is one you agree with (filtering out candidates who are incompetent due to housewifery) can you at least see the ends as not justifying the means?”
– I don’t know where you see discrimination. People with zero experience of working anywhere apply for a position that specifies a very long list of practical experience in a variety of areas. How is it discrimination to reject their applications?
“can you at least see the ends as not justifying the means”
– What means? Warning people honestly from the get-go that they don’t have a chance instead of making them waste time, energy and money where they have no hope of employment?
“Also, if you’re such a campaigner against housewifery, why block its exits”
– Exits into a profession they are incapable of practicing? Do you want to be taught by somebody who has no idea what they are doing just to offer them an exit into a cushy position?
” But without some kind of transition role available in the J.O.B. market, there is an economic incentive to stay “in the life.””
– Not a single housewife has applied to our recent secretarial position. Neither are they interested in instructorships. They only apply for cushy tenure-track jobs because they are used to uncritical acceptance and unquestioning subservience of others to their every whim. There are many ways of leaving housewifery. But professorial nobody is entitled to a professorial position after sitting on their ass doing nothing and letting their brains grow mold for 10 years.
LikeLike