I am currently working as a full time lecturer after two years of unemployment post disatorous tenure denial. I have two on campus visits lined up for associate professor positions. The lecturer position I currently have was advertised as an assistant/associate position which I applied for initially. The Dean asked me to apply for the lecturer position because she wanted to offer another candidate (different specialty) the tt position. Turns out the other candidate was abd and the provost insisted on hiring that position as a lecturer until dissertation was completed. Other candidate not only has not completed dissertation but teaching performance was so poor that they have decided not to renew contract. Meanwhile, my concentration has exploded with quadruplethe number of students from previous year. My teaching evaluations were glowing and they have offered another year as a lecturer. I want to reopen the possibility hiring on tt track and promotion to Associate before I get counter offers from campus visits. Pretty sure the Dean wants to keep me as a mule but the Provost might have very different ideas. Any advice on strategy?

addendum

  1. The plan is to rehire next year but the position is open now.
  2. I do not have offers now but I am a finalist for two separate positions, campus visits this week. I would like to give the Dean a letter now requesting negotiation to get the idea on the table. I’m assured work as a lecturer, want to float the possibility of getting more.
  3. There may be a more general question you could ask, such as “What factors determine whether a university will consider its non-TT lecturers for a TT position?” Noted, will consider.

There are multiple lecturer openings in the UK that are very relevant to my work, say posts A and B. I prefer B over A, but B’s application deadline is a about 2 months after A’s.

If I apply for both posts, there is a chance I might be accepted for A while I am still waiting for a response from B. In that case, how should I react and what should I do if I get a positive response from B after I have accepted the offer from A?

My question is particular to the UK. In Germany, for example, I know that people openly apply for multiple positions and leverage this for negotiations. But I am not sure if the process is the same in the UK.

I have been shortlisted for a job interview later this month for a lectureship in a UK university. The interview will consist of a presentation and a panel interview.

As per the HR’s email, the presentation should talk about how I can contribute to the school’s research, teaching and engagement. My question is, what to include in the teaching part? I will specify the school’s existing modules that I can cover. Meanwhile, should I suggest one or two modules that I can develop but are not in the school’s teaching portfolio yet? Or should I not include this in the presentation, but simply wait until the panel interview bring up this?

I’d like to show that I have done some research on the school’s teaching programmes. But I don’t want to sound like I am challenging the school’s existing programmes. The job description does not mention the development of new modules, either.

Any comments and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

In the country I did my PhD in, at a lot of courses there are lectures by a professor covering theory, and then lectures by a PhD student which cover exercises, examples, clarifications, etc. Those are lectures which require preparation, standing in front of a full class, just like the “main” lectures. My question is, how should I refer to it in my CV. Maybe if I write “Teaching Assistant”, in the US it might be understood as something with less weight than what I described?

Thanks

I am struggling to work out how good my presentation of material is in lectures I’m currently doing. I’ve done many lectures in the past, and I’ve typically received good feedback. I’m now teaching subjects I haven’t taught in the past.

Usually I can look at the audience and ascertain that they are (mostly) engaged.
At the moment I’m not getting that however. People are looking at their devices, look sullen, or appear to be more interested in talking with one another than the contents of the lecture. Nobody asks any questions (though I’ve repeatedly encouraged them to do so). I’ve left a form online (anonymous) for people to ask questions (or leave comments) and nobody has used it.

Maybe the material is just really easy to understand? I’m somewhat limited to what extent I can even change the scope of the course, even if I wanted to. But trying to ascertain what is too easy or difficult is nontrivial anyway, and I’m aware that the audience is mixed. I’m concerned about rushing through material and finding out later that people didn’t adequately understand what was being taught. The appreciation that people may potentially not like the content of the lectures has made me somewhat nervous during lectures – it makes it more difficult to speak clearly, coherently, and certainly articulately. This almost certainly impacts on the quality of the lecture, and so is a vicious circle.

What can I do to try and gauge how well I’m currently doing, without finding that people simply complain when the course is over (or alternatively heap praise, which, though I believe is highly unlikely, would mean that I’m currently experiencing much unneeded stress? ) It’s left me feeling more than slightly despondent – to put in hours and hours of work only to feel that people would rather not hear me speak at all: and probably get the same sort of rating regardless of the amount of work on my part. For what it’s worth turnout is mixed (50-65% on average, which is about typically for most courses), but students are likely to be in the area anyway (having other courses to attend) so they’d probably have to make an active decision not to turn up if they really wanted to avoid this particular course.

As part of my graduate program, I am required to give presentations to a group of attendees and a program panel about various topics including but not limited to research, involvement, and case studies.

The audience pays attention but rarely ask questions. A survey was released about my effectiveness as a lecturer and nearly 65% of attendees stated my voice was “too authoritative.” A common problem was my voice being authoritative and causing the audience to be too timid to ask serious questions related to the topic. Talking in an “enthusiastic” tone (in my own opinion) yielded no results. My voice is very deep and, in order to project well, I tend to speak loudly (no microphones).

What are some tactics to get the attendees engaged and not appear “too authoritative?”

EDIT:

Let me add some details that I find relevant that I missed adding. The survey is handed out as attendees walk in. Between each lecturer there is a 10 minute “intermission” to allow attendees to exit or enter. The attendees are required to hand in surveys as they leave. The uni hosting the lecture combines common themes among the surveys. It is unknown how similarities are determined except to the staff reviewing the surveys. The results are then emailed to the lecturer with good and bad things about the lecture. I am then required to email to my supervisor.

I am currently in a VAP at a selective liberal arts school for psychology, first year post-grad. I have five publications but probably won’t get any offers for tenure track positions without an additional postdoc. I also am trying to find a position in which research is an element, but not the first priority of the job (which is a really narrow path, it seems).

I am situated in the Midwest and am trying to find a position on the east or west coast, which limits things somewhat but it has also pushed me to apply for positions I wouldn’t have necessarily considered before if they are in a good location. For example, I know that I have been at least “moved up” in the hiring process for 2 lecturer positions at large, high-ranking universities on the east coast.

I haven’t been able to find a lot of information specifically about “lecturer” positions in US universities. I know they can come with some security and focus mainly on a lot of teaching. I enjoy teaching and would be happy to make it the focus of my career, but I am still holding on to the ideal of the tenure-track line. If I did take a lecturer position at a high-ranking school, I figure I can depend on potentially a better starting salary than a tenure line at a smaller or lower-ranked school- while it would be at the cost of career growth, would it be incorrect to assume I could just make a living that way and possibly get some job security down the line? (For example, I know there have been “senior lecturer” designations and such that seem to indicate security of employment). Or even if there was stability but no growth?

Can anyone speak to maintaining a lecturer position as a kind of permanent position? I know that they are generally term to term, or are on some contract every x years (for example one of the positions I applied to is renewable on a 3 year contract). I know that lecturer positions are not really helpful to transition to tenure-track lines focused on research, but what about teaching-focused schools? Or, even, if one just stops at lecturer?

I feel at the moment that taking a lecturer position would sort of end my tenure-track aspirations on paper, but also I don’t want to end up doing term positions or adjuncting for 10 years (true stories about this have been told to me). I could do a postdoc but the return rate on those is generally later in the year, which comes at the expense of current opportunities if I get any offers. Additionally, although I’m young in my career I am already feeling myself fatiguing and I don’t want to go through years of moving, instability, financial insecurity, etc. I started grad school initially thinking of the classic tenure track position, focusing on research, etc. but I didn’t really enjoy the research aspect as much as I thought, so I shifted my focus to teaching (apparently not a good move). Since I don’t actually know anyone who’s gone in for a lecturer position or what kind of growth there is there, can anyone weigh in on their stability, enjoyability, growth etc?? And if I take it and do want to try to pursue a tenure track line somewhere else, could it ever be useful?

Sorry for the length! Thank you for reading!!

This question already has an answer here:

I am a Full-Time research scholar in finance about to submit my thesis in a month or two.

After this is it good to go for post-doc or as a lecturer in finance?

If I apply for lecturer will colleges entertain it as I am a fresher?

And one more doubt I got is, Am I eligible to apply for Post-doc position after submitting my thesis? or should I wait until the completion of Vivo-voce and/or graduation? Because its time-consuming process to receive Vivo-voce.

Kindly give your valuable suggestions

I had a very successful postdoc experience. Now I have 47 papers published in excellent journals (90% by the American Chemical Society). I understand that research is subjective, but as I compare my publications with almost any newly appointed assistant professor in the US and lecture in the UK, my research record is much stronger.

I just applied for a lecturer position in the UK and was not even invited for an interview. I contacted the department head to get feedback and he replied my application was good but other candidates had stronger research records.

I understand that each search committee has a set of criteria but this answer was insulting to me (professionally not personally). There are 9 lecturers in that department and none of them has a research record as strong as half of my publications. How is it possible that suddenly at least 2-3 candidates with research records stronger than mine have applied for this job?