Academic Rank Decisions
May 2, 2018 1:22 AM Subscribe
I am faculty at a public university and am being aggressively recruited by a larger, far better funded public university in a different state-but to come in at a lower academic rank.
In my current position, I expect to be promoted to Associate Professor on a non-tenure track at the end of this academic year. I should know for sure in early June, but I have spoken to multiple people involved in the process and have been assured that it is a sure thing. This is an early promotion essentially based on service to the institution rather than research/publications. I would have this rank prior to my predicted move to the new place, if I decide to go.
At the institution recruiting me, I have been told that there is no way for them to bring me in at the Associate level as I do not meet their objective criteria for that rank. This is true, however, I know that the Chair/administration have some say in the matter. This institution is much more research focused and I think they do not want to bend their rank criteria for non-research achievements.
The recruiting institution is trying to convince me that it is better to take their position at the Assistant Professor level because 1) they will pay me about the same at that rank as my current place at the Associate level and 2) it is better to come in at a high pay level at a lower rank because then when I do get promoted I will be at a higher pay level in the associate rank. There are no promises about when I would go up for promotion but it would be at least 2 years based on time in rank and I would need to crank out some publications. There are not really opportunities for pay raises outside of rank promotion other than cost of living increases.
In addition to the financial considerations, they are telling me I should come there because their resources and reputation will accelerate my academic career and allow me to attain national and international recognition in my field.
Should I be considering their offer of assistant professor? Should I demand to come in as an associate professor? Does their reasoning for 2 above make sense? If they are trying to convince me going there is a better path to success in academia, would regressing in rank between institutions forever mar my credentials? Help me figure out if this makes sense!
In my current position, I expect to be promoted to Associate Professor on a non-tenure track at the end of this academic year. I should know for sure in early June, but I have spoken to multiple people involved in the process and have been assured that it is a sure thing. This is an early promotion essentially based on service to the institution rather than research/publications. I would have this rank prior to my predicted move to the new place, if I decide to go.
At the institution recruiting me, I have been told that there is no way for them to bring me in at the Associate level as I do not meet their objective criteria for that rank. This is true, however, I know that the Chair/administration have some say in the matter. This institution is much more research focused and I think they do not want to bend their rank criteria for non-research achievements.
The recruiting institution is trying to convince me that it is better to take their position at the Assistant Professor level because 1) they will pay me about the same at that rank as my current place at the Associate level and 2) it is better to come in at a high pay level at a lower rank because then when I do get promoted I will be at a higher pay level in the associate rank. There are no promises about when I would go up for promotion but it would be at least 2 years based on time in rank and I would need to crank out some publications. There are not really opportunities for pay raises outside of rank promotion other than cost of living increases.
In addition to the financial considerations, they are telling me I should come there because their resources and reputation will accelerate my academic career and allow me to attain national and international recognition in my field.
Should I be considering their offer of assistant professor? Should I demand to come in as an associate professor? Does their reasoning for 2 above make sense? If they are trying to convince me going there is a better path to success in academia, would regressing in rank between institutions forever mar my credentials? Help me figure out if this makes sense!
You say your current position isn’t TT; is the new one? If so, that alone might be enough explanation for people. I would worry more that the X years you’ve spent at an institution with very different expectations for promotion will hinder you in clearing the hurdle at the new place.
posted by eirias at 2:48 AM on May 2, 2018 [22 favorites]
posted by eirias at 2:48 AM on May 2, 2018 [22 favorites]
An extension of eirias' point above: if the new position is tenure-track, do you think you would reliably satisfy their criteria for tenure in N years? They are already showing you that they are unwilling to count your current achievements in service to the institution as a relevant (or good enough) currency. I would be very careful to understand in detail what they require for tenure at the new place, so that you're not without a job after the tenure review if you accept their offer. On the other hand, if the new job is an assistant professorship *with* tenure (which I think is only done by a few institutions), it's a whole different beast and a much better offer.
posted by CompanionCube at 3:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
posted by CompanionCube at 3:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
The most salient questions are whether the new position is tenure-track and if so, whether you have decent prospects for being able to achieve tenure. If both are yeses, I'd think most would value a TT job over a non-TT, when with a difference in rank.
The chair's comment on salary is correct, as most institutions seem to have a fixed pay-increase with promotion, which means being near the top of a tank has a serious advantage.
posted by JMOZ at 4:19 AM on May 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
The chair's comment on salary is correct, as most institutions seem to have a fixed pay-increase with promotion, which means being near the top of a tank has a serious advantage.
posted by JMOZ at 4:19 AM on May 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
Do you want to be a well-regarded service person - do you actually enjoy service, and building the dept? - and follow that career path? Or - do you want to produce research (and do service as well)?
If the latter you could take a chance on switching. Who is recruiting you? - Someone established at the new dept? Be aware though that promises of future career development can mean absolutely nothing in academia, and at worst can be deceptive. Even if the new chair is friendly, both university and dept politics can shift considerably over the coming years, and be beyond their control. How long will Chair in the new dept. be remaining as Chair, anyway?
posted by carter at 4:49 AM on May 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
If the latter you could take a chance on switching. Who is recruiting you? - Someone established at the new dept? Be aware though that promises of future career development can mean absolutely nothing in academia, and at worst can be deceptive. Even if the new chair is friendly, both university and dept politics can shift considerably over the coming years, and be beyond their control. How long will Chair in the new dept. be remaining as Chair, anyway?
posted by carter at 4:49 AM on May 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
A TT position is more advantageous than a non-TT one, to be sure. The difficulty lies in the requirements for tenure at the new position. They appear to be recruiting you as though tenure and promotion is a sure thing, when it really isn't--not least because you need to "crank out" the scholarship in order to meet their requirements. At a minimum, this sounds like you're going to have a stressful two years, and more if things go haywire. Do they have a clear appointments, promotion, & tenure document laying out exactly what you need to do?
posted by thomas j wise at 4:52 AM on May 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by thomas j wise at 4:52 AM on May 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
Do they have a clear appointments, promotion, & tenure document laying out exactly what you need to do?
Yup - there should be both Dept and university versions of this. And get them to define (if they have not already) what 'crank out' means. For example:
- how many conference papers and articles?
- which venues in particular?
- grants? - If so how many, what amount, which funding body, etc.
posted by carter at 5:03 AM on May 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
Yup - there should be both Dept and university versions of this. And get them to define (if they have not already) what 'crank out' means. For example:
- how many conference papers and articles?
- which venues in particular?
- grants? - If so how many, what amount, which funding body, etc.
posted by carter at 5:03 AM on May 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
A lot of the advice here seems to be assuming that the new position is TT, but that's not stated in the question. It would be helpful to know.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:13 AM on May 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:13 AM on May 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Where is the new university, and how does its funding situation -- and the new state's current government, which does much to determine the funding -- compare to your current situation? How solid are these resources being offered? Are state-level budget cuts or other legislative attacks a likely threat?
The point carter makes above is also so important: who in the department is doing the recruiting, and how solid is their position in the department and the institution as a whole? Are they trying to build power to make their own department position more secure? (I have seen chairs do this, and it has ended badly for the recruited faculty.) Are you truly wanted, or might you be a pawn of sorts? This can, of course, be hard to tell from the outside, though campus visits can help.
Consider, too, that academics are often trained to chase career at the expense of general quality-of-life. Don't forget that there is life outside of the institution. What is the new location like? Is it a place you'd want to live, potentially for years or forever? Do you like the climate? Are you comfortable with the culture and politics of the place? (Admittedly academics often sacrifice on this, but in my experience a fair number end up regretting that.) How will your commutes be? How do teaching loads compare?
posted by halation at 6:08 AM on May 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
The point carter makes above is also so important: who in the department is doing the recruiting, and how solid is their position in the department and the institution as a whole? Are they trying to build power to make their own department position more secure? (I have seen chairs do this, and it has ended badly for the recruited faculty.) Are you truly wanted, or might you be a pawn of sorts? This can, of course, be hard to tell from the outside, though campus visits can help.
Consider, too, that academics are often trained to chase career at the expense of general quality-of-life. Don't forget that there is life outside of the institution. What is the new location like? Is it a place you'd want to live, potentially for years or forever? Do you like the climate? Are you comfortable with the culture and politics of the place? (Admittedly academics often sacrifice on this, but in my experience a fair number end up regretting that.) How will your commutes be? How do teaching loads compare?
posted by halation at 6:08 AM on May 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
That said, I feel like if this is a tenure-track offer then yes, take it. Even if it isn't probably still take it—the pay bump is permanent but the drop in status is not. Titles are just like those special hats that people buy in free-to-play games—they don't do anything except signal your status to others, and chasing status is a sucker's game anyway.
The only thing that would change that equation to me would be if you didn't intend to stay at the new university long enough to advance (in which case why bother anyway?) or if you would lose important privileges by going back down to Assistant from Associate, meaning privileges that allow you to do better work. From the sounds of things this move would if anything increase your ability to do good work (that is, if publishing lots of high-impact research papers is what you see as the core of your job, rather than say serving your academic community or educating students) so if that's true then it would probably negate the effects of a temporary loss of rank.
Also, your promotion at your current university is an early promotion. It sounds like rather than putting you behind the curve, taking this new job would merely put you back onto a more traditional timeline while also giving you an environment that's more conducive to long-term success. So in the long run, the drop in rank probably won't matter.
There are a lot of assumptions built into the above advice.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 6:10 AM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
The only thing that would change that equation to me would be if you didn't intend to stay at the new university long enough to advance (in which case why bother anyway?) or if you would lose important privileges by going back down to Assistant from Associate, meaning privileges that allow you to do better work. From the sounds of things this move would if anything increase your ability to do good work (that is, if publishing lots of high-impact research papers is what you see as the core of your job, rather than say serving your academic community or educating students) so if that's true then it would probably negate the effects of a temporary loss of rank.
Also, your promotion at your current university is an early promotion. It sounds like rather than putting you behind the curve, taking this new job would merely put you back onto a more traditional timeline while also giving you an environment that's more conducive to long-term success. So in the long run, the drop in rank probably won't matter.
There are a lot of assumptions built into the above advice.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 6:10 AM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
Consider, too, that academics are often trained to chase career at the expense of general quality-of-life. Don't forget that there is life outside of the institution. What is the new location like? Is it a place you'd want to live, potentially for years or forever? Do you like the climate? Are you comfortable with the culture and politics of the place? (Admittedly academics often sacrifice on this, but in my experience a fair number end up regretting that.)
So, so true. I left a TT job after one year because the location was miserable. I was lucky enough to jump right into another TT position in a better location but it's very hard to do that. You definitely need to consider your whole quality-of-life situation where you are vs. the new place, regardless of what the tenure situation is at the new place.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 6:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
So, so true. I left a TT job after one year because the location was miserable. I was lucky enough to jump right into another TT position in a better location but it's very hard to do that. You definitely need to consider your whole quality-of-life situation where you are vs. the new place, regardless of what the tenure situation is at the new place.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 6:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Great advice above, including considerations about life in the new place.
When you say you don't meet the new institution's "objective criteria" for the rank of Associate, I'm assuming you don't have the publication record to merit Associate there. Is this because you've been heavily focused on service at your current institution? If so, do you think you'll be able to re-engage with research and publish at the new place? That can be really hard to do. (Maybe you have old data or project ideas you can dust off, but reigniting a research program can be very difficult after you've been away.)
I worry that the new position will be holding you to different requirements/expectations that the current position, which you seem to have been successful in. It sounds like you've read the faculty handbook at the new place. Take a cold, hard, honest and even brutal look at what promotion to Associate will entail there, and think about what support you'll get from the institution. Is "cranking out" those papers something you could do, and would want to do?
The new place is technically correct about the pay situation of coming in at Assistant and getting promoted there. But that's just math and being technically correct does not mean you are happy. Also, you can't pay bills with recognition, reputation, or prestige.
Is there anyone at the new institution who has a position similar to the one you're being recruited into who recently got promoted to Associate? If yes, email them to set up a phone call. Pick their brain about their experience with the process.
posted by cyclopticgaze at 7:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
When you say you don't meet the new institution's "objective criteria" for the rank of Associate, I'm assuming you don't have the publication record to merit Associate there. Is this because you've been heavily focused on service at your current institution? If so, do you think you'll be able to re-engage with research and publish at the new place? That can be really hard to do. (Maybe you have old data or project ideas you can dust off, but reigniting a research program can be very difficult after you've been away.)
I worry that the new position will be holding you to different requirements/expectations that the current position, which you seem to have been successful in. It sounds like you've read the faculty handbook at the new place. Take a cold, hard, honest and even brutal look at what promotion to Associate will entail there, and think about what support you'll get from the institution. Is "cranking out" those papers something you could do, and would want to do?
The new place is technically correct about the pay situation of coming in at Assistant and getting promoted there. But that's just math and being technically correct does not mean you are happy. Also, you can't pay bills with recognition, reputation, or prestige.
Is there anyone at the new institution who has a position similar to the one you're being recruited into who recently got promoted to Associate? If yes, email them to set up a phone call. Pick their brain about their experience with the process.
posted by cyclopticgaze at 7:30 AM on May 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
You don't have anything in writing saying you're Associate Professor now, you won't have tenure at your current institution, it sounds like the recruiting institution does not consider your current institution to be a peer institution, and it sounds like your CV wouldn't pass the bar for Associate Professor and tenure at the recruiting instiution on your own merits.
I'd assume that if the recruiting institution says they can't hire you as as Associate Professor with tenure right now, it really isn't going to happen no matter how hard you push. I'd consider the other things brought up by other commenters under this assumption.
posted by grouse at 8:31 AM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
I'd assume that if the recruiting institution says they can't hire you as as Associate Professor with tenure right now, it really isn't going to happen no matter how hard you push. I'd consider the other things brought up by other commenters under this assumption.
posted by grouse at 8:31 AM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
Based on my experience, it would be impossible to "demand" to come in at Associate Professor at a more research-oriented institution if you haven't already met their criteria for promotion to Associate Professor.
At my institution, for example, the research required for promotion is highly quantified: i.e., you need at least N# of publications and grants to be promoted from Assistant Professor on the tenure track to Associate Professor with Tenure. If you don't have N#, you can't be promoted, and if you don't get to N# by the end of your fifth year as an Assistant Prof, you're out of a job.
There's a lot of good advice above about considering quality of life issues and whether or not the new position is tenure-track. I would also recommend that you compare your own research record so far to that of other faculty in the recruiting department or program who completed their degrees at roughly the same time as you. You should do this in order to see if you think your research record can be brought into line with theirs in the time you have allotted to you for moving from Assistant to Associate. It's also worth noting, I think, that from the sound of things, the recruiting department has a different kind of relationship to research than the one you're currently in -- and that won't stop once you're promoted. You should think about whether or not you want pursuing publications/grants to be something you do for the rest of your career because it likely will be at new institution.
posted by pinkacademic at 8:45 AM on May 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
At my institution, for example, the research required for promotion is highly quantified: i.e., you need at least N# of publications and grants to be promoted from Assistant Professor on the tenure track to Associate Professor with Tenure. If you don't have N#, you can't be promoted, and if you don't get to N# by the end of your fifth year as an Assistant Prof, you're out of a job.
There's a lot of good advice above about considering quality of life issues and whether or not the new position is tenure-track. I would also recommend that you compare your own research record so far to that of other faculty in the recruiting department or program who completed their degrees at roughly the same time as you. You should do this in order to see if you think your research record can be brought into line with theirs in the time you have allotted to you for moving from Assistant to Associate. It's also worth noting, I think, that from the sound of things, the recruiting department has a different kind of relationship to research than the one you're currently in -- and that won't stop once you're promoted. You should think about whether or not you want pursuing publications/grants to be something you do for the rest of your career because it likely will be at new institution.
posted by pinkacademic at 8:45 AM on May 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
What they said about coming in at high pay/lower rank may be true. If you come in at associate, it will be just barely, and the next promotion to full may be a really long time. If you come in at assistant, but can then advance to associate in a couple years, that is likely to come with a large pay raise. So in three years time, say, coming in at associate, you may have a lower salary with only "cost of living" raises, than if you are promoted to associate from your starting salary.
posted by 445supermag at 12:58 PM on May 2, 2018
posted by 445supermag at 12:58 PM on May 2, 2018
I'm going to push back against the assumptions that many people have made about a tenure-track or tenured position being inherently better than a non-tenure-track position. I'm sure that some institutions treat non-tenure-track faculty very poorly but many institutions take care of them - reasonable pay, voting rights in the faculty governance system (except for decisions about tenure), professional development and support, similar or identical titles (our students have no idea who is on the tenure track and who is not because our titles are identical), etc. It's far more important that you (a) work at a place that treats you well and (b) have a job that supports the life that you want to live. I know some fantastic scholars and researchers who choose to work in non-tenure-track positions because they simply don't want to live the extremely demanding life that the tenure-track, especially at the assistant professor-seeking-tenure level, demands. Those colleagues genuinely appreciate having time for their family and activities other than conducting research and writing. Many also enjoy having a proportionally higher teaching load than their tenure-track colleagues. Many also have the freedom to conduct research if they would like but it's not an expectation or requirement.
(All of the above only applies to full-time faculty; most institutions still treat part-time faculty poorly.)
posted by ElKevbo at 6:36 PM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
(All of the above only applies to full-time faculty; most institutions still treat part-time faculty poorly.)
posted by ElKevbo at 6:36 PM on May 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
From substantial personal and friend experience, this is normal. You can negotiate to go up for tenure a bit earlier... A year instead of two. But they need to get to know you first. Seriously.
But don't stress, they'll likely ask the same people for letters and you already have your materials.
These cases have all been at sister institutions tho.
At my U and many others, people with tenure hired in have to go through a mini tenure review anyway.
posted by k8t at 11:13 PM on May 2, 2018
But don't stress, they'll likely ask the same people for letters and you already have your materials.
These cases have all been at sister institutions tho.
At my U and many others, people with tenure hired in have to go through a mini tenure review anyway.
posted by k8t at 11:13 PM on May 2, 2018
This thread is closed to new comments.
Do you mean: Should I give them an ultimatum? Do you have the leverage to do that, and a plan B?
posted by Thella at 1:39 AM on May 2, 2018