So, we're one week away from the Central APA. As you'll recall, the Central meeting was moved from late March to late February, but the publication schedule of Jobs for Philosophers was not adjusted accordingly. So the next issue of JFP publishes during the meeting. What a disaster.
Amazingly, the APA thus far has said nothing about this incredible fuckup. Given the other stresses on the job market this year, this is unbelieveable.
Some speculated that the "web only" ads would make up for the error. But this turns out to not be the case.
Isn't it time for an organized protest?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Yes.
Even if they'd moved the publication date of the JFP up to (fail to) coincide with the conference, I don't think it wouldn't have made much of a difference. It's too early for very many ads to be out, anyway. If they want to use the Central for interviews, they need to put it back where it was. If not, they need to set something else up. If not, they need to let us know that we're on our own.
I understand the frustration, but perhaps this is for the best. Schools will now most likely conduct phone interviews instead of forcing people to shell out cash to attend the Central for in-person interviews (for a temporary position). I'm having a hard time seeing the downside to the APA's snafu.
If nothing else, this clearly represents very poor planning by the APA. They should be ashamed.
Until recent years, Pacific was in late March/early April and Central was in late April. What little interviewing took place mainly addressed one-year sabbatical replacements, not tenure-track jobs for the coming fall semester.
Like Dr. Killjoy, I have trouble seeing what is lost by having Central meet in February instead of late April. Are there really a lot of tenure-track jobs for fall 2009 that were known about too late to advertise in the November JFP, with APA interviews in December? The main thing happening now seems to be cancellations of tenure-track jobs, not late additions.
As unpleasant as the December meetings are with the meat market, it seems more helpful to applicants to focus their limited resources on attending that one meeting, rather than having to find funds to get to Chicago in February, along with the east coast in December. I.e., getting everybody to focus on the same hiring calendar, with ads in the fall and APA interviews in December, seems like a good idea.
What am I missing here in the "outrage" about the February meetings and JFP?
Anon 1:57,
Is this really so hard? What you're missing is this: Whereas in previous years there were a total of three meetings at which one could interview for a job in philosophy (tt, one-year, what have you), now there's only two. Why isn't that sufficient for outrage? Furthermore, whereas it used to be the case that one of those three meetings was located centrally, now the two are on opposite ends of the continent. This year, job-seekers first had to go to Philadelphia and now need to go to Western Canada if they want interview for a job in philosophy. And have you checked the fares from, say, Delaware to Vancouver?
I don't understand the argument that says it's no big deal because all that's left job-wise is non-TT positions. My guess is that, non-TT jobs are important for someone with no position. That there are typically relatively few positions open at the Central and Pacific makes the loss of one of the three job-interviewing opportunities all the more hard on job-seekers.
But the complaint is that people can't take advantage of the February meeting for interviewing unless they have a print version of JFP. The on-line JFP (web-only) apparently isn't good enough, which is mystifying.
Okay. So work out the timeline to get a print JFP into people's hands to be useful for the February meeting.
*To be interviewed Feb. 20, you should be notified two weeks ahead so you can make arrangements. That takes us back to Feb. 6.
*Any decent search committee needs at least two weeks to plow through the applications and decide who to interview at APA. That takes us back to Jan. 23 as a deadline to submit your application.
*JFP requires that your submission deadline be at least two weeks after your ad is announced. That takes us back to Jan. 9.
*Assume that it takes a week or two minimum for JFP to be assembled, printed and mailed. Now we are back into the holiday break for submission of ads for that issue.
How many schools decide in December that they will have a job in the coming fall which they want to advertise? That's what would be necessary to get ads into a print version of JFP in time for the Central meetings.
In fact, though, we have a web version of JFP in time for the Central meetings. It's called the web-only ads and they are on the same on-line page as the regular JFP.
The complaint here seems to be that only a print version of JFP is acceptable to advertise and that just doesn't make sense.
Increasingly, publications are no longer published in print, but only on-line. Why isn't that good enough for JFP? Indeed, it is much faster and more economical than the print version.
If a University has a requirement that there must also be a print publication, there is the ad section of the Chronicle of Higher Education to meet the requirement. Indeed, many JFP ads also appear in the Chronicle. Serious job-hunters are presumably checking the Chronicle ads on-line every week. Those are free to non-subscribers and you can even set up an e-mail notification in your specialty. Many schools (especially community colleges) advertise only in the Chronicle, so job-seekers should be checking both sources anyway.
Here's a suggestion: Stop paying APA-dues. The organization is a total disaster.
What Tenured Prof said. I expect with some faculty having pay freezes and even pay reductions, and an organization that provides no useful services or representation, I imagine and hope that many people will either end their membership or else declare their income level as the lowest one. If the APA went out of existence, who would miss it?
Post a Comment