14 September 2016 by Kristen Moore
\n<\/b><\/p>\n
Job searches are hard. And academic job searches, especially, seem fraught with unknowns. Women in TC will publish a series of blog posts that consider aspects of the job market & job searches throughout the year. This first one will handle different approaches to the job market: how should you plan and strategize your job search?<\/p>\n
<\/a>The perhaps obvious answer to this question–and our recommended guiding principle–is that everyone\u2019s job search is personal and contextual and therefore should be tailored to their own life circumstances and goals. Nevertheless, various approaches get spun as \u201cthe best way\u201d to search, and understanding these approaches will help you decide the best approach for YOU given the circumstances of your own life. In general, there seem to be two philosophies about the job search: 1) Cast a Wide Net and 2) Narrow and Focus Your Search. Other approaches emerge from life conditions, too: like the internal job search, the alt-ac job search, and the geographically limited job search. I\u2019ll deal with the first two here–and if y\u2019all want to chat about these other options, let us know–we can write up a blog about them or we can talk them through at our Women in TC Job Market Talk<\/a>.<\/p>\n Casting A Wide Net<\/b><\/p>\n Some folks will tell you to cast a wide net: apply to as many places as you can. The philosophy of casting a wide net builds from at least two principles:<\/p>\n First, regardless of what you think<\/i> a department wants based upon the job ad, as an applicant, you can\u2019t really be sure of requirements for a job.<\/p>\n Second, having a job is better than not having a job and, since the first point is true, it\u2019s best to play it safe.<\/p>\n So, you find the jobs you\u2019re qualified for and apply to them without discretion. For me, this meant applying to 80+ in the first round of applications [think Sept-Nov] and an additional 30 or so in the second round [think Jan-Feb]. So, I\u2019m sure you can see the drawbacks of this philosophy already: so. much. work.<\/p>\n The affordance of this approach is that you\u2019ll learn more not just about who you are<\/a> but who schools think<\/i> you are based upon your dossier. Particular kinds of schools won\u2019t call back, maybe, or you\u2019ll suddenly be getting calls back for all the Digital Humanities jobs, which you didn\u2019t even think you were really a good candidate for, but apparently now you are. This approach plays the numbers game–more apps out, more likely to get called back and therefore more likely to get an offer.<\/p>\n The first time on the job market is scary because [even in Tech Comm] the jobs are limited, the assistant professors on the move are many, and the control you have over the outcome is, well, pretty much zilch [sorry]. Casting a wide net acknowledges the uncertainty and addresses it strategically and through work hours–just brute force. [And probably some yoga & wine. Sometimes at the same time.]<\/a><\/p>\n And that\u2019s the drawback: you\u2019ll be tired. You\u2019ll be so, so, so tired. Tired of tailoring letters to schools, tired of interviewing [or tired of not<\/i> interviewing after you\u2019ve done all that work], tired of responding to requests for more materials that require, like, a 1.25 page administrative AND teaching philosophy or a teaching portfolio with four sample sylllabi and a 250 word statement of how your teaching and research overlap [wait, what? 250 words for all that??!].<\/p>\n Another potential problem is that it\u2019s easy to lose yourself on the market, and in interviews, having a strong sense of who you are and what your teaching and research hope to accomplish is, IMO, really important. Casting a wide net often involves stretching yourself, contorting at times, and in turn becoming something of a chameleon. Are you a master teacher or a research-focused scholar? These two identities fit different schools, and applying to both can cause sway in confidence and an unsteady foundation for answering questions in round one interviews. It means preparing vastly different campus visit presentations and imagining vastly different lives.<\/p>\n Those who support this approach often argue that having an offer allows you to negotiate. True enough. But the newly extended and unpredictable timeline of the market, makes it more difficult to predict when campus interviews and offers will occur. So this philosophy is a little riskier now than, say, ten years ago when interviews followed pretty closely with the MLA timelines. Because schools are trying to game the system, you could end up with a job offer in December before you\u2019ve even done any other campus visits. So if you\u2019re not being choosy about where you send your applications, you may feel tempted to take an offer you\u2019re not sure you want.<\/p>\n Narrow and Focused<\/b><\/p>\n Now, I know others who used the other philosophy: Narrow and Focused. This approach is smart because it is driven by the work you want to do and the kind of place you want to do it at. Philosophically, it assumes at least two things:<\/p>\n First, it\u2019s a silly [and even unethical] waste of time to apply for a job you wouldn\u2019t want to take in the first place.<\/p>\n Second, the well-focused and pruned job search can more effeciently lead to the job you want.<\/p>\n