*Concerns of Young Mathematicians* Volume 2 Issue 4 February 2, 1994 An electronically distributed digest for discussions of the issues of concern to mathematicians at the beginning of their careers. PLEASE FORWARD TO ANY POTENTIALLY INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS Please direct submissions and questions to Frank Arlinghaus frank@math.ysu.edu , editor for the month of February. Next issue: Wednesday, February 9, 1994. To subscribe: Send mail to Charles Yeomans at cyeomans@s.ms.uky.edu Back issues and other information are available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ms.uky.edu, in pub3/mailing.lists/ymn-list. Editor for November was Steve Kennedy kennedy@math.stolaf.edu . Editor for December was Vic Perera vperera@silver.ucs.indiana.edu . Editor for January was Kalin Godev kalin@math.psu.edu . The opinions expressed herein are those of the contributors and not necessarily those of the YMN or the editorial board. Table of Contents Item # Title 1 Editorial: Employment 2 Comments, News, and Notes * AMS Employment Register * Ethics for Applicants 3 AMS Council Election Mark Winstead and Ben Lotto 4 Interview Advice Chris Leary 5 AMS Election Results Edward F. Aboufadel 6 Closing Credits __________________________________________________________________________ Item #1 Editorial on the "Employment Situation" ************************************************************************** Note: The opinions expressed herein are the idle musings of the editor and not necessarily those of the YMN, the editorial board, or other sentient beings. ************************************************************************** Most of us are worried about employment, both for ourselves and for our friends and colleagues. Even those of us fortunate enough to get tenure-track positions have concerns about our future, especially if we're trying to do research while teaching 12 contact hours per week. The current situation is one we're all aware of. Too many Ph.Ds and too few positions. It's especially bad for those who want the opportunity to win a position at a research university, or at least at a university whose workload allows one to pursue a meaningful research program. This situation has led to more committees, studies, petitions, and proposed remedies than the graphics calculator calculus has. For what it's worth (probably nothing), I'd like to offer a few commments of my own or others. I do caution you that from this point on, the reasons given may look like facts, but they're really nothing more than my opinions, and are overly simple (much like me). The market started to decline about 5 years ago, due in part to the cutbacks made in the public schools in the East, virtually all of whom had to cut back because of the budget deficits at the state level which had reduced their allocations from the state. These budget deficits gradually spread West, and were coupled with a decline in corporate-sponsored research in some areas. Still, many of us refused to worry because of the forecasted shortage of Ph.Ds in the future. What that forecast did not take into account was the number of Chinese (PRC) Ph.Ds produced in this country who would remain due in large part to the squelched student uprising. Before that time, almost all of these mathematicians returned home due in part to visa requirements. Neither did it take into account the large number of mathematicians who would emigrate from Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet empire. The effect of this has been felt from the top down. These mathematicians who've emigrated are among the best in the world, and are naturally being hired by Ph.D schools, especially Level I schools. The students coming over to study, or staying after their degrees are also among the best (the worst foreign student accepted by a Level I or II school is often better than the average American doctoral student at the same school). These makes the level of competition among new Ph.Ds for these research-related positions much higher. Due to all of these factors, we've all been pushed down the chain, and this is evident when you see where new Ph.Ds from any school go compared to their counterparts 5 years ago. Enough of this. I'd like to point out that this issue of CoYM includes a call for discussion of applicant ethics, specifically with regard to holding offers, a discussion of AMS Election results, a request for counsel from two potential AMS Council nominees, and several other submissions. ____________________________________________________________________ Item #2 Comments, News, and Notes: ******************************************************************** This is a minor issue, but one that would seem on the surface easy to change. The applicant resume form (and employer form) must be typed on specified lines and spaces. In this time when typewriters are getting very rare, shouldn't it be possible to submit this via e-mail or at least have some type of word processor friendly form? Terri Magnus, Saint Mary's College, Indiana ********************************************************************* Ethics in Looking for Jobs Now that we have started the ball rolling on the question of ethical behavior in hiring policies, I would like to discuss ethical behavior by candidates. In my conversations with various members of my department and other deparments, there seems to be one main concern. That is the question of holding offers. I would like to see a general consensus on when it is acceptable to hold multiple offers without attempting to decide between them. Obviously, candidates should be given time to make an informed decision between two different offers, the question is, when is it ethical not to try and decide? I am sure there are many times when it is appropriate and inappropriate to sit on an offer (if you are lucky enough to have one). I would be interested to hear from both faculty and applicants what the general view is. If you would send your comments to me, I will summarize. I would also like to know the reasons behind the views. Curtis Bennett cbennet@andy.bgsu.edu ______________________________________________________________________ Item #3 AMS Council Election: Notes from Mark Winstead and Ben Lotto ******************************************************************** Dear CoYM subscribers, Summary: The AMS Nominating Committee has asked me to run for Council and I have accepted. Ben Lotto's main goal is to see a younger mathematician on Council and many of you have given him encouragement in his petition drive. Dilemma: I decided to run based partially on the impression (due to earlier communications from Ben) that he would withdraw if I ran, since he felt it more important that someone closer to the issues of young mathematicians be on the Council. He no longer feels comfortable with the thought of withdrawing because of notes some of you have sent him. Furthermore, after further thought, it is conceivable that if we both run we could both win. We desire your input into the situation. *Introduction When I made the suggestion in the pages of the Young Scientists' Network that the YSN start subnetworks specific to disciplines, I never imagined the impact would be what it has been. YSN more or less rejected my suggestion but Curt Bennett, Ed Aboufadel and Kalin Godev (forgive me if I forgot someone) wrote to me in support of the idea. After posting to sci.math, etc., we found more support (Neil Calkin for one) and decided to go it on our own. Since our start in July, less than three weeks after I planted the seed in YSN, we have grown in numbers and support from the general mathematical community. Instead of realizing some fears that we would be perceived as young upstarts and troublemakers, we have instead been embraced by most as a group trying to influence our destiny and make things easier for our peers and those who will follow us in future years. As I stated in CoYM vol 2 issue 2 (many of you may have gotten a mutilated copy like e-math and I did), it is now time to move more towards taking action. The AMS has propped the doors open for us. I know of at least two members of YMN who have accepted AMS committee assignments and I understand that the AMS is/was looking for someone from among us for an assignment on the Joint Committee on Employment Opportunities. Additionally, the new MAA president, Ken Ross, is a supporter of our efforts (see vol2 issue 1), so I expect some doors to open within the MAA, too. *And the Nominating Committee Selects There is yet another door open for us. The AMS Nominating Committee has made its selections for the fall ballot, sans the petition candidates, and its alternate selections. I have been asked by the committee to run for the AMS Council. I engaged Ben Lotto, petition candidate, in discussions on the issue. In these earlier discussions, Ben told me his primary goal was to see a younger mathematician on the board. Convinced of Ben's sincerity (and I still am convinced that he is a sincere person), I set about to make my decision. I decided I would like to be on the Council, where I could do a lot of good and give a different viewpoint on various issues that appear before the Council. I engaged in conversation with many people on this issue, and the fact that name recognition is a very powerful tool in winning an election often came up. Due to my status as a cofounder of the Young Mathematicians' Network, I was told that I probably have as much name recognition as anyone among younger mathematicians. The desire to see a younger viewpoint on the Council and these opinions played a part in my decision to accept the nomination. *Dilemma I informed many people of my decision, including Ben. Between the time of my last conversation with Ben and my informing him of my decision, Ben received many letters of support from some of you. I understand that Ben feels that withdrawing may be letting those who support him down. Furthermore, it is quite possible that we could both win, but there is also a risk that a large proportion of those who vote this fall will support one "young mathematician candidate" but not two, thus Ben and I split votes and we both lose. (Note: YMN does not endorse candidates, thus the quote marks) We both have agreed to write you telling you about what has happened. We both feel that we need your counsel (pun intended!) on this. We must consider chancing if both of us can win, or if both of us appearing on the ballot this fall would result in neither of us winning. Here are some facts: this previous election, there were 4806 valid ballots (source: January issue of the Notices). There are 9300 nominee members of the AMS (read: graduate students) and in recent years there have been roughly 1000 PhD's granted each year. A successful get out the vote campaign among these groups which would seem more likely to support Ben and I could result in both of us winning. However, we must not run a get out the vote campaign that could be interpreted as "us vs. them" because that could lead to a backlash against the issues of young mathematicians. And we also have to consider how hard a get out the vote campaign would be to run given the diffusion of the targeted groups. (Any ideas on how to run such a get out of the vote campaign?) *Closing Ben and I seek your thoughts and opinions. Ben's e-mail address is BeLotto@vaxsar.vassar.edu, mine appears below. Sincerely yours, Mark W. Winstead Virginia '93 Currently at UC-San Diego winstead@euclid.ucsd.edu ************************************************************************ In volume 1, number 20 of Concerns of Young Mathematicians, I mentioned the possibility of running for the AMS Council and asked for comments. Because of the uniformly positive response, I announced in volume 2, number 1 that I had decided to seek a nomination to the Council and asked all of you to support my effort through nomination petitions. In response to this, I have received a number of petitions and notes of support---thank you all. Recently, I received e-mail from Mark Winstead telling me that the Nominating Committee of the AMS had asked him to run for the AMS Council. We started corresponding about the problems that might arise if the two of us were to both run for the Council. Because of these and other discussions, Mark has decided to accept the Nominating Committee's nomination. I support his decision---this is formal recognition by the AMS that the Council needs junior mathematician representatives, and such recognition cannot be turned down. The question now arises as to whether I should withdraw my candidacy for the Council. Let me very briefly outline what I see as the pros and cons of withdrawal. My first priority is to get representation for junior mathematicians on the Council, so I am happy to withdraw if I believe that my running would hinder this possibility. In fact, that was my initial response to Mark when he first told me that he was being nominated. The concern, of course, is that with two of us running we might split the vote, resulting in neither of us getting elected. As our discussions have continued, the wisdom of my withdrawing has become less clear. There are five positions on the Council that are being filled in the upcoming election and each member of the AMS has five votes to cast for these positions. Because of this, if both Mark and I were to run, we would not be running directly against each other. In fact, two of us running might actually *build* support for each other as we talk to the different groups of mathematicians we know. And if we can both get elected, it would be twice as useful to have both of us on the Council---even more than twice, perhaps, since the two of us would bring different abilities, perspectives, and experience to the Council, which I believe could result in broader and better representation of the interests of junior mathematicians. Mark and I ask your counsel (pun intended) in this matter. Please let us know your thoughts. I can be reached at BeLotto@vassar.edu; Mark is at winstead@math.ucsd.edu. Thank you. -- Ben Lotto Department of Mathematics/Box 349/Vassar College/Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 914-437-7180 belotto@vassar.edu _____________________________________________________________________ Item #4 Interview Advice: Chris Leary, SUNY Geneseo It is about that time of year when the favored few (well, let's hope that it isn't all that few) will actually get phone calls and get interviews. Here is one thought on something that might help you as you try to prepare for the interview. When you ask a question, ask for specifics. In other words,don't ask, "Do you have a sabbatical program here at Enormous State University?" Rather ask, "Who was the last person from the Department who had a sabbatical? Have you had sabbatical requests turned down recently? How often?" Don't ask, "What sorts of things do I need to do to get tenure here at ESU?" Rather ask, "Who was the last person here who was granted tenure? What was his/her teaching/research/grant/service record like?" Don't ask, "What sorts of courses will I get to teach?" Ask, "I imagine my teaching schedule for the first year will be predetermined. What will it be? When will I get to teach my course on Left-Handed Quasi-Semi-Hemi Rings?" This is designed, of course, to get you the most accurate information possible. I do not think that people will try to deceive you, but you should assume that the people interviewing you have an interest in showing their institution in the best possible light. And you don't want to be believing the (honest) statement, "ESU has a well-established sabbatical program, and you will be eligible to apply after you have been here seven years," when the fact of the matter is that the school grants exactly one person a sabbatical leave each year, and the math department hasn't seen a sabbatical since 1907! ______________________________________________________________________ Item #5 AMS Election Results: Ed Aboufadel Last September in an Editorial, I asked "Do Elections Matter?" Looking at the election results of 1993 [Jan. 1994 Notices, p.64], I thought of another question: "Do candidate statements matter?" In particular, I went back and read the statements of the candidates for all the positions (see the Sept. 1993 Notices). In the chart below, I list all of the candidates in the election. The first column indicates who was elected. The second indicates if, in their statement, they mentioned either the job market or young mathematicians in some way. (e.g., "employment opportunities are scarce." -- L. P. Rothschild.) At a glance, there does seem to be a correlation between those who mentioned our issues and those who were elected, except in the Nominating Committee vote. (I apologize to anyone who thinks I am using the term "our" too loosely.) Of course, that doesn't indicate causality, but it is something to think about. elected mentioned our issues President Hyman Bass * Cathleen S. Morawetz * * Vice-President Jerry L. Bona Ramesh A. Gangolli Jean E. Taylor * * Member-At-Large of the Council Edward Bierstone James W. Cannon * Dennis Deturck * Robert K. Lazarsfeld * * Frank Morgan * Donald St.P. Richards Norberto Salinas * * Sylvia M. Wiegand * * Robert J. Zimmer * * Trustee Donald J. Lewis * * Marc A. Rieffel Nominating Committee Morris W. Hirsch * Hugh L. Montgomery * no statement Linda Press Rothschild * * Seymour Schuster * Charles C. Sims no statement Chuu-Lian Terng * __________________________________________________________________________ Item #6 Closing Credits: The Young Mathematicians' Network is administered by: Charles Yeomans cyeomans@s.ms.uky.edu Mark Winstead winstead@ml.kva.se Vic Perera vperera@silver.ucs.indiana.edu Franklin Mendivil mendivil@math.gatech.edu Stephen Kennedy kennedy@stolaf.edu Kalin Godev kalin@math.psu.edu Neil Calkin calkin@math.gatech.edu Curtis Bennett cbennet@andy.bgsu.edu Jeff Adams adams@bright.uoregon.edu Edward Aboufadel aboufade@scus1.ctstateu.edu Frank Arlinghaus frank@math.ysu.edu Matt Hudelson hudelson@math.washington.edu ____________________________________________________________________________ End of Journal -- Next week: The Discussion Continues