PFTF Discussion: Job talks, chalk talks, and teaching demonstrations

Last month we finished off winter quarter with another talk about the academic job search, where UC Davis faculty Siobhan Brady (Plant Sciences) and Sarah Perrault (University Writing Program) gave us the rundown on job talks, chalk talks, and teaching demonstrations.

Firstly, we discussed how these three presentations differ:

• Job talk (research talk, about 50 minutes long) - what you did in the past
• Chalk talk (research plans, can be 20-90 minutes long) - what you're going to do in the future
• Teaching demonstration (can be 25-60 minutes) - mock classroom or course instruction

Then we broached the finer details.:

Chalk talks usually put forth the aims listed in your research statement (e.g. they can be the exact points you outlined in your original job application packet). Few institutions will allow any type of presentation aids for chalk talks (and if powerpoint is allowed, you'll usually be limited to just a few slides). The focus of this talk should be on your research goals (both short-term and long-term) as well as your long-term research questions. Some tips for chalk talks:

• Speak quickly on your feet and show mastery of your field
• Introduce your long-term research questions during your job talk
• Being conservative here can help - people will see you as practical and thus able to get funding (and show preliminary data, if possible)
• Gear your chalk talk towards faculty; talk about methods but don't be too technical: talk about what equipment and personnel you will need
• People will interrupt you nonstop (in this sense, a chalk talk is similar to a PhD qualifying exam). Your responses will indicate how much (and how deeply) you have thought about the future.
• People often fall apart because of a) nervousness and/or b) falling prey to the potential pitfalls of your subject matter
• Most importantly: practice! Practice your chalk talk a lot before your interview, using diverse audiences (faculty, postdocs, etc.) Be critical as you strive to perfect this talk.

Job Talks are perhaps the most familiar, but we hit on some critical points that will ensure a successful presentation:

• Keep your slides simple, use black text on a white background. Use 40pt font to make your slides readable in a large room
• Use sentences for slide headings - these are more memorable than topical phrases (studies have shown this is true)
• Use clean, simple graphics. Watch some TED talks to get an idea of how to use good visuals.
• Beware of humor in a job talk: it can backfire
• During questions, if you need to buy time to think you can ask "Can you repeat/rephrase the question?"
• Be sure to remain poised and composed if you're battered with questions that seem to come out of left field (composure is what people are looking for). Sometimes these difficult questions are a result of faculty performing out of ego, or for the sake of their peers.

Teaching seminars come in different formats, and we discussed two different scenarios that our speakers had experienced.

• The first scenario is more common in teaching universities: a candidate was asked to teach an intro course that was completely different from their own disciplinary subject area. The candidate was given good guidelines and plenty of preparation time (in this case, they were given a course textbook and told to teach the first chapter). At the interview, the audience for this teaching demo was comprised of the search committee and undergraduates. 
• The second scenario was much less structured, with only one instruction: no powerpoint allowed. The candidate was asked to teach a class as if it were an upper-level course, using only the blackboard. The demo only lasted 25 minutes, and the audience was the search committee. In this scenario, a good interview strategy would be to show expertise in a class not currently offered by the university (e.g. to show your potential fit in the Department). For the sake of the audience, it's also prudent to state your learning goals as well as a textbook, chapter, and figures that complement your teaching demo.

We also had an interesting discussion about "illegal questions" - the inevitable queries about your personal life that interviewers aren't supposed to ask (Are you married? Do you have kids? Do you want kids?). Someone suggested that you should be honest - after all, you don't want to insult your possible future colleagues. Another person suggested ways to deflect the question (and address the underlying concern that prompted the question), without answering or insulting: for example, saying something like "If this is about my productivity, I can assure you that I'm first and foremost passionate about my research..." It was interesting to hear different thoughts on this tricky subject.

Overall, our discussion provided a very eye-opening look into the interview process, and I learned a lot. We ended with some final tips and general guidance:

• Keep your presentations backed up on a thumb drive during all interviews (just in case!)
• At some institutions (UC Davis is one), admin staff will give their input during the faculty hiring process. So when you interview, keep in mind that every single person you encounter is your "audience" during a campus visit. 
• Keep a supply of water and energy snacks in your bag - interviews are exhausting, and you will need them.
• Make a cheat sheet of people based on your interview schedule - note their recent publications, research interests, and other professional activities.
• Never bluff answers. It's better to just say "I don't know". Or better yet, "I'd be happy to get back to you" - and then take their name and follow-up later with the answer.
• For phone or Skype interviews, it's a good idea to dress in interview clothes and book a conference room to make sure you feel professional.
• Make a mental note of people throwing their weight around - if other faculty don't shut them down, it might be an indicator of departmental culture (or indicate people that might have power over your career).

PFTF discussion: The Academic Interview Process

The topic at last week's Professors for the Future meeting was the academic interview process! UCD faculty members Julia Simon and Warren Pickett led a great discussion, answering all of our eager questions (and there were indeed many questions).Here are my notes from the meeting, representing a mix of the speakers' slides and other discussion points I jotted down:

---

Presenting Yourself

Your apparel:

• Don't stand out because of what you wear - the search committee is not looking for a mannequin
• You should be comfortable in what you wear, and other people should not be made to feel uncomfortable because of what you wear.
• The best scenario: your host should not be able to remember.
• Its about what you know and do, not about what you wear.
• Practices might be different in law school, business, vet school, etc. - Know your discipline and its general practices.

Note: I disagree with some of the above advice. Dressing yourself for an interview is both a skill and an art (and should be highly personalized). A memorable piece of clothing (shoes, scarf, printed skirt) can be a conversation point, so don't feel you need that you have to dress boring to be taken seriously. This topic deserves its own post, but I reccommend you check you this article at Inside HigherEd.

Don't be someone else - be yourself, but be on your "best behavior"

• Be positive, and express enthusiasm about the future and the institution
• Be prepared to ask questions - to learn about the new environment
• Know your viewpoints on the questions of the day (in your discipline)
• Keep a lid on your politics - it will not help, and it might hurt. Don't play stupid, but just put on a tolerant front.

---

Structure of the Interview Schedule

• Typically, interviews are a two day campus visit where you meet with the department chair, the dean, and many other people (e.g. half-hour meeting with prospective colleagues).
• Do some homework (IMPORTANT!):
• Learn about your schedule and presentations (even though you might only get it 2 days beforehand)
• Know something about the department and institution
• Know something about several faculty members
• Ask people about their interests, as well as talking about yours.
• Generally be an interesting person to converse with
• Often the search committee is invisible - but they will be paying much more attention than the typical faculty member.
• The most important people you'll meet during your interview are: 
• The faculty in your area of research
• The rest of the faculty 
• The chair (whose job it is to work with you)
• The dean (who improves the faculty, while balancing the budget). Although the faculty vote on who to hire, the dean has to sign off on this decision: so be sure not to rub them the wrong way!
• Be prepared! Understand the needs of the group (e.g. the department) and the reason for the search. Is the search specific, to fill a particular need? Or is it more general: to shore up the group and its teaching needs, to find the "best person at this time?"
• This aspect becomes more important at higher levels of hiring - what is your "vision" (for the group, department, division, college)? What are the existing strengths and imminent challenges?
• Things that you can (should) ask the dean/chair: 
• What is the tenure review process? What is the typical teaching load (and is there a policy for new faculty to have a one-semester reprieve while they adjust to the new job)?
• What is the sabbatical policy? What is the family/childcare policy? - but perhaps consider the kind of institution you're interviewing at before asking these two questions

---

Research Presentations

• You will be expected to give one or two talks (and be sure to understand the purpose and audience): 
• one for a "general" audience, colloquium style for all in the department/group
• one or more related to your research specialty - still, do not be specific for these talks. Introduce the field, discuss various viewpoints, finally get to the point(s) you want to convey to the audience. But avoid too many details; let them read your papers.
• Your presentation gives the exceedingly important impression of how well you can get your ideas across - essential for both education and for research, and more generally in interactions with colleagues 
• Caveat: being a good speaker is important; but you don't have to be the best 
• Most important: know your audience and keep them interested

---

Your Self-Presentation

• Important: know what your plans and hopes are, and be able to articulate them well and field questions
• Have a well thought-out research plan
• What is the intellectual "hook" that makes you so excited?
• Where will the funding support come from? Do you have experience?
• What broader requirements do you have? Collaborators, travel, seasonal restrictions?
• To what degree are you already connected in the field?
• Education: readiness and aspirations
• What style of teaching is effective in your field and why?
• What new approaches do you find intriguing, exciting?
• You can suggest what courses you'd like to teach, but be careful in case a course is someone's "pet". 
• Good to ask "what are your undergraduates like?" - this is something you'll want to know, but also show that you did your homework.

Examples of what NOT do do or say:

• "I'm enthusiastic about research now. I may go into administration when I get tired of research" (said to a dean)
• Don't paint yourself into a corner by demanding/requesting a larger start-up package than is reasonable. Find out what is customary, perhaps get some input on limitations.
• Don't give the impression you need/deserve special considerations (the process needs to be fair to all)
• Don't be derogatory about planned social events - complaining about restaurants, food, etc.

---

Other things to consider

What usually seals the deal: 

• Research Area Fit (you can't control this - this is a search committee decision)

• Whether or not you connect with everyone and can have intellectual discussions during your interview (you can practice and prepare for this)

If you have a phone interview, try to use Skype if at all possible (and remember to look at the camera, and be sure the background is appropriate). Its generally hard to be engaging and sell yourself over a speakerphone.

Be concise in answering questions - aim for a 3 minute answer, then watch for body language and engagement with the person. Your eye contact and body language are also very important - don't look too rigid or too relaxed (no lazing on a sofa).

You'll have to be adaptable for questions about "service" - you can't be sure what they'll ask, and you will have to think on your feet.

Be prepared to defend yourself - search committees may want to challenge candidates. Politely, calmly stand your ground and give good arguments.

---

The Bottom Line

The search committee and faculty are a group of individuals, with different opinions and means of evaluation. What works for some may not work for others. Search committee members negotiate with one another and present a recommendation to the faculty, who then vote. 

The above guidelines may be helpful. But the bottom line is, there is no bottom line.

The Fisher Files - podcast series on academic productivity

Last weekend I took a road trip to LA, and I needed something inspiring to make the 7-hour drive on the CA I-5 less tedious.

I came across The Fisher Files, a fabulous podcast series originally recorded by MIT physicist Peter Fisher (since collated and rescued from internet oblivion by the Foonyor Barzane blog). In addition to the typical career advice (PhD/postdoc/junior faculty), there are some great musings on how to promote personal productivity and efficiency in academic life.

I'm über-organized, so a lot of the advice was reassuring - after listening, I think I seem to be doing things right (organizing my calendar, reviewing/assigning work tasks on a weekly basis, etc.). But it was still great to hear how a senior academic manages his career and work life - I always like to try out new things and pick up tips I might not have thought about. For example:

Fisher argues that meeting should ideally adhere to three rules: 1) Always stick to a one hour timeslot, 2) Always prepare and distribute and agenda, and 3) An effective way for meeting chairs to move on from a discussion is to first summarize peoples' thoughts and ask if there are any final, additional points. If people start to repeat ideas say "we already discussed this" and move on. This can be necessary to cover all agenda items within the allotted time.

For my to-do lists, I've now added a couple subheadings that Fisher suggested - an "agenda" list where I keep track of things I need to discuss with different people (so when they drop by your office, you remember what you need to ask them), and a "waiting on" list where I keep track of outstanding items that require action by others.

So far I've only made it halfway through the podcast series (each topic is about 30 minutes long), but I would definitely recommend it to other researchers!

Fun with Myers-Briggs Assessments!

This week at PFTF we went through results from our Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Assessments, and used our profiles as a discussion point for careers outside academia.

I guess I'm a bit unusual because I've wanted to do biological research since high school, and even way back then I knew I wanted a PhD and a career in academia. I've never deviated (or considered deviating) from this path. But still, I always find these personality assessment tools fun to look at - particularly from a management perspective, so I know what my weak points are when it comes to dealing with employees and colleagues. However, my profiles on these things are never a surprise.

I am an ENTJ according to Myers-Briggs:

Frank, decisive, assume leadership readily. Quickly see illogical and inefficient procedures and policies, develop and implement comprehensive system to solve organizational problems. Enjoy long-term planning and goal setting. Usually well informed, well read, enjoy expanding their knowledge and passing it onto others. Forceful in presenting their ideas.

Yep, the MBTI has me down to a T. Inefficiency drives me insane. I set daily goals every morning, and I'm already filling in iCal events for 2015. The MBTI rated science and law as two of my top recommended career choices, and I was weighing exactly those two options in high school.

Some people in our group expressed skepticism (or resistance) to these type of personality assessments, but I think everyone should complete one at some point to gain some insight on their natural personality tendencies. The results can be eye-opening, particularly if you're looking to make a change or searching for the ideal career path.

We finished up with some recommended external readings:

• The Search Is Over (Chronicle of Higher Ed) - transitioning out of academia
• How to do an Informational Interview (Chronicle of Higher Ed) 
• Do What You Are: Discover the Perfect Career for You Through the Secrets of Personality Type (Amazon.com - book)