Editing Spanish and Portuguese 2018-2019

*Boston University (11/07)

*Boston University (11/07)

==Word on the street==

==Word on the street==

*Any word on Miami University (VAP/Inst)?

*Any word on Miami University (VAP/Inst)?

*Anyone heard from Auburn Univ re: Spanish linguistics?

*Anyone heard from Auburn Univ re: Spanish linguistics?

*Anyone heard from Bowling Green?

*Anyone heard from Bowling Green?

*Any updates about Texas State University literature position? Thanks! 

*Any updates about Texas State University literature position? Thanks! 

*Anything on the U Miami job? A: I recieved the affirmative action form today. For some reason their webpage isn't working today. I have a feeling that there is an inside candidate, but who knows. Good luck! A2: Hmm...wondering how to interpret that...think it's a mass email to everyone who's applied? '''A3''': I feel like it was a mass e-mail, too. The webpage worked perfectly when I tried it. What makes you think there’s an internal candidate, A?

*Anything on the U Miami job? A: I recieved the affirmative action form today. For some reason their webpage isn't working today. I have a feeling that there is an inside candidate, but who knows. Good luck! A2: Hmm...wondering how to interpret that...think it's a mass email to everyone who's applied? '''A3''': I feel like it was a mass e-mail, too. The webpage worked perfectly when I tried it. What makes you think there’s an internal candidate, A?

*Any news on the Boston U. position?

*Any news on the Boston U. position?

==Free advice (especially for colleagues new to the market)==

==Free advice (especially for colleagues new to the market)==

* Would American Univerisites or Colleges typically sponsor candidates for VAP positions or would that only happen with TT jobs? '''A1:''' Depends on the University/College, some do, some don't.''' A2:''' It also depends oh how soon you get the offer. Your chances of getting sponsored are much higher if the institution does not have to look for express procedures to sponsor you. Thanks, A1 and A2. Would most VAP positions for 2019 be advertised by now or do you reckon there should be more coming after Christmas? '''A3:''' More VAP positions will come out after the holidays, especially as people begin to accept/reject offers. They can be announced quite late into the semester actually.'''A4: '''Depends on the institution. Less and less universities/colleges do it these days, unfortunately. Some won't even do it if it's a TT position. 

* Would American Univerisites or Colleges typically sponsor candidates for VAP positions or would that only happen with TT jobs? '''A1:''' Depends on the University/College, some do, some don't.''' A2:''' It also depends oh how soon you get the offer. Your chances of getting sponsored are much higher if the institution does not have to look for express procedures to sponsor you. Thanks, A1 and A2. Would most VAP positions for 2019 be advertised by now or do you reckon there should be more coming after Christmas? '''A3:''' More VAP positions will come out after the holidays, especially as people begin to accept/reject offers. They can be announced quite late into the semester actually.'''A4: '''Depends on the institution. Less and less universities/colleges do it these days, unfortunately. Some won't even do it if it's a TT position. 

* How does everyone prepare for Skype interviews here? I have had a few go really well, and a few go really not well, and just looking for advice in general on how to approach them.

* How does everyone prepare for Skype interviews here? I have had a few go really well, and a few go really not well, and just looking for advice in general on how to approach them.

* '''"Not a good fit"'''. While in the midst of a campus visit, I realized that I could not really see myself working in that place. I needed a job, so I decided to suck it up and just go on with the interviews, handshaking, smiling, etc. But I felt horribly guilty because I could not deny to myself that the place was "not a good fit" for my intellectual and even personal goals, despite everyone in the search committee being sufficiently nice to me. I was lucky that besides being offered the "not a good fit" job, I was also offered one that I really wanted. But to be honest, during that awkward campus visit I wondered if I should have said something after the first day of the visit to stop everyone (and myself) from wasting their time. I would appreciate your thoughts on a situation like this or sharing similar stories. Thanks! '''R1: '''I'd say it is better to go through the whole thing or as much of it as possible. This year I had an awful experience at a campus visit. The committee was clearly not interested in me (none of them met with me during the campus visit) and yet 2 people, not from the committee, but from the department (a lecturer and a senior professor), had the decency to be cordial throughout the entire day. These were the only people with whom I had the chance to talk about my research, their research, and about life in general. I wouldn't say that it was all worth it because of the opportunity to meet with these 2 people, but that it is better to just endure the awkwardness. I think one learns a lot from those experiences. I did once have a colleague, however, who canceled the "last supper", the dinner after the job talk. She said that it was a disaster so after it she just said: "look, we both know this isn't going to work out, so why don't I just go and have dinner by myself?" and the committee agreed. I think I would have done the same. '''R2:''' A friend of mine decided not to give his own job talk after getting confilcting information regarding his positoin and expectations. I think he just said, "Well, that's it. Please take me to the hotel; I am no longer interseted in this job." One of the professors said, "That's someone who knows what he's doing," or something to that effect. Depending on circumstances, it may make more sense to suck it up and finish the interview or make a simple but polite statement of withdrawal.

* '''"Not a good fit"'''. While in the midst of a campus visit, I realized that I could not really see myself working in that place. I needed a job, so I decided to suck it up and just go on with the interviews, handshaking, smiling, etc. But I felt horribly guilty because I could not deny to myself that the place was "not a good fit" for my intellectual and even personal goals, despite everyone in the search committee being sufficiently nice to me. I was lucky that besides being offered the "not a good fit" job, I was also offered one that I really wanted. But to be honest, during that awkward campus visit I wondered if I should have said something after the first day of the visit to stop everyone (and myself) from wasting their time. I would appreciate your thoughts on a situation like this or sharing similar stories. Thanks! '''R1: '''I'd say it is better to go through the whole thing or as much of it as possible. This year I had an awful experience at a campus visit. The committee was clearly not interested in me (none of them met with me during the campus visit) and yet 2 people, not from the committee, but from the department (a lecturer and a senior professor), had the decency to be cordial throughout the entire day. These were the only people with whom I had the chance to talk about my research, their research, and about life in general. I wouldn't say that it was all worth it because of the opportunity to meet with these 2 people, but that it is better to just endure the awkwardness. I think one learns a lot from those experiences. I did once have a colleague, however, who canceled the "last supper", the dinner after the job talk. She said that it was a disaster so after it she just said: "look, we both know this isn't going to work out, so why don't I just go and have dinner by myself?" and the committee agreed. I think I would have done the same. '''R2:''' A friend of mine decided not to give his own job talk after getting confilcting information regarding his positoin and expectations. I think he just said, "Well, that's it. Please take me to the hotel; I am no longer interseted in this job." One of the professors said, "That's someone who knows what he's doing," or something to that effect. Depending on circumstances, it may make more sense to suck it up and finish the interview or make a simple but polite statement of withdrawal.

* '''U of FL''' (3/29) Spanish Lecturer (accepted, second hand, realiable). This confirms once more the department's preference for Spaniards, or people who have completed some studies in Spain. '''R1''': ¡Mecachis! '''R2: Breaking News:''' AMLO demands King Felipe VI apologizes for qualified Spaniards' getting jobs in the Americas. '''R3: '''King Felipe VI should apologize for qualified Spaniards not getting jobs in Spain and becoming new immigrants in the Americas.''' R4:''' Hello fellow job seekers! I personally think we should all celebrate the fact that academics can get a job in different countries if that's what they want, and avoid any remarks that could be deemed xenophobic. Let's all be good colleagues and not bitter! Good luck on your searches and congrats if you already secured a job! '''To O.P. '''100% Agree. The worst part is that is not only U of FL. '''R6: '''Well, I don't know which part xenophobia is in these comments, yet I can add that not only words can be xenophobic, but also attitudes, preferences, behaviors, even lack of any words. As for qualifications, there are many non-Spaniards as qualified as any Spaniard, most of them with training in US. Regardless of national origin, it's kinda unlikely that an individual with a non-American degree can be as qualified as anyone with an American degree, not because the foreign degree is worse, but because we are talking about very different educational systems, preparation, teaching methods and expectations. So it's impossible to accept covering up a reality that may be uncofortable for those involved in such a clear preference. When you see that all of the finalists are Spaniards, one of them from the same town of a Spanish professor, and also another one who was a student of another Spanish professor elsewhere, then you cannot simply trivialize a fact nor demand collegiality, which has nothing to do with complicity. '''R7''': Spaniards are not always the selected ones. I know Spaniards with excellent qualifications who have been rejected after campus visits and the position was finally for a non-Spaniard with fewer academic merits. '''R8: '''The opposite also happens. Spaniards with fewer merits than non-Spaniards get the job. '''R9: '''From an outsider's perspective, it is interesting that two of the UF searches are being the most controversial this year, however the literature one was not. I'm assuming no Spaniard got that position and therefore there's no reason to complain about that one? As for candidates with international degrees, I believe hiring such individuals enriches any educational system, since they bring in new ideas and perspectives, which is the point of education at the end of the day, and in fact, I'd say it is harder for people without an American degree (even if it's Canadian) to get a job in the States. I don't know about the backgrounds of these finalists, but I'd say we shouldn't rush into conclusions, since there is always a lottery factor in job searches. There's no way we can know what the search committees see in a particular finalist, or how well they did during a campus visit, in terms of scholarship potential, or simply by seeming to be someone who'd be a good colleague, which is, after all, what they are looking for. I think passing resentful judgment on people's nationalities or educational backgrounds doesn't help us much, especially when being on the job market. This is already too difficult an experience already. Once again, good luck everybody! '''R10: '''I think the literature position is in Latin American colonial studies, so it's rare to see a Spaniard doing research in this field. As for the enriching the educational system with an international degree, come on, anything not done "a la americana" has little chance even in Spanish departments, especially when there are hundreds of people with a US degree in hand without a job. I don't know about anyone with a Latin American degree getting a job in the States, though. So it's striking that someone who doesn't even have the PhD in hand from a foreign college suddenly gets the job. As for a "good colleague," what does it actually mean? That Latin American collegiality isn't as good as Spanish? If this is the case, it would sound a little racist. After all, a good colleague typically is someone either manipulable or willing to suck up to superiors without complaining and to agree with all of their decisions that benefit them, even if those decisions affect their subordinates, including those who suck up to them. Yeah, this is what they are all looking for. With that said, good luck everyone! '''R11:''' I think there is some confusion of terms going on here. Is the problem the hiring of Spaniards without degrees from the US or is it that the hires come from the same hometown as a faculty member? The latter seems like a conflict of interest which is a huge problem, but the complaints about the hiring of "Spaniards" as a problem is xenophobic at best. Why should a university only hire from within the US? Is it also a problem when someone is hired with a degree from a Chilean or Mexican university or just a Spanish university? If so, why? '''R12: '''2 things - can we put this at the bottom in the General Discussion where it belongs like the last one which is my second thing responding to R9, the colonial(lit) job did generate a lot of discussion and it was moved to a different part of the page. Scroll down and you'll see the same ridiculousness you see here. '''R13: '''There is no confusion here, so let's not distort the original comment. The problem isn't hiring Spaniards, but a clear preference for Spaniards (or non-Spaniards who have studied in Spain or people who learned the peninsular Spanish) when it comes to hiring faculty in that particular department, which is racism at best. And yes, the new faculty member comes from the same town and the same college where another faculty member completed the PhD. So the claim about "let's be good collegues" and the accusation of xenophobia to cover up this obvious bias are just ways to distract from the real problem. It's been almost impossible to fight this powerful system, but at least let's speak freely even if nothing changes. R13, you can move this thread to the General Discussion section if you like. '''R14'''. A couple of years ago, a Spanish woman was hired by another Spanish woman (her friend who was also the head of the search committe), and they didn't even interview me after they email me scheduling an interview. When I contacted them they had already selected her. I had to file a complain to the dean who thought what they did was awful. Please, do not tell me there isnt't a bias. Spaniards hire Spaniards no matter what their qualifications are. Look at the faculty at Colorado State University. '''R15: '''I think that's an overgeneralization; hires are decided by the whole faculty and ultimately by the department head, not just the head of the search committee. I do agree that it sounds like they didn't maneuver your situation well at all. On a different note, if everyone's ok with it, I'll move this whole thread to general discussion. '''R16''': Responding to R14, also non Spaniards tend to hire non Spaniards. I have seen departments that have non Spaniard faculty in fields like medieval or golden age studies, but you will hardly see a Spaniard in the colonial field (unless he or she is golden age AND colonial). Spaniards have more chances to be rejected in Latin American positions than non Spaniards to be rejected in peninsular positions. At the end, all that matters is whether you have contacts or not. '''R11. '''It's not distorting terms when the follow-up to the OP stated that "The worst part is that it is not only U of FL." The OP is upset about a singular institution--which may be true. To extend that to Spaniards or non-Spaniards who have studied in Spain is where it becomes overgeneralization and confusing. This led to R16's assertion that non-Spaniards hire non-Spaniards. My point here is: Can we discuss particular institutions or departments without extending that to the entire profession? I worry sometimes that we are creating an atmosphere where everyone suspects everyone, rendering collaboration impossible. '''R18''': I'm going respond only because this post has gone on much longer than it really should. I always question why people continue to beat this dead horse? This is a problem with no solution in sight, yet it (and others like it) appears time and again, year in year out, on this board. I get it...we seek comfort in knowing that others feel/think/suffer the same thing we do, but most of the accusations andassumptions thrown out on this forum are tenuous at best and absolutely cannot be proven. Furthermore, why would we discuss particular institutions? What good does that do? Do you actually think that a candidate who is offered a job from one of these schools would turn it down as some form of protest or in solidarity with those who in theory were never given a chance (Hint: they won't, because desperate times won't allow it, plus that protest would be rendered ineffective because it would never be known)? Between inside candiates and xenophobic hiring practices, this place is the biggest witchhunt since Salem, MA (see OP for evidence of this). '''R19: '''It can be a dead horse, but at least this forum shoud be a hub for job seekers to openly disccuss issues that affect most of us. That insistence in preventing people here from speaking some truths only shows how disturbing some are about explicitly pointing the dark sides of hiring practices. It's ironic that someone calls this place a witchhunt when academy is one of the most oppressive workplaces, and even more when most scholarship is about colonialism, dictatorship, censorship, discrimination of racial minorities, women, homosexuals, ... and then we should keep silent about favoritism. Right, nothing will change, but how about free speech which this country is the champion of? Censoring and blocking commentators access won't change people's mind either. '''R20''': Obviously. But a witchhunt is premised on someone crying "wolf" and then others taking that and running with it. Much like 90%-95% of these claims. Someone in the most remote corner of the room yells fire and everybody is just on board with it. No hard evidence. No facts or anything to substantiate their claim. They see smoke and assume the whole building is ablaze. I'm not saying they are wrong, but I am saying that all they do is spread the seeds of malcontent and paranoia to those who have little to no experience on the market. Those of us who have been around understand how these things work, more or less. What good does that do here except curb people's enthusiasm for a job that they thought they (and probably do) enjoy. None. I'm not saying don't talk about it. I'm not saying it isn't a problem. What I'm saying is that unfounded claims bring nothing to the conversation. Would anything you wrote get published without a solid, well-founded argument? I hope not. If so then that's another problem in and of itself. Well, the same should hold true for this forum. If you want to dialogue about something and effect change, well then bring a good argument to the table and let's talk about it, but don't come here assuming that just because so and so got hired at XYZ University that it is because they are Spanish. Before pointing the finger elsewhere, maybe we should reflect on our own practices and take a deeper look at ourselves. Maybe the problem lies much closer than we originally believed. '''R21.''' This is a remarkably resilient horse. Are we sure it's dead? We should probably all look at our practices, yes, especially the notion that disagreements equals "censoring" and "blocking." I would also disagree that the Academy is one of the "most oppressive" workplaces. It's definitely a mess, no argument, and we can call it out on it. Some institutional messes are more privileged than others, just as some are more toxic than others, but to say it's "most oppressive" is an over generalization that runs the risk of erasing far more oppressive workplaces, like prisons, factory lines, agricultural work and so on. '''R22: '''I didn't know that witchhunt is premised on the wolf story. So I guess that if someone cries "Nike," then you see most people running with it because it's "cool" and any generic sport shoes are dissmissed because, you know, it's not cool. Or some academic upstart cries "disability studies" and then everyone do research in disability studies because if you don't, well, you're not doing "cool" research. Hard evidence of this being cool or that not being cool? This entire wiki works on the grounds of no evidence at all. Where is the evidence of a fellow who got a job at X college, or an interview at Y, or $83,000 at an eastern liberal arts college? People see these claims and take them for granted. No one truly concerned about those new to the job market being infected with malcontent and paranoia doesn't spend so much time showing unease with this issue (Oh, that's so sweet to be concerned about new little ones). Maybe this horse is part of the problem and feels pointed. Anyways, what makes someone feel entitled to determine what can be said and what can't be? Evidence of preference for Spaniards in THAT particular department? The chair speaks peninsular Spanish and did research in Spanish literature for the thesis, the graduate coordinator is Spanish, the administrative coordinator speaks peninsular Spanish and does research in Spanish literature, the language teaching coordinator studied and lived in Spain for a long time. Last year a former student, Spanish of course, got a TT linguistics job. This Spanish alumnus was the head of the search committee for another linguistics TT position and again a Spaniard got the job. The new lecturer, yes, Spaniard, comes from the graduate coordinator's hometown and PhD granting institution after several faculty members and graduate students voiced that they were not impressed with the candidate. So, all the leading positions are either Spaniards or Americans who speak peninsular Spanish or studied in Spain. A Spanish MA student, who wasn't required to write a thesis to get the degree, got a research assistantship and even lived out of town doing... who knows, while a PhD Latin American student, who's required to write a dissertation, was denied an RA for whatever reason they invented. Then the same Spanish student, after graduating, and another MA Spanish graduate are the only privileged people who have taught online from their towns, even though they are no longer students, whille no anouncements for these positions were published. Now another MA Spanish graduate is the only one teaching online. So, after all this evidence, sorry, I meant "coincidence" (and there is much more), I don't need to experience prison or agriculture life to know how oppressive academia may be. Implicit oppression is as painful as explicit oppression, sometimes even more. And no, censorship and blocking don't equal disagreement, rather the opposite--disagreements equal being censored and blocked.''' R23 to R19.''' Thank you! Some people want to censor comments here becasue they know it is true and it's an issue. Actually, some of use DO have evidence, we just can't post names here (otherwise I would). Also, it is not too hard to check departments' websites where you can CLEARLY see where each faculty member is from. There are universities even in the southwest where only this year a mexicanist is being hired and has several faculty from Spain. No hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver.... '''R24:''' Witchhunt's have nothing to do with being "cool". Not sure where "being in" came to the fore. It has to do simply with making an unsubstantiated claim and then it getting blown out of proportion - cool or not. Your "evidence" about the faculty in question may be true. Maybe they do ONLY hire peninsularists or those with experience/studies in Spain. Or maybe, just maybe, they hired the candidate that the committee felt was the most qualified for the position. Maybe those who interviewed from other parts came across as pompous, entitiled, unprofessional, or just incompetent.You can't prove that it is one way, just like I can't prove that it is not. The point being made is that these claims are all fine and dandy if you want to throw them around to your friends over drinks in order to explain why YOU THINK you didn't land a job, but they aren't for the forum - at least making assumptions that do no good for anyone (even though it might feel good to get it off your chest anonymously). Furthermore, if you think you have been excluded based on your background, race, beliefs, or whatever, then go talk to a lawyer. I'm sure that if one can be discriminated against due to age, they can be discriminated against because of where they are from/where they studied. Maybe the threat of class action suits will force their hand...and your condescending remark about being mindful of future scholars in our field? Shouldn't we all be concerned with the future of our fields, our colleagues, and our work? Shouldn't we be looking out for those who come after us to try and make the whole job market process a little less toxic and "oppressive"? Sholdn't we come down from our ivory tower even if for a moment? Maybe this in one of the problems with the Humanities in general...the divide between those who have been in the field and those who are just begining. Perhaps the solution lies in concerning ourselves with others, understanding their plight, and showing a little bit of solidarity with them rather than making snide remarks about caring about their situation. Maybe if we weren't so focused on our own studies, we might be able to mitigate the diminishing market. You know what is oppressive to me...trying to learn about the job market and how to best approach things only to end up reading a thread chalked full of vitriol about certain departments, people, and area studies. I know that nothing got me more excited to take on the job market than being soured on it before I even began the journey. YAY! This doesn't only refer to this thread either...in refers to the ever-present "inside candidate" paranoia that abounds. It refers to passive-agressive comments like one I read the other day (that has since been deleted) that mentioned and offer to a university, yet criticized the area in which the university was located. Why is that necessary? Sounded like someone was a little bitter that they didn't land the job. Anyway, I'm going to go back to what my mother always told me...if you don't anything nice to say, then don't say it. There are ways raise awareness and dialogue about certin topics that don't require libel and backhanded insults. '''R25: '''So I don't know what kind of evidence you have used to claim that if somebody points out a bias favorable to Spaniards, this is because s/he didn't land a job. I did land a job, and a good one, but this doesn't prevent me from pointing to a series of despicable "coincidence" taking place wherever. What makes you entitled to tell me what I must do? It's curious to see that you present yourself as the guy who's "right" and those who rub salt in the wound are necesserily wrong. Why? Because you're part of those benefited from this bias? FYI, it's a truism that this political regime has been created for the rich --that's why any racist attitude is "illegal", because most people who are excluded based on race are blacks, Latinos, indigenous, i.e., people who typically can't afford a lawyer and discrimination against them remains unpunished. Those who discriminate knows who they can discriminate against. And of course, in academe, search committees usually resorts to mandatory farce to cover their asses, that is, for people like you come to say: "this search has given thorough consideration to all applicants and there is no evidence of violantion nor bias" blah blah blah. So it's interesting to read that we should provide assistance to new job seekers in our field, but at the same time hiding the fact that academic market is really diminishing (which has triggered fake searches, nepotism, favoritism as never before) is seen as "helpful." I guess that a delusional "solidarity," if "positive" and "nice," is OK and never creates false expectations nor any disappointment. This must be very helpful to our colleagues indeed. In a extremely individualistic, double-standard society like this, it's mind-blowing to hear the ridiculous rhetoric of comfotable, false solidarity while keeping privileges and opportunities based on their class and/or race. If we really want to help others, let's start by moving away from our comfort zones, giving up our privileges, and not pretending solidarity from a safe place. Well, it seems that you haven't followed your mommy's piece of advice--you haven't had anything very nice to say as your responses are full of anger, bitterness, and desperation for removing any uncomfortable remarks that affect you in the first place. Otherwise you wouldn't be ranting here over and over again. It looks like you are the one here who haven't landed any job despite the fact of you being so caring, smiley, altruistic, and of course, privileged and favored. '''R26''': I haven't said one derogatory remark yet and I have hardly (nor will I ever) claim to be "right". I apologize if you misinterpreted my statement, but to clarify to you and anyone else who mistakingly thinks I'm criticizing people or trying to "silence" them (as if I have the power to do so), my remarks simply point out the flaw in using this page as some platform to smear others/departments/searches. Again, write whatever you want, that's ultimately your perogative, but don't cry wolf because you didn't get a job. Or cry wolf, but please provide hair, scat, or something to substantiate it. Isn't that sort of the premise of everything we do in our jobs? Make a claim or argument, and then back it up (and no, coincidence probably won't get you anything published, so why should it hold water here? We all know that this is a highly subjective, competitive, and potentially discriminatory job market/search, but there is no need to fan the flames of discontent among others (especially if it may only be partially true). Again, nobody except the search committee is privy to what goes on behind closed doors, and to think that you, me, or anyone else has some kind of "in" is delusional and misrepresentative at best. I'm all for outting all those forms of discriminatory practices that you laid out above to shed light on the problems of our job market - I'll even be the first to rally around you with torches and pitchforks. However, for that to happen you have to give me something to work with, not just a whim because you are angry about not landing a job. Solidarity comes in many forms. Constructive advice would be one of them, and more than likely the most useful via this platform. '''R27''': ''' '''I guess calling someone xenophobic for pointing at a clear preference for Spaniards in that particular department isn't derogatory from your view.; it's just right and indisputable. However, this is also unfounded, or what have you provided to substantiate such a claim? And again, what makes believe that I didn't land a job? Just because I'm telling an obvious trend in that department? Please, read above again--I DO have a job, a great job I can't complaint about. Yet, this isn't a reason why I should keep silent about favoritism. Again, why you feel entitled to tell me not to cry wolf? You aren't the only one here posting and this is a free forum to talk about anything related to the job market. If you don't like what you read, simply stop reading and move along. It's obvious that you are trying to silence people who post uncomfortable remarks that bothers you in the first place. Conveying what YOU think can be said or not won't get you anything published either. But when you see so many facts that paint the same picture, can't I draw a conclusion based on that? Want more "coincidence", beside the many facts I have pointed above? A PhD Spaniard is the only student who has been awarded the "best student" award in his very first year, which has never been the case. And yes, we also know that the best student usually isn't the best student, but the best asslicker. A Spaniard MA student had much more consideration than a non-Spaniard for the same requests (deadline extensions, positive remarks on papers and presentations, better guidance, etc). A female Spanish professor has been engaged in sexual relationships with many undergraduate students, even getting pregnant from one of them, with no consequences (I guess if she were a Latina, she would probably be accused of "misconduct" and expelled, or if she were a male Argentine professor, probable she would had been kicked out by this point [https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/s%C3%ADmbolo-almohadilla-numeral.1972049/ #]MeToo). Last but not least (and this is true for the whole academe), all Spanish textbooks include the vosotros forms, which is only used in Spain, however vos forms, which are used in several countries across Hispanic America and much more than vosotros ones, is only a footnote in those textbooks. Wow, what a coincidence! Too many, right? And still you would say that this is unfounded, lacks of evidence, and it's a subjective perspective from somebody bitter because s/he hasn't landed a job. I don't think these issues only can be discussed over a beer. Since we can't either discuss them in our colleges or workplaces because of retaliation that would affect your career, at least a forum like this should also embrace dark sides of our profession. In general, only arguable issues that affect white people can be publicly discussed. Otherwise, for example, why sexual harassament or assault may put you in prison, while beating a black or a Latin individual to death won't arouse such a punishment? Ah, because sexual harassment affects white women, but racism, even if violent, only affects non-white people. And you know, it doesn't matter--those bad hombres should be deported to Africa or Mexico, right? If you want more "coincidence" about preference for Spaniards in that department, let me know. I'll be more than happy to provide a complete picture of it.

* '''U of FL''' (3/29) Spanish Lecturer (accepted, second hand, realiable). This confirms once more the department's preference for Spaniards, or people who have completed some studies in Spain. '''R1''': ¡Mecachis! '''R2: Breaking News:''' AMLO demands King Felipe VI apologizes for qualified Spaniards' getting jobs in the Americas. '''R3: '''King Felipe VI should apologize for qualified Spaniards not getting jobs in Spain and becoming new immigrants in the Americas.''' R4:''' Hello fellow job seekers! I personally think we should all celebrate the fact that academics can get a job in different countries if that's what they want, and avoid any remarks that could be deemed xenophobic. Let's all be good colleagues and not bitter! Good luck on your searches and congrats if you already secured a job! '''To O.P. '''100% Agree. The worst part is that is not only U of FL. '''R6: '''Well, I don't know which part xenophobia is in these comments, yet I can add that not only words can be xenophobic, but also attitudes, preferences, behaviors, even lack of any words. As for qualifications, there are many non-Spaniards as qualified as any Spaniard, most of them with training in US. Regardless of national origin, it's kinda unlikely that an individual with a non-American degree can be as qualified as anyone with an American degree, not because the foreign degree is worse, but because we are talking about very different educational systems, preparation, teaching methods and expectations. So it's impossible to accept covering up a reality that may be uncofortable for those involved in such a clear preference. When you see that all of the finalists are Spaniards, one of them from the same town of a Spanish professor, and also another one who was a student of another Spanish professor elsewhere, then you cannot simply trivialize a fact nor demand collegiality, which has nothing to do with complicity. '''R7''': Spaniards are not always the selected ones. I know Spaniards with excellent qualifications who have been rejected after campus visits and the position was finally for a non-Spaniard with fewer academic merits. '''R8: '''The opposite also happens. Spaniards with fewer merits than non-Spaniards get the job. '''R9: '''From an outsider's perspective, it is interesting that two of the UF searches are being the most controversial this year, however the literature one was not. I'm assuming no Spaniard got that position and therefore there's no reason to complain about that one? As for candidates with international degrees, I believe hiring such individuals enriches any educational system, since they bring in new ideas and perspectives, which is the point of education at the end of the day, and in fact, I'd say it is harder for people without an American degree (even if it's Canadian) to get a job in the States. I don't know about the backgrounds of these finalists, but I'd say we shouldn't rush into conclusions, since there is always a lottery factor in job searches. There's no way we can know what the search committees see in a particular finalist, or how well they did during a campus visit, in terms of scholarship potential, or simply by seeming to be someone who'd be a good colleague, which is, after all, what they are looking for. I think passing resentful judgment on people's nationalities or educational backgrounds doesn't help us much, especially when being on the job market. This is already too difficult an experience already. Once again, good luck everybody! '''R10: '''I think the literature position is in Latin American colonial studies, so it's rare to see a Spaniard doing research in this field. As for the enriching the educational system with an international degree, come on, anything not done "a la americana" has little chance even in Spanish departments, especially when there are hundreds of people with a US degree in hand without a job. I don't know about anyone with a Latin American degree getting a job in the States, though. So it's striking that someone who doesn't even have the PhD in hand from a foreign college suddenly gets the job. As for a "good colleague," what does it actually mean? That Latin American collegiality isn't as good as Spanish? If this is the case, it would sound a little racist. After all, a good colleague typically is someone either manipulable or willing to suck up to superiors without complaining and to agree with all of their decisions that benefit them, even if those decisions affect their subordinates, including those who suck up to them. Yeah, this is what they are all looking for. With that said, good luck everyone! '''R11:''' I think there is some confusion of terms going on here. Is the problem the hiring of Spaniards without degrees from the US or is it that the hires come from the same hometown as a faculty member? The latter seems like a conflict of interest which is a huge problem, but the complaints about the hiring of "Spaniards" as a problem is xenophobic at best. Why should a university only hire from within the US? Is it also a problem when someone is hired with a degree from a Chilean or Mexican university or just a Spanish university? If so, why? '''R12: '''2 things - can we put this at the bottom in the General Discussion where it belongs like the last one which is my second thing responding to R9, the colonial(lit) job did generate a lot of discussion and it was moved to a different part of the page. Scroll down and you'll see the same ridiculousness you see here. '''R13: '''There is no confusion here, so let's not distort the original comment. The problem isn't hiring Spaniards, but a clear preference for Spaniards (or non-Spaniards who have studied in Spain or people who learned the peninsular Spanish) when it comes to hiring faculty in that particular department, which is racism at best. And yes, the new faculty member comes from the same town and the same college where another faculty member completed the PhD. So the claim about "let's be good collegues" and the accusation of xenophobia to cover up this obvious bias are just ways to distract from the real problem. It's been almost impossible to fight this powerful system, but at least let's speak freely even if nothing changes. R13, you can move this thread to the General Discussion section if you like. '''R14'''. A couple of years ago, a Spanish woman was hired by another Spanish woman (her friend who was also the head of the search committe), and they didn't even interview me after they email me scheduling an interview. When I contacted them they had already selected her. I had to file a complain to the dean who thought what they did was awful. Please, do not tell me there isnt't a bias. Spaniards hire Spaniards no matter what their qualifications are. Look at the faculty at Colorado State University. '''R15: '''I think that's an overgeneralization; hires are decided by the whole faculty and ultimately by the department head, not just the head of the search committee. I do agree that it sounds like they didn't maneuver your situation well at all. On a different note, if everyone's ok with it, I'll move this whole thread to general discussion. '''R16''': Responding to R14, also non Spaniards tend to hire non Spaniards. I have seen departments that have non Spaniard faculty in fields like medieval or golden age studies, but you will hardly see a Spaniard in the colonial field (unless he or she is golden age AND colonial). Spaniards have more chances to be rejected in Latin American positions than non Spaniards to be rejected in peninsular positions. At the end, all that matters is whether you have contacts or not. '''R11. '''It's not distorting terms when the follow-up to the OP stated that "The worst part is that it is not only U of FL." The OP is upset about a singular institution--which may be true. To extend that to Spaniards or non-Spaniards who have studied in Spain is where it becomes overgeneralization and confusing. This led to R16's assertion that non-Spaniards hire non-Spaniards. My point here is: Can we discuss particular institutions or departments without extending that to the entire profession? I worry sometimes that we are creating an atmosphere where everyone suspects everyone, rendering collaboration impossible. '''R18''': I'm going respond only because this post has gone on much longer than it really should. I always question why people continue to beat this dead horse? This is a problem with no solution in sight, yet it (and others like it) appears time and again, year in year out, on this board. I get it...we seek comfort in knowing that others feel/think/suffer the same thing we do, but most of the accusations andassumptions thrown out on this forum are tenuous at best and absolutely cannot be proven. Furthermore, why would we discuss particular institutions? What good does that do? Do you actually think that a candidate who is offered a job from one of these schools would turn it down as some form of protest or in solidarity with those who in theory were never given a chance (Hint: they won't, because desperate times won't allow it, plus that protest would be rendered ineffective because it would never be known)? Between inside candiates and xenophobic hiring practices, this place is the biggest witchhunt since Salem, MA (see OP for evidence of this). '''R19: '''It can be a dead horse, but at least this forum shoud be a hub for job seekers to openly disccuss issues that affect most of us. That insistence in preventing people here from speaking some truths only shows how disturbing some are about explicitly pointing the dark sides of hiring practices. It's ironic that someone calls this place a witchhunt when academy is one of the most oppressive workplaces, and even more when most scholarship is about colonialism, dictatorship, censorship, discrimination of racial minorities, women, homosexuals, ... and then we should keep silent about favoritism. Right, nothing will change, but how about free speech which this country is the champion of? Censoring and blocking commentators access won't change people's mind either. '''R20''': Obviously. But a witchhunt is premised on someone crying "wolf" and then others taking that and running with it. Much like 90%-95% of these claims. Someone in the most remote corner of the room yells fire and everybody is just on board with it. No hard evidence. No facts or anything to substantiate their claim. They see smoke and assume the whole building is ablaze. I'm not saying they are wrong, but I am saying that all they do is spread the seeds of malcontent and paranoia to those who have little to no experience on the market. Those of us who have been around understand how these things work, more or less. What good does that do here except curb people's enthusiasm for a job that they thought they (and probably do) enjoy. None. I'm not saying don't talk about it. I'm not saying it isn't a problem. What I'm saying is that unfounded claims bring nothing to the conversation. Would anything you wrote get published without a solid, well-founded argument? I hope not. If so then that's another problem in and of itself. Well, the same should hold true for this forum. If you want to dialogue about something and effect change, well then bring a good argument to the table and let's talk about it, but don't come here assuming that just because so and so got hired at XYZ University that it is because they are Spanish. Before pointing the finger elsewhere, maybe we should reflect on our own practices and take a deeper look at ourselves. Maybe the problem lies much closer than we originally believed. '''R21.''' This is a remarkably resilient horse. Are we sure it's dead? We should probably all look at our practices, yes, especially the notion that disagreements equals "censoring" and "blocking." I would also disagree that the Academy is one of the "most oppressive" workplaces. It's definitely a mess, no argument, and we can call it out on it. Some institutional messes are more privileged than others, just as some are more toxic than others, but to say it's "most oppressive" is an over generalization that runs the risk of erasing far more oppressive workplaces, like prisons, factory lines, agricultural work and so on. '''R22: '''I didn't know that witchhunt is premised on the wolf story. So I guess that if someone cries "Nike," then you see most people running with it because it's "cool" and any generic sport shoes are dissmissed because, you know, it's not cool. Or some academic upstart cries "disability studies" and then everyone do research in disability studies because if you don't, well, you're not doing "cool" research. Hard evidence of this being cool or that not being cool? This entire wiki works on the grounds of no evidence at all. Where is the evidence of a fellow who got a job at X college, or an interview at Y, or $83,000 at an eastern liberal arts college? People see these claims and take them for granted. No one truly concerned about those new to the job market being infected with malcontent and paranoia doesn't spend so much time showing unease with this issue (Oh, that's so sweet to be concerned about new little ones). Maybe this horse is part of the problem and feels pointed. Anyways, what makes someone feel entitled to determine what can be said and what can't be? Evidence of preference for Spaniards in THAT particular department? The chair speaks peninsular Spanish and did research in Spanish literature for the thesis, the graduate coordinator is Spanish, the administrative coordinator speaks peninsular Spanish and does research in Spanish literature, the language teaching coordinator studied and lived in Spain for a long time. Last year a former student, Spanish of course, got a TT linguistics job. This Spanish alumnus was the head of the search committee for another linguistics TT position and again a Spaniard got the job. The new lecturer, yes, Spaniard, comes from the graduate coordinator's hometown and PhD granting institution after several faculty members and graduate students voiced that they were not impressed with the candidate. So, all the leading positions are either Spaniards or Americans who speak peninsular Spanish or studied in Spain. A Spanish MA student, who wasn't required to write a thesis to get the degree, got a research assistantship and even lived out of town doing... who knows, while a PhD Latin American student, who's required to write a dissertation, was denied an RA for whatever reason they invented. Then the same Spanish student, after graduating, and another MA Spanish graduate are the only privileged people who have taught online from their towns, even though they are no longer students, whille no anouncements for these positions were published. Now another MA Spanish graduate is the only one teaching online. So, after all this evidence, sorry, I meant "coincidence" (and there is much more), I don't need to experience prison or agriculture life to know how oppressive academia may be. Implicit oppression is as painful as explicit oppression, sometimes even more. And no, censorship and blocking don't equal disagreement, rather the opposite--disagreements equal being censored and blocked.''' R23 to R19.''' Thank you! Some people want to censor comments here becasue they know it is true and it's an issue. Actually, some of use DO have evidence, we just can't post names here (otherwise I would). Also, it is not too hard to check departments' websites where you can CLEARLY see where each faculty member is from. There are universities even in the southwest where only this year a mexicanist is being hired and has several faculty from Spain. No hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver.... '''R24:''' Witchhunt's have nothing to do with being "cool". Not sure where "being in" came to the fore. It has to do simply with making an unsubstantiated claim and then it getting blown out of proportion - cool or not. Your "evidence" about the faculty in question may be true. Maybe they do ONLY hire peninsularists or those with experience/studies in Spain. Or maybe, just maybe, they hired the candidate that the committee felt was the most qualified for the position. Maybe those who interviewed from other parts came across as pompous, entitiled, unprofessional, or just incompetent.You can't prove that it is one way, just like I can't prove that it is not. The point being made is that these claims are all fine and dandy if you want to throw them around to your friends over drinks in order to explain why YOU THINK you didn't land a job, but they aren't for the forum - at least making assumptions that do no good for anyone (even though it might feel good to get it off your chest anonymously). Furthermore, if you think you have been excluded based on your background, race, beliefs, or whatever, then go talk to a lawyer. I'm sure that if one can be discriminated against due to age, they can be discriminated against because of where they are from/where they studied. Maybe the threat of class action suits will force their hand...and your condescending remark about being mindful of future scholars in our field? Shouldn't we all be concerned with the future of our fields, our colleagues, and our work? Shouldn't we be looking out for those who come after us to try and make the whole job market process a little less toxic and "oppressive"? Sholdn't we come down from our ivory tower even if for a moment? Maybe this in one of the problems with the Humanities in general...the divide between those who have been in the field and those who are just begining. Perhaps the solution lies in concerning ourselves with others, understanding their plight, and showing a little bit of solidarity with them rather than making snide remarks about caring about their situation. Maybe if we weren't so focused on our own studies, we might be able to mitigate the diminishing market. You know what is oppressive to me...trying to learn about the job market and how to best approach things only to end up reading a thread chalked full of vitriol about certain departments, people, and area studies. I know that nothing got me more excited to take on the job market than being soured on it before I even began the journey. YAY! This doesn't only refer to this thread either...in refers to the ever-present "inside candidate" paranoia that abounds. It refers to passive-agressive comments like one I read the other day (that has since been deleted) that mentioned and offer to a university, yet criticized the area in which the university was located. Why is that necessary? Sounded like someone was a little bitter that they didn't land the job. Anyway, I'm going to go back to what my mother always told me...if you don't anything nice to say, then don't say it. There are ways raise awareness and dialogue about certin topics that don't require libel and backhanded insults. '''R25: '''So I don't know what kind of evidence you have used to claim that if somebody points out a bias favorable to Spaniards, this is because s/he didn't land a job. I did land a job, and a good one, but this doesn't prevent me from pointing to a series of despicable "coincidence" taking place wherever. What makes you entitled to tell me what I must do? It's curious to see that you present yourself as the guy who's "right" and those who rub salt in the wound are necesserily wrong. Why? Because you're part of those benefited from this bias? FYI, it's a truism that this political regime has been created for the rich --that's why any racist attitude is "illegal", because most people who are excluded based on race are blacks, Latinos, indigenous, i.e., people who typically can't afford a lawyer and discrimination against them remains unpunished. Those who discriminate knows who they can discriminate against. And of course, in academe, search committees usually resorts to mandatory farce to cover their asses, that is, for people like you come to say: "this search has given thorough consideration to all applicants and there is no evidence of violantion nor bias" blah blah blah. So it's interesting to read that we should provide assistance to new job seekers in our field, but at the same time hiding the fact that academic market is really diminishing (which has triggered fake searches, nepotism, favoritism as never before) is seen as "helpful." I guess that a delusional "solidarity," if "positive" and "nice," is OK and never creates false expectations nor any disappointment. This must be very helpful to our colleagues indeed. In a extremely individualistic, double-standard society like this, it's mind-blowing to hear the ridiculous rhetoric of comfotable, false solidarity while keeping privileges and opportunities based on their class and/or race. If we really want to help others, let's start by moving away from our comfort zones, giving up our privileges, and not pretending solidarity from a safe place. Well, it seems that you haven't followed your mommy's piece of advice--you haven't had anything very nice to say as your responses are full of anger, bitterness, and desperation for removing any uncomfortable remarks that affect you in the first place. Otherwise you wouldn't be ranting here over and over again. It looks like you are the one here who haven't landed any job despite the fact of you being so caring, smiley, altruistic, and of course, privileged and favored. '''R26''': I haven't said one derogatory remark yet and I have hardly (nor will I ever) claim to be "right". I apologize if you misinterpreted my statement, but to clarify to you and anyone else who mistakingly thinks I'm criticizing people or trying to "silence" them (as if I have the power to do so), my remarks simply point out the flaw in using this page as some platform to smear others/departments/searches. Again, write whatever you want, that's ultimately your perogative, but don't cry wolf because you didn't get a job. Or cry wolf, but please provide hair, scat, or something to substantiate it. Isn't that sort of the premise of everything we do in our jobs? Make a claim or argument, and then back it up (and no, coincidence probably won't get you anything published, so why should it hold water here? We all know that this is a highly subjective, competitive, and potentially discriminatory job market/search, but there is no need to fan the flames of discontent among others (especially if it may only be partially true). Again, nobody except the search committee is privy to what goes on behind closed doors, and to think that you, me, or anyone else has some kind of "in" is delusional and misrepresentative at best. I'm all for outting all those forms of discriminatory practices that you laid out above to shed light on the problems of our job market - I'll even be the first to rally around you with torches and pitchforks. However, for that to happen you have to give me something to work with, not just a whim because you are angry about not landing a job. Solidarity comes in many forms. Constructive advice would be one of them, and more than likely the most useful via this platform. '''R27''': ''' '''I guess calling someone xenophobic for pointing at a clear preference for Spaniards in that particular department isn't derogatory from your view.; it's just right and indisputable. However, this is also unfounded, or what have you provided to substantiate such a claim? And again, what makes believe that I didn't land a job? Just because I'm telling an obvious trend in that department? Please, read above again--I DO have a job, a great job I can't complaint about. Yet, this isn't a reason why I should keep silent about favoritism. Again, why you feel entitled to tell me not to cry wolf? You aren't the only one here posting and this is a free forum to talk about anything related to the job market. If you don't like what you read, simply stop reading and move along. It's obvious that you are trying to silence people who post uncomfortable remarks that bothers you in the first place. Conveying what YOU think can be said or not won't get you anything published either. But when you see so many facts that paint the same picture, can't I draw a conclusion based on that? Want more "coincidence", beside the many facts I have pointed above? A PhD Spaniard is the only student who has been awarded the "best student" award in his very first year, which has never been the case. And yes, we also know that the best student usually isn't the best student, but the best asslicker. A Spaniard MA student had much more consideration than a non-Spaniard for the same requests (deadline extensions, positive remarks on papers and presentations, better guidance, etc). A female Spanish professor has been engaged in sexual relationships with many undergraduate students, even getting pregnant from one of them, with no consequences (I guess if she were a Latina, she would probably be accused of "misconduct" and expelled, or if she were a male Argentine professor, probable she would had been kicked out by this point [https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/s%C3%ADmbolo-almohadilla-numeral.1972049/ #]MeToo). Last but not least (and this is true for the whole academe), all Spanish textbooks include the vosotros forms, which is only used in Spain, however vos forms, which are used in several countries across Hispanic America and much more than vosotros ones, is only a footnote in those textbooks. Wow, what a coincidence! Too many, right? And still you would say that this is unfounded, lacks of evidence, and it's a subjective perspective from somebody bitter because s/he hasn't landed a job. I don't think these issues only can be discussed over a beer. Since we can't either discuss them in our colleges or workplaces because of retaliation that would affect your career, at least a forum like this should also embrace dark sides of our profession. In general, only arguable issues that affect white people can be publicly discussed. Otherwise, for example, why sexual harassament or assault may put you in prison, while beating a black or a Latin individual to death won't arouse such a punishment? Ah, because sexual harassment affects white women, but racism, even if violent, only affects non-white people. And you know, it doesn't matter--those bad hombres should be deported to Africa or Mexico, right? If you want more "coincidence" about preference for Spaniards in that department, let me know. I'll be more than happy to provide a complete picture of it.

* A reflection. Yesterday I received this on my email and I am wondering about ethical uses of the information we provide in our applications. I am questioning this because this college has already moved on with its processes and, as far as it's been discussed here, they are on the verge of making an offer. In other words, they are using our applications as bait to complete their surveys, probably without knowing that we can call out their bluff. Thoughts?. This is the text I received: “Thank you for your interest in the Assistant Professor for Assistant Professor of Spanish for X College.   Your credentials are currently being reviewed by the appropriate search committee.  X College endeavors to promote diversity on campus. Through its commitment to equal opportunity X College has developed an applicant survey form. This form is completely'' voluntary and confidential.'' All applicants are asked to complete the form that can be found on our website: (link)” '''A1:''' It just looks like HR didn’t send the survey out earlier in the application process like they should have. It’s fairly boilerplate text. The purpose of requesting demographic information is usually so HR can figure out if they are attracting a diverse group of applicants to given position types. If they see that they are not, they can then try to remedy that. They can do this by reassessing the wording and content of their job ads, making sure that the ads get posted in a wider variety of outlets, or in the case of faculty positions, taking the step of sharing the ads directly with specific graduate programs that faculty recommend or with HBCUs and other institutions that have more diversity in their graduate student populations. HR can even revamp the training they do for employees serving on search committees to make them aware of all of these and other considerations. And HR does these things based on the trends they see in the demographic surveys.

* A reflection. Yesterday I received this on my email and I am wondering about ethical uses of the information we provide in our applications. I am questioning this because this college has already moved on with its processes and, as far as it's been discussed here, they are on the verge of making an offer. In other words, they are using our applications as bait to complete their surveys, probably without knowing that we can call out their bluff. Thoughts?. This is the text I received: “Thank you for your interest in the Assistant Professor for Assistant Professor of Spanish for X College.   Your credentials are currently being reviewed by the appropriate search committee.  X College endeavors to promote diversity on campus. Through its commitment to equal opportunity X College has developed an applicant survey form. This form is completely'' voluntary and confidential.'' All applicants are asked to complete the form that can be found on our website: (link)” '''A1:''' It just looks like HR didn’t send the survey out earlier in the application process like they should have. It’s fairly boilerplate text. The purpose of requesting demographic information is usually so HR can figure out if they are attracting a diverse group of applicants to given position types. If they see that they are not, they can then try to remedy that. They can do this by reassessing the wording and content of their job ads, making sure that the ads get posted in a wider variety of outlets, or in the case of faculty positions, taking the step of sharing the ads directly with specific graduate programs that faculty recommend or with HBCUs and other institutions that have more diversity in their graduate student populations. HR can even revamp the training they do for employees serving on search committees to make them aware of all of these and other considerations. And HR does these things based on the trends they see in the demographic surveys.

* Any word on Michigan State post campus visits?

* Any word on Michigan State post campus visits?

* '''Moved from Offers''' since it was deleted by another user: '''U of FL''' (02/15) Syntax (Second hand, reliable) The department's preference for the Spaniards is obvious. '''A: '''Ha ha, trying being non-native. Villanova won't even interview highly qualified non-native scholars. '''A: '''Non-native of English? '''A2: '''Non-native of Spanish. '''A3: '''That's probably at Villanova, but in general non-native of English are always at a disadvantage for best positions. '''A4. '''Non-native Spanish speakers complain they are at a disadvantage while non-native English speakers complain they are. It's been pretty even as far as I can tell, although I am noticing a huge amount of paranoid persecution complexes these days. For the record, I'm at an R1 with even distribution on both sides. '''A5. '''The Spanish jobs wiki has been civil this year. Please don’t start with condescending characterizations about “paranoid persecution complexes” while slipping in “I’m at an R1” in the same comment. The Spanish jobs wiki has been a lot less toxic this year than previous ones, and there are kinder ways to help people understand that their anecdotal experiences with the market might not accurately capture the overall trends in hiring decisions in the field. '''A6:''' Absolutely agree with A5, please let's keep consdescending comments away from the wiki. The market is awful as it is, the least thing we can do is be kind with other people here. We are all here for the same reason. '''A7: '''Sois todos unos gilipollas. '''A8: '''Wow, that escalated quickly. '''A9'''. Not sure how it is unkind to say "paranoid persecution complex" when multiple people are accusing institutions of inside hires or talking about how native or non-native are preferred for a job. It pits people against each other when they can use support. It was not at all meant to be condescending, but to remind people that some programs train their graduate students to think their fellow grad students are out to get them when that is not necessarily the case. I discovered late that my biggest problem was HR, not search committees. Also, why do you all assume everyone on here wants R1? They don't. Colleges are cool. '''A9:''' In what way was your problem HR? Their primary involvement in the process besides paperwork is posting the job ad, doing the background checks on finalists, and then completing the hiring procedures for the candidate who gets the position. And how is “R1” distinct from “colleges”? '''A10. '''R1s are bigger than colleges, with larger enrollments. HR is often a problem with descriptions, types of language put into searches and demands on who can and cannot be hired. My first job was in a place where they were not allowed, by HR, to hire anyone who needed a visa, but they were also not allowed to say so in the advertisement. Unfair. 

* '''Moved from Offers''' since it was deleted by another user: '''U of FL''' (02/15) Syntax (Second hand, reliable) The department's preference for the Spaniards is obvious. '''A: '''Ha ha, trying being non-native. Villanova won't even interview highly qualified non-native scholars. '''A: '''Non-native of English? '''A2: '''Non-native of Spanish. '''A3: '''That's probably at Villanova, but in general non-native of English are always at a disadvantage for best positions. '''A4. '''Non-native Spanish speakers complain they are at a disadvantage while non-native English speakers complain they are. It's been pretty even as far as I can tell, although I am noticing a huge amount of paranoid persecution complexes these days. For the record, I'm at an R1 with even distribution on both sides. '''A5. '''The Spanish jobs wiki has been civil this year. Please don’t start with condescending characterizations about “paranoid persecution complexes” while slipping in “I’m at an R1” in the same comment. The Spanish jobs wiki has been a lot less toxic this year than previous ones, and there are kinder ways to help people understand that their anecdotal experiences with the market might not accurately capture the overall trends in hiring decisions in the field. '''A6:''' Absolutely agree with A5, please let's keep consdescending comments away from the wiki. The market is awful as it is, the least thing we can do is be kind with other people here. We are all here for the same reason. '''A7: '''Sois todos unos gilipollas. '''A8: '''Wow, that escalated quickly. '''A9'''. Not sure how it is unkind to say "paranoid persecution complex" when multiple people are accusing institutions of inside hires or talking about how native or non-native are preferred for a job. It pits people against each other when they can use support. It was not at all meant to be condescending, but to remind people that some programs train their graduate students to think their fellow grad students are out to get them when that is not necessarily the case. I discovered late that my biggest problem was HR, not search committees. Also, why do you all assume everyone on here wants R1? They don't. Colleges are cool. '''A9:''' In what way was your problem HR? Their primary involvement in the process besides paperwork is posting the job ad, doing the background checks on finalists, and then completing the hiring procedures for the candidate who gets the position. And how is “R1” distinct from “colleges”? '''A10. '''R1s are bigger than colleges, with larger enrollments. HR is often a problem with descriptions, types of language put into searches and demands on who can and cannot be hired. My first job was in a place where they were not allowed, by HR, to hire anyone who needed a visa, but they were also not allowed to say so in the advertisement. Unfair. 

*Not sure where to put this but Duolingo is looking for a Spanish Expert (PhD). Job details can be found [https://hire.withgoogle.com/public/jobs/duolingocom/view/P_AAAAAADAAADJztnid32xv7 here] . 

*Not sure where to put this but Duolingo is looking for a Spanish Expert (PhD). Job details can be found [https://hire.withgoogle.com/public/jobs/duolingocom/view/P_AAAAAADAAADJztnid32xv7 here] . 

*Hey folks! I tried to send my application to Marietta College adverstised here and I noticed on the university webpage that the deadline was January 9th (Chronicle vitae and other websites listed the deadline January 31st!). I wrote to HR and they don't allow me to send my material. Just letting you know if you were planning to apply for this position. '''R1: '''ugh, sorry :(

*Hey folks! I tried to send my application to Marietta College adverstised here and I noticed on the university webpage that the deadline was January 9th (Chronicle vitae and other websites listed the deadline January 31st!). I wrote to HR and they don't allow me to send my material. Just letting you know if you were planning to apply for this position. '''R1: '''ugh, sorry :(

*Please remember this wiki page depends on info volunteered by all of us directly or indirectly participating in this year's job market. I have just reposted info on campus visits to Syracuse that were erased. If you find that info has 'dissapeared' please repost even if its not connected to the position you are expecting to hear about. And to those who''' erase or post false info''', c'mon, you are seriously trying to become an academic who will educate future generations of students??? Shame on you. '''A1: '''Tienes razón. Alguien borró un puesto que vi anunciado aquí. Alcancé a solicitarlo, pero cuando vine a ver a los pocos días para buscar updates, ya no estaba en la lista de empleos, dejó de existir.

*Please remember this wiki page depends on info volunteered by all of us directly or indirectly participating in this year's job market. I have just reposted info on campus visits to Syracuse that were erased. If you find that info has 'dissapeared' please repost even if its not connected to the position you are expecting to hear about. And to those who''' erase or post false info''', c'mon, you are seriously trying to become an academic who will educate future generations of students??? Shame on you. '''A1: '''Tienes razón. Alguien borró un puesto que vi anunciado aquí. Alcancé a solicitarlo, pero cuando vine a ver a los pocos días para buscar updates, ya no estaba en la lista de empleos, dejó de existir.

#'''University of California, Santa Barbara.''' Lecturer Pool: Spanish. '''Open until filled.''' Posted on 1/29/19. Apply [https://recruit.ap.ucsb.edu/JPF01423 here].

#'''University of California, Santa Barbara.''' Lecturer Pool: Spanish. '''Open until filled.''' Posted on 1/29/19. Apply [https://recruit.ap.ucsb.edu/JPF01423 here].

#'''Allegheny College (PA)'''. TT Assistant Professor of Spanish. Deadline:''' open until filled.''' [https://www.higheredjobs.com/faculty/details.cfm?JobCode=176850345&Title=Assistant%20Professor%20of%20Spanish HigherEdJobs] (posted 10/30/18) .

#'''Allegheny College (PA)'''. TT Assistant Professor of Spanish. Deadline:''' open until filled.''' [https://www.higheredjobs.com/faculty/details.cfm?JobCode=176850345&Title=Assistant%20Professor%20of%20Spanish HigherEdJobs] (posted 10/30/18) .

#'''Appalachian State University (NC)'''. TT Asst. Professor - Spanish (Translation / Interpretation). Deadline: '''16 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56895 Interfolio].

#'''Appalachian State University (NC)'''. TT Asst. Professor - Spanish (Translation / Interpretation). Deadline: '''16 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56895 Interfolio].

#'''Arizona State University (AZ)'''. Clinical Assistant or Associate Professor, Spanish. Deadline: '''19 Feb 2019'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000462947-01 Chronicle] .

#'''Arizona State University (AZ)'''. Clinical Assistant or Associate Professor, Spanish. Deadline: '''19 Feb 2019'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000462947-01 Chronicle] .

#'''University of British Columbia (CAN)'''. TT Assistant Professor of Spanish (Caribbean Literatures and Cultures). Deadline: '''1 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/54967 Interfolio].

#'''University of British Columbia (CAN)'''. TT Assistant Professor of Spanish (Caribbean Literatures and Cultures). Deadline: '''1 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/54967 Interfolio].

#'''University of British Columbia (CAN)'''. Assistant Professor of Spanish (20th/21st-Century Mexican Literature and Cultures). Deadline: '''September 10, 2018''' and will continue until the position is filled. [https://fhis.ubc.ca/assistant-professor-of-spanish-20th-21st-century-mexican-literature-and-cultures/ fhis.ubc.ca].

#'''University of British Columbia (CAN)'''. Assistant Professor of Spanish (20th/21st-Century Mexican Literature and Cultures). Deadline: '''September 10, 2018''' and will continue until the position is filled. [https://fhis.ubc.ca/assistant-professor-of-spanish-20th-21st-century-mexican-literature-and-cultures/ fhis.ubc.ca].

#'''University of California, Los Angeles (CA)'''. Open Rank Faculty Position in Brazilian Studies. Deadline: '''16 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56415 Interfolio].

#'''University of California, Los Angeles (CA)'''. Open Rank Faculty Position in Brazilian Studies. Deadline: '''16 Nov. 2018'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56415 Interfolio].

#'''University of California, Riverside (CA)'''. Associate or Full Professor, spec. in literature and culture of Latin America. Deadline: '''9 Nov. 2018'''. [https://www.h-net.org/jobs/job_display.php?id=57281 H-NET].

#'''University of California, Riverside (CA)'''. Associate or Full Professor, spec. in literature and culture of Latin America. Deadline: '''9 Nov. 2018'''. [https://www.h-net.org/jobs/job_display.php?id=57281 H-NET].

#'''University of Kansas (KS)'''. TT Assistant Professor in Indigenous Latin American Cultures & Languages. Deadline: '''not stated'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56533 Interfolio].

#'''University of Kansas (KS)'''. TT Assistant Professor in Indigenous Latin American Cultures & Languages. Deadline: '''not stated'''. [https://apply.interfolio.com/56533 Interfolio].

#'''University of Kentucky (KY)'''. TT Assistant Professor in Latinx Studies.Deadline: '''26 Nov. 2018'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/157085-FE01670 Chronicle] .

#'''University of Kentucky (KY)'''. TT Assistant Professor in Latinx Studies.Deadline: '''26 Nov. 2018'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/157085-FE01670 Chronicle] .

#'''University of Lynchburg (VA)'''. Non-TT Visiting Assistant Professor/Instructor of Spanish. Deadline: '''1 Feb. 2019'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000459364-01 Chronicle] .

#'''University of Lynchburg (VA)'''. Non-TT Visiting Assistant Professor/Instructor of Spanish. Deadline: '''1 Feb. 2019'''. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000459364-01 Chronicle] .

#'''University of Macau '''. Associate/Assistant Professor of Portuguese (begin Jan. 2019). Deadline: open until filled. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000427557-01 Chronicle].

#'''University of Macau '''. Associate/Assistant Professor of Portuguese (begin Jan. 2019). Deadline: open until filled. [https://chroniclevitae.com/jobs/0000427557-01 Chronicle].