*Concerns of Young Mathematicians* Volume 2 Issue 23 July 6, 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 Franklin Mendivil mendivil@math.gatech.edu , editor for the month of June. Next issue: Wednesday, June 8 Editor for May: Curtis Bennett cbennet@andy.bgsu.edu Editor for June: Franklin Mendivil mendivil@math.gatech.edu Editor for July: Franklin Mendivil mendivil@math.gatech.edu Editor for August: 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. Table of Contents Item # Title ------ ----- 1 Editor's notes 2 C. Mannix JOB PANEL IN EUGENE 3 Annalisa Crannell Letters of Recommendation 4 Editorial Board YMN is one year old. 5 Closing Credits _______________________________________________________________ Item #1 Editor's notes: This issue marks the one-year anniversary of the *Concerns*. The editorial board thought it would be a good idea to reflect on our accomplishments and think about some goals for the future. Please read our thoughts on this (in item #4) and let us know if you have any further ideas. After all, the *Concerns* is your newsletter and YMN is your network. Also in this issue is a report on the job panel in Eugene by Charles Mannix and some further comments on letters of recommendation by Annalisa Crannell. Please keep the ideas coming! Franklin Mendivil Georgia Tech mendivil@math.gatech.edu _______________________________________________________________ Item #2 C. Mannix JOB PANEL IN EUGENE The June 16th, 17th, and 18th meeting of the regional AMS-MAA organizations took place at the University of Oregon in Eugene. Of special interest to Young Mathematicians was the job market panel discussion on June 17th with moderator Ken Ross, three department chairs, and three recent graduates in the job market. Drs. Howard Gage, Douglas Lind, and Julie H. Lutz were the chairs while Drs. C. E. Mannix, Jenny McNulty, and Tom McKenzie had recent job searching experience. Dr. Ross opened the discussion. The panel members alternated. Dr. Gage described his experiences of the golden days of job searching and the present contrast and perspective as seen from his department. Dr. Mannix presented viewfoils which focused on why the present job crunch is not likely to be a short term event and some recommendations to ease both the problem and the application processes. Dr. Lind indicated that his department received over 900 applications and then described some of the budgetary constraints and other problems involved in advertising positions and making offers. A big driver in PhD student numbers is the necessity to teach quiz sections, etc. Dr. McNulty described her own job search and procedures stressing the time and inefficiency it involved. Dr. Lutz indicated that her department attempts to place a notice describing the ideal candidate although this means more work and discussion beforehand. She also urged being prepared for interviews. Dr. McKenzie described his job search, the importance of good letters of recommendation, and his own application packet. A significant point he made was that there were really two tasks -- getting to the short list and being selected as the finalist. They are very different in nature and require different strategies. Several things emerged. There seems to agreement that the problem is real and will not just go away without actions by the mathematical community. A new suggestion was the use of Mosaic by colleges to provide more detailed descriptions of job duties and of the college itself. Dr. McNulty felt this would have saved her much time and effort and everyone agreed. The widespread use of adjunct faculty was raised. On the one hand, the posts do give at least marginal employment to new PhDs which might be better than no employment at all. On the other, such persons already have an inside edge on career employment prospects over the new graduate -- thus further reducing the odds for a new graduate securing a career post. Moreover, two adjuncts = one full time tenure track opening -- further limiting the numbers of real lifetime career positions. That too many PhD's are being produced for the present job conditions seems to have been a universal agreement among the panelists. Certainly nobody wanted more than the present level of PhD's per year. Dr. Mannix argued that perhaps part of the present PhD output could be better served by strengthened MS and PhC programs. All onstage seemed in agreement that the job application process badly needs streamlining. Part of the audience participation indicated that there were still some departments and community colleges open to MS candidates. One chair in the audience actually preferred MS math degree-holders as better teachers; to get tenure, though, they did have to go on for the Ph.D. Concerns were validly raised about the impact of decreased PhD production on departmental funding levels, headcount, and accreditation, since these are often linked to the number of enrolled PhD candidates. Another suggestion was that qualifying exams be offered in a larger variety of topics so as to encourage a wider training for young mathematicians. Part of the overproduction stems from the pressures put on a math department by the larger community. The outside community and statehouse want a "good, strong" university and departments which implies a large PhD program. In the past, a PhD program also attracted stronger new faculty and carried more prestige for the established faculty. Thus, there are external and internal pressures to maintain high production. This was good audience input and the issue can not be ignored. As Ken Ross pointed out, cutting back on PhD production is sort of like a suicide pact where any one member is reluctant to be first since there are definite sacrifices involved for a department attempting to do so. The session was constructive and educational for all concerned. C. E. Mannix Jr. _______________________________________________________________ Item #3 Annalisa Crannell Letters of Recommendation This is in response to Greg Gibson's request for advice on how to get good letters of recommendation. He was distressed over the fact that his letters were very bland, and hardly personal. This was true even in letters from professors that had seen him teaching and read all his student evaluations. For those of you that have heard me talk about this before, I apologize for being redundant all over again. First, put yourself in the letter writer's shoes. You're busy, you've got to write letters for people, and you really don't know a whole lot more than stuff you've seen written down (a thesis, student evaluations). Some professors try to learn more about the people they're writing for (see the next paragraph, for example), but a lot of people give in to ennui. It's easy to think that professors should know about you by reputation or by actually remembering good things about you, but that's generally not the case. Those of you who have had to write letters for students in your own sections of calculus (or whatever) know how hard it is to say something meaningful. Greg wrote: One of my committee members asked for a copy of my resume. He then asked questions about what was listed there and mentioned some of my entries in his letter. This certainly helped personalize it. I really believe that this is the key to getting more individualized letters. I think it's in bad form to chastise your letter writers about being too generic, nor is it a good idea to ask them to "Please say _this_". On the other hand, it's a *great* idea to give them as much information as you can, and let them cull their own excerpts. Before you go ask for letters of recommendation, put together a folder that contains all sorts of stuff that you're proud of. (I recommend, actually starting this the first year of grad school). Folks in the know call these "Portfolios"; but mine was called "Bragging Folder" for a long time. In this folder, put anything that you're proud of. This might include: copies of syllabi, letters from students, parents, Deans material from conferences you've attended lists of grants you've gotten records of how many students continued in math after passing your class announcements from talks you've given resume innovative teaching/computing/research you've done. Then, organize this folder, make a table of contents, and take this to your letter writers. You might even give them a list of the places you're applying to (they might know someone at one of these institutions, or give you more advice). Your letter writers will love having the information at their fingertips (as opposed to in the dark recesses of their minds); you'll get a more individual and more accurate letter. I hope that this helps! Annalisa Crannell who was told that she is famous, "but not as famous as Ed Aboufadel" Franklin & Marshall College A_Crannell@ACAD.FandM.edu _______________________________________________________________ Item #4 Editorial Board YMN is one year old. The editorial board has been waxing reminiscent of late. July 7^th is the anniversary of the first issue of this newsletter. Last June Mark Winstead posted a note to the Young Scientists' Network Digest inquiring whether there was interest in spawning specialist sub-Networks. Most of the folks responding rejected the notion--except for the mathematicians, almost all of whom thought it was a great idea. Some of them (Ed Aboufadel, Curtis Bennett, Neil Calkin, and Kalin Godev) even volunteered to help him set it up. Thus was born this "confederacy" (as Ed called it) and this newsletter. The celebration of an anniversary leads quite naturally to reflection and summation: what have we done well, what poorly, what more could (and should) we do? We thought it would be worthwhile to celebrate our accomplishments and look ahead and set some goals for our second year. Changing the Community According to the YMN charter we have five purposes. Numbers one and five are: i] a mathematicians' group keeping the mathematical community honest about the job market and its future; v] a group to inform the mathematical community of the interests and concerns of the younger mathematicians. The mathematical community is listening--many of the officers and administrators of the various mathematical organizations regularly read and occasionally write to this newsletter. The AMS-MAA-SIAM Joint Committee on Employment Opportunities (JCEO) sponsored two panel discussions at the winter meetings in Cincinnati: Effective Job Seeking in Today's Market, and, What Can Be Done About Employment in the 90s and Beyond? This latter discussion was co-sponsored by YMN and Curtis Bennett was a panelist. The AMS Nominating Committee placed Mark Winstead on the ballot for the upcoming elections for the AMS Council. Ben Lotto of Vassar College used this newsletter to start a successful petition drive to get himself also placed on the ballot. Curtis Bennett is on the subcommittee of the AMS Committee on the Profession which is concerned with employment issues. Ken Ross, the president-elect of the MAA, recently posted a request to this newsletter for advice from young mathematicians' on what the MAA can do to alleviate the problem. Goals: We are being heard, but we should not relax. Lotto and Winstead have been nominated, let's get them elected--and let's get some more young mathematicians on the ballot for next year, one or two young AMS Councillors is a start, not a goal. The JCEO currently consists of six members, two from each of AMS, MAA, SIAM. It should be mandated in the JCEO charge that some number of the members be "young" (within 5 years of Ph.D.?). We need to begin a more active dialogue with the MAA, SIAM, and the AWM. We look forward to the day when young mathematicians are involved in the governance of all the mathematical societies. Finally, we believe that the entire mathematics community needs to begin a serious discussion of the overproduction problem: 1202 Ph.Ds produced last year for 721 domestic jobs (Notices, Nov. `93, pp. 1164-1171). Improving the Job Search Process Items two and three from the Purpose section of the YMN charter are: ii] a group providing information about job searches from both the inside and the outside; iii] a support group for those on the job market. We have run a large number of pieces (solicited and unsolicited) on how to run a successful search. We hope that this information has been helpful. The AMS and the AWM have officially expressed disapproval of expedient and unethical hiring practices by adopting the resolution "Supportive Practices and Ethics in the Employment of Young Mathematicians." We expect that SIAM Council will do the same at its summer meeting. We hope that the MAA will follow suit. Goals: There are plenty of ideas out there for improving the current chaotic methods of matching position to applicant: Charles Mannix's coupon books, imitating the medical profession's resident placement procedure, establishing a central repository for applicant files. We need to think about (and continue to discuss here) these ideas. We have three suggestions that we believe would unquestionably make a difference and that we would like to accomplish this year: 1) Establish a standard format for academic job ads on the e-math node and include in it some kind of notification feature, i.e., make it mandatory that the advertiser post a notice to e-math when a position advertised there has been filled (or cancelled). We'd also like to see similar notification at various critical points of the process (short-list completed, campus interviews scheduled). 2) We have asked AMS and AWM to automatically send a copy of the Employment Practices Resolution to any institution which submits an advertisement for a one-year position to any of their journals/newsletters, or to the e-math node. We'd like to see this instituted. 3) Create a file of sample dossiers for applicants to consult and make it available in the YMN ftp archive. Probably, most new Ph.D's have no idea what a c.v. should look like, or a research summary, or cover letter. Ideally, we would have several copies of each kind of document, tailored for various kinds of positions. Providing Information about the Profession Item four of YMN's five purposes is: iv] a group providing information on publishing, grant proposals, obtaining industry jobs, and other things which many of us did not get in graduate school. We have run pieces on all these topics and have established a directory of sample grant proposals at the YMN ftp archive. Those among us fortunate enough to have obtained a job doing mathematics should help each other learn how to function as professional mathematicians. The minutiae of grantsmanship, publishing, reviewing, advising are foreign and must be mastered to succeed. This network has, naturally, focused more on the employment crisis and we intend to maintain that emphasis. We should, however, share our experience and knowledge, as we gain it. Goals: 1) Providing information on continuing research after graduate school: How do you find problems, collaborators, travel funds? How do you decide where to send a manuscript? How do you referee a manuscript? ... 2) Increase the number of sample grant proposals in the YMN archive. In particular, we have only one proposal which is not for an NSF post-doc. What other sources of funding are there besides NSF? 3) Provide more information on finding jobs in industry. 4) For those lucky enough to have landed tenure-track jobs, we should be providing information on the tenure process: what to expect and how to survive it. Reaching Out Since last July the number of subscribers to CoYM has increased from 5 to over 1000 and we expect our numbers will continue to grow. There were over 1200 Ph.D's awarded last year, we would hope that most of them would benefit by reading (and writing to) this newsletter. Certainly, the 1000+ who graduated this year would, and the 1000+ who will next year, as well. Please spread the word. We would like to increase the diversity of viewpoints heard in this newsletter and represented on the editorial board. In particular, women, graduate students, and the unemployed are underrepresented. Please consider submitting an article to CoYM, or volunteering some time. We believe that NSF should have a role in easing the horrible oversupply of mathematicians (and other scientists). We are not of one mind as to what it can do. Certainly, it should be helping to form connections to the private sector--that's where most of us are going to end up after all. Perhaps NSF should fund industrial post-doc positions and summer programs for graduate students to help us (and industry) learn what we can do for them. [We have just learned that the NSF has begun a a program like this. The Mathematical Sciences Postdoctoral Industrial Research Fellowship Program (NSF 93-139) proposes to fund 10-15 post-docs annually in research projects jointly sponsored by a university and a private company. Proposals for this program must come from the university. We do not know if any such post-docs were funded this year. For more information about this and other NSF programs consult the gopher server stis.nsf.gov.] Conclusion We have begun the work of improving the lot of young mathematicians. However, the horrendous job prospects for young mathematicians still exist, the ridiculously inefficient job market still operates, and one can still hear mutterings that "everything will be better in a couple of years." We do not believe that anything will be better until the entire mathematics community squarely faces up to its problems and resolutely and honestly tries to solve them. We are committed to bringing this about. We thank you all for your support, your encouragement, your ideas, and your contributions to this conversation. The editors *************************************************************************** _______________________________________________________________ Item #5 Closing Credits The Young Mathematicians' Network is administered by: Charles Yeomans cyeomans@s.ms.uky.edu Mark Winstead winstead@euclid.ucsd.edu Vic Perera vperera@silver.ucs.indiana.edu Franklin Mendivil mendivil@math.gatech.edu Stephen Kennedy kennedy@stolaf.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