Thinking+about+applications

Thinking about applications
My rule of thumb is always to say (1) "in what situations and for what purposes by what persons will this application and its constituent parts be reviewed?" and (2) "what do those persons want to see clearly, immediately, readily, and conveniently?"

For me, this typically translates in the following dicta:

(a) Make sure each constituent element is clearly labeled in common parlance: if it's a cover letter, make it a single-page cover letter that begins "Dear [Selection Committee][Chair][Professor X]." If it's a "Summary of Research Interests," include a separate sheet, so labeled. Don't confuse the committee by making them wade through six dense paragraphs about your research when the primary function of the cover letter is simply to say "this is who I am and that is the post I am interested in." If you feel it is important to include detail about your research interests (and I would not say that was mistaken), include it in a separate constituent which can be put aside while they read other materials.

(b) Make sure each constituent element is handy, portable, and convenient. Visualize the situation in which the material will be reviewed: once (if you're lucky) by each individual committee member, sitting at her/his desk, skimming quickly through each constituent and mentally checking a list to make sure all portions are present; and a second time (if you're lucky) by the committee, seated together around a conference table, passing materials from hand-to-hand. You want to emphasize a physical format for your materials that facilitates and streamlines both these processes.

Typically, that means that items which are free-standing should be grouped together (obviously), and that, if possible, you should have more separate single-sheet items than large agglomerated items. Obviously, the CV will be multi-page (and stapled or clipped), but the cover letter, the "Brief Bio," and the "Summary of Research Interests" should, all, ideally, be brief, to the point, clearly labeled, separate, and single-sheet (or, if multi-sheet, stapled/clipped).

(2) The detail, scope, and rigor of your research may be very impressive--but it is not (in most cases) the reason an institution will hire you. Typically, schools hire *senior* professors (already-tenured, associate or full rank) for their research profiles, and "junior" professors (adjunct, visiting, assistant) for (a) their ability to carry the requisite teaching load for the post and (b) their *promise* for future research. The typical committee will be much more interested in "can this person cover the load of the person departing, and perhaps bring some new/additional skills to the table?" rather than "does this person have the most impressive bibliography of work in her/his specialization?"

So I might suggest tailoring your CV and cover letter to directly and immediately address the issue of covering the existing load. The committee wants to feel confident that you are (a) experienced and (b) skillful at teaching the core classes (surveys, major-period seminars, "great-composer" courses, genre studies of rock/world/jazz musics); that is what pays their credit hours and your salary.

If it happens that you don't have extensive experience at such meat & potatoes courses, do two things:

(a) address this directly in your cover letter, articulating that while you "realize that the CV shows relatively little work in mainstream course-teaching, [I] am very interested in teaching such topics and very ready to develop interesting, effective, and challenging syllabi on them", and

(b) get some experience doing it: community college, prep school, etc. 90% of the institutions in the world are not hiring research specialists: they are hiring team players who can handle mainstream courses while *also* pursuing interesting and marketable research (I know, it's not fair, but that in my observation is how it works).