The Philosophers' Cocoon

2 responses to “Tips from Search Committee Members: how do you evaluate candidates in first-round interviews?”

1. Assc prof

   October 10, 2023

   I don’t put a lot of stock in first-round interviews. But insofar as I do, I’m looking for a) evidence of thoughtful teaching and b) some sort of synoptic view about philosophy. A note about each:
   a) Thoughtful teaching doesn’t require some super novel and creative assignment or approach. It could just be a recognition of some not-easy-to-solve problem facing instructors. Last year one interviewee noted how it’s hard to balance respecting accomodations with keeping a course schedule on track (because of so many students having different due dates, etc.).
   b) Philosophy is so specialized these days that it’s common to find philosophers who are very good at their niche, but either don’t know a whole lot outside of it, or who know it in some sense, but more in a rote way. I love to see someone with an opinion on something big, which doesn’t touch on what they publish. I don’t want just a bunch of specialists in my department, but someone who can wrestle with me on stuff outside their area.

   Loading…

   Reply
2. Bill Vanderburgh

   October 11, 2023

   By the time first round (usually Zoom) interviews occur, the committee has thoroughly reviewed the application materials and has determined that the candidates selected (usually 10-12 of them) can all do the job. A few people might have risen to the top of the list, but the committee is usually open to being surprised by a good interview that boosts someone up the list. It is also possible to blow your chances in the first round interview.
   In part, committees are looking to confirm what they learned from the application materials–that the person is qualified for and is a good fit for the position. In virtue of the academic career you’ve had to date, you are either in a good position for a particular job or you aren’t: there’s nothing much you can do by way of interview prep to improve your research, teaching, or personality. Which is just to say, you got this!
   The first round interview is also a chance to begin to figure out relative fit, the mysterious thing that most hiring decisions come down to: Which candidates, with which combinations of experience, skills, and attitudes, will bring the most to the department and university given its current conditions. A lot of that element of fit is beyond candidates’ knowledge, let alone control, so the only thing to do is to be yourself. Most important is coming across as someone who is knowledgeable and curious, willing to do things for the general good at least sometimes, invested in helping students, able to manage competing priorities, and a pleasure (or at least not a displeasure) to be around.
   Questions about teaching areas, pedagogical practices, how you’ll teach a specific class, what classes you envision adding to the curriculum, and so on, obviously aim to elicit info about candidates as teachers. (And to distinguish candidates in terms of the value they would add to the department and students.)
   Answers to teaching questions also reveal a lot more. For example: attitudes towards students, student success, diversity, service teaching, teaching vs. research, undergrads vs. grads, willingness to teach outside the AOS, etc., can all come through. I wouldn’t say candidates need to have prepared answers on all those topics, but I do recommend thinking through those subjects so the wrong undertones don’t pop out in other answers.
   Questions about research have a dual purpose, generally. One is to assess whether you are likely to have the right sorts of abilities, backgrounds, and attitudes to be able to construct an independent research agenda adequate to earn tenure in that place. The other is to test your philosophical acumen–how well do you know your subject, how well can you explain things to non-experts, are you effective at motivating a topic and justifying a position, how good are you “on your feet” dealing with objections/misunderstandings, etc.
   Other thoughts:
   Some candidates struggle with the mindset shift from being a grad student to being a peer to the potential colleagues conducting the interview. You don’t want to come across as fawning or subservient or you could be judged as too green. Coming across as an arrogant know-it-all is just as bad, of course.
   Don’t let your first interview be the first time you face an interview-type situation. Good grad programs will help arrange mock interviews for their students who are on the market.
   If you don’t know something or don’t have a good answer to a question, it is much better to say so than to try to fake it.
   You don’t have to be an expert on the institution, but be familiar with it. Read the department webpage, the university’s main page, perhaps the Wikipedia page for the university. Know something about the shape of the major, the courses being taught (ones you could teach; new ones you would like to add), and the kinds of students enrolled. This will help you give good answers/avoid tone-deaf or irrelevant answers, and most importantly it will enable you to have good questions for the committee about the department/university/job.

   Loading…

   Reply