St Gall Plan Project Job

Please repost as appropriate.

Manuscripts Specialist (Staff Research Associate III)

Under the direction of the project's Principal Investigator Professor Patrick Geary and the Project Manager Dr. Julian Hendrix, the Research Associate will be responsible for directing and performing archival and library research, and for identifying and analyzing the linguistic, orthographic, paleographic and textual features of some 168 medieval manuscripts for the research project "Creation of Virtual Libraries of the Carolingian Monasteries of St. Gall and Reichenau." Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, this project will make accessible online digital images, descriptions, and contextual data of ninth-century manuscripts from libraries at St. Gall and Reichenau. The Research Associate will assist the Project Manager with the development of XML templates and user interfaces for the project's manuscript website. The Research Associate will also assist the Project Manager in creating descriptions and indices of the manuscripts' contents as well as be responsible for writing thematic essays highlighting significant elements of the manuscript collection for publication on the project website.

Candidates must have a PhD in some area of medieval studies and strong Latin and German, as well as extensive knowledge of Carolingian paleography and codicology, and experience working with early medieval manuscripts. Experience working with XML markup and web design is strongly preferred.

This is an eleven month (08/01/11 - 06/30/12), grant-funded position. In addition to completing the online application at hr.mycareer.ucla.edu/applicants/Central?quickFind=15980 (you can not be considered for the position without applying on-line), please send a copy of your letter of application (cover letter) and CV to the project PI, Professor Patrick Geary, by email to geary@ucla.edu AND Project Manager Dr. Julian Hendrix, email jhendrix AT ucla DOT edu. Review of applications will begin immediately.

An open letter to applicants

An open letter to applicants (NaNoBloPo/NaSchoWriMo 22)

ProfGrrrl posted the other day about hiring committees and it got me thinking. I'm on a search committee this year, and it's going to be interesting. Politics and an inside candidate. I hate inside candidates. I try to stay away from committees where there is one. I don't know that this is true, but I don't feel I can speak freely about the inside candidate, because there will always be people who simply expect that we are supposed to hire the person they know, regardless of the other candidates. Ugh.

But that's not what I wanted to say. Mostly, what I wanted to say, not very delicately, is:

Dear Applicant and Applicant's Advisor/Referee,

Are you taking the piss? Because if you are, you have wasted a bunch of people's time. If you are not, you are friggin' morons. What the *hell* did you think you were doing? Our position is pretty specific. There's a chance that we won't find anyone who meets all the criteria, but we have a good chance of meeting someone who comes close. But you... I do understand that you come from a big and reputable research university, but really, you aren't all that, let alone a bag of chips.

Let's start off with your cover letter:

Nowhere does your letter address your suitability for the job we advertised. It doesn't show that you have the first clue about SLAC, a campus that has not only undergrads, but also several specialized schools that have very special needs. Some of those needs were outlined in the ad, but strangely, you didn't think you needed to mention how your very fancy-pants dissertation addresses the 4-3 teaching load and the classes you would teach: classes that have NOTHING to do with your fancy-pants dissertation. Now, to be fair, you do mention your teaching. Sort of. You've taught a lot, mostly as a grad student, and it's hard to tell how many of your courses were as a GA and how many were independent. But that's OK. And incorporating your philosophy into your cover letter is not a bad idea, either. But seriously, it's better to give us a clear idea of what you actually do than it is to include posh phrases in Italian and French -- I suppose it's at least a blessing that the Greek was at least transliterated. However, when you mention that you try to impart X's ideas of Y, where Y is theory, then really, you come off as a pretentious little git who thinks he's not only the gods' gift to the students, but oh, so much better than the people you'll be working with. Either that or no one has ever explained that, in a department that's hiring two people and only has four full-time faculty, that there will be at least two non-specialists on the search committee.

Also, it's good to sign the cover letter and to make sure that, when you cut and paste from your teaching philosophy, you at least try to re-word the most outstandingly precious phrases. I'm just sayin'.


Of course, I can't blame you entirely. You've been allowed to do all your work at the same BigName institution, from when you walked in the door as a freshman. No wonder your letter is so much like the one your advisor wrote for you. You might lose hir, by the way. The letter zie sent was even more pretentious. David Lodge couldn't have made that one up. Bespeckled with the droppings of name and reference to theory, the letter told us far more about your advisor than it did about why you were a suitable candidate for our job. This was a letter all about how erudite your advisor is -- why surely, we should hire someone purely because you are clearly the genius sprung forth from hir loins. Your publishing career, based on the sheer brilliance of your thesis, so carefully directed by the advisor, will allow us to bask in the glow of your reflection. Oh -- by the way, I still can't tell exactly what the point of your thesis was, because you defined yourself entirely in terms of the scholarship of others, without so much showing your own contribution to your field. If you're going to focus on research you'll never have a chance to do or teach while at SLAC, at least let us know how tragic it will be five years down the road when you die under the crush of our loads and your own bitterness. Except it's unlikely we'll be interviewing you, because, well, there's nothing you've told us about yourself but that you would be the last person we'd want to teach our students, who really want us to focus on them and teach them without making them feel stupid.

And to you other advisors out there? Please, do think about it before sending us two candidates from your program. Or at least in some way acknowledge that you are sending two students who have the same committees, and that each of them has hir own strengths. Maybe even make sure that the applicant letters aren't based on the same template, and that your letters are not formatted and written to say almost the same things in the same order. It makes you look sloppy. It doesn't help the person whose name comes alphabetically second. It makes me wonder what you've taught them about dealing with other academics. Having said that, I do like your candidates, and part of it is that the package looks solid -- it's just that seeing the same package (more or less) twice really does weaken the impact.

And for the rest of you people: this is not a bad job. It is a job in a field with not nearly enough openings, and it is tenure-track. Some of you should have applied. And some of you? Really. If you can't be bothered to tell us how you can fill the job we advertised, rather than the job we need to fill, stop wasting my time.

Brain Fart

Brain Fart

I'm applying for a job. I remembered to ask my Dean for a referral. But as for others, I forgot that I haven't yet asked people, and also I have no idea to ask anymore. I seem to be in a weird place where my only publication is forthcoming and in pedagogy, and I'm trying to think of people who have come to my presentations, and I don't really know them well enough to ask on what is becoming very short notice! Aargh.



I spend an awful lot of time thinking about applications, so that I write good letters and statements, but I don't know how I managed to blank on this part. D'oh.

Has anybody got suggestions for how to dig myself out of this one?

Should I or shouldn't I?

should I or shouldn't I?

So there is one reason at SLAC that I really do not love it. It's nothing I can do anything about, sadly. It will play itself out, one way or another.

Otherwise, I love my job, mostly. I love my colleagues, mostly, and I have made really good friends here. I am happy to work with them AND play with them. I love working for Superdean. He's a great boss in almost every way (nobody's perfect), and knows me well enough to nag me about my scholarship. Frankly, I could use a bit more nagging, but that's not really his job. I also just get along really well with him.

We have a cool new Provost and an energetic BoT, and I think that the direction SLAC is taking is one I like. In 5-10 years, I think we may have moved along to much closer to the kind of place where I want to end up. It's a neat idea to think of myself as someone who can help take it there.

Speaking of which, I really think that there's a chance of building a much stronger program, one known for producing good teachers, public historians, and grad students.

And I really like my students. Sometimes I wish they were more driven, but as human beings, they are some of the nicest I've taught.

So why am I thinking about applying for the really cool job? Especially when I really am not competitive compared to many of the candidates?

Well, besides working with an incredibly cool scholar I really admire, that is?

Because honestly, as much as I love SLAC, I sometimes feel that I work best when surrounded by people who function at the levels I aspire to. When I surround myself with people who are good teachers AND good scholars, I find myself more energized and more productive. It's not that SLAC doesn't do that, but ...

so, my loyal readers, should I or shouldn't I? Am I disloyal to SLAC if I do? Am I being selfish?

Or is it just smart to keep reaching higher?

PSA -- jobs

PSA: Jobs via H-Net

OMG!! Assistant Prof at GW (not so good now that I'm an associate ...)


This one at Hamilton College ... I applied there about three years ago and didn't even get an interview. Guess their hire didn't work out? Also Assistant Professor

This assistant professorship at Amherst/Mt Holyoak. The dates start at 300, but the text is pretty much weighed towards a Central/High MA person

What kind of Medievalist am I?

What kind of Medievalist am I?

JJ Cohen asked that the other week or so, and I started to write something else, which I shall no doubt post later. Because really, Jeff asked what kind of medievalist I yearn to be. This last week has put that a bit clearer in my mind.

On Saturday, I went to AHA. I went for an interview. I went for an interview for Dream Job. Now, I need to make it clear that I'm not looking to leave SLAC. I have a good position, and I feel very settled. I get a lot of support, physical and moral, from my Dean, and it does look like I can be continually successful there. My colleagues are mostly lovely people, and I have made good friends.

But realistically speaking, I'm the only non-US historian in my department. I don't spend a lot of time being a medievalist. I spend most of my time being a generalist, and worrying about falling behind in my research and writing. I teach a 4-3 load -- plus an additional course that isn't quite a course. I manage to crank out a couple of conference papers a year, one usually pedagogical, but the other definitely medieval. I have a book in the works -- and advance advertising on it has begun. I have two articles in the works, and two book projects I'd like to work on. In my head, and I think more and more among my medievalist colleagues, I think I might be working towards what I'd like to be -- someone who is known to produce reasonably interesting, solid research, and is a really good teacher.

The thing is, smack in the middle of my interview on Saturday, I realised that that wasn't what I'd like to be -- it's what I yearn to be. At the moment, being a medievalist is like a reward for doing a lot of grunt work. As I sat and talked to the nice people at Dream Job, where the load is 3-2, there is automatic access to R1 libraries at no extra charge, where the students are capable of reading Anglo-Saxon, and faculty collaborate, I realised that Dream Job was a place where I could actually be the kind of medievalist I want to be -- or at least, it would be a hell of a lot easier. At the moment I'm rather on tenterhooks. I'm pretty sure I bollixed up the interview. They opened with, "We have 2 hours of questions and have half an hour," and despite bringing in 3 pages of notes and questions of my own, I think I came off as someone who alternated between deer-in-the-headlights and someone who might have been too assertive (or even bossy?) for a person applying for a junior position. I just don't think I managed to come off as competent and special enough. I really hope to hell I'm wrong.

And if I'm not? That's OK. Because interviewing reminded me that I have a list of things that are important to me. They remind me of the path I stepped on when Phlebas offered to let me give a paper on his panel, and I started meeting more and more of you lot IRL, and LDW and I got together, and he convinced me I was capable of being a lion cub, at least. After the book contract came through (as much as it has), I ended up being so focused on that, and the collapse of some of the more important parts of my life, and the hell of the last semester and the stress of a tonne of committee work, more new preps, and advising, that I kind of forgot that I do have a research agenda, I do have an image of the kind of medievalist I want to be. It's a lot like the medievalist I am, but an even better teacher in my specialty and more productive. How I'm going to get it done at SLAC is an interesting question, but I expect it can be done -- I just don't want it to kill me. So Provost, if you're reading this, I hope you've got some good ideas :-) I'll tell you what I told Dream Job -- I'm damned good at what I do. I am a good colleague and dammit, I'm managing to keep writing even though I seldom teach my field, let alone my research. I shoulder at least my share of service. And dammit, I do like the fact that we seem to be turning a corner and I could be in on some really fantastic changes. If, by chance, I didn't screw things up and end up heading to a campus interview, and don't screw that up, I'd still have lots of thinking to do. SLAC isn't a place I want to run from, after all. If it were, there were lots of jobs I could have applied for; instead, I limited myself to a very special one. But either way, I'm going to have a lot of work to do to be the kind of medievalist I yearn to be.