Academic Hiring Research Articles

The Future of Doctoral Training in Nonprofit Studies: New Students and New Challenges

The past decade has witnessed important shifts affecting the training of doctoral students studying nonprofits. The student body has become larger and more diverse as more students gain access to graduate school, more universities introduce doctoral programs, and the increasing use of the PhD or the Doctorate in Public Administration (DPA) as a professional qualification drives practitioners to seek these degrees. At the same time, academic hiring has not kept pace with the number of graduates, while non-academic employers are increasingly interested in hiring PhDs and DPAs. How should educators respond to these challenges? Combining market data with our experiences as teachers and pracademics from several different disciplines, we offer a roadmap for the evolution of doctoral training. We argue that doctoral programs must focus on meeting employer needs ahead of boosting recruitment. This includes focusing on training students for practitioner jobs and moving away from defining student success as an academic job offer. Programs must embrace the diversity of their students and attend to the needs of the whole student by developing peer support structures, encouraging faculty mentorship, adopting new teaching practices, including interdisciplinary perspectives, and creating resources that orient students to both doctoral study and post-graduation employment.

Arbitrariness of bibliometric parameters: a case study on leading scientists in the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (DGPT)

Bibliometric rankings of researchers are increasingly important for academic hiring and for making grant application decisions in the biomedical sciences. As a case study, we performed a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of German pharmacology and toxicology. The 42 members of the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (DGPT) represented in the German ‘best scientist’ ranking in biology and biochemistry on www.research.com for the year 2022 were analyzed according to various aspects. The scientist ranking on Research.com is based on the Hirsch Index (h-Index). In the comparatively small field of pharmacology, which accounts for only 4.2% of the scientists in the ranking on Research.com, there are only two women. This shows that female pharmacologists are highly underrepresented in elite pharmacology. To achieve a high h-Index, a pharmacologist must publish more papers than a biochemist or biologist. Furthermore, German elite pharmacology was compared in the three sub-societies of the DGPT. There are no significant differences between elite pharmacologists and toxicologists in terms of productivity. Two large German pharmacology schools (Günter Schultz and Franz Hofmann) are similar in all bibliometric parameters except for number of total publications. Age-specific factors were also defined for the analysis: ‘academic age’ and the quotient of the h-Index by ‘academic age’. Any given bibliometric parameter (or combination of parameters) yielded different ranking results. This became even more evident when additionally considering the highly popular and widely used Laborjournal ranking of top pharmacology and toxicology researchers with only very few DGPT members listed. We unmasked 7 types of publication patterns of pharmacologists, an age-dependent publication peak at around 55 years and different trajectories for high- and low-volume publishing pharmacologists. In the future, less emphasis should be paid to bibliometric parameters in academic hiring and grant decisions than to the authentic societal and scientific impact of the research. Bibliometric parameters are very arbitrary within a very large segment of pharmacologists. Studies according to the paradigm of this account should be made for other countries, other learned societies, and other scientific fields. The different cultures among related scientific fields must be considered in bibliometric analyses as exemplified here for pharmacology versus biochemistry. Conversely, the bibliometric similarities between pharmacology and toxicology show that both fields belong together and have a very similar culture.

Shakespeare is Not Pie: Contingencies of Labour, Marginalisation, and Early Modern Studies

ABSTRACT In the United States, zero-sum economic models (‘scarcity mindset’ often represented by the metaphor of pie) are being deployed in service to neoliberal ideas about humanist curricula. Backed by the insistence that dismantling the canon is the only way to enact strong DEIJ initiatives, these models are systemically attacking the study of Shakespeare in higher education. The echoes of these problems are strongly evident in the famously bad academic hiring market. Several key studies about the labour market in recent years render the turn towards contingency clear and quantifiable in English, History, and Theatre Departments, and clarify how this turn is unduly impacting Shakespeareans. Institutions say they are eliminating Shakespeare to make curricular space for marginalised voices, but these claims don’t hold up to scrutiny in light of systemic attacks on DEIJ work. This paper underlines how critical the studies of race and gender are to Shakespeare studies as a field; early modernists have been doing the labour of DEIJ for a long time, and thus are uniquely equipped to serve social justice initiatives. Accordingly, Shakespeareans and the work we do are vital to the health of the humanities as a whole.

Commentary: 'Responsible Research Assessment II: A specific proposal for hiring and promotion in psychology'

Based on four principles of a more responsible research assessment in academic hiring and promotion processes, Gärtner et al. (2022) suggested an evaluation scheme for published manuscripts, reusable data sets, and research software. This commentary responds to the proposed indicators for the evaluation of research software contributions in academic hiring and promotion processes. Acknowledging the significance of research software as a critical component of modern science, we propose that an evaluation scheme must emphasize the two major dimensions of rigor and impact. Generally, we believe that research software should be recognized as valuable scientific output in academic hiring and promotion, with the hope that this incentivizes the development of more open and better research software.

But what if I lose the offer? Negotiators’ inflated perception of their likelihood of jeopardizing a deal

When deciding whether to negotiate, individuals typically assess any potential costs of negotiation. We propose that one major cost that individuals are concerned about, particularly in the context of job offers, is an offer being withdrawn from the bargaining table—losing out on a deal entirely. We refer to this heretofore unexamined concern as the perceived likelihood of jeopardizing a deal by negotiating. We investigate job candidates’ perceived likelihood of jeopardizing a deal, as compared to hiring managers’ reports, across seven studies (total N = 3,338), including surveys of academic job candidates and members of academic hiring committees, managers and hiring professionals, and experimental studies with interactive, incentivized negotiations conducted both in person and online. We consistently document that job candidates’ perception of the likelihood of jeopardizing a deal is exaggerated, i.e., discrepant with that of the hiring side. In some cases, this perception is associated with negotiation avoidance. We also theorize and find support for two underlying psychological mechanisms: zero-sum perceptions and psychological power. We further document contextual factors that decrease candidates’ zero-sum perceptions or increase their perceived power, which, in turn, diminish (but do not fully eliminate) the discrepancy between candidates’ and managers’ perceptions of the likelihood of jeopardizing a deal.

ESTABLISHING A CENTRALIZED RECRUITMENT COMMISSION FOR ACADEMIC STAFF IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CURRENT PRACTICES AND THE NEED FOR STANDARDIZATION

The recruitment of academic staff in India’s higher education sector currently lacks a centralized, standardized approach, leading to significant inconsistencies, transparency issues, and potential biases in the hiring process. While the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and State Public Service Commissions (SPSCs) provide a structured and merit-based recruitment model for civil and administrative officers, no such unified mechanism exists for academic staff in Central and State universities and colleges. This research paper explores the shortcomings of the current decentralized recruitment practices, including the subjective nature of direct interviews and the varying interpretations of University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines, which contribute to disparities in the quality of academic personnel. Utilizing a mixed-method approach, the study combines quantitative data from surveys of 500 respondents (250 males and 250 females) and qualitative insights from in-depth interviews with stakeholders such as university officials and policy experts. The findings reveal significant challenges, including a lack of transparency, susceptibility to favouritism, and inconsistent recruitment standards across institutions. These issues highlight the urgent need for a centralized academic recruitment commission to ensure uniformity, meritocracy, and fairness in the hiring processes. The paper advocates for the establishment of a centralized recruitment body, modeled after the UPSC and SPSCs, to enhance the integrity and quality of academic hiring. Such a system could standardize recruitment criteria, reduce biases, and promote transparency, thereby aligning India’s higher education sector with global best practices and ensuring a high standard of education across all institutions..

Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: A Boon or a Bane for Women?

Women are underrepresented in many prestigious positions. Could increasing the share of women in hiring committees boost the rates at which women are hired into these positions? I use a difference-in-differences design to examine the effects of a French law on academic hiring committees that required each gender to represent a share of at least 40% of members. Contrary to the objectives of the law, I show that the reform backfired and significantly lowered women’s probability of being hired. Because the negative effect of the reform is concentrated in committees headed by men, this result seems driven by the reaction of men to the reform. I find little evidence that the reform affects supply-side characteristics, such as the likelihood of women applying. The results suggest that the underrepresentation of women is unlikely to be solved by simply increasing the share of women in hiring committees or interview panels. This paper was accepted by Isabel Fernandez-Mateo, organizations. Funding: This work is supported by the ANR LIEPP [Grants ANR11LABX0091 and ANR11IDEX000502]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.01637 .

Geoscience academic hiring networks reinforce historic patterns of inequity

Abstract An analysis of the academic hiring networks in geoscience reveals a severe imbalance that favors graduates from a small handful of institutions. In this study, social network analysis was conducted on a database consisting of every individual with a Ph.D. working in a geoscience degree-granting program in the United States (n = 6694) between 2015 and 2021. Individuals were mapped from the institution where they earned their Ph.D. to the institution where they currently work. Of the 895 geoscience degree-granting institutions included in the database, 10 alone produced nearly a quarter (24.6%) of the entire academic geoscience workforce. Network analysis also identified a small, closed network consisting of five of the top-10 institutions, which suggests that these networks hire more frequently from one another than from other institutions in the network. When academic rank was used to analyze the network for change over time, no significant shift in the hiring patterns was found. These imbalances in faculty production disadvantage scientists who are educated at programs other than the top-placing institutions and ultimately reinforces longstanding inequities in the field, such as the underrepresentation of people who are Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC), and first-generation college students in geoscience faculty. These patterns of inequity have also been shown to limit the spread of new scientific ideas throughout research communities.

The “Palestine Test” Revisited: Faculty, Students and Activists Talk about Their Experiences of Harassment, Intimidation and Suppression of Speech on Palestine

This article acknowledges the prescience of MJ Nadeau and Alan Sears’ 2009 article “The Palestine Test, Countering the Silencing Campaign”. It introduces recent research with Canadian academics and activists about their experiences of suppression of speech on Palestine. These include political interventions in academic hiring, threats of violence, harassment by pro-Israel advocates and media outlets and classroom surveillance by pro-Israel campus groups, all of which are violations of academic freedom and grave impediments to the production of knowledge.

Adjuncting for Life: The Gendered Experience of Adjunct Instructors in Ontario

The market-based imperatives driving economic growth in Western societies have, in ways, both been acknowledged and implicitly used to reorient public institutions - academia dramatically so. This article deals with upending of post-secondary academic hiring priorities, and the impact on the adjunct or sessional lecturers implicated in the change. Over half of the courses offered by academic departments and programs in Ontario, Canada, are now taught by part-time faculty members (Pasma & Shakes, 2018). Their use in post-secondary education is underpinned by a notion of just-in-time course delivery in a free market of untenured PhD holders. This study assessed 26 adjuncts in Ontario, Canada, equally divided between male and female. It found working conditions, development of research dossiers, and health and work-life balance to be characterized by gendered differences and hardships. Although the hardships of post-PhD adjunct work have been abundantly documented, this work brings to light components of the experience that have not been previously studied, most significantly, its health effects and gender nature. It concludes with policy recommendations to support adjuncts in Ontario and beyond, including mentorship, longer term contracts, institutional research funding, extended health benefits, and affordable childcare.

Editorial: ChatGPT and Law Exams; On My Way In IV: ‘Aren’t You Exclusive?!’ On the Pros and Cons of Writing Letters of Reference for Only One Candidate in an Academic Hiring Process; In This Issue; In This Issue – Reviews

Editorial: ChatGPT and Law Exams; On My Way In IV: ‘Aren’t You Exclusive?!’ On the Pros and Cons of Writing Letters of Reference for Only One Candidate in an Academic Hiring Process; In This Issue; In This Issue – Reviews

Biased Evaluative Descriptions

AbstractIn this essay I identify a type of linguistic phenomenon new to feminist philosophy of language: biased evaluative descriptions. Biased evaluative descriptions are descriptions whose well-intended positive surface meanings are inflected with implicitly biased content. Biased evaluative descriptions are characterized by three main features: (1) they have roots in implicit bias or benevolent sexism, (2) their application is counterfactually unstable across dominant and subordinate social groups, and (3) they encode stereotypes. After giving several different kinds of examples of biased evaluative descriptions, I distinguish them from similar linguistic concepts, including backhanded compliments, slurs, insults, epithets, pejoratives, and dog whistles. I suggest that the traditional framework of Gricean implicature cannot account for biased evaluative descriptions. I discuss some challenges to the distinctiveness and evaluability of biased evaluative descriptions, including intersectional social identities. I conclude by discussing their social significance and moral status. Identifying biased evaluative descriptions is important for a variety of social contexts, from the very general and broad (political speeches) to the very particular and small (bias in academic hiring).

Unpacking (un)conscious social class bias in faculty hiring processes in Chile: PhD prestige granting university and network

AbstractSocial class of origin is apparently an imperceptible attribute among doctorate holders seeking academic jobs. Yet, recent studies in different countries reveal that social class of origin may still be influencing the chances of PhD holders from low social class being hired at prestigious universities. Drawing from the theory of social and cultural reproduction, normative ‘fair’ academic hirings frameworks, and qualitative evidence collected in Chile, this research identifies the mechanisms that trigger (un)conscious social class bias in the stages of recruitment and selection of candidates in seven academic departments in economics and industrial engineering (46 interviews). Findings did not prove explicit classism manifestations, but practices of inclusion/exclusion of candidates based on the prestige of PhD‐granting universities, and networks. These reproduce the relationship between social class and unequal chances of being connected to prestigious universities. Recommendations to address (un)conscious social class bias in academic hiring are discussed.

Preparing Graduate Students for Successful Faculty Careers: A Course Focusing on the Tricks of the Trade

This article focuses on how we can enhance the preparation of our graduate students for future faculty careers. It describes a course in a professional program that highlights the subjective characteristics of the faculty position that go beyond the traditional elements of research, teaching and service. The course looks at the origins of the US education system and its underlying philosophies, and compares the US system to higher education systems abroad. It discusses the internal politics of academia, in particular when it comes to the job application process and promotion and tenure decisions and Keywords : Graduate course, graduate students, history and politics of higher education, academic hiring process, P&T DOI: 10.7176/JEP/14-1-08 Publication date: January 31 st 2023

How search committees assess teaching: Lessons for CTLs

This study updates and expands upon past work on how tenure-track hiring committees evaluate teaching effectiveness to provide centers for teaching and learning (CTLs) current data as they support graduate students and postdocs navigating the academic hiring process. In this study, 166 hiring committee chairs from nine academic disciplines and a variety of institution types (e.g., Baccalaureate, Master’s, and Doctoral) responded to survey questions addressing how they evaluate teaching effectiveness for tenure-track positions. Results indicate that hiring chairs across institution types and disciplines value a candidate’s teaching effectiveness. Hiring committees use a variety of documents to gather information about an applicant’s teaching, but the teaching philosophy statement is most common. The survey responses also provide greater clarity on what hiring chairs find effective in applicants’ teaching philosophy statements, diversity and inclusion statements, and presentations of student evaluations. We discuss implications of these findings for scholarship of educational development (SoED) researchers, CTL leadership engaged in strategic planning, and educational developers providing consultations and workshops for future faculty.

Steep Hierarchies of Prestige in Academic Hiring

Steep Hierarchies of Prestige in Academic Hiring

Association between academic degrees and research productivity: an assessment of Canadian academic general surgeons.

Background:For academic hiring committees and surgical trainees, the benefits of a graduate degree are unclear. We sought to identify if graduate degrees or professorship status were associated with increased research productivity among Canadian academic surgeons.Methods:We included general surgeons from the largest hospitals associated with accredited residency programs. We classified staff surgeons active between 2013 and 2018 by degree (MD only, master’s degree, PhD) and professorship (assistant, associate, professor) status. We identified their publications from January 2013 to December 2018. Variables of interest included publications per year, citations per article, journal of publication, CiteScore, author’s Hirsch (h) index and the revised h-index (r-index). We used Kruskal–Wallis tests and the Dunn multiple comparison test to assess statistical significance.Results:We identified 3262 publications from 187 surgeons, including 78 (41.7%) with no graduate degree, 84 (44.9%) with master’s degrees and 25 (13.4%) with PhDs. Surgeons with graduate degrees had more publications per year, higher CiteScores, more citations per article, and higher h- and r-indices than those without graduate degrees. Surgeons with doctorates had the highest median values in all domains, but differences were not significant compared with surgeons with master’s degrees. Seventy-seven (41.8%) surgeons were assistant professors, 63 (34.2%) were associate professors and 44 (23.9%) were full professors. Statistically, full professors had a greater number of publications per year and higher h- and r-indices than their counterparts.Conclusion:Surgeons with graduate degrees or more advanced professorships had the greatest research productivity. Surgeons with doctorates trended toward greater research productivity than those holding master’s degrees.

“Conjoint Communicated Experience”: Art as an Instrument of Democracy

“Conjoint Communicated Experience”: Art as an Instrument of Democracy

Dear German Academia: What is Your Role in African Knowledge Production?

Although African critical scholars since the 19th century have challenged the culture of studying and writing about Africa, research practices on Africa are still entangled in epistemic injustices resulting from colonial structures of power. In this reflective contribution, we illustrate how such knowledge production perpetuates coloniality and outline the ways in which academic coloniality affects the quality of research and is detrimental to both research subjects and knowledge consumers. To that end, we draw on our own experiences as researchers and teachers in German institutes and universities to analyse current trends and patterns in African Political Science. We provide concrete examples to demonstrate that this coloniality in academia is detrimental to research, fieldwork and publishing practices, teaching, and academic hiring policies. To challenge and change how knowledge is produced, Africanists from the Global North need to be aware of, and sensitised towards, their role in knowledge production. This article continues the debate on decolonising research on Africa.

AI in Academic Hiring: Creating a Sustainable Workplace through Right Sourcing and Human Resource Management

AI has proven useful in sports, healthcare, transportation, and industry. Recruitment practises including locating applicants, vetting them, holding interviews, and hiring them have gained in popularity. This can affect a company's policies, candidate attitudes, and HR duties. In some circumstances, recruiters may not know about this technology, or companies may still be using it. HR's duty is to provide a safe and supportive workplace while giving employees the independence, intelligence, and empathy they need to accomplish their best work. AI has greatly improved the HR department. AI has taken over low-value HR tasks to free up time for strategy.