The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2025-26)

recent posts

about

How well do candidates need to satisfy AOS/AOCs in job ads?

In our August "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I'm on the market for the first time this fall and have the following question. When a job posting lists multiple AOSs and AOCs, how seriously should one take the AOS constraints? I'm trying to read between the lines of these posts, wondering whether sometimes search committees list one thing but are in fact somewhat open to simply attracting a strong candidate in any number of areas.

Just as an example, consider this post from Holy Cross (https://philjobs.org/job/show/24034), which says AOS: Metaphysics and Epistemology; AOC: Ethics, Political Theory, or Feminism.

Suppose you do not do metaphysics or epistemology; you do ethics or feminist philosophy. Is it worth applying to this job? Is it a "long shot?" Is it a complete waste of time?

Is there a rule of thumb for this sort of thing, or respectable ways to gather information/clues about what a particular search committee might /really/ be open to?

Good questions - what do you all think? It would be great to hear from search committee members and administrators, but also from past or present job candidates.

Posted in

11 responses to “How well do candidates need to satisfy AOS/AOCs in job ads?”

  1. Anonymous

    The job ad says AOS Metaphysics and Epistemology and you do neither. Why would you apply to that job, you shouldn’t do that? The job ad itself was probably written by several people and required a department vote and then had to be sent on through the Dean’s office for approval, it was written very carefully. You should only apply to a job if you fit the AOS.

    Reply
  2. Michel

    The AOSes in that ad are perfectly compatible with one another; likewise, so are the AOCs, although they introduce a wider gap between themselves and the AOSes. To my mind, that’s an indication that they’re pretty serious about wanting candidates who fit that profile. It would be different if each were a long list of fairly disjoint subfields.
    If your AOS were in political theory/feminism (I’m less sure about ethics, actually) and you had strong AOCs in metaphysics/epistemology (i.e. you’re publishing in them even though they’re not full-on AOSes), then I think it’d be worth a try, even if a long shot. But if you don’t fit the AOSes in any capacity, even as AOCs, there’s no point. They want someone who publishes in those fields but can pick up courses in the others.

    Reply
  3. Jared

    It would almost definitely be a waste of time to apply. They wouldn’t narrow their AOS spec from “Open” to “Meataphysics and epistemology” if they could get away with hiring beyond it. Besides, faculty lines are usually obtained with a specific AOS in mind, as part of the deal with the dean. This doesn’t mean job ads are always the whole truth. Sometimes, what they really want is much narrower than the listed AOS and AOC (e.g. they’ll only take someone with one of the AOCs listed). But never broader.

    Reply
  4. Bill Vanderburgh

    The ad cited is a good example. That’s a department with specific teaching needs. They aren’t fishing.
    In general, HR departments will not allow hires of candidates who do not meet the requirements in the ad. You don’t need to guess what they “really” are looking for: It is in the ad.
    That, plus the fact that pools are large and competitive (someone will meet the required and preferred characteristics), means that applying to long-shots is a waste of your time (and the committee’s).
    If in doubt, you could email the search chair to ask whether a file like yours would be considered.

    Reply
  5. John

    Please do not waste committee members’ time by applying in such situations. If they did not want someone with an M&E, then they would have advertised the position differently. There is a reason that the job is not AOS: Open. Best case scenario you piss off the committee.

    Reply
  6. Prof L

    I’ve applied to several long-shot AOS jobs and received interviews from those places, a job offer at one … There are politics involved in coming up with the AOS and AOCs, and it may be that the people controlling the process at one point are not those controlling the process at another. I’m surprised at Jared’s “never broader” above. I know there are situations where the negotiated or published AOS IS narrower or different than what the search committee actually wants. Or the search committee could realize, in the process of reading applications, that their past characterization of their departments’ needs was overly narrow.
    I would think that it’s very unlikely to get an interview on the basis of the OP’s described scenario. But not impossible, so it depends on how much your time is worth to you.

    Reply
  7. Chris

    My view is perhaps slightly in between the views expressed so far – departments do sometimes hire areas that seem like a bit of a stretch for the AOS – but mostly, it is true, you’ll be wasting your time. (Unlike John, I wouldn’t worry about wasting the committee’s time – they can just throw your file away in a minute if they’re not interested. But: it may take you a significant amount of time to apply – that’s the real concern).
    There will be some “borderline cases” – maybe you do feminist style metaphysics (e.g., a la Haslanger), or maybe you do history of epistemology or philosophy of science style metaphysics or epistemology. If you’re in one of these borderline areas, you might as well apply to an “M & E” job, because search committees don’t always agree (collectively or individually) about what exactly falls into what area, or what they’re looking for).
    But yeah, if you do political theory or feminism, and don’t have any publications or significant work in M&E, it probably isn’t worth applying for.

    Reply
  8. SLAC Associate

    Good rule of thumb: At a research-oriented place, don’t apply for a job with AOS of “X or Y” unless you’re publishing in either X or Y; at a teaching-focused place, don’t apply for that job unless you can commit to teaching in that AOS every semester.
    Chris and Prof L are correct to observe that committees are fickle beasts and sometimes what exactly the committee wants even changes once they see the applicant pool, but the ad is written the way it is for a reason and it does usually put non-negligble constraints on which candidate the department can hire.
    To use that Holy Cross ad as an example, if you look at their major program requirements, they require a course in either Metaphysics or Epistemology for their philosophy major and they don’t have anyone on the permanent faculty with those specialities, so I’m sure they want to find someone who can regularly teach one or both of those courses for majors. Now, maybe they’d decide midway through the process to prefer someone with AOS feminism or whatever if that person had the chops and willingness to regularly teach epistemology, but I doubt they’d be interested in someone who couldn’t staff those courses they need for their major.

    Reply
  9. When in Rome…

    I can only speak about a European context: not much, if at all. I have seen people go into TT jobs in completely different AOSs from their own. I have personally gone into a postdoc where I was not at all a good fit for the AOS, but the PI was changing what the project was about, and didn’t want the funders to realise. I know similar experiences that people have had in Asia/the Antipodes.
    However, as in so many respects, the US job market might be different.

    Reply
  10. On Europe

    Just a quick response to what @When in Rome… writes about the European/UK context.
    I’m pleased for @When in Rome… that this worked out for them, but in my experience this is very rare, and is often explained by other external factors that are very rarely in place.
    My experience (multiple interviews for teaching fellow, post-doc, and permanent postions in at least 4 european countries, and now a permanent position in the UK) is that in Europe the AOS/AOC fit is VERY important. I’ve been on more hiring panels than I can remember, and the first way that people are excluded is due to a lack of fit with the advertised position.
    What your AOS/AOCs are might differ from what you more publically are known for (hence @When in Rome… experience’s perhaps?), but in the CV/cover letter you MUST make a clear case as to why you fit the AOS and ideally also (some of) the AOC.

    Reply
  11. Anon

    The answer to this depends on the type of school you are applying to. If a large research university is requesting a specific AOS, then you should not apply if you don’t fit that AOS, even if you meet some of the AOCs. If you are at a smaller college or university that is looking for someone to teach specific classes, the AOS and AOC may be more flexible. If the department is small, they may be more open to different AOC’s if you can fulfil their teaching needs.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to MichelCancel reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading