Academic Jobs Wiki
Edit Page
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 183: Line 183:
 
*Total Score: 3.83 (Challenge: 4.60, Feasibility: 3.95, Capability: 3.45). Committee 4a. 21/70.. Location: Canada. Status: 2nd year of postdoc. Qualifications: 2 papers published (both first author), 2 in press (both first author), 10 under review (8 first author). 1 encyclopedia entry. Funded PhD and one 50k grant as a collaborator. A few national and dozens of international conference presentations. Finished PhD in 4 years.
 
*Total Score: 3.83 (Challenge: 4.60, Feasibility: 3.95, Capability: 3.45). Committee 4a. 21/70.. Location: Canada. Status: 2nd year of postdoc. Qualifications: 2 papers published (both first author), 2 in press (both first author), 10 under review (8 first author). 1 encyclopedia entry. Funded PhD and one 50k grant as a collaborator. A few national and dozens of international conference presentations. Finished PhD in 4 years.
 
*Total Score: 2.98 (Challange: 3.7; Capability; 2.4; can't recall the Feasibility). Committee 5. Location: Canada. Status: ABD (in 8th year). Qualifications: 1 top tier publication, 2 under review/R&R, 1 book chapter, 20+ conference presentations, OGS x2, and preliminary feildwork for the post-doc also completed. I'm not upset at the score for the score's sake, but at the drastic change from the 4.21 it was worth last year. From my perspective this experience has just underscore the subjective (arbitrary?) and opaque nature of SSHRC and the entire academic enterprise. Last year my score was 4.21 and I was 5th on the waiting list. I applied last year with a marginally worse CV and with the exact same research programme at the same school with the same supervisor, etc. The "Challenge" of the project has, apparently, dropped from 4.45 to 3.70, and my capability to do it from 4.40 to 2.40 (2/6 points!) over the course of twelve months. Beyond a change in the selection committee and thus the preferences/biases of SSHRC, the only 'negative' devlopment is an additional year in the PhD - as I decided against attempting to defend quickly only to chase sessional work. That worked out, as I have a tenure-track position starting this August. However, the drastic change in score from one year to the next for the exact same project (to be undertaken by the exact same guy!) strikes me as telling of the importance of luck/chance in academia more generally. And is also rather annoying.
 
*Total Score: 2.98 (Challange: 3.7; Capability; 2.4; can't recall the Feasibility). Committee 5. Location: Canada. Status: ABD (in 8th year). Qualifications: 1 top tier publication, 2 under review/R&R, 1 book chapter, 20+ conference presentations, OGS x2, and preliminary feildwork for the post-doc also completed. I'm not upset at the score for the score's sake, but at the drastic change from the 4.21 it was worth last year. From my perspective this experience has just underscore the subjective (arbitrary?) and opaque nature of SSHRC and the entire academic enterprise. Last year my score was 4.21 and I was 5th on the waiting list. I applied last year with a marginally worse CV and with the exact same research programme at the same school with the same supervisor, etc. The "Challenge" of the project has, apparently, dropped from 4.45 to 3.70, and my capability to do it from 4.40 to 2.40 (2/6 points!) over the course of twelve months. Beyond a change in the selection committee and thus the preferences/biases of SSHRC, the only 'negative' devlopment is an additional year in the PhD - as I decided against attempting to defend quickly only to chase sessional work. That worked out, as I have a tenure-track position starting this August. However, the drastic change in score from one year to the next for the exact same project (to be undertaken by the exact same guy!) strikes me as telling of the importance of luck/chance in academia more generally. And is also rather annoying.
  +
*Total score: 2.84 (Challenge: 3.5; Feasability: 2.55; Capability: 2.75). Committee 1 (Art History). Location: Canada (to be held at University of Toronto). Status: 8 months post PhD. Qualifications: one published article in top journal, book review, book deal with commercial press, 20+ conferences, over $100,000 in funding, and one major award, now working as adjunct. I beat cancer during my PhD and STILL finished within my funding deadline (3 years, UK university). To see my capability score so low after pulling off what I consider to be an amazing feat is really, really disheartening. I explained in my application that I prioritized finishing my PhD on time over publishing in my final year. I'm not too upset about the rejection, but that capability score is completely baffling to me.
 
*Total score: 2.9 (Challenge: 2.00; Feasibility: 2.9; Capability: 3.25). Committee 4B (Education; Linguistics; Psychology; Social Work). Location: Canada (to be held at the Univerity of Toronto). Status: 8-9 mos post PhD (at present, rather than time of application). Qualifications: 5 peer reviewed pubs; 1 publication under R & R; 6 published proceedings; 16 conference presentations; 10 invited presentations; 4.5 years to complete PhD; SSHRC funded doctoral program. Currently working as an adjunct. So disappointed, but I suspect that because my application was related to health (but within the social realm, which is why I applied to SSHRC), they may not have wanted to support it. So surprised by my scores. Great potential supervisor, good design (I thought!). I really wish that feedback could be provided to incorporate into future applications. Having a gin and tonic as I write this, and thinking about applying to med school... :s Thanks so much for the support on this forum everyone!
 
*Total score: 2.9 (Challenge: 2.00; Feasibility: 2.9; Capability: 3.25). Committee 4B (Education; Linguistics; Psychology; Social Work). Location: Canada (to be held at the Univerity of Toronto). Status: 8-9 mos post PhD (at present, rather than time of application). Qualifications: 5 peer reviewed pubs; 1 publication under R & R; 6 published proceedings; 16 conference presentations; 10 invited presentations; 4.5 years to complete PhD; SSHRC funded doctoral program. Currently working as an adjunct. So disappointed, but I suspect that because my application was related to health (but within the social realm, which is why I applied to SSHRC), they may not have wanted to support it. So surprised by my scores. Great potential supervisor, good design (I thought!). I really wish that feedback could be provided to incorporate into future applications. Having a gin and tonic as I write this, and thinking about applying to med school... :s Thanks so much for the support on this forum everyone!
 
*Total score: 2.9 (Challenge: 2.55; Feasibility: 2.95; Capability: 3.00). Rank: 57/90. Committee 2B (Religious Studies). Location: Netherlands (to be held in Canada). Status: Graduation this year. Qualifications: 3 peer reviewed articles, 2 major encyclopedia entries, over $125,000 of postgraduate funding. It doesn't seem like anyone on my committee does Asian Studies. I am not too disappointed since I was told at the beginning not to get my hopes up. I've got plenty of other options in Europe and Asia, so I won't be returning back to Canada anytime soon.
 
*Total score: 2.9 (Challenge: 2.55; Feasibility: 2.95; Capability: 3.00). Rank: 57/90. Committee 2B (Religious Studies). Location: Netherlands (to be held in Canada). Status: Graduation this year. Qualifications: 3 peer reviewed articles, 2 major encyclopedia entries, over $125,000 of postgraduate funding. It doesn't seem like anyone on my committee does Asian Studies. I am not too disappointed since I was told at the beginning not to get my hopes up. I've got plenty of other options in Europe and Asia, so I won't be returning back to Canada anytime soon.
Please note that all contributions to the Academic Jobs Wiki are considered to be released under the CC-BY-SA
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: