It's not *none* mind you, some people thrive in alt-ac jobs...but there's a lot of bitterness and broken dreams in alt-ac too, especially since many supposedly alt-ac jobs don't even remotely require a PhD. They're not alt-ac jobs, they're just jobs. 10/25
-
-
But a system with this much of a mismatch stops being able to detect the best candidates. Given so many candidates and so few hires, departments hire 'for promise' accepting sight-unseen candidates with good pedigrees. You can see it here: 21/25pic.twitter.com/6qnpetrJbT
Näytä tämä ketju -
It sure seems to me that most departments have at least one disaster hired 'for promise' so this is hardly good for departments either. Meanwhile good candidates with great CVs languish because they were unlucky in that crucial first year...22/25
Näytä tämä ketju -
...and hiring committees that don't understand what has changed don't give them a second look because they assume that if you've been on the market for 3-4 years you must be bad. But that's just *normal* now - those candidates are fine! 23/25
Näytä tämä ketju -
Solutions? 1) Jobs-having academics need to abandon the comforting lies for the uncomfortable, data-driven truth. Yes, the job market is different now. 2) Stop 'hiring for promise.' It's a bad strategy that is all about delaying compromises by accepting risk. 24/25
Näytä tämä ketju -
And finally: 3) The market is never coming back. Given that, grad programs need to cut slots, probably by about half. Keeping current numbers is actively perpetuating a system of academic exploitation - and we all know what we think about labor exploiters. end/25
Näytä tämä ketju
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.