Monday, October 1, 2012

The New JFP Is Up

I don't have time to dig into it right now, but I'll have a review later today. Immediate reaction: I don't like the way the institution's name is small, inconspicuous, desaturated, and occasionally abbreviated or written in code, while the location is displayed more prominently. The institution's location is somewhat less important to me than its identity.

--Mr. Zero

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

well, let's start with the obvious: there are no new jobs in the the new jfp. *sigh*

Anonymous said...

It's awful.

Can you get to more than the first 100 jobs? The numbers go over 900, but I can only see 10 pages.

Why can't I filter out visiting and search by AOS?

Anonymous said...

This seems like the worst JFP of the last 4 years. There are essentially no jobs. Is it just me? Am I not using the new site properly? It seems as if there are like 1/3 of the jobs there were last year...

Anonymous said...

The resume format is also so generic as to be almost useless. It's as though no one realized we are applying to academic jobs. Good to know at least some things stay the same. Good ol' APA...

Anonymous said...

not all of the jobs from the online adds are on the new website. for example, Uchicago had three jobs up earlier and they aren't on the new site. hope this is just an oversight.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure that the jobs have not all been posted yet; I know of at least one institution that is missing.

Also there is this from the notification e-mail from M. Morris: "All ads posted in JFP 194W during September now appear on the new JFP website, and new ads will be posted immediately upon APA approval after they are purchased."

Anonymous said...

8:33, that might be because the deadline for those jobs is today (for reasons passing understanding). hope you've got your materials ready!

Anonymous said...

(1) Jobs are being added as the hours go by...when I first went on the site several ones that are there now were not there...so I don't think we can tell yet how things compare to previous years.

(2) The filter for AOS/AOC function is not reliable

Anonymous said...

With regards to the low number of ads, I'll just mention that I know at least three places (including my own department -- I'm the search committee chair) that have waited until today or tomorrow to submit job ads, since it was quite unclear whether ads submitted before today would be transferred in a timely fashion.

In other words, I would not be surprised to see a ton of ads appear in the next few days.

Anonymous said...

And now it's crashed.

Anonymous said...

As someone who was originally distraught by the absence of new jobs, let me mention some mitigating considerations:

1. We're used to this being posted in mid-October, so it's reasonable that not as many departments have been able to post their ad or even decide on what their ad should look like earlier in the month.

2. The email the APA sent out this morning announcing the new site is actively urging employers to submit their ads, suggesting that they know there are still many out there who haven't yet.

3. Since this morning, I've already seen five new jobs posted, starting with Kent State. This suggests that APA people either had a backlog of requests still to enter into their system, or that people are already responding with new ads in response to that email.

So it's not all doom yet.

Dr. Prof. Yikes said...

1. You should be able to see more than 10 jobs on a single page.

2. AOS/AOC should be listed in upfront, so you don't have to CLICK on the job to see what the AOS is.

3. As someone else mentioned, why is the title of the job so prominently displayed, and the school so hard to see?

4. When you look at the latest jobs, the numbers jump all over the place, from 917 to 852 and so on. What the hell does this mean, and what's going on? Can't we just see the jobs in order? This is confusing. It makes you feel like you're missing something. You're *already* starting at 917!! WTH?

5. I searched for jobs within 50 miles of Dallas, TX, and got something for a job in Chicago.

6. All in all, a C minus at the very best. Perhaps this will prompt a mass Exodus to Philjobs. I hope so.

Amy Ferrer said...

Thanks, everyone, for your feedback on the new JFP. Rest assured that we at the APA hear your concerns and will continue to update the JFP website based on your experiences.

I do want to emphasize that this is not just a new JFP site, but in fact a new kind of JFP. It no longer comes out in issues, as it used to, but instead is a rolling job board. There will no longer be a delay between when an ad is submitted and when JFP comes out: ads will be posted immediately upon APA approval. So watch for more ads in the coming days and weeks as hiring committees submit new postings.

And we apologize that the site is slow today. As you might expect, we're experiencing much heavier traffic than normal. While we've made every effort to prepare for such traffic, some slowdown is unavoidable, and we apologize for any inconvenience it may cause.

Thanks again for your feedback, and please feel free to reach out to me with your concerns.

Anonymous said...

8:59

the real deadline is in early november. The "full considration" talk is hollow.

Anonymous said...

Amy, this new system is horrible, and you should go back to the old pdf listing. Want to make it easy to search? It's called "ctrl f."

Anonymous said...

I wish the AOS/AOC info was most prominent. This is the first thing I want to know about any position, since an AOS that isn't even close to mine means that I don't give the position one more second of thought. As things stand, I have to click on the position to find out. Also, regarding the AOS/AOC cloud, since when is philosophy of language merely tagged as "linguistics." I find that rather odd.

Anonymous said...

I want to third the 'AOS/AOC upfront' suggestion -- that would make it much easier to use the site!

Anonymous said...

There are so many things to complain about. But one of them is something we've been complaining about for years: WTF is up with the stupid numbers? They're not even in order anymore! How are we supposed to make sense of this crap? Keep track of which ads we've already seen and dismissed? My god, the people who run this organization all have terminal degrees, they can't count 1, 2, 3, 4...?!?

Anonymous said...

I miss the PDF not only for the "command f" search feature mentioned above, but because I could print it out. Why would I do that?

So, I could sit on the couch with my wife and go through each job with her. Jesus, not everything needs to be only electronic!

Anonymous said...

This new site is just shockingly bad.

I can't believe they don't list the AOS upfront, and that the name of the university is in microscopic font.

Geesh.

Popkin said...

Why are there two numbers? There's the number that appears next to the job title, and then there's often another different number under the job description?

And as has been pointed out, not including AOS/AOC in the main list means that I have to click on most of the jobs. So looking through the all the ads is actually taking longer than it used to (which I wouldn't have thought was possible).

Have they seen philjobs? Why can't the APA just do that?

Xenophon said...

Amy, your "thanks for the feedback" comment is nice, I guess, but it rings hollow. I hope you understand that the APA has been incompetent for years, and since in recent months we've been hearing from the APA and its board nothing but "this time we'll get it right," this was really your last chance. And you blew it.

Obvious stuff is easy enough to fix if you've got competent web design people: emphasizing rank and location, and making the important stuff (name of the school, AOS, unique and sequential identifiers) hard to find can be fixed in a day by updating your CSS. But I'll bet you won't, even though that would make it much easier for your actual users, the people who this system is designed for.

As for the breakdowns and delays in service: I hope you aren't running your own servers. If you're outsourcing to a server farm, and given the fact that you knew everyone and his brother would be logging in on the 1st with all your advance advertising, you should have been able to get sufficient resources to make the whole thing come off seemlessly.

I think you've only got one solution at this point: quit and close the whole motherfucker down. People can turn to other online job sites, organize their own conferences, and do interviews on Skype. Sorry if this sounds rude, but you really blew it, and you should have seen this coming. Everyone else did.

Anonymous said...

eHave you all been checking the PhilJobs site? From the jobs listed there I've found about 40 tenure track jobs to apply to in my area and maybe six or seven postdocs and visiting gigs. And there are probably another 10 or so jobs I can credibly apply to though they'd be a stretch. For sheer volume that seems pretty good to me. I assume that at least another 15 or 20 in my area will be listed, which would make this a decent year. At the moment I'd say the PhilJobs site is a more accurate reflection of the state of the market than the APA site.
Also, it's just a far superior site on every level. There are a few jobs on the APA site that aren't on the PhilJobs site (and vice versa) but for the most part I'm going to be using the philjobs site. It's so much better than the JFP that honestly the best thing for all concerned would be if the JFP were to die a peaceful death so everyone would post there.

Anonymous said...

There are problems with the new site, but people (like Xenophon) are being way too hard on Amy Ferrer. I think she deserves the benefit of the doubt precisely because she has taken over an incompetent organization. Yes - the site has problems, and I am more than willing to call for her to be fired or step down if those problems do not get resolved. But Jesus Christ give her a chance first.

Anonymous said...

I can only agree with the above comments about the (non-)usability of the new JFP. This is all the more disappointing that this was paid by association fees that could have been used to support better alternatives like Philjobs. Either the APA puts its own interests as a business above those of its members, or it's seriously misguided and incompetent. I'd be curious to know how much they spent on this.

Anonymous said...

Is there any way to access the jobs list without being an APA member? I can't pay the membership fee and I would like to take a look at it. Thanks

Anonymous said...

Needs AOS/AOC upfront! Needs 50 results per page! Needs multiple search criteria! Needs more jobs!

Anonymous said...

"Aesthetics" (or "philosophy of art") is an AOS/AOC. So is "philosophy of language".<Twould be nice for the search to reflect those facts, especially when there are some jobs advertising these AOSes/AOCs.

zombie said...

According to philjobs, it's philjobs 170, JFP 109. Burn.

Xenophon said...

I think Anon 12:03 is being too generous. Amy Ferrer and the APA braintrust (such as it is) should have realized that they already were at their last opportunity to turn things around. We don't need the APA. I think I'm going to vote with my feet and just not renew next year. Everything they do is being done better by others.

I also found Amy's half-assed reply disengenuous and naive. "Oh, we fucked up yet again. Oh well, thanks for your comments. They'll go into the comment box and be considered in due course" just won't cut it anymore. The only proper response was "gee, we tried our best and fucked up yet again. I'm so completely embarrassed. LET ME ACTUALLY GET THIS SHIT FIXED RIGHT AWAY." That's another administrator who should be collecting welfare. Sorry if this is harsh, but it's the truth.

Dr. Prof. Yikes said...

Further,

7. You should be able to jump more than one page at a time. Suppose you want to pull up the "Latest jobs", but suppose you want to skip 4 or 5 pages deep. You can't. You have to press "next page" 4 or 5 times.

Anonymous said...

I'd be very happy if the APA would (i) transfer the money I sent them over to the PhilJobs project, and then (ii) take the JFP offline, and then (iii) dedicate their staff to entering all JFP-bound entries into the PhilJobs system. Thanks!

Mary said...

I have to agree with 12:03. Give Amy Ferrer a chance. The site's not great, but it's a hell of a lot better than last year.

Anonymous said...

Two more thoughts:

1. The "featured jobs" section at the top is so unclassy. All jobs should be given equal prominence.

2. The cloud thing on the right (where "Ancient" is listed in big letters, e.g., and "early modern" in small) is really cool and informative. I would keep that. Scrap the rest and start over.

Anonymous said...

Why do the tenure track jobs have a little red label next to them while the Grant/Fellowship positions are in blue? Obviously this gets things exactly backwards. Amy Ferrer should be drawn and quartered and the Justice Department should IMMEDIATELY investigate the APA.

Anonymous said...

The new jfp site is not very good, but it's a lot better than the old one. I really don't give a shit about the numbers, myself, but it really would be much better to have the AOS visible up front.

Xenophon's comment reads like a parody of the very worst Philosophy Smoker whining. I hope it is. But if not:

"this was really your last chance. And you blew it."

That's particularly moronic. As if some nitwit who posts comments on this blog has the authority to give ultimatums to the (brand new) APA director.

Mr. Zero and the other erstwhile Smoker bloggers are able to express the angst of job-seeking in philosophy without coming off like self-important schmucks. Give it a shot.

Anonymous said...

Search for "early modern" jobs. A few jobs in 17th/18th century phil show up. Then search for "modern" jobs. Another set of 17th/18th century phil jobs appear. I can't blame the new JFP for this infelicity, which arises from lack of terminological consensus in the field itself (you find the same lack of consensus in other fields). But it does make me want to have a big paper in front of me with all the jobs clearly laid out so I can just scan and circle them the old-fashioned way and not worry about missing any. And I want those AOS's up front like everyone else...

Anonymous said...

Hey, someone help me out. I don't trust the APA's filters, so has anyone found a way to get the new site just to show you every job in the JFP? Then I can look through them all myself. (And figure out whether the numbers are really non-consecutive or I'm just seeing only half the jobs.)

Xenophon said...

Anon 1:41,

Schmuck yourself. I stand by what I said. The APA has no reason to exist.

(The fact that this is my day to drink heavily has no bearing on my views, or my ability to spell. Ha.)

Dale said...

The new site is in many respects a major step forward. However, the APA website was so outmoded that a major step forward still leaves it looking sad in comparison to PhilJobs or the sites of other professional organizations. I'm also a member of the American Political Science Association, and their job site has offered better functions for many years than the site the APA unveiled today. Plus they still have a monthly jobs newsletter in PDF format for those who want to print. They do have the advantage that political science jobs seem to fit more neatly into a few pre-defined categories than philosophy jobs. Still, I'd suggest that the APA take what they have as a model.

Anonymous said...

Dear Amy,

Here are some questions I have, and I think everyone has similar questions. Replies would be greatly appreciated.

1) How do I search for all and only jobs that meet my (three) criteria in a single search? (For instance, I want to search for jobs in the U.S. and Canada only that are tenure track and have an AOS of x and y and open).

2) If I click on 'x' in the cloud, does that mean it doesn't show me jobs with an open AOS? If I click on, say, 'ethics', will it (not) show me jobs in environmental ethics (and so on for other related tags).

3) Are the featured ads only shown on top where they're featured or do they appear in the main listings as well?

4) Are departments required to ad a tag to the ad or does the APA tag all of them? If I click on a particular ad for AOS x, might there be some ads that aren't tagged?

5) Why can't I see how many pages of ads there are after I filter the results? Why can't I just see them all on one page?

6) Can I see a listing of all the jobs regardless of AOS, etc.?

7) Why are some jobs listed as 'not specified'? And relatedly, why doesn't the APA require them to be specified?

8) Why do I have to click on the ad to see what the AOS is given that the specified AOS will disqualify me given my AOS?

9) Is there a way of saving the jobs I'm interested in? Is there a way of making the jobs I already have on my list disappear (as one can on Philjobs)?

For what it's worth, I think we could all benefit from these questions and Amy's answers, so if you have a question for Amy, I suggest posting it.

Thanks very much.

Anonymous said...

Printability would be a huge improvement.

Anonymous said...

They should have just made the print one better first, and then done a digital test with the last JFP of the season to get the kinks out.

Rolling it out this way at the start of a job market was a bad decision.

Live and learn.

Anonymous said...

I like the new site, but it could still be improved. Points that should be kept in mind: With regard to searching by AOS/AOC, I think that would be difficult to do in any way other than tags because of the diversity of ways an AOS/AOC can be classified and named. Also, honestly, there aren't so many jobs that job candidates cannot just read through the additions at the end of each day/week or at whatever frequency suits the candidate. I do think it would be valuable to have a function for saving jobs so candidates could avoid the hassle of copying and pasting descriptions into their own document.

Anonymous said...

3:06 PM: you're neglecting the most important question of all: why aren't you encouraging everyone to use PhilJobs instead of imposing your own amateur site to the profession?

Anonymous said...

Apparently Yale has now opened a campus in Saskatchewan.

Anonymous said...

Amy Ferrer,

I salute you for taking on this job, because in the World According to Most Philosophers, managing a large, national organization with limited resources and staff, and which has been poorly run for years, and that caters to a group that is notoriously picky, prone to disagreement, thinks they know everything, is systematically biased against women, and usually treats non-philosophers with derision is totes easy and could easily be done by a Chimpanzee in a suit with a computer from 1997.

Meanwhile, obscure and possibly interesting philosophical problems are really, really important -- maybe the Most Important -- and obviously your gross incompetence that compromises the ability of someone WHO REALLY KNOWS SOME STUFF to get a REAL JOB (you know, a tenure-track philosophy professorship that is for grown-ups, and not some throwaway position like Executive Director of a national organization, that is for mindless zombies and/or children to do) answering these VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS is an intolerable crime for which you must be publicly mocked, humiliated, derided, and possibly executed (since you preventing someone from earning a living as a philosopher is pretty much killing them).

Good fucking luck.

From, an administrator who got tired of philosophers and so left philosophy

Anonymous said...

12:04 - that was brilliant. Thank you for that.