The Job Search: Observations of a Reader of 177 Letters of Application

Eleanor H. Green

ADE Bulletin 113 (Spring 1996), pp. 50–52

ISSN: 0001-0898
CrossRef DOI: 10.1632/ade.113.50

Copyright © 1996 by The Association of Departments of English

All material published by the The Association of Departments of English in any medium is protected by copyright.
Users may link to the ADE Web page freely and may quote from ADE publications as allowed by the doctrine of fair
use. Written permission is required for any other reproduction of material from any ADE publication.

Send requests for permission to reprint material to the ADE permissions manager by mail (26 Broadway, New York,
NY 10004-1789), e-mail (permissions@mla.org), or fax (646 458-0030).
 The Job Search: Observations of a Reader of
177 Letters of Application
ELEANOR H. GREEN
A LETTER of application
is one of the most important letters a new PhD will ever
write. With English departments flooded by applications
for each rare opening, a candidate needs to make a posi-
tive impression from the very first paragraph.
Many of the assistant professorships for which new
PhDs apply are at small liberal arts colleges and universi-
ties, those with enrollments of fewer than five thousand
undergraduates. A candidate who is truly interested in
working at such a school and who is not just mailing ap-
plications indiscriminately needs to do a little homework.
These institutions, numbering about eight hundred
across the country, are a diverse group, but most share
certain specific qualities. Almost without exception they
view teaching as their primary mission and stress close
faculty-student contact. Faculty members normally teach
both composition and literature, and few such institu-
tions have teaching assistants. These schools are usually
proud of their uniqueness and their tradition, and they
use their emphasis on teaching and on close personal re-
lationships and their campus culture to attract students
who might otherwise attend larger institutions. To be
happy and successful in such a setting, faculty members
must be collegial and be willing to become involved in
the innumerable activities of the campus and the depart-
ment. Many of these schools are located in small towns
in geographically isolated areas, and thus faculty members
interact with their colleagues not just at work but also in
everyday personal activities. There is simply no place to
hide, no possibility of disappearing into the anonymity
of a library carrel or behind the closed door of an office.
Furthermore, while these small colleges and universities
include some of the most prestigious and selective institu-
tions in the country, the huge majority fall into Barron’s
guides’ “competitive” grouping, with fewer in the “very
competitive” and “less competitive” categories. By neces-
sity these schools require heavy teaching loads and stress
teaching and service over research and off-campus profes-
sional involvement. Students are generally of average abil-
ity, and each English professor’s teaching load is mainly
composition and introductory literature courses; the spe-
cialized upper-level course is an infrequent and highly val-
ued assignment. Faculty members teach in a wide range
of subject areas and have little opportunity to specialize.
My institution, Ohio Northern University, fits this
profile. In the fall of 1993 we advertised in the MLA Job
Information List and in the Chronicle of Higher Education
for a “student-centered” assistant professor to teach com-
position and literature, indicating a preference for exper-
tise in eighteenth-century British literature. We received
177 applications for this position. In addition to teach-
ing skills, the potential to perform service-related activi-
ties, and a willingness or even a desire to teach at a small
university in a very small town (population three thou-
sand) in the cornfields of west central Ohio, we, like hir-
ing committees at most similar institutions, were looking
for evidence of special skills, personality characteristics,
or past experience that might enrich the department and
benefit our students: previous employment as a writer or
editor; overseas study, travel, or work; teaching certifica-
tion, which would qualify a candidate to help advise and
supervise our student teachers; undergraduate or gradu-
ate work outside English that might appeal to nonmajors
or broaden the experience of majors; volunteer, service,
or professional activities indicating initiative and a wide
range of interests.
The vast majority of the letters we received, however,
were obviously not written to us as members of an En-
glish department search committee at Ohio Northern.
They were in fact generic form letters written with the
apparent aim of securing a position at an institution far
different from anything Ohio Northern is or ever will
become. A good number appeared to be applications for
some kind of postdoctoral fellowship rather than for any
kind of faculty position anywhere. Most did not do jus-
tice at all to the talents, training, or experiences of the
applicants. And these comments relate entirely to the con-
tent, organization, and format of the letters we received,
The author is Professor of English and former Chair of the English
Department at Ohio Northern University.
ADE BULLETIN, NO. 113, SPRING 1996

not to their language and tone, which were also often bi-
zarrely inappropriate.
Most letters emphasized research far more than any
other subject. Such discussion of research, usually focused
on the doctoral dissertation, took up half or more of the
space in 76 of the letters (43% of the total), and 22 of the
76 devoted two-thirds of their text to a highly technical
and detailed description of complex research difficult to
relate in any way to the Ohio Northern University class-
room. A few candidates even stated their eagerness to
teach graduate courses, although a quick look at any col-
lege guide would show that Ohio Northern, like most
small universities, has no graduate students in English.
Many applicants listed all the courses they had ever taught
but made no mention of their teaching philosophy or
pedagogical techniques. Those who did make a positive
impression on our committee not only stressed teaching
over research but also gave specific examples of methods
they used in the classroom and projects that had been suc-
cessful, summarized the pedagogy they used (especially
for teaching composition), discussed the training they had
received, and mentioned positive student and peer evalu-
ations or teaching awards.
A small campus definitely has a particular ethos, and
those candidates who had studied or worked at a small
school clearly had an advantage; this sort of experience
was one important but unspecified qualification for which
we were watching. Of the 58 candidates (approximately
one-third of the total) who did have this background,
however, few pointed out that they were familiar with a
small-school environment like Ohio Northern’s, and even
fewer expressed a desire to teach in such a setting. Indeed,
47 of the 58 never mentioned having experienced life on
a small campus, and only 5 made the obvious point that
familiarity with small-school culture might make them
comfortable at Ohio Northern.
Only 34 letters even mentioned the name of our insti-
tution; one called it “Northern Ohio” and another “Butler
University.” Those clearly familiar with Ohio or even with
Ohio Northern never said as much or else made rather
gushy and generalized statements—“I love Ohio,” for in-
stance, by itself did not make much of an impression on
our committee. And although 13 candidates did refer to
the phrase “student-centered” from our announcement, it
was clear that almost none of the candidates had bothered
to look up Ohio Northern in a college guide, much less to
read our catalog, and those who had taken the trouble to
do so were not able to use the information effectively.
Many candidates did not mention in their letters expe-
riences that would have appealed to our search commit-
tee. Only 46 pointed out any professional or service work
that would have indicated involvement in activities valu-
able to students or to the institution. At least 58 more of
the candidates clearly had this type of experience but
Eleanor H. Green • 51
tucked it away in their résumés while including paragraph
after paragraph in their letters about different sections of
their dissertations. Another 32 applicants mentioned no
activities or interests at all aside from research and teach-
ing in either their letters or their résumés.
Moreover, of 33 applicants who had overseas experience,
only 15 mentioned such experience even in passing, and
even fewer pointed out that this experience would enrich
their teaching, give them a broader cultural perspective,
or positively influence their students. Although 10 of the
applicants were not native-born Americans or Canadians,
only 3 of them discussed their nationality, which would
be of particular importance in teaching writing and lit-
erature to students mostly from small-town Ohio. The 2
who had taught in colleges of pharmacy said nothing
about this experience, even though over eight hundred of
our students are pharmacy majors. Less than half of those
with secondary-school certification or teaching experience
mentioned these qualifications at all, and while several
applicants did cite extensive study in fields outside English
as a positive attribute, just as many failed to draw any at-
tention to such study. Indeed, applicants whose résumés
suggested diverse interests and backgrounds came across
as narrow and dull in their letters. And sometimes—often,
in fact—both letter and résumé indicated so little that
would be useful at a small university like Ohio Northern
and so little interest in teaching at such an institution that
it was not clear why the applicant had bothered to write
to us at all.
A somewhat common error, furthermore, was the ex-
treme brevity of many of the letters, apparently the result
of a mistaken belief that the letter should be only one
page long. It is difficult to sell oneself among such a large
field of candidates in one page, yet 31 of the applicants
attempted to do exactly that, often narrowing margins
and reducing font size to make a plausible case for them-
selves in such a restricted space. While three or four pages
is certainly excessive, very few letters of less than one and
a half to two pages gave the committee an accurate sense
of the applicant.
And a small minority of the letters were inadequate
even in format and appearance. Writing with faulty me-
chanics is certainly a poor introduction to a person who is
asking to teach composition. However, we received 13
letters with errors such as lack of an inside address, incor-
rect punctuation of the salutation, double-spaced typing,
and omission of the date. Three applicants neglected to
sign their letters; 2 sent computer paper that had not
been separated; and 1 typed on both sides of the page.
Even more annoying for an overworked search com-
mittee was the failure to provide useful references. Some
applicants did not include phone numbers for references
in either the letter or the résumé. Some reference lists
consisted entirely of the dissertation committee and
52 • The Job Search: Observations of a Reader of 177 Letters of Application
included no one with knowledge of the applicant’s teach-
ing abilities. Worst of all were statements that the names
of references would be furnished on request.
Producing an effective and persuasive letter of applica-
tion requires time and effort, but when so much of a per-
son’s future rides on this letter, there are surely few
projects more deserving of such an investment. At the
very least, a letter to a small college or university with a
clear teaching mission should be focused differently from
one directed to a large “publish or perish” institution. A
quick glance through a college guide will indicate the
nature of the institution advertising an opening. At Ohio
Northern we are far more interested in knowing if an
aspiring assistant English professor has worked in a writ-
ing center, tutored athletes, planned and organized a con-
ference, or set up a specialized reading group for fellow
graduate students than if he or she has a reading knowl-
edge of ancient Greek or a specialist’s knowledge of an
obscure corner of literary scholarship.
We value highly, of course, those who have read widely
and who love literature and writing, who intend to be ac-
tive in the profession, to grow intellectually, and perhaps
to contribute to the field of literature or rhetoric. But we
need, above all, excellent, dedicated, and patient teachers
to instruct undergraduate students most of whom are not
English majors and few of whom are brilliant. We need
hardworking, congenial, and committed colleagues who
will help us carry out the numerous activities of the de-
partment and will represent us well to constituencies in
other parts of the university. We need faculty members
who bring to our somewhat isolated and parochial cam-
pus diverse and stimulating backgrounds and experiences.
If a candidate has these qualities, the letter of application
should tell us about them. The letter should also show
that Ohio Northern really exists in the applicant’s imagi-
nation and that he or she would choose such a place as a
future work environment. Finally, the letter should be
addressed to us as a search committee at this particular
type of institution. We were eventually able to identify
some excellent candidates, but few of them sold them-
selves adequately in the most important letter they may
ever write. Surely aspiring academics can do better.