Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
So, that is the standard method, yes. I've been through my share of searches from the candidate end. Here's the thing though: almost all of that work is basically worthless? My understanding is that most of the research suggests interviews are poor predictors.
Some of that research summarized here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2018/02/12/job-interviews-dont-work-how-to-rethink-your-interview-process/?sh=590335ac32e8 … All of the added rigor in the job search process consists of adding more layers of the one part of the process that doesn't work: lots of interviews where interviewers confuse their biases for data.
Teaching demos are a better idea. I haven't been asked to do one yet (so good on you guys for doing them). I have given job talks, of course, but if you wanted to know how I delivered a paper, one could save the cost of a flight and just watch at an annual meeting of <society>
I'd argue the absolute best predictor of a successful hire would be watching them teach, not one class, but a bunch, over a series of years. I'm sure that adjunct-to-TT happens, but it sure seems really rare. Every example of 'tell the adjunct to apply to the search' I know...
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
