A while ago I had the service chore of being part of a couple of search committees. After many years of being on the applicant side of the equation and reading about the process from experts, I would like to share some of the insights I gained about the first round. This is about science positions at a primarily teaching institution with a majority of non-traditional students.
- Please follow instructions. If we are asking for X documents and they are not provided, that application is immediately discarded (with rare exceptions, see points 5&6).
- in teaching institutions, “proof of teaching effectiveness” means student evaluations and/or peer observations. Being chosen for a “best instructor” or similar award, or getting a grant for innovative teaching practices is obviously great.
- Yes, we read your teaching philosophy carefully . What most of us are looking for is thoughtfulness (are you REALLY thinking about your teaching) and how knowledgeable you are about innovative teaching practices.
- Having experience with online teaching is a bonus.
- Doing your homework about the institution you apply to is a huge bonus. One applicant was brought back from the discard pile (due to not providing student evaluations) because of a sentence in the cover letter that clearly indicated the person had read more than just the start page on our website. The Mission statement of the institution is a great place for clues.
- Yes, we read your cover letter. Very carefully, in fact. This is the place where we look for the “why” of your application, especially if you have an established position. If for some reason you were unable to provide something we asked for, this is the place to explain why.
- Be authentic but try not to sound naive. This is particularly important for younger applicants, for whom “being too green” is a real possibility, and you do not want to compound it by sounding silly.
- Sometimes you are absolutely wonderful, but not what we are looking for. Nothing personal: it may be that your expertise already exists in the department, or does not fit to our specific needs.
- Sometimes you are really wonderful, but too new and unexperienced. For those from a research background, consider teaching a course or two on your own at a community college or similar. Being a TA and supervising other grad students is nice, but may not be enough. Especially when competing with folks who have been teaching for quite a while.
- Related to #9, can you handle diversity? Are you aware that your students may be older than you? Or that you will have war veterans in class? In many teaching institutions, the norm is having a huge variety of students, both academically, culturally, demographically, etc. If you have not had that experience, at least we want to know that you are aware of it.
- Different aspects will appeal to different members of the committee. Nothing to do about it. That’s why it is a committee.
- Because of #11, the more we learn about you the better. At the beginning stage, the committee is looking for ways to narrow down the field for phone interviews. One piece of information may move your application to the next step. It may have to do with a side project that connects with a new budding initiative. Or some skill or expertise we really need. It is better to err on the side of too much information.
- Putting your name on the upper right corner of each page of your application or having it in big bold letters at the front of your package makes life easier.
As a final thought- after being on the other side, I felt much better for the many unsuccessful applications in my past. Really, the only times we got personal were with applicants who were not paying attention to instructions or clearly did not qualify. Not being chosen for a phone interview simply means that one was not considered to be the right fit for the particular institution. And probably that is a good thing for both parties.
Update: I just realized that I did not say anything about research. And indeed, research was not a critical aspect in this phase. We noticed when applicants wrote something really weak or something completely unrealistic in a teaching institution. However, if the teaching qualities are good, research expectations and possibilities can be still discussed over the phone.