Friday, October 7, 2011

The APA's JFP Web Page Is Organized Wrong



This is a small point, but worth making. The JFP section of the APA's website contains a list of various editions of web-only ads. These ads are listed in a senseless and arbitrary order, beginning with issue #190, last updated June 16 of this year; followed for some reason by #187, last updated October 20 of last year; then #188, last updated February 4 of this year; then the current "summer" web-onlies, last updated a couple of weeks ago; lastly, issue #189, last updated April 14.

I mean, what is the deal? Why not just put them in goddam chronological order? And if you're not going to do that, why not try numerical order? What's the point of giving them numbers if you're going to turn around and display them in some random bullshit order? Why would the most recent ads be listed second to last?

I mean, I'm not saying I think they should do something right. I'm not crazy. Why can't they do anything in a way that makes any sense at all?

--Mr. Zero

25 comments:

zombie said...

Clearly engaging in some experimental philosophy.

Anonymous said...

The whole APA website is a mess. Many features have not and continue not to work. The jobs portion is obscure at best.

We've gone from a somewhat bad website to one that is truly abysmal.

Anonymous said...

In case you missed it (it wasn't up long), they (accidentally?) posted the web ads for volume 191 yesterday. There were about 35 positions, several of which I haven't seen posted anywhere else.

I'm thinking that they posted 191, realized that it wasn't supposed to go live until after the October JFP was published, and in the process of taking it down somehow they messed up the ordering of their list.

Anonymous said...

"In an effort to reduce the carbon footprint of The American Philosophical Association, the National Office is pleased to announce that the JFP, available to all current APA members, will be published exclusively online beginning in the fall of 2012."

Have people seen this? I guess that blows the argument that JFP ads are better than the other job databases because it comes out in printed form out of the water.

It is also annoying that there are no ways to access a non-PDF version of past JFPs.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for expressing my frustration. This post was a nice cathartic. Where's the Steve Jobs for American philosophy?

Zarathustra said...

The web-only ads are still available, if you know where to look...

Hint: http://www.apaonline.org/APAOnline/Members_Only/JFP/Web_Only_Ads/Volume_191_Web-Only_Ads.aspx

word verification: "grous" It's just too easy...

Anonymous said...

Heeding 7:21's happening upon vol. 191, I tried this, and it worked:

http://www.apaonline.org/APAOnline/Members_Only/JFP/Web_Only_Ads/Volume_191_Web-Only_Ads.aspx

That is, I just changed the '190' in vol. 190
s link to '191', and it gave me the 191 that's not supposed to be up yet. Happy hunting.

Anonymous said...

Yup 191 is up right now. (Do what 8:12 did and you'll see it.)

What puzzles me is this: Why can't they just put the goddamn JFP itself up? I am sure it's ready. The ads are in right? So what gives?

Also - is it just me or does it seem that there are hardly any "AOS: Open" jobs this year? I don't know if this is good or bad.

Anonymous said...

Someone should just grab the PDF and throw it up on mediafire or zshare or some other upload site so that other people can see it.

Anonymous said...

Agreed, 10:27.

Anonymous said...

I'm hopeful that the web-only 191 sneak peak is only a partial list of the web-only 191 ads that will officially be listed on the 12th. The web-only 187 list initially contained a much larger "number" of ads than the 30-some contained in today's sneak peak.

Not much point in speculating about this I guess, but still...

Anonymous said...

With Anon 8:41, I DO, really, really DO hope that there are more AOS Open positions in the JFP 191 proper. This appears just to be the web only ads.

Anonymous said...

The 191 appears to be down now. Can anyone confirm? Can anyone post what was there earlier if it has been removed?

Anonymous said...

Between phylo, philjobs, higheredjobs.com, and the chronicle, I'd say there are close to 100 jobs that have been posted already. I say that the JFP produces only 50 additional jobs. The rest will be overlap.

Anonymous said...

Here is an online link to the JFP that was available earlier today: http://www.zshare.net/download/947752889ccb12fa/

CTS said...

This is insane.

By the way, I believe it should be 'wrongly,' not 'wrong.'

(ducks and runs)

Anonymous said...

is it just me or does it seem that there are hardly any "AOS: Open" jobs this year? I don't know if this is good or bad.

Actually, I'm surprised there have been so many 'open AOS' searches since the market blew-up in 2008. These days, if you run an open AOS search, you're asking for 600 applications. (Remember Boise State?) Maybe some SCs are willing to sift through 600 apps to find the proverbial perfect fit. But why go through that trouble if you already have a general idea what your department needs? Like it or not, it's a buyer's market. The job market's so bad that SCs have less incentive to cast as wide of a net as they might have in the past.

Anonymous said...

I'm personally glad to see at least 10 jobs in my area already. Open jobs are a crap-shoot anyway. Anyway, my area is one that has been previously neglected. I am hoping I am not just getting the best of the stack at the beginning. If so, I still have 5 more in my area than I did last year, and if not, well, maybe I'll get a tt this year (and the moon might turn to green cheese too). But, I do have one question: what the hell is engineering ethics?

YFNA

Anonymous said...

only 1 job for me that I wasn't already aware. Way to become obsolete APA.

CTS said...

On AOS postings:

I have long wondered why some programs [sometimes] do not know the areas in which they want/need to hire.

Of course, they might have been given the go-ahead to add a body, but shouldn't they sit down and do some - you know - planning ahead of time?

veteran said...

sometimes, CTS, you just want to hire the best person you get, regardless of what they do. and sometimes the dept can't agree and they're just putting off a fight.

Anonymous said...

About the rationality of advertising for open. Not every department takes it upon themselves to represent the discipline and are being, I think, reasonably opportunistic, you know, looking for the best of the best. Maybe it's not the best year for topic x or what have you. Notice that top places very often advertise open positions.

YFNA

L. A. Paul said...

I have been following the problems with the APA website, as have some of the members of the APA Board, and we are deeply concerned about the problems. In an effort to improve the situation, a subcommittee of the Board has been appointed to try to fix or at least improve things as soon as possible.

I just wanted to write to try to explain that not everyone is deaf to the problem—many of us want to fix the problems if we can. I'm not on the Board (I'm just the Program Chair for the 2012 Eastern) and have no connection to the National Office. So I cannot do anything directly about the problems with the website or the APA more generally. However, I understand that adding to the stress and difficulty of job-searching is unacceptable, and since I know that many Board members feel the same way, I thought the Smokers might like to know.

Anonymous said...

Hello L.A. Paul: I sure hope they fix it. I don't know who they hired to design this website, but I personally do know an extremely good usability expert that could probably help them, since they don't seem capable of finding a good one themselves. I'm not complaining at you. I know it's not your fault personally, but I mean the menu items are not even spaced apart in order to individuate them -- that one fact strikes me as particularly absurd. The organization is terrible, but at least I can understand that kind of mistake.

Perhaps all of us job seekers should collectively send a complaint to the head office. Would that make any diff?

YFNA

L. A. Paul said...

Please call me Laurie.

I have nothing to do with the website, and nothing to do with the way the APA is run. But I have been able to talk with various APA Board members about the problems. And I'm not sure why things are such a mess. My personal view is that it is ridiculous to have three divisions and three annual meetings, and I suspect that the National Office is severely understaffed in part because it does certain things in triplicate (like host big conferences).

Actually, a petition or letter to the National Office might not be a bad idea. I don't know. They don't seem to realize how bad things are, and a petition might help spur them to change.

Laurie

PS: Another thing I'd like to see changed but that I don't have any control over: I'd like to have the timing of the Eastern meeting changed. And, for that matter, to end the smokers and APA interviews.