Not only is it MLA Season, it’s also time for the meetings of the American Philosophical Association’s Eastern Division. The APA meetings are scheduled at this time of the year because, as is well known, philosophers hate Christmas — even if a good number of its senior wranglers do their best to look like Santa. So here I am in Boston. This year I even have a professional excuse to be here, because I’m doing some work on the relationship between specialization and status amongst philosophy departments.
Unlike most academic associations, the APA doesn’t have a proper national meeting, just regional ones. But the Eastern APA is the biggest, partly because there’s a high concentration of philosophers on the East Coast,1 but mostly because the job market happens at it. Like the MLA, Philosophy departments interview their shortlist of 10 to 15 candidates at the meetings, with a view to whittling them down to three or four for campus visits. Personally, I don’t believe this stage adds any useful information to the recruitment process, unless you are interested in whether a candidate can sit comfortably in a cramped hotel suite.
I nearly got an interview at the APA myself a few years ago, when I accidentally sat at the wrong table in an empty conference room, put my feet up and started reading some book or other. After about half an hour some people started filing in to the room, but I wasn’t paying attention. Then two guys (one with a Santa beard-in-training) sat down at my table. “Mr Robertson? We’re from East Jesus State University,”2 said one of them, “Shall we begin?” I should have said yes, but of course instead I was a coward and mumbled something about not being Mr Robertson. Pity: I’ve become quite good at bluffing my way amongst philosophers, and I might have gotten a fly-out.
1 Every single Mets fan, for instance.
2 Not its real name.
Kieran,
Can you say more about the work you’re doing? It sounds really interesting. I’m very pleased a good sociologist is starting to look at philosophy departments…
I’m really pleased that Met fans can be referred to as “philosophers”; clearly means the bar has been (1) lowered and (2) opened.
Say hi to Julian and Jeremy if you see them. Or say Phooey or Yaboosucks or Don’t you two look silly, or whatever pops into your head. Or just stare incredulously, or laugh, or point and laugh. One of those.
You say:
“Personally, I don’t believe this stage adds any useful information to the recruitment process…”
I think this is correct only if interviews are conducted very badly. And I believe that many interviews are conducted very badly. But surely we can learn important things in APA interviews that aren’t readily available in standard job files. For example, we can learn lots about candidates’ Areas of Competence (and about any Areas of Specialty for which we don’t have a writing sample). And even where we have several writing samples, we can learn whether candidates know the areas more broadly than indicated by the writing. Some candidates with an AOS in, say, ethics, work primarily in meta-ethics and don’t know much of anything about normative ethics. Others who work primarily in meta-ethics know the field quite broadly (including normative ethics and some areas of applied ethics). These distinctions aren’t always apparent in a file, but can be discovered in APA interviews.
We can also have discussions with candidates about how they teach and why they teach that way (not simply “what syllabus?” but also “what goals?” and “what approach?” and “why that syllabus and approach given those goals”?
We could, I suppose, get this information by having candidates fill out more detailed written forms, but can’t we also get this information in a 45 minute APA discussion?
I’m guessing that your main point is that APA interviews in which departments shout back and forth with candidates about their primary research (as evidenced in the writing sample) are a waste of time and add no helpful / relevant information to the process. Sadly, that’s how many departments interview. But we don’t have to do it that way.
Kieran,
On the topic of sociology of philosophy, I wonder if you’ve looked at the huge fat book (about 900pp) by Randell Collins “The Sociology of Philosophies”. I’d looked at it very briefly when it came out (late 90’s, I think) but also think it was largely ignored by philosophers, and I vaguely recall those who reviewed it being annoyed by it. That’s compatible, of course, w/ it being good. I’d be interested to know if you know of it and if you think it’s any good.
” The APA meetings are scheduled at this time of the year because, as is well known, philosophers hate Christmas”
When the AEA used to hold its meetings in this week, it was rumored that the reason was that this was the only time of the year when economists lacked a good excuse for avoiding their families.
Personally, I don’t believe this stage adds any useful information to the recruitment process
I’ll go along with that, Kieran. Not only does the convention interview stage not improve departments’ decisions by enough to justify the huge waste of time & expense involved, but I think departments actually end up, after all the bother, making worse decisions than they would if they just went all the way down to the three or so candidates to come to campus on the basis of dossiers alone.
However, we should note the possibility that this stage has benefits for the field, even if it doesn’t yield them by improving departments’ decisions. Indeed, the convention interviews may help precisely by making departments’ decisions worse.
Often, multiple departments are trying to hire the same candidate. This especially happens at the “top of the heap” — those viewed as the best candidates. Those departments that lose the competition for their first choice then offer their job to other candidates, but it takes a while for the whole thing to work out, and it can be quite a mess. Perhaps if the hiring process were more rational, you’d get still more departments trying for the same candidates, and the mess would be even considerably worse! So maybe we’re better off with this extra bit of irrationality in the process?
(But if that’s how the interviews help, we could get the same effect, without all the bother, simply by weighing in in the appropriate amount the results of some random process, like rolling dice, into each department’s decision.)
I was having dinner with a smart philosopher last year who told me that he had read about a study which compared how well a person did in the 45 minute APA-style interviews with how well they ended up performing in scholarship and teaching over the course of the next few years (or something like that). The study found that doing well in these sorts of interviews was actually not correlated at all with academic excellence. I’m not a creative enough Googler to find this study, but I remember being kind of appalled to learn about it.
The reason the Eastern division meeting is at Christmas is because having a healthy personal life is negatively correlated with productive philosophical output, as Nietzsche demonstrated decisively when he noted that none of the famous philosophers he could think of were married. By making all philosophers spend their late 20s missing Christmas, they ensure that they will consistently snub boyfriend’s and girlfriend’s family holiday gatherings, miss out on the healthy warmth and unconditional affection of their own families’ get-togethers, and run their nerves up so high that they anually get so wasted on New Years that they embarass themselves to the point of complete social withdrawl that lasts into February - all this combines to ensure that the philosopher will remain lonley, depressed, and pumping out treatises for the rest of his or her natural life.
Keith—funny, I just heard about your theory during the APA. It seems to me that if we want to introduce an element of noise into the process we’d be much better off rolling dice—there’s the possibility that interviews just lead to multiple departments competing for the candidate who can sit most comfortably in a cramped hotel suite. (In other words, it’s worse to have a factor that might introduce a systemic bias than a factor that’s completely random.)
Allan—I kinda figure that the job meetings are then because it’s the only time nobody has class. Also, wasn’t Bishop Berkeley married?
Kieran—Wish I’d seen you. Hope you gathered some good data.
The study found that doing well in these sorts of interviews was actually not correlated at all with academic excellence.
I hadn’t heard of such results. Based very unscientifically on cases I had observed, I was supposing that there was a very slight positive correlation. Experience seems to indicate these things are close to worthless, but it would seem at least to me quite strange if there were a negative correlation, or zero correlation. But if someone has actually done a serious study & found no correlation at all, believe them instead of me.
So, I was assuming a very slight positive correlation. I thought that interviews make departments make worse decisions despite this positive correlation because the correlation, I thought, is very slight indeed, and evaluations of interviews crowd out other, more reliable, considerations (involving the evaluation of dossiers).
if we want to introduce an element of noise into the process we’d be much better off rolling dice
Right: If it’s really noise you need, better to go for pure noise.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review