Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Academe doesn't pay very well (unless you are at a top school) and expects a lot of work.
You'd think Amherst could get Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard level candidates. Really crazy to see the decline so quickly
They can and do.
There's evidence right here showing they do not. There's people from Iowa teaching at Amherst now for crying out loud!
Truly, the Midwest could not possibly produce a brilliant scholar
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe Amherst is getting what it deserves: look at how many of those people are in crappy VAP or lecturer positions compared to tenure track.
What's that supposed to mean? Amherst is getting what it budgets for, which is not permanent positions. In which case you all REALLY need to give these people a break, no mid-career scholar with multiple books is going to move for a VAP.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe Amherst is getting what it deserves: look at how many of those people are in crappy VAP or lecturer positions compared to tenure track.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Academe doesn't pay very well (unless you are at a top school) and expects a lot of work.
You'd think Amherst could get Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard level candidates. Really crazy to see the decline so quickly
They can and do.
There's evidence right here showing they do not. There's people from Iowa teaching at Amherst now for crying out loud!

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just ran a faculty search for a leading R01 university in engineering. We got 300+ applications (another department got 800) and had to turn away ridiculously amazing applicants. When you said "has the faculty search gotten worse" I was thinking you meant "more competitive for applicants."
Then why not choose the most qualified and best applicants from the best schools. Stop the DEI craze and give people an $80,000 education
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Academe doesn't pay very well (unless you are at a top school) and expects a lot of work.
You'd think Amherst could get Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard level candidates. Really crazy to see the decline so quickly
They can and do.
There's evidence right here showing they do not. There's people from Iowa teaching at Amherst now for crying out loud!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Amherst has hit bottom. Stay away!!!
Is this true? My kid is looking to apply.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Academe doesn't pay very well (unless you are at a top school) and expects a lot of work.
You'd think Amherst could get Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard level candidates. Really crazy to see the decline so quickly
They can and do.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Academe doesn't pay very well (unless you are at a top school) and expects a lot of work.
You'd think Amherst could get Princeton, Berkeley, Harvard level candidates. Really crazy to see the decline so quickly
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Those are fine professors. No, they aren't household names, but everyone has to start out assistant and make themselves known. There's an economist from UChicago, a Princeton classicist, and a legal studies professor from Harvard. An uninteresting lineup but they'll make themselves known.
I'm checking through their pages and it looks like they are amateurs. Sakeef Karim, one of the new full time faculty, has only published 3 articles, has only gotten small grant funding, and has less research experience than a newly minted PhD student...How this person is getting a position at Amherst College is very very suspicious.
Anonymous wrote:Reminiscent of the obscure Wisconsin faculty postings.
Anonymous wrote:I just ran a faculty search for a leading R01 university in engineering. We got 300+ applications (another department got 800) and had to turn away ridiculously amazing applicants. When you said "has the faculty search gotten worse" I was thinking you meant "more competitive for applicants."