The 2016 Chemistry Faculty Openings List

August 17th, 2015

ed_academic_bigThe end of summer means that the start of the academic hiring cycle is upon us. In celebration of this fact, Chemjobber and I are curating a list of all of the tenure-track faculty openings in chemistry. Well, not all of the openings. The list is limited to those that meet the following criteria:

(i) tenure-track faculty positions with anticipated start dates in 2016

(ii) in chemistry departments or with a focus on chemistry

(iii) at institutions in the United States or Canada

We’ll deal with jobs in gray areas—e.g., a pharmacology department posting for a medicinal chemist at a medical school—as they come up, but engineering jobs are out. Go to ChemEngBark or EngineeringJobber for that.

The jobs are sorted by their ‘full-consideration’ deadlines. Please leave a comment or e-mail me (paul at or Chemjobber (chemjobber -at- if you find an unlisted position or catch an error or broken link. Please send a link to the job posting as well, preferably one that is hosted on the institution’s server.

The full list, with expanded data, may be downloaded as a spreadsheet here. This spreadsheet includes columns for city, state/province, and department (in addition to the columns shown below).

The 2016 Chemistry Faculty Openings List

Downloadable Spreadsheet

Pri. Date School Specialization Rank
8/10/2015 Rhodes College Organic Asst
8/24/2015 Dalhousie University Analytical or Inorganic Asst
8/24/2015 Dalhousie University Computational/Theory Asst
8/24/2015 Memorial University of Newfoundland Organic Asst
8/25/2015 St. Bonaventure University Physical Asst
8/31/2015 Rochester Institute of Technology Biochemistry Asst
9/1/2015 University of Alabama Materials Asst/Assoc
9/1/2015 St. Olaf College Organic or Inorganic Asst?
9/1/2015 North Carolina State University Organic All
9/1/2015 North Carolina State University Analytical All
9/1/2015 Illinois College Inorganic / Organometallic Asst?
9/2/2015 California State U. – Channel Islands Physical Asst
9/5/2015 Creighton University Analytical Asst
9/9/2015 University of Houston – Clear Lake Physical Asst
9/11/2015 Emory & Henry College Organic / Biochemistry Asst
9/12/2015 Lake Forest College Organic Synthesis Asst
9/14/2015 Northwestern University Open Asst
9/14/2015 Whitworth University Interdisciplinary All
9/15/2015 Wheaton College Biochemistry or Organic Asst
9/15/2015 Mills College Analytical or Environmental Asst
9/15/2015 Georgia Tech Open All
9/15/2015 Georgia Tech Open All
9/15/2015 Georgia Tech Open All
9/15/2015 State University of New York – Oswego Organic Asst
9/15/2015 Cal Poly Pomona Biochemistry Asst
9/15/2015 State University of New York – Oswego Analytical Forensics Asst
9/15/2015 Butler University Inorganic Asst
9/15/2015 College of Charleston Inorganic or Biophys., Bioanal., Comput. Asst
9/15/2015 Rockhurst University Biochemistry Asst
9/15/2015 Emory University Open Asst
9/16/2015 Lawrence University Inorganic / General Asst
9/18/2015 California State U. – Chico Organic Asst
9/18/2015 Austin College Physical Asst
9/18/2015 University of San Diego Biochemistry Asst
9/24/2015 Hope College Biochemistry Asst
9/25/2015 San Jose State University Organic Asst
9/25/2015 Fort Lewis College Physical Asst
9/25/2015 San Diego City College Analytical Asst
9/25/2015 University of Virginia Energy All
9/27/2015 University of Rhode Island Open Asst
9/28/2015 Salisbury University Analytical Asst
9/28/2015 Florida Institute of Technology Analytical/Inorganic Asst/Assoc
9/28/2015 Florida Institute of Technology Physical Asst/Assoc
9/28/2015 Florida Institute of Technology Organic Asst/Assoc
9/28/2015 Swarthmore College Inorganic + Environmental Asst
9/28/2015 Brown University Inorganic or Computational Asst
9/28/2015 California State U. – Bakersfield Organic/Bioorganic Asst
9/28/2015 Stanford University Open Asst
9/28/2015 El Camino College Teaching General & Organic Asst?
9/28/2015 Dixie State University Biochemistry Asst/Assoc
9/28/2015 University of California – San Diego Biochemistry Asst
9/28/2015 University of California – San Diego Synthetic Assoc/Full
9/28/2015 University of California – San Diego Molecular Biophysics Asst
9/28/2015 University of California – San Diego Open Asst
9/30/2015 The College of Saint Rose Organic Asst
9/30/2015 California State U. – East Bay Analytical, Physical, or Biophysical Asst
9/30/2015 Hamilton College Biochemistry Asst
9/30/2015 University of Central Oklahoma Inorganic, Materials, Environmental Asst
9/30/2015 Morehead State University Organic Asst
9/30/2015 University of Central Oklahoma Open, expertise in NMR Asst
10/1/2015 College of Wooster Analytical (MS, Environmental) Asst
10/1/2015 College of Wooster Inorganic (Polymers, Organometallics) Asst
10/1/2015 Humboldt State University Analytical Asst
10/1/2015 Hillsdale College Biochemistry Not Spec.
10/1/2015 University of Miami Materials/Energy Asst/Assoc
10/1/2015 University of Richmond Inorganic Asst
10/1/2015 University of California – Irvine Atmospheric Asst
10/1/2015 University of California – Irvine Atmospheric Full
10/1/2015 Western Washington University Analytical Asst
10/1/2015 San Francisco State University Analytical or Inorganic Asst/Assoc
10/1/2015 Providence College Inorganic Asst
10/1/2015 Oklahoma State University Organic or Open? Asst
10/1/2015 Northeastern State University Physical/Analytical? Asst
10/1/2015 California State U. – Fresno Computational – Biochem or Organic Asst
10/1/2015 University of Toronto Experimental Physical Chemistry Asst/Assoc
10/1/2015 University of Maryland – College Park Organic Asst
10/1/2015 Brigham Young University Open Asst
10/1/2015 Susquehanna University Organic Asst
10/1/2015 Loyola Marymount University Organic Asst
10/1/2015 Loyola Marymount University Biochemistry Asst
10/1/2015 University of the Pacific Biochemistry (Anal., Phys., or Expt.) Asst
10/1/2015 University of Minnesota – Twin Cities Open Asst
10/1/2015 University of Minnesota – Twin Cities Open Assoc/Full
10/1/2015 University of Michigan Open Asst+
10/1/2015 Cornell University Organic Asst
10/1/2015 Columbus State University Organic Asst
10/1/2015 Sam Houston State University Chemical Education Asst
10/1/2015 Sam Houston State University Inorganic Asst
10/2/2015 DePaul University Organic / Polymers Asst
10/2/2015 Washington State University Inorganic Asst
10/2/2015 San Jose State University Analytical and/or Inorganic Asst
10/4/2015 University of the Sciences Organic and/or Inorganic Asst
10/5/2015 University of the South Organic Asst
10/5/2015 Penn State Erie, The Behrend College Organic / Bioorganic / Biochemistry Asst
10/5/2015 Lafayette College Organic Asst
10/5/2015 Penn State Inorganic/Materials All
10/5/2015 Penn State Organic All
10/5/2015 Penn State Experimental Physical or Analytical All
10/5/2015 Texas Tech University Soft Matter Asst+
10/5/2015 Ursinus College Organic Asst
10/5/2015 University of Colorado – Boulder Physical Organic Asst
10/5/2015 Bates College Organic (Neuroscience slant?) Asst
10/5/2015 Univ. of North Carolina – Chapel Hill Organic (Chem. Bio. or Polymers) Asst
10/5/2015 Univ. of North Carolina – Pembroke Analytical, Forensic, or Physical Asst+
10/5/2015 Marshall University Organic Asst
10/6/2015 MIT Open Asst
10/7/2015 Christopher Newport University Biochemistry Asst
10/7/2015 Christopher Newport University Analytical Asst+
10/8/2015 Tufts University Interface with Life Sciences Asst
10/9/2015 Skidmore College Computational Asst/Assoc
10/9/2015 Hobart and William Smith Colleges Phys./Inorg./Anal./Environ./Materials Asst
10/10/2015 Davidson College Inorganic Asst
10/12/2015 Duquesne University Organic Asst
10/12/2015 Bucknell University Materials All
10/12/2015 California Lutheran University Organic Asst
10/12/2015 California State U. – Long Beach Materials, Inorganic or Physical Asst/Assoc
10/12/2015 Wabash College Analytical Asst+
10/12/2015 University of Pittsburgh Physical Asst
10/12/2015 University of Pittsburgh Organic Asst
10/12/2015 University of Pittsburgh Inorganic/Materials Asst
10/14/2015 Spring Hill College Physical Asst
10/14/2015 University of Kentucky Biochemistry / Mol. Bio. Asst
10/14/2015 University of Kentucky Synthetic Biology Asst
10/15/2015 Harvard University Open Asst
10/15/2015 Washburn University Forensics Any level
10/15/2015 University of Toronto – Mississauga Bioorganic Asst
10/15/2015 York University Materials Asst/Assoc
10/15/2015 York University Materials Full
10/15/2015 University of Texas Organic Asst
10/15/2015 Nevada State College Physical / Biophysical Asst
10/15/2015 University of Delaware Inorganic Asst
10/15/2015 Washington University Organic Asst
10/15/2015 The Scripps Research Institute Organic, Medicinal, Chemical Biology Asst
10/15/2015 The Scripps Research Institute Organic, Medicinal, Chemical Biology Assoc/Full
10/15/2015 University of Pennsylvania Biological Asst
10/15/2015 University of California – Santa Cruz Computational/Theoretical Asst
10/15/2015 University of Louisville Organic All
10/15/2015 University of Utah Organic All
10/15/2015 University of Utah Experimental Physical All
10/15/2015 University of Texas Experimental Analytical/Physical Asst
10/15/2015 Texas A&M University Open Asst+
10/15/2015 Texas A&M University Organic Asst+
10/15/2015 Virginia Tech Energy and the Environment Asst
10/15/2015 New York University Synthetic Organic Asst+
10/15/2015 New York University Experimental Physical or Biophysical Asst+
10/15/2015 New York University Materials / Polymers Asst
10/15/2015 Lawrence Technological University Inorganic, Materials Asst
10/15/2015 Purdue University Analytical Assoc/Full
10/15/2015 Lehigh University Bioanalytical Asst
10/15/2015 University of California – Merced Open (Experimental) Asst
10/15/2015 University of California – Merced Theoretical/Computational Asst
10/15/2015 Xavier University of Louisiana Biochemistry Open
10/15/2015 Earlham College Analytical Asst
10/15/2015 Virginia Tech Open / Interdisciplinary Asst
10/15/2015 Barnard College Inorganic Asst
10/15/2015 Boston College Chemical Biology Asst
10/15/2015 Southwest Baptist University Experimental Physical or Inorganic Asst/Assoc
10/15/2015 University of California – Davis Materials Asst
10/15/2015 Notre Dame Open All
10/15/2015 University of Central Florida Biochemistry Asst/Assoc
10/15/2015 Georgia Tech Renewable Feedstocks All
10/15/2015 Vanderbilt University Exp. Physical (at Interface…) Asst
10/15/2015 Emporia State University Analytical / Forensic Asst?
10/15/2015 Marquette University Analytical Asst
10/15/2015 Colorado State University Chem. Bio., Physical, or Soft Mater. Asst/Assoc
10/15/2015 Colorado State University Chem. Bio., Physical, or Soft Mater. Asst/Assoc
10/15/2015 University of Utah Chemical Biology Asst
10/15/2015 Converse College Physical Asst
10/15/2015 Johns Hopkins University Biological All
10/16/2015 Cal Poly Pomona Organic Asst
10/16/2015 Reed College Inorganic Asst
10/16/2015 University of San Francisco Biochemistry Asst
10/16/2015 Carthage College Analytical Asst?
10/16/2015 College of William and Mary Physical Asst
10/18/2015 University of Illinois Open Asst
10/19/2015 University of Kansas Medicinal All
10/19/2015 East Central University Open Asst
10/21/2015 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Organic All
10/21/2015 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Biochemistry All
10/22/2015 Univ. of Texas – San Antonio Mass Spectrometry (Bio) Asst
10/23/2015 University of Windsor Environmental All
10/23/2015 St. Ambrose University Biochemistry Asst
10/23/2015 San Diego State University Inorganic Asst
10/26/2015 Westminster College Inorganic Asst
10/30/2015 Temple University Analytical, Organic, Chemical Bio. All
10/30/2015 UCLA Inorganic Asst
10/30/2015 Northern Illinois University Open Chair
10/31/2015 University of Louisiana – Lafayette Polymers Asst
10/31/2015 California State U. – San Bernardino Bioanal., Biomat., or Environmental Asst
10/31/2015 University of California – Davis Organic “LPSOE”
10/31/2015 Augsburg College Physical Asst
10/31/2015 Auburn University Computational Asst
10/31/2015 Auburn University Energy Asst
10/31/2015 Auburn University Small Molecule Synthesis Asst/Assoc
11/1/2015 Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Organic or Chemical Biology All
11/1/2015 University of Maryland – Baltimore County Chemical Biology Asst
11/1/2015 West Virginia University Analytical Asst
11/1/2015 Rowan University Analytical/Bioanalytical Asst
11/1/2015 University of Central Arkansas Analytical Asst
11/1/2015 Harvard Medical School Chemical Biology Asst/Assoc
11/1/2015 University of Colorado – Boulder Theoretical Asst
11/1/2015 University of Colorado Chemical Biology Asst+
11/2/2015 University of California – Berkeley Experimental Physical Assoc/Full
11/2/2015 Univ. of Massachusetts – Amherst Polymers Asst+
11/9/2015 University of Denver Biochemistry/Biophysical Chemistry Asst
11/10/2015 University of Colorado – Denver Theoretical / Computational Asst
11/13/2015 Georgia Tech Polymers All
11/15/2015 Murray State University Synthetic Organic Asst
11/15/2015 Murray State University Polymers or Materials Asst
11/15/2015 University of Connecticut Open All
11/15/2015 University of Connecticut Open All
11/15/2015 Montclair State University Analytical Asst
11/15/2015 Georgetown University Synthetic Macromolecular Asst
11/15/2015 California State U. – Los Angeles Analytical Asst
11/15/2015 Boise State University Inorganic Asst
11/15/2015 University of Minnesota – Morris Open Asst
11/16/2015 California State U. – Stanislaus Analytical, Biochemistry, or Food Asst
11/25/2015 University of Florida Soil and Water Chemistry Asst
12/1/2015 Suffolk University Physical? Asst
12/1/2015 California State U. – Fullerton Theoretical Physical Asst+
12/11/2015 University of Arkansas – Little Rock Analytical Asst
Not spec. University of Chicago Inorganic Asst
Not spec. University of Chicago Organic Asst
Not spec. University of Chicago Physical Asst
Not spec. Stetson University Environmental / Sustainability Asst
Not spec. Northwestern University Organic Systems Assoc/Full
Not spec. Concordia University Wisconsin Medicinal All
Not spec. California State U. – Los Angeles Inorganic Materials Asst
Not spec. Georgetown College Biochemistry Asst/Assoc
Not spec. St. John’s University Medicinal Asst
Not spec. Princeton University Open Asst
Not spec. Radford University Biochemistry Asst
Not spec. Radford University Organic Asst
Not spec. SUNY Polytechnic Institute Nanoscale Science All
Not spec. Louisiana State University – Alexandria Open Asst/Assoc
Not spec. Moffitt Cancer Center/U. South Florida Medicinal / Synthetic Organic All
Not spec. Moffitt Cancer Center/U. South Florida Medicinal / Synthetic Organic All
Not spec. Colorado College Bioorganic Asst
Not spec. Purdue University Drug Discovery & Development Full?
Not spec. University of Tennessee – Martin Analytical Asst
Not spec. University of Tennessee – Martin Open (Organic or Physical) Asst
Not spec. Biola University Analytical Asst
Not spec. Clarke University Analytical / Instrumental All
Not spec. Liberty University General / Inorganic Asst
Not spec. Marshall University Medicinal Asst/Assoc
Not spec. Southwestern Oklahoma State Univ. Medicinal Asst/Assoc
Not spec. The College of St. Scholastica Biochemistry Asst
Not spec. Wayne State University Open All
Not spec. UT Southwestern Medical Center Open Chair
Not spec. Bridgewater State University Biochemistry Asst
Not spec. University of Florida Anal./Inorg./Mater./Phys./Theo. Full
Not spec. University of Houston Biophysical Asst
Not spec. Bowie State University Analytical Asst
Not spec. Columbia University Organic All
Not spec. St. Peter’s University Biochemistry Asst
Not spec. Houghton College Biochemistry Asst/Assoc


This post will be updated periodically through the rest of 2015. Last updated: 11 September 2015. Total number of positions: 255. New positions added today: 7 (marked in red).

1,139 Responses to “The 2016 Chemistry Faculty Openings List”

  1. Jus Says:

    Thank you thank you thank you.

  2. Brandon Findlay Says:

    Here’s one: IRIC (Universite de Montreal) is looking for a Syn. Bio/Systems Bio prof. They list chemical biology and new compound identification as one of their focus areas.

    Sept. 15.

  3. Silicon Says:

    Thank you so very much for taking the time to do this…

  4. Paul Bracher Says:

    A couple of points:

    1) In order to facilitate the identification of new listings within the huge master list, each day’s additions will be marked in red text. They’ll revert to black/blue the next day.

    2) If you are on the hiring committee for any of these positions and you want to provide more context to the listing, kind of like how this post explained SLU’s faculty search last year, then please leave a comment or shoot us an e-mail. We’ll link your comment to the listing above. Providing more context can help applicants decide if your post is right for them.

  5. Jan H jensen Says:

    Great initiative – thanks for doing this! I have written a blog post called Writing an informed teaching statement for a university faculty position (, which may be of interest for readers of this post.

  6. HelpfulBiochemist Says:

    Found this one recently:

    University of San Diego Biochemist

  7. buches Says:

    Asst Professor of Bioorganic Chemistry at Colorado College:

  8. Paul Bracher Says:

    Not a position, but some related food for thought from Twitter:

  9. Paul Bracher Says:

    A note about the dates that appear in the spreadsheet:

    In the event sites/locations report different deadlines for applications, we will enter the earlier/earliest date in the table. When schools report a deadline that is simply a month (i.e., with no specific date), we will use the 1st day of that month as the deadline.

  10. Cat Herder Says:

    Dear ChemJobber and Paul,

    Thank you from the bottom of my VAP heart. What a wonderful resource. Thank you for all your efforts to compile and amend this list!


    Herder o’ Cats

  11. Chem Unjobber Says:


    Your list is very helpful, thanks.

    The URL which you provide for the SUNY Oswego organic advert, namely:;jsessionid=4E66430BFE22CD4787B3C14963A5634C?JOBID=62243

    Does not appear to describe the job opening. You may wish to consider replacing it with:


  12. Chemjobber Says:

    Chem Unjobber – changed.

  13. Chemjobber Says:

    P.S. Are you my alter ego? My archrival? My nemesis? A bearded version of me?

  14. Another VAPper Says:

    This is excellent. I will now be obsessively checking this page instead of obsessively checking the other four or five pages. Also, VAPs represent! Terrible idea to VAP or THE MOST TERRIBLE idea?

  15. Paul Bracher Says:

    FYI, UNC wants four letters of recommendation. Seems a little excessive (and annoying) relative to the standard three.

  16. Ian Tonks Says:

    Here’s a link to the Minnesota job posting on our departmental website (easier to navigate/read):

  17. Marion Emmert Says:

    We will also be hiring at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (Worcester, MA)! Keep an eye out for our ads!

  18. Paul Bracher Says:

    Here are some things that are annoying about hunting for faculty openings:

    1. C&EN lists tons of jobs almost completely irrelevant for its audience. Take, for instance, this opening in political science at UW:

    I understand that the ACS/C&EN is happy to take their business, but what a complete waste of money. It also annoys the readership, who has to wade through crap in political science, mathematics, and all sorts of non-chemical-engineering jobs.

    2. I don’t know who is responsible—e.g., do schools pay for this service?—but jobs posted weeks ago get relisted as “posted two days ago”. This practice makes it confusing as to whether the job is a new listing or not. I would suggest marking these as “relisted” or something similar.

  19. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Such non-chemistry jobs will even appear on the C&EN website if you carry out a search using e.g. the term “organic”. I have already e-mailed and called the C&E N person who is indirectly responsible for un-chemistry job adverts. At first, he admitted that it was a mistake. But this “mistake” compounded itself over the past few months. After the third time, I asked him for the name of his manager, which he refused to provide.

    If this is the status quo with C&EN, then this list of chemistry faculty jobs really is helpful, since C&EN does not appear willing to prioritize helping chemists. This does, however not address the listing of industrial or government job openings.

  20. Kyle Says:

    Posting at Wayne State University:

  21. Chemjobber Says:

    Added! Thank you.

  22. Boston College job Says:

  23. Chemjobber Says:

    BC position added, thank you!

  24. Mel Says:

    Hi Paul! My other friend Paul (!!) asked me to forward his program at Northeastern around to colleagues. It’s not a direct Assistant Professor position, but a one to two year Fellowship program, after which the Fellows can become tenure-track faculty. It seems to be a school-wide initiative, not just Chemistry:
    Hopefully someone out there finds it useful!

  25. Paul Bracher Says:

    13 new jobs today brings the list over 200. In other news, the number of relisted/old jobs today on the C&EN/ACS jobs site was terrible. They really get in the way.

    Also, a number of schools cut costs by listing multiple faculty positions in a single ad. Three of these today cited chemistry faculty positions that don’t seem to have corresponding searches:

    University of Dayton is apparently seeking a bioanalytical or bioinorganic chemist, but the position is not listed on the site linked in the ad.

    Gettysburg College may want an inorganic or analytical chemist?

    Syracuse University may have a position open in chemistry.

  26. Paul Bracher Says:

    Here’s an example of how jobs get listed multiple times over multiple days. There are only two positions available to go with the four ads. I have a suspicion that sometimes, the old posts are deleted so that the new posts can’t be compared to the old ones. In this case, at least one of the old posts remained. I wonder if this is something you can pay for.

  27. Chemjobber Says:

    Man, the C&EN search engine/website/thingy is just impossibly confusing and irritating sometimes. Also, the “featured” advertisement is simply annoying after a while.

  28. Paul Bracher Says:

    @chemjobber: Agreed. It is incredibly annoying to find what you are looking for on that site. The C&EN site in general is full of distracting ads and pop ups. I hope they are making a lot of money from this strategy, because if they aren’t, it’s not worth it.

  29. Chemjobber Says:

    I have been looking at/away from that main popup (the one you get a lot when you go to that shows up in the middle of the screen for ~4 years now. I’m still not sure what it is about. (IH2? OH2? The International Hostel for Hungarian Postdocs?)

  30. J.S. Boc Says:

    NC State has two openings: analytical and organic

  31. Chemjobber Says:

    Added, thanks!

  32. Chemnonymous Says:

    William and Mary (Williamsburg, VA) just put one up.

  33. Chemjobber Says:

    Thanks, I added it.

  34. Paul Bracher Says:

    You gotta love this posting from Illinois College. They did not advertise in C&EN/ACS, and the first whiff I caught of it was buried in an ad with slew of listings on ChronicleVitae. That ad posted today (9/3). The review started 9/1.

  35. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Either this is an example of in flagrante delicto, or they screwed up. For those interested, it’s straightforward to give them a ring and straighten the facts out.

    On the other hand, some of the places which you’ve listed require a research program outline, yet their departmental websites have 0% indication of instrumentation (both are in PA) and so far have not responded to my inquiry in that regard…..

  36. Disappointment Central Says:

    I love that BYU wants two five-page research proposals. Just want to create another maddening twist on the proposal front, eh? I’m used to the 1-page each or 3-5 page total. Maybe it’s just the phrasing… “Also attach five page summaries of each of two specific research proposals.” As if they demand the proposals meet that limit.

  37. Paul Bracher Says:

    @Disappointment Central:

    It is always irritating when schools decide to ask for non-standard materials. For example, UNC wanting a fourth letter of recommendation. Applicants will have to bug another professor for a letter, and this letter will hardly be used for anything but that school. Is the committee at UNC really getting much information out of that fourth letter? I also enjoy schools that request essays on how the candidate will support the school’s mission.

    It was also frustrating when schools wanted transcripts sent directly from your undergraduate and graduate institutions. You’d think these could be reserved for those on the short-list. I can only imagine these are to perform due diligence in making sure the candidate has the degrees he/she claims. Or perhaps conversations go along the lines, “Candidate A has a spectacular record of publication, but he got a B+ in Dave Evans’ Advanced Organic class. That is hardly balanced by the A in Garg’s undergraduate organic.”

  38. Paul Bracher Says:

    One more thing that is kind of annoying about the process is that ads on the main sites (C&ENJobs, ChronicleVitae, HigherEdJobs) have a tendency to disappear. I’m not sure what the standard length of time for an ad to remain active is, but I assume it has to do with money (more time, more $$) and any pull date requested by the institution.

  39. Misc Says:

    Note of some importance… after encountering a 2MB limit on document size with one university’s jobs site, I circumvented the jobs website and sent my package to the chair of the department. I also alerted them to the constricting size limitations, and agreed and thanked me for letting them know. They said that seemed unreasonable and had a feeling many people would be impacted. It’s worth piping up about these sorts of things, considering the amount of time we spend on the application package.

  40. Chemjobber Says:

    @Misc: is this a function of IT at the relevant university?

  41. Chemjobber Says:

    …either way, thanks for letting us know!

  42. Misc Says:

    @Chemjobber that’s a good question. So far, yes, it’s all been a function of the IT or HR that deal with the website. When I’ve gotten in touch with the IT people, they’ve given me the “we are restricted on space” argument. When I get in touch with faculty, they can’t believe the limit is so small and it gets changed in a matter of hours.

  43. Former Applicant Says:

    It’s worth noting that Houghton faculty are asked to subscribe to their Statement of Community Responsibilities and Doctrinal Statement, both available on their HR page.

  44. Chem Unjobber Says:

    The C&EN advert for the opening with University of the Sciences has a dead link. The direct link to the advert on the U of the Sciences website is

  45. Chemjobber Says:

    Fixed, thank you.

  46. VeryThankful Says:

    St. Mary’s College of Maryland just posted one.

  47. Chemjobber Says:

    NB we will not be posting VAP positions to the list.

  48. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Amen to no-posting of VAP openings!

  49. CrystalDude Says:

    Illinois State University just posted a Biochemistry position

  50. VeryThankful Says:

    The St. Mary’s position is actually NOT a VAP contrary to the webpage name. Their pchemist died unexpectedly and they have a full opening.

  51. Chemjobber Says:

    I stand corrected! Added.

  52. Chemjobber Says:

    The Illinois position is on the list!

  53. CrystalDude Says:

    Chemjobber: Not Illinois (in Urbana/Champaign), but Illinois State, in Normal. I don’t see it.

  54. Chemjobber Says:

    CD: Sorry, I knew I screwed up the second I posted that. 1) Yes, the Illinois State position is on the Google Docs that I help update. (It was added by Paul yesterday):

    It may not be on Paul’s blog yet, because he has not updated it.

  55. blargh Says:

    FYI: BU has an experimental physical position posted—790-6188

  56. Chemjobber Says:

    Added on the Google docs – thanks!

  57. cko Says:

    I wish academic institutions would leave the references requirement until the resume and other credentials of the applicant are found relevant to the applied position. This would essentially reduce dramatically the load on the recommender and encourage applicants to apply to more positions.

  58. Rebecca Says:

    KSU has an inorganic opening:

  59. Chemjobber Says:

    Added. Thanks!

  60. H-Bomb Says:

    University of Alabama has a Biochemistry opening:

  61. jrm Says:

    Looks like Rice posted a position in late August that hasn’t yet made it on to the list:

  62. I can has job? Says:

    Update to the “rumored” Syracuse position, which now has an official listing:

  63. Chemjobber Says:

    H-Bomb, I can has job? – added.

    jrm: I have put it into the “rumored” category, since there is no institutional ad. Also, the ACS advertisement says “anticipated.”

  64. KNP Says:

    I LOVE this list. Thanks for putting this together! It would have been an awesome resource several years ago when I was looking for a job. One thing that would put the list over the top would be a column for the types of degrees is offered at each school. For example, my current university offers PhD; however, many people do not realize this. It would offer an additional way to sort the data for prospective applicants (e.g., those who want only a PUI, someone wanting MS only, or someone wanting a PhD granting institute).

  65. wolfie Says:

    HOW about the Unibersty of Hiedlberg ?

    Noone is intersteed in truth, or naything like trhkis.

    Just stupids end up in St luois.

    ande teach orgo

    their lif long

    Paul you must have Asperger or anything just like myself,

    which isenoigh to neglect


    The goal of life is not to teach some blakc or yellow people here and there what’s goimng on

    : But in St. Luois , you can drink th best Bavarina Beer in the states.–3021917

    just in case she had been fortgotten

    Note: Another Wolfie crapflood combined into single comment by Paul

  66. Kansas State University Says:

    Kansas State University if looking for a Synthetic Inorganic Chemistry and Lecturer concurrently. Great two-party hire!!!

  67. Chemjobber Says:

    K-State TT inorganic position on the Google doc.

  68. Chemjobseeker Says:

    Princeton has a priority date of Oct 15 in this link:

    Also, the current linked page for Princeton on this list has a dead link when you click “Apply”.

  69. Chemjobber Says:

    Thanks, I’ve updated the list and changed it to the institutional ad.

  70. rpv Says:

    Thanks for this amazing tool! In the last couple of weeks both this post and the google doc sheet seems pretty stuck though. It looks like the last update here was on September 11, while the last update on the google sheet was probably a few days later. Many new positions have been added recently (Rutgers, Yale, Caltech, to name a few) it will be good if you can keep this list updated, or at least advice the readers that new updates are not coming, so they know they need to be extra-vigilant for new positions elsewhere…

  71. Chemjobber Says:

    Hi, rpv: I am keeping up on the Google Spreadsheet while Paul is busy; keep looking for updates there, and keep feeding me new openings.

    Best wishes, CJ

  72. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, rpv:

    The Rutgers and Yale positions have been added to the Google doc; I have not seen the Caltech position, nor did I find it on their website. Can you provide a link?

    Thanks, CJ

  73. rpv Says:

    Hey Chemjobber, thank you once again for your effort! I’m glad to see that the google document is still updated.
    Here’s the link for Caltech:

    By the way, Stanford has moved their deadline from Sep 28th to Oct 15th.

  74. Prof_SJE Says:

    Boston University has just posted our ad for a position in the area of experimental physical chemistry (broadly defined).

    Deadline of Oct 31st.

  75. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for September 22. Total stands at 280 positions total.

    Cheers, CJ

  76. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for September 24. Total stands at 288 positions total, 8 new:

    Cheers, CJ

  77. HansonFSU Says:

    Hey Chemjobber and ChemBark,

    FSU just posted a job opening for a tenure-track faculty position in the area of Analytical Chemistry:

    Review of applicants begins on Oct 15th but will continue until the position is filled.

  78. Chemjobber Says:

    Thanks, Ken, added.

  79. VeryThankful Says:

    Ball State U. has two openings.

  80. AggiesUSU Says:

    Utah State University has an opening for a biochemist at the Assistant Professor level:

    Priority Date: 10/26/15

  81. scripps Says:

    links to scripps jobs are not working, or they just cancelled the job ad?

  82. Chemjobber Says:

    Ball State: added
    Utah State: added
    Scripps FL: 1) the ad is no longer up, not listed on the Scripps website, either. Interesting. (Noted on Google Doc)

  83. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for September 28. Total stands at 301 positions total, 13 new:

  84. Anonymous Says:

    University of Georgia – asst professor physical or analytical

  85. Chemjobber Says:

    UGA: added.

  86. Anon Says:

    University of Nevada, Reno-theoretical/computational materials

  87. Chemjobber Says:

    UNR: Added. Thank you!

  88. Laina Says:

    UNR is also hiring inorganic materials

  89. Chemjobber Says:

    UNR inorganic: added – thank you!

  90. Chem Unjobber Says:


    I’m encountering issues with two different HR websites. My referees are uploading their reference letters, but somehow those letters are not being stored/processed/passed on to the hiring committees. Was curious if anyone else has had this happen to them during this season?

  91. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for October 3. Total stands at 312 positions total, 11 new:

  92. Another VAPper Says:

    I am so grateful for this spreadsheet that I hesitate to ask for more, but I will anyway! Would other people appreciate anonymous additions to the spreadsheet for various milestones in searches? For example, if I know that a school had phone interviews last week (b/c I had one….OH YEAH!) and informed CJ or CB anonymously, that information could be added to the sheet. Same for on-site invitations, etc etc. Given the standard of radio silence for much of the job search, this would be really nice! Just a suggestion!

  93. Chemjobber Says:

    Speaking for myself, I would be happy to make this happen (i.e. I would be happy to take in information on where each search is at.)

    However, how can we do this and preserve privacy for the candidates and also not have the hiring institution be aware of the information to be transmitted? Any thoughts?

  94. Another VAPper Says:

    I’m not sure that it matters for phone interviews as long as there were the normal amount (which is, I don’t know…5-10? more?). The committees will know (if they bother to check) that one of those people submitted the information, but not which one. For the on-site invitations, which are presumably in the ~3 range, maybe people will be less likely to submit information. I know that more active departmental wikis have this sort of information all of the time. Anyway, if I’m the only one interested, this is all moot! Thank you for your willingness though!

  95. DH Says:

    A few Canadian additions to your list (great resource, btw!):

    The Department of Chemistry at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Manitoba is searching for a Department Head (open discipline, full professor level) and a Tier I Canada Research Chair in Surface Chemistry.

  96. Cat Herder Says:

    Another VAPper and Chemjobber,

    I would guess that pretty much everyone applying for positions this year would like to have information on where searches stand; the anxiety of waiting and not knowing is something that very few human beings sit with well–Siddhartha excluded.

    As for the scorn of search committees, I don’t think this is a problem at all. Web postings by candidates are the norm in other disciplines (see Moreover, I for one would have misgivings about joining a department so neurotic and insecure that it objected to candidates letting each other know when milestones are reached. It isn’t like we are going to compare notes on startup offers or the like. Of course, Chemjobber and Paul, as the de facto admins of the list, may have a different view.

    I would be happy to contribute my results to the list of search milestones, should you decide to maintain one.

  97. Agreeable chemist Says:

    I second (third? fourth?) the notion that search status updates would be very useful (if likely depressing). Information might not always come directly from the candidates – for example, I do know of one school that’s called an on-site interview candidate because they’re in my research group.

  98. Untenured Prof Says:

    I agree with “Agreeable chemist” – the information need not come from a candidate… I’m happy to pass along the status of the current search in my Department via private email to Paul / Chemjobber

  99. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Info on where searches currently stand would be useful, but for my case likely depressing!

  100. LiqC Says:

    +1 on search status updates. Will be happy to contribute if I’m lucky to get this information.

  101. minorthreat Says:

    Rockefeller, deadline soon

  102. UCF Says:

    University of Central Florida – Materials Oct 15, 2015. Assistant.

  103. Chemjobber Says:

    1. Thank you everyone for the input on “status updates” – Paul and I will take all of this under advisement, and a decision will be made soon (two weeks?)

    2. Manitoba, Rockefeller, UCF positions added – thank you!

    3. More Canadian positions coming. Apologies that the list is a little thin in that sense.

  104. Anon Says:

    I can speak to the timelines from both the perspective of a successful search candidate and now as someone on the other side doing the searching. Typically the top 50 schools will schedule 4-6 candidates for on-campus interviews between Oct 1-Nov 1. The visits usually happen between Nov 20-Dec 20 with some visits happening in January. Offers typically start coming in from Dec 20-Feb 1, although this is more flexible as they occur on a rolling basis.

    With regards to phone interviews – those tend to me more random and on a rolling basis as well. There were only a few places that were that well organized to have everything conducted in 1-2 weeks so I wouldn’t read too much into those.

    I hope that helps!

  105. Bishnu Says:

    Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, has three openings !!

  106. Bishnu Says:

  107. Chemjobber Says:

    Mirabile dictu, the LSU positions are already on the Google Document.

  108. The Rock Says:

    Rockefeller extended their deadline to the 16th

  109. LiqC Says:

    I’m wondering what experience have applicants had with Vitae or similar services.

    Most positions advertised through departmental websites require the reference letters to be provided through the links they send out. Sometimes they provide an email. In that case I send the letters there through Vitae. I have yet to get feedback on whether they reach the recipients.

  110. Chem Unjobber Says:

    A few weeks back, I had some issues with “Interfolio”: it would only upload one of the three requested reference letters. I found this out from the chair of the search committee, and it was consequently necessary for me to contact the referees and request that they directly e-mail the letters to him/her.

  111. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for October 11. Total stands at 328 positions total, 16 new:

  112. LiqC Says:

    Northwestern skyped with candidates on ~10/8-10/9

  113. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Cal State Northridge will ONLY accept application materials and ref letters by snail mail. Is this the year 2015 in California? Sheesh….

  114. Dave Says:

    UMD theoretical chemistry position opened on OCT 15th

  115. Chemjobber Says:

    Added – thank you!

  116. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for October 17. Total stands at 339 positions total, 11 new:

  117. Chemjobber Says:

    sooooooooooooo tired

  118. Anon Says:

    Thank you for your late-night efforts, Chemjobber : )

    Just something I noticed, one of the 2 new UCLA ads on the spreadsheet should actually be for biochem (not physical). The deadlines are slightly off too, it looks like both are due in late November to receive full consideration (Nov 20 for physical, and Nov 25 for biochem).

  119. Chemjobber Says:

    Thanks – I will try to change it asap.

  120. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hey, I that reminded me to also thank you for your effort, as well. It saved a lot of time and cut through the weeds.

  121. Chemjobber Says:

    Anon323p: Thanks for your help, corrected.

    CU: You’re welcome.

  122. Misc Says:

    I was rejected for the University of Scranton position. I don’t have any records of applying…

  123. Chemjobber Says:

    In Soviet Russia, job applies to you!

  124. Chem Unjobber Says:

    “In Soviet Russia, job applies to you!” Sign me up….and please purchase for me a ticket in the time machine, as well!

  125. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, everyone. The update has been applied for October 18. Total stands at 364 positions total, 25 new:

  126. Misc Says:

    It appears that Georgia Tech has scheduled interviews with candidates over the next 3 months (

  127. LiqC Says:

    Two candidates two days apart from the same research group on GATech list… interesting.

  128. Penn15 Says:

    It appears Northwestern has scheduled interviews as well…..

  129. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Glad that I didn’t waste my time applying for the GA Tech job!

  130. Penn15 Says:

    It seems that GA Tech is interviewing a number of organic people…..

  131. Misc Says:

    Several PUIs are getting in their phone interviews and scheduling in-person interviews for later this month and early next month. I’ve been contacted by 6 so far with 3 in-person interviews scheduled.

  132. JayBee Says:

    Cornell notified their chosen candidates today

  133. Buckeye Chemistry Says:

    Two new positions recently posted at The Ohio State University …

    One is a Sr Faculty position in catalysis (Organic/Inorganic)
    One is a Jr Faculty position in materials (Inorganic/Analytical)

  134. minorthreat Says:

    Weill Cornell Chemical Biology

  135. Agreeable chemist Says:

    University of Maryland, College Park, notified their candidates today.

  136. Chem Unjobber Says:

    So far, received the automatic “Dear John” letters from these:
    Cal State Chico

  137. Cat Herder Says:

    Chemjobber and Paul,

    Any decision on whether to maintain a search milestones database (perhaps a new column or two in the existing Google Sheet)?

    Thanks again for all your efforts putting this list together, I know we all appreciate it.

  138. Chemjobber Says:

    @CH: I’m going to do a big update tonight (yeah, sure, the folks say) and yes, I will be applying a column with status lines.

  139. Wildcat Says:

    Northwestern has interviewed 3 junior candidates so far and is interviewing an additional 2 next week. Pretty much all have been organic chemistry/ biology motivated.

  140. Agreeable chemist Says:

    Apologies for the spam, but I should note that the Maryland interview request came for experimental organic chemistry. I didn’t notice there was also an opening in theory; I don’t know about the status of that application process.

  141. Chemjobber Says:

    Thanks, corrected.

  142. TGIHiringSeason Says:

    Heard from various sources that Gettysburg, Davidson, Bucknell, Lawrence Univ, Wooster, Bucknell, and Univ of Richmond have finished phone interviews. Some have given invitations for on-site interviews.

  143. TGIHiringSeason Says:

    Apologies, second Bucknell should have been Butler.

  144. BerkeleyChem Says:

    It appears the Scripps FL job was not taken down. Candidates were notified today.

  145. Anon Says:

    I was contacted by Notre dame for a phone interview today

  146. Onium Says:

    UC Davis contacted for Skype interview on 10/31

  147. Chemjobber Says:

    Latest update applied: 397 total, 33 new.

  148. TGIHiringSeason Says:

    Thanks but no thanks sent from Barnard today. Didn’t make their “short list”.

  149. Anon Says:

    I was contacted for an interview at UT Austin Today.

  150. anotheranon Says:

    @Anon11:43am – UT Austin had two positions listed (organic and analytical/physical), do you mind saying which position you’re referring to?

  151. Anon Says:


    I applied to the physical/analytical position.

  152. Anon Says:

    it also appears that princeton has notified candidates. they have 4 seminars on their websites from postdocs

  153. Chemist Says:

    IU, Bloomington has notified candidates

  154. Applicant Says:

    Hi Paul, Chemjobber and fellow applicants,
    This website has been a great help in staying sane and organized during faculty job search. I have a Skype interview coming-up in the next few days. Could you please share your thoughts and advise on the type of questions to expect or how these type of interviews are typically conducted?

    Thanks very much in advance.

  155. Agreeable chemist Says:

    MIT appears to have scheduled candidate talks

  156. Misc Says:


    I had video conference interview two weeks ago, and there really was no difference in the questions. It was actually easier to have a conversation than over a conference call when you’re on speakerphone. You could see when someone was getting ready to ask a question, no one was accidentally interrupting each other, etc. I would just make sure you have a well-lit area for yourself, and it could help if you have the camera perched at eye-level of yourself instead of in your lap looking up toward you.

    Best of luck!

  157. Anon Says:

    I was contacted today by CalTech for an interview.

  158. ^ Says:


  159. Anon Says:

    @ ^Says

    Yes you are correct. It is quite obvious I am not from Caltech since I typed it incorrectly. At least I didn’t make the mortal error of putting a space between the words!

  160. Applicant Says:

    Thanks very much for your advise. I will keep these in mind.
    Could you please elaborate if you were asked to present slides in your Skype interview? I am curious to know if the search committee has a prepared questionnaire for every candidate or they want to hear about the past/future research-teaching interests of the candidate?

    Good luck for your interviews!

  161. Misc Says:


    I can only comment on what happened in my interview. They asked me the standard questions: “why this school?”, “what equipment do you need for your research?”, “would you be willing to teach XYZ class?”, and then I had time to ask my own questions of the committee. Don’t overthink it! You’ll be fine.

  162. Applicant Says:

    Thanks again for your inputs.

  163. JayBee Says:

    Florida Institute of Technology (Analytical/Inorganic) sent their rejection letter today.

  164. Anon Says:

    UNC has identified candidates for skype interviews

  165. Anon Says:


    I performed a phone interview yesterday. In addition to the questions stated by @Misc, they will also ask you what you project your program will be like in 5-10 years (this question is usually in relation to the number of students and postdocs in your group). You want to heavily research faculty in your department. Additionally they will ask you about possible collaborations in the department. You want to give the impression that you fit in with the department. So make sure your projected number of postdocs, undergrads and grad students fit in with the status quo of the department in which you are applying. You can of course do w/e you want when you get hired, but the important impression you must leave is that you fit in with the status quo.

    I hope this helps, good luck!

  166. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Your choice of terms, i.e. ” fit in with the status quo” is an interesting one. Did you mean this entirely in the context of science, funding and collaboration?

  167. Anon Says:

    @chem unjobber

    I meant this in the context of educational interests. You don’t want to say you want a group of 5 people if the average group size is around 20. You want to give the impression that you can collaborate with multiple people in the department.

    Your research program is a personal choice, and funding of course depends in the type of science you study.

    The phone interview isn’t about your science (that’s for the in person interview), it’s a way to screen out people who don’t fit into the department culture.

  168. JayBee Says:

    Rice University notified their candidates recently

  169. Iseesd Says:

    Ucsd has candidate talks lined up for interviews.

  170. Applicant Says:

    @ Anon (3.03 PM)
    Thank you so much for taking the time to share your phone interview experience. I particularly liked your comment “The phone interview isn’t about your science (that’s for the in person interview), it’s a way to screen out people who don’t fit into the department culture”.
    Your advise also reinforces the experience of one of my friend: Last year, he was rejected after the phone interview as his research interests required resources/manpower that couldn’t be afforded by this department.

    Wish you also a successful job search!

  171. Chem Unjobber Says:

    That is a good way of putting it. Of course, you need to tailor your expectations to the target employer.

    My experience has been that a little bit of background research can go a long way towards saving time in your applications. After reading a new advertisement, my own flow chart follows:

    1. Is the department too prestigious? Or or on the other hand, is it clearly just a teaching farm? Does the departmental website date from the 1980s?
    2. Does the department at least have access to an FT-NMR and either a ES-MS or a TOF-MS (I am into big organic molecules and coordination complexes). If necessary, then I will go as far as calling the department to get the answer (but not every time…).
    3. Are the current faculty – especially those who already have tenure – actively publishing in refereed journals ? (J. Chem. Ed. doesn’t count)
    4. Are there any faculty there who might know my referees? (this is helpful, but is not a precondition).
    5. Can I think of an excuse to call up someone in the department to have an informal chat, i.e. so that they will at least recognize my name, and let them know that I speak native English and already know the ropes (on account of having a weird name).

    Just this evening, I checked out a MSc department in “the heartland”. While it did have NMR & MS, the faculty listed no publications on their webpages. Of course, this was a red flag, which was easy to confirm using GoogleScholar.

  172. walter Says:

    UC Santa Cruz (Computational): rejections sent and interviews scheduled on departmental calendar.

  173. Bill Says:

    @Chem Unjobber
    “Are the current faculty – especially those who already have tenure – actively publishing in refereed journals ? (J. Chem. Ed. doesn’t count)”

    Can you elaborate on why JCE does not count? Does this apply (in your opinion) to teaching-focused schools/PUIs? Genuinely interested.

  174. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Bill,

    Your question is a good one, and my position on the topic is of course a subjective one. There are many PUI schools whose faculty nevertheless produce peer-reviewed publications which contribute to the greater scientific knowledge, albeit with a lesser frequency than a R1 university (I have a applications currently pending at some PUIs). While J Chem Ed does serve a valid purpose (i.e., contributing to educational-instructional knowledge), I don’t see it in the context of contributing to scientific knowledge.

    I hope that answers your question.

  175. LiqC Says:

    University of Denver scheduled phone interviews

  176. chemdraw Says:

    Do you need to have all your recommendation letters sent before the committee looking at your application?

  177. JayBee Says:

    It depends on the school, but in most places yes, all letters must be received before the committee looks at the application.

  178. JayBee Says:

    U of VA sent their rejection today

  179. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi JayBee,

    Were the rejection letters via snail mail or e-mail?



  180. Anon Says:

    Northwestern sent rejection letters today.

  181. Anon Says:

    Minnesota and Penn have schedules interviews

  182. Anon Says:

    I was contacted by UC Merced for an interview.

  183. Scholar Says:

    For UC Merced, was it an interview request for the experimental or theoretical position?

  184. Anonymous Says:

    Florida Tech has identified candidates for skype interviews

  185. Bill Says:

    @Chem Unjobber


  186. Anon Says:


    The UC Merced position was for experimental.

  187. Scholar Says:


  188. JayBee Says:

    >Were the rejection letters via snail mail or e-mail?

  189. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Thanks for that info, and best of luck to you!

  190. Anonymous Says:

    I was contacted by UMass Amherst for skype interview.

  191. Applicant Says:

    Brown University – rejection letters sent.

  192. Anonymous Says:

    Texas Tech have scheduled interviews

  193. Anonymous2 Says:

    ^ When did Texas Tech call /email you about the interview? When was your phone/skype interview?

  194. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >I was contacted by UMass Amherst for skype interview.

    Hi, was this for the polymer job or the more general, “Chemistry” one?

    I have to admit a growing sense of dread, each time that a new contribution appears on this thread….

  195. Anonymous Says:

    looks like the search committees are very active.

  196. Anonymous Says:

    it is the chemistry one at UMass.

  197. anon Says:

    University of Cincinnati has sent rejection letter.

  198. Anonymous Says:

    @anonymous2 – I wasn’t interviewed by Tech, I spoke with someone on the search committee

  199. Anonym Says:

    Is the UCMerced interview for inorganic or organic materials?

  200. Anon Says:

    I’m inorganic materials

  201. Anonymous Says:

    I heard Harvard scheduled interviews.

  202. Anonymous Says:

    Illinois Urbana-Champaign as well

  203. Anonymous Says:

    UCLA contacted candidates

  204. Anomymous Says:

    When did Ucla contact candidates?

  205. Anomymous Says:

    For what position did Ucla contact candidates!

  206. Anonymous Says:

    Inorganic position at UCLA, call has been done some time this week

  207. Anonymous Says:

    Has any one heard from Penn State or Univ of Michigan?

  208. Anonymous Says:


    I have not heard from those schools yet.

    I’m wondering, do schools usually notify candidates on the same day? Or does it take a few days to notify all first round candidates.

  209. Anonymous Says:

    Which UCSD division contacted candidates?

  210. Anonymous Says:

    Which UC Davis position contacted candidates?

  211. Bondangle Says:

    Christopher Newport University (Biochemistry) and the University of San Francisco started conducting phone interviews.

  212. nonymous Says:

    >Which UC Davis position contacted candidates?

    Skype interviews were done for the Materials position at UC Davis.

  213. Anonymous Says:

    San Francisco State has contacted candidates

  214. LiqC Says:

    Is there a right answer to the question along the lines of “how do you effectively teach your courses to our diverse student population?

    What other tricky questions have people heard?

  215. Anonymous Says:

    >Which UCSD division contacted candidates?

    Based on their seminar schedule,, it looks like Biochem.

  216. Anonymous Says:


    The “how do you effectively teach your courses to our diverse student population?” is a stock question that many CA schools are encouraged to ask at some point during the interview process. From my experience, it seems like most faculty members like when interviewees use their answer to describe how they will increase student engagement and approach the material from different directions. If you draw from past experiences, then that is helpful as well. This might be more directed at some comments higher up, but the most important aspects of phone interviews are clarity and enthusiasm. Give in depth answers to each question and then try to highlight why you are a remarkably good fit for the position. Never just give monotone or brief answers, which does happen a lot (I’m assuming because people are naturally a bit nervous). I personally try to just focus on what the candidate is saying because the phone interview is kind of an abnormal environment. However, it seems people are inclined to vote to bring candidates on campus that were more engaging during the interview.

  217. blargh Says:

    Colorado State scheduling interviews.

  218. no phone interview? Says:

    Has anyone had a good experience with an on-campus interview invitation when no phone interview was conducted? At first I was overjoyed because I despise phone interviews, but now my pessimistic side is telling me to be suspicious, that they clearly have an internal candidate and I’m just the “dummy” candidate. It just seems like the norm to have phone interviews these days.

  219. Anonymous Says:

    @no phone interview?

    I have 4 on-campus interviews scheduled and none involved phone interviews. You could also be optimistic and think they didn’t bother with a phone interview because they were very confident in bringing you out. But I mostly think it is highly dependent on the institution.

  220. no phone interview? Says:

    I’m trying to be optimistic! Your reply helps; thanks!

  221. SpeedyGonzales Says:

    I had 2 on site interviews last hiring cycle, neither of which involved a preliminary phone interview, and both went great, I definitely was not the dummy candidate.

  222. Anon Says:

    NC State is conducting on-campus interviews

  223. Chem Unjobber Says:

    While not entirely relevant, I will offer my own personal experiences in the context of interviews and pre-interviews.

    Interviews in the UK typically involve all of the candidates being simultaneously invited. And so it is possible to interact with those other people. While there, I had one interview where the other candidates were clearly “mock” or dummy candidates (I got the job offer). I’ve also participated in yet other UK competitions where I was clearly the dummy. In none of those cases was a telephone interview conducted – either domestically or internationally (at first, I was located in continental Europe).

    From North America, I’ve also interviewed for a position with a very good university in Brazil. The interviews were similarly structured to the UK: the internal candidate got the job, I was officially ranked #2, and most of the other candidates were “dummies”. Again, no telephone interviews.

    Now, back in the US, the interview system is different, and hence it is not possible for an outsider to reach any analogous conclusions. However, human nature remains unchanged, and my observation is that university faculty anywhere are loathe to think out of the box. An additional consequence is that search committees may reason that there is no point in spending more than the minimal amount of time to create the appearance of an open competition. Hence, the absence of a phone or skype pre-interview is cause for suspicion.

    Of course, I realize that others who are reading this may have a different take on the situation.

  224. Anon Says:

    I would certainly take the absence of a phone interview as a bad sign! From what I have seen, most PUIs do phone interviews first, presumably because their budgets for bringing in candidates are limited. Most R1’s seem to just invite candidates for an on-site visit (I’m at an R1). At most, if we have a candidate for which there is some concern about communication skills, then the Department Chair or Search Committee chair would call the candidate before a forml invitation was extended.

  225. Anon Says:

    Wow–bad typo in that last comment. I would certainly NOT take the absence of a phone interview as a bad sign!

  226. Ian Tonks Says:

    I would disagree that the absence of a phone interview is necessarily a bad sign, nor does it indicate that there’s some “insider” candidate. While things are definitely trending that way, not all schools are on board with Skype–institutional momentum is hard to overcome. I had 6 on-site interviews in the ’12-13 season that didn’t utilize Skype, and in none of those cases were there obvious reasons/feelings for it other than… they just didn’t do it.

  227. StayCalm Says:

    Hi guys. What is a typical number of applications do you send? Is it time to start freaking out if you have not heard from any of the schools you applied? If not, then when?

  228. Someone Says:

    I sent out about 30 applications to research universities (5 of them not in the US). So far, I got one interview (in the US, without a prior phone interview), one official rejection letter and 6 other schools are listed here that they invited candidates/scheduled interviews without me. It looks like some searches go on for over 4 weeks before candidates get notified.

  229. Anon Says:

    I sent about 30 applications as well. I have been contacted for 4 interviews and had 2 rejections. I have not been contacted from at least 7 schools which have sent notifications as mentioned here. I have heard nothing from the rest of the schools.

  230. Agreeable chemist Says:

    It’s probably time to start freaking out. :/

    I applied to ~30 schools, received 1 rejection, and am quasi-rejected (other people received interviews, I did not) from 16 schools.

  231. bad wolf Says:

    The time to start freaking out is when you notice that the people talking about how many interviews they went on were at top name groups at one of about 5 schools. That’s when you have 6 schools recruiting Ian Tonks and 0/30 for, well, the rest of us.

  232. inorganic_anon_app Says:

    For folks at R1 schools – how does a short stint in industry after a postdoc look? I’m just finishing up my first year, but I’m concerned that I’ll seem flaky or something since I started a job and then realized that I definitely don’t want to be in industry. I haven’t gotten any rejections and none of the places that I applied have any updates posted here yet, so there’s that, I guess.

  233. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Usually avoided applying for those where I’ve already tried, or which looked too pedigree-intensive, e.g. featuring pedigree trees on their websites.
    Also avoided most PUIs which didn’t have (a) a FT-NMR , (b) a Maldi-TOF or ES-MS and (c) no clear evidence of current, peer-reviewed, published research.

    27 were in the US, and three were overseas. That left 30 applications over the entire calendar year.

    So far, the score is not good: 12 rejections or implicit rejections (i.e. interviewing already is ongoing). No interviews, but am hoping that some networking might (finally!) pay off.

    Life sucks, and then you die.

  234. minorthreat Says:

    Applied to 29 R1 schools
    one Skype interview, did not proceed and one email contact expressing interest
    about 6 implicit rejections, the rest no word, still seems early to freak out

  235. nonymous Says:

    Some schools have clearly not notified candidates yet.

    It still seems early to freak out, even if you have been “quasi” rejected based on other people getting interviews and you not hearing anything from the same school. Some of those interviews might go horribly wrong and the school will need to set up interviews with more candidates later on.

  236. TGIHiringSeason Says:

    I’ve gotten 6 on-site interviews this year at PUIs, and I still received another request for a phone interview today. Don’t worry! Schools are still trying to get in gear. Although, it should be said that these places are getting 100 applications for a single position. It’s tough to stand out from the crowd.

  237. Anon Says:

    At the R1 where I work, we often do more than one round of interviews, so just because a place has already invited people in December/January doesn’t mean they won’t invite a couple of more in February. Oftentimes, the top choices brought in during December/January end up taking other positions and so we quickly bring in a second batch of candidates once we get a hint that our top choice is potentially heading somewhere else.

  238. ChemBro Says:

    Guys, how common is the following scenario when one school invites multiple candidates from the exact same lab? Or do they pick one “best” or most suitable candidate from each lab?

  239. anon Says:


    This scenario has happened mutliple times this year. Check out who is getting interviews from the Swager Lab at MIT. You will see the same two postdocs have interviews at the same universities…..

  240. ChemBro Says:


    Thanks, did not see it! I guess some labs have acquired a “brand name” for growing high quality organic postdocs 😉

  241. yoyo Says:

    I would be patient. When I was applying last year I had one on-site interview in december and one on-site interview scheduled for mid to late January. It all depends on what the schools are looking for in their position. Do they want someone who does similar research or someone who does something totally different and will broaden the expertise in that department/division. I did have like 4 phone interviews (3 from PUIs) and 1 skype interview last year. These interviews came at all different random times. It also depends on when the institutions start reviewing applications. Even though they have an Oct 15th deadline committees don’t look over the applicants until probably two weeks to one month after the deadline. Some schools also start interviews one week to get their first on-site interview setup and then another week later do another round and so forth. I remember when I was on-site they were still doing phone interviews to setup more on-sites. So be patient and relax. I wish you all the best!

  242. Anonymous Says:

    Any news about candidate notifications today? hmm today seems quite dead.

  243. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >Any news about candidate notifications today? hmm today seems quite dead.

    Count your blessings? :-/

  244. StayCalm Says:

    Thanks guys for the information and advice!

  245. StayCalm Says:

    Do you know any good websites/materials/resources for interview preparation, e.g. samples of Q&A?

  246. Modestly Panicked Says:


    I’ve been using the “Get A Job, Ken!” blog series throughout my application process. It has some good tips on how to prepare for phone and on-site interviews at R01 institutions. I’m interested in teaching-heavy PUIs, and have still found that a lot of the tips are still perfectly applicable.

    Most of the questions I’ve been asked during my interviews (phone and on-site) were about my teaching pedagogy, skills, and experience. Of course they asked me about my research, but I made sure to highlight both the educational and scientific merit of my proposal.

    Phone interviews can be difficult, and the search committee often reads scripted descriptions of the school and moves on to prepared questions. It makes the interview feel a bit procedural, so I’ve found that asking the question “What do you enjoy about teaching at PUI College?” gives everyone a chance to loosen up and allows for good back-and-forth between the committee and the candidate.

  247. The Iron Chemist Says:

    I’m at an R1 school that’s hiring. We’re currently arranging phone interviews with the top choices. We expect to have these next week. From there, we’ll winnow the list down a bit further before scheduling on-site interviews.

    When I was interviewing, I only had one phone interview. None of the seven on-site interviews that I got were preceded by a phone one. The first of my on-sites was scheduled in November, the last of my on-sites was scheduled in February.

  248. Chem Unjobber Says:

    The “Get a Job, Ken” website is insightful, and I’m currently considering re-vamping my research proposal ideas accordingly (on one hand, where appropriate, on the other hand, if it’s not too late in my career).

    On the other hand, the suggestions on that website to bounce one’s research ideas off of others is not new, and I’ve been attempting that for more than ten years: back when I was post-docing, I tried it with my former research advisers would hand it back to me, and say “looks good”, and not provide any comments. Ahem. I wonder if any others who are reading this blog reach the same conclusions as I did…..

    On the other hand, I only remember one former post-doc-colleague who aspired to the professoriate, and hence the opportunity for “peer review” was also never there.

  249. CopiesOfCopies Says:

    It is concerning that it appears that the vast majority of interviews go to candidates from specific groups. For example, two organic groups—one lab on the east coast (2 applicants) and another lab on the west coast (3 applicants)—currently have someone interviewing at nearly every major institution in the USA, and many of the top 10 schools are bringing out 2-3 of the 5. It should be surprising that two groups could have the intellectual capacity to blanket the entire market. However, this season isn’t unique, as I’ve seen similar results virtually every year. I’m not sure if this implies direct inter-University discussions (or indirect via seminar postings) about who’s already got interviews at such and such school, which would be borderline collusion in my opinion (being both highly unprofessional and anti-academic). Either way, I do think it’s unhealthy for the community overall. All new assistant professor’s research programs are going to be influenced by their previous experiences. If a small number of PIs at only a few schools are greatly impacting who gets these academic jobs (with the top jobs being particularly oligarchical), then this significantly limits the scope of scientific topics, problems, etc. that will be pursued in the future. I’ve set on several faculty search committees, and I believe that either (1) the system is becoming less of a meritocracy (i.e., search committees are using lineage as a significant factor, reducing the need for performing time-consuming careful looks at many other strong applicants) OR (2) the best PhDs each year are choosing to do postdocs in only a narrow range of subfields—resulting in a high concentration of strong applicants in just a handful of specific labs. Both scenarios would be especially unfortunate—the former not allowing >95% of applicants a real chance, while the latter suggesting that even the most talented aren’t thinking out of the box.

  250. Kathaarian Says:

    You’re using the term “organic” in a broadly defined sense

  251. Chemjobber Says:


    This is an interesting set of statements. I encourage you to expound on them here, or you are welcome to e-mail me:

    Confidentiality guaranteed. Cheers, Chemjobber

  252. chem-chem-chem Says:

    Auburn is arranging Skype/phone interviews.

    Also, this website offers a lot of great advice:

  253. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >the system is becoming less of a meritocracy (i.e., search committees are using lineage as a significant factor
    Indeed, the faculty member from Minneapolis who posted here under his real name has also decorated his website with a pedigree-tree.

  254. crabtree Says:

    I noticed the Harvard opening goes to a page stating “this position is not available”. Although I haven’t heard about the position being filled (nor am I likely to be informed), it might be worth following up on the dead link.

  255. Anon Says:


    I agree completely and think this is due to both effects you mention: search committees need to comb through 100s of applications to narrow it down to 4-5 for interviews. The quickest way to do this is to look for those with the best pedigrees and push those towards the top of the list. This is what seems to happen (although it is often not explicit) in the hiring committees I’ve been on).

    At the same time, the best grad students can recognize when groups are churning out assistant professors, and will surely try to get postdoc positions in those few groups. And why shouldn’t they? The result is a rich-get-richer scenario.

    At the same time, this leads to most schools wasting time pursuing candidates that will almost certainly end up somewhere else. If a candidate has 20 on-site interviews, unless you are a top-10 school then it the probability of you landing that candidate are pretty slim. It’s an odd sort of dilemma. Of course, you want to pursue the best candidate, but at the same time faculty searches are expensive in terms of time and money.

  256. Ian Tonks Says:

    Chem Unjobber:

    >Indeed, the faculty member from Minneapolis who posted here under his real name has also decorated his website with a pedigree-tree.

    I sure did. I want to give credit to the countless hours of mentorship I received from several wonderful mentors and friends.

    Let me give you one piece of advice that I received from one of my mentors: pedigree may get your foot in the door, but you’re damn well on your own once that interview starts. If you’re the type of person willing to (anonymously) cut down people who want to engage and constructively help, I’m sure this second part is going to be extremely tough for you, regardless of where you come from. Best of luck.

  257. Tweedle-Dee Says:

    @CopiesOfCopies and @Anon,

    I also agree that the past, present and (inevitably) future hiring situation is abysmal and unfair to the vast majority of applicants who will not end up getting the job they wanted. Regardless of the cause (or causes) that resulted in the highly specific subset of successful applicants being selected from only a couple of research groups, it is clearly a problem. Unfortunately, faculty search committees do not have any philanthropic interests motivating their selection of potential candidates; they do not care about giving everyone a fair chance at employment. They want to improve their departments.

  258. Anon1234 Says:

    Arizona State has a couple of positions listed, one for Cryo EM and another for Molecular Energy.

  259. anon Says:

    Kansas is scheduling phone interviews.

  260. Zrrrr Says:

    which Kansas? University of Kansas? or Kansas state university?

  261. anon Says:

    University of Kansas

  262. yoyo Says:

    I totally agree that it is where you come from and who you work for. I have been on a search committee once or twice myself and people look straight at the universities then advisors. They even go on and say I know they are going to be good because they worked for this guy even if the research proposals are weak. So keep that in mind.

    However, I would also mention that people with strong research proposals and recommendation letters and not so well-known advisors, we have considered for on-site visits. Most of them are the ones we also hire as well because they tend to blow our minds when they are on-site (take the interviews more seriously).

    I know three guys who came from awesome universities and groups and each garnered 6-7 interviews each and didn’t land one job. So you may get your foot in the door but you may not perform well. So be prepared and again good luck.

  263. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Dear Ian:

    You have never met the majority of the individuals in your website’s pedigree tree, as they were not alive over your own lifespan. Regardless of your justification for placing the pedigree tree on your website, unfortunately you do not appreciate how you make other people feel: that they are not worthy of a faculty position at the same university as yours.

    At the university where I undertook MSc studies, there was also a pedigree tree which was prominently posted….Harvard, CalTec, Columbia (!), Princeton, etc. The impression that it left on the co-workers, together with the attitude of the faculty, was unambiguous. One co-worker (not I) even posted a cartoon, mocking the attitude of my own research director, who consequently had a temper-tantrum, stating that he would have the perpetrator kicked out of the department, if he could find out who did it.

    As a matter of fact, I, too was accepted at prestigious universities for my doctorate. But instead, I undertook something else which was more intellectually challenging while simultaneously obtaining my doctorate. Unfortunately, those achievements appear to be too far outside of the box for search committees, which I take full responsibility for.

    As far as being “anonymous” is concerned, yes that is one of the benefits of the internet. After all, I am looking for a job. I hope that we agree that people do not say or write everything in public that they would under the veil of privacy.

  264. Chem Unjobber Says:

    thanks, yoyo, I am crossing my fingers. Not a reflection on you, but I will also spread some chicken heads in a circle and consult a witch doctor while I’m at it.

  265. Jack McChemistry Says:

    @Chem Unjobber @Ian Tonks

    It feels unfair to attack Ian on his decision to post his tree. His response was both appropriate and well measured. Chem Unjobber, your dig at Ian is ridiculous – just because you’re on a diet doesn’t mean you should attack and victimize someone quietly eating a cheeseburger at their desk.

  266. Hoping4Misery Says:

    I have some thoughts that I have been hesitant to express IRL because they are somewhat (read “overwhelmingly”) self-interested, but here goes..

    So there have been all these protests on campuses, with students demanding(!) that schools hire more faculty of color. From what I’ve seen, the major reason that’s been given for the lack of minority profs is that there just aren’t a lot of qualified URMs applying for these jobs. Which, on the surface, seems legit. But if the condition for being “qualified” is that you come from one of a handful of prestigious labs, then it seems they are taking something that was already a difficult ask and making it very nearly impossible.

    It also calls into question the whole “not sacrificing quality for inclusivity” argument. Can it really be used in earnest by those who are unwilling to wade through the less shiny parts of academia to search for that quality (minority or otherwise)?

  267. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Jack, you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, and I respect you for that. We live in a country where you are free to think whatever occurs to you. Both of our opinions are shaped by our backgrounds. And at issue here is indeed our backgrounds.

  268. Anonymous Says:

    …yes, and one of the downfalls of being on the internet is this has descended into insults, complaining, and trolling.

  269. Misc Says:

    It’s really not that bad. And I have yet to see trolling in this thread.

    Back on topic, Auburn is scheduling phone interviews.

  270. Anonymous Says:

    I agree.

    I heard Stanford contacted people for interviews.

  271. Anonymous Says:

    Which Stanford? Chemistry or Chem-H? Phone interviews or on sites? Thanks!

  272. TheLanthanideContraction Says:

    Sorry to ask you about doing work Chemjobber but will there be an update to the excel sheet soon? Seems like a lot of info is here about interviews and the like.

    Great website too! It has been a life-saver this job season =)

  273. walter Says:

    Do you have any idea for which position is Auburn scheduling phone interviews? Computational, Energy or Small Molecule Synthesis ?

  274. Anonymous Says:

    Stanford chemistry, on site

  275. Chemjobber Says:

    TLC: let me see what I can get up to today.

  276. Anonymous Says:

    Has anyone heard anything from BC, Michigan or Emory?

  277. Anonymous Says:


    I have not heard anything from Michigan or Emory.

  278. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Yeah, the positions for which I’m doing some serious hand-wringing include U Virgina, Virginia Tech and Montana State. Montana State says that they will contact the candidates’ referees, if interest exists on their part.

    Does anyone have any information on those searches?


    PS – “Hoping4Misery”: yes, while being just another white male, I sympathize with the issues which you have highlighted. Humans are tribal, and this is especially true of the Ivory Tower.

  279. Chem-chem-chem Says:

    UC merced is scheduling phone/skype interviews for the computational position

  280. Anonymous Says:

    @Chem Unjobber

    I received a rejection letter from U Virginia over the weekend. I noticed “Jaybee” received a rejection on 11/12. I suppose at this point no news is good news?

  281. Anonychemist Says:

    Chem Unjobber,

    First – thank you for all the work you put into the job list file. It has been very helpful! Second, I didn’t know about the remark you made above concerning letters of reference for the Montana State position. But I can tell you that my references were indeed contacted by them – probably a week or so ago (perhaps longer).

  282. Anonychemist Says:

    Well – I just realized I thanked the wrong person. Sorry about that: THANK YOU CHEMJOBBER! This blog and the associated job list has been a big help in my job search.

  283. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Anon 2:20 PM and Anon 2:33 PM,

    Thanks for the updates.

    For the record, my contributions to the job list file were minimal; the person who you need to thank and recognize is ChemJobber!

    We all know that there are only so many jobs to go around. But I will nevertheless extend my well wishes and condolences for Montana State and U Virgina.

    It is possible that, at this stage, no news = good news. However, that is obviously only the first of several hoops to jump through….

  284. Anonychemist Says:

    I guess I may as well make it three posts and make a couple of remarks about the chemistry pedigree business. While it is truly unfortunate that high quality candidates may be easily overlooked (myself included, if you don’t mind me saying – I am VERY worried about this), there is another side to the story that I do think is important. That is, our chemistry “ancestors” should certainly be acknowledged and there’s nothing wrong with doing so, in my opinion. I didn’t see the pedigree tree Ian Tonks had/has on his website, but it seems ridiculous to criticize him for posting it. I would say this to the critic: No one can make you feel unworthy – how you feel about yourself is fully up to your own discretion. Venting negative remarks toward a single well-connected scientist is hardly going to change the bigger picture. If you read this, Dr. Tonks, I appreciated your contributions here and hope you will continue visiting, despite the remarks that were directed at you.

  285. bad wolf Says:

    I’ve been critical of the pedigree overemphasis for ages, even before everyone called me an a-hole for noting that a recent hire (provenance Caltech and Stanford) had zero publications. Still, it makes a kind of sense, in that everyone is concerned about brand-name now and if the qualifications look about the same, why get a new professor when you could get a new ***HARVARD*** (eg) professor? Looks good to the students and parents too. Sure, it may reduce the number of approaches used when everyone has the same background and run the risk of groupthink, but i guess it’s worth it. To them.

    The funny part of this for me is that it would eventually have to backfire in everyone’s faces. If you are hired at a non-top 5 school, you and all your colleagues believe that your school and all the students therein are inferior to the top-5ers. So if you were an ambitious student, wouldn’t you look only at the top-5 school also? Why would you even bother going to a U of Minnesota when even the professors there believe that won’t do anything for you? The outsider schools attract less and less ‘top talent’ and the vicious/virtuous circle goes on.

    Maybe the poster above sincerely does only want to honor his mentors, and his mentors’ mentors. Looks a little incestuous, but that’s just me. I’m even more skeptical of faculty members who are still talking about what high school they went to. Still, from now on i’ll refer to pedegree posters as “Professor #humblebrag” and invite you all to do the same.

  286. Anonymous Says:

    just to clarify, when bad wolf says zero publications, he actually means eleven.

  287. bad wolf Says:

    just to clarify, when bad wolf says zero publications, actually means zero first-author publications at time of hire, with one review and one research pub since then. would you go out on the market with that record?

  288. Rex Ryan Says:

    Dear bad wolf,

    Who would you rather be, Justin Blackmon or Antonio Brown? Now get back to work.

  289. I can has job? Says:

    This listing for Arizona was apparently just posted, with less than 2 weeks until review starts:

  290. Anonymous Says:

    I’ve heard that BC contacted candidates

  291. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello friends:

    Status updates made. Please look over my transcriptions of your contribution and feel free to e-mail me directly (or put in the comments here if I made an error.)

    Also, I will be making an update to the site tonight, if I have time.

    Thanks for all your help. Cheers, CJ

  292. ZAY Says:

    For updating the google sheet purposes, here are confirmed updates on a few schools:

    Stanford ChemH (candidates contacted for video interviews),
    U. Texas-Austin (candidates contacted for on-campus interviews),
    Utah (biochemistry position, candidates contacted for on-campus interviews),
    U. Maryland-Baltimore County (interviews posted),
    U. Houston (interviews posted),
    Purdue (MCMP position, interviews posted)
    Weill Cornell Medical (rejection letters sent via email)

  293. chem-chem-chem Says:

    syracuse is scheduling phone/skype interviews

  294. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >just to clarify, when bad wolf says zero publications, actually means zero first-author publications


    Bad Wolf, many P.I.s insist on either
    (a) alphabetical order of authors -especially when their family names start with A, B or C.
    (b) if that doesn’t work, then preemptively putting themselves in first place.

    Myself, as the P.I., use alphabetical order, even though my family name is further down the alphabet. The exception was the 5th tire, with whom I had a prior agreement: I was allowed to use his lab benches to carry out the actual work, in return for including him in the authors’ list. His name clearly went into last place, and he had no gripes about it, either.

    “First authorism” reminds me of two children arguing about whose turn it is to sit in the front seat. It ranks up there with “pedigree-tree-itis”: Is it a coincidence that pedigree trees and pyramids share the same shape? Why is it that this behavior does not exist in other scientific disciplines?

  295. Anonymouse Says:

    Chem Unjobber:
    Unfortunately, in this case, neither PI this individual worked for used approach (a) or approach (b) you mentioned. In both groups, 1st authorship was based on the person doing the bulk of the synthetic work.

  296. Avacado's Number Says:

    Here’s one more update for the file: Cal State East Bay has held their phone interviews (they told me that Wednesday was their last day of interviews).

    Thank you again Paul and Chemjobber for this resource!

  297. sad Says:

    Folks at R1 schools – how does a Research Assistant Professor after a postdoc look? Just spend some time at this position and have more than 30 publications. I haven’t gotten any rejections and none of the places that I applied have any updates.

  298. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Anonymouse,

    The identity of the person carrying out the bulk of the synthetic work is sometimes clear, but other times contentious.

    BTW, the “good luck” e-mail just arrived from U Virginia. At least for me, the term “luck” implies randomness, in the sense of a lottery. And this process is anything but random.

  299. bad wolf Says:

    Chem Unjobber–Not going to keep going into this so as not to derail this thread further, but you may be selling yourself short to search committees with this attribution method. I am familiar with A as used by Larry Overman and few others and B as the ‘old school’ method favored by Denmark, Trost, and various others. But i would say that without specifying your method, first and corresponding/last authors are credited more highly, and like it or not this seems to be common and growing especially in ‘glam’ journals–such as the 5-author paper i was reading last week with 2 co-first authors and 2 co-corresponding authors. (The unfortunate who was neither had already started his new faculty position so no loss.)

  300. anon Says:

    Hi All, I have a question regarding campus visit etiquettes. During my email correspondence with search committee chair and campus visits, should I address the faculty members as Dr, Prof. or by their First name?

  301. inorganic_anon_app Says:

    Whenever I interviewed for anything (which to date are just postdocs and industry jobs), I’ve used the most formal title for the first contact and matched their level of formality after that. So if I’m addressed as Dr. So-and-So, I’ll respond with Mr./Ms./Dr./Prof. If they’re all first names, so am I.

  302. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Bad Wolf-

    You may well be right. We can’t change the world we live in, very much at least.

    The bad joke about the paper which I referred to was that I did the work (continuing my prior independent research program) as a volunteer while adjuncting, using the lab of someone who stopped what little research he did, after getting tenure. The entire project (including synthesis) was my idea, and the others who wanted to be co-PIs happened to be lucky WRT the alphabet. The co-PI whose family name started with “B” then went into retirement, a year later….

  303. Rex Ryan Says:

    Cool story bro

  304. anon Says:

    @ inorganic _anon_app
    Thanks for your input. Most of the times, they are addressing me by my first name but I have been using “Dr” to address them. I plan to switch to first names when I personally meet them during campus visits. Hope it goes well !

  305. Chem Bio Says:

    @ ZAY

    Are you sure about the status of Utah Biochem and U. Maryland-Baltimore County ? So far as I know, UMBC hasn’t posted any interviews on website, and Utah Biochem only sent out one or two interview invitations.

  306. ZAY Says:

    UMBC was an oversight (accidentally checked the College Park website). Utah was from the grapevine, which is never 100% reliable. If you have more secure info, then I’d trust that. Sorry for any confusion.

  307. Test Says:


  308. Marcus_Crassus Says:

    Has anyone heard from UCSD Open, Georgia TEch- renewable energy, UI Bloomington- materials, or UChicago-inorganic?

  309. Crassus Says:

    Has anyone heard from UCSD Open, Georgia TEch- renewable energy, UI Bloomington- materials, or UChicago-inorganic?

  310. Anonymous Says:

    Delaware contacted applicants for on-site interviews.

  311. cko Says:

    Dear everyone,

    I’ve been searching for a job in academia and industry for more than a year with 100s of applications submitted but to no use. I am trying a startup in chemical education which is a walk on the wild side. To get an idea check what’s happening to adjunct faculty with high caliber PhDs or postdocs plus multiple years of experience in academia as assistant professors. With all the billions of dollars getting wasted I propose the plan below for our Federal government to consider as it would at least save more than 4000 PhD families from asking for unemployment benefits or even food stamps for 3 years a time span to find a job.

    Below only for illustration and it goes in conjunction with humble research centers spread nation wide to house those unlucky scientist until they manage to find a job. These research centers can be a seed for entrepreneur ventures thus potential to employ more people.

    Number of PhD Physical scientists in labor force in 2010 146000
    % of unemployed 2.9 %
    Total of unemployed PhD Physical scientists 4234

    PhD + experience + family Salary/mo month year # of PHDs FED Support ($)
    family > 4 2800 12 3 400 40320000
    family 4 2600 12 3 1000 93600000
    family 3 2300 12 3 1200 99360000
    Couple 2 1900 12 3 200 13680000

    PhD (single) + experience 1500 12 3 800 43200000
    PhD (new graduate) 1 year unemployed 900 12 3 600 19440000

    Total Members FED Support
    4200 $309,600,000.00

    For example, there were 300 million dollars wasted on a state government website that was never launched.
    Bless you all,

  312. Anonymous Says:

    I was contacted for an interview at University of Michigan today.

  313. JayBee Says:

    Anonymous Says:
    > I was contacted for an interview at University of Michigan today.

    Hey Anonymous, what field do you work in?

  314. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Dear CKO,

    I read you call for help a few days back, and left it ruminating until now. There are some issues with some of your claims. But it is also a good start.

    1. You wrote “I’ve been searching for a job in academia and industry for more than a year with 100s of applications submitted but to no use”. With all respect, I am surprised that there are so many employment opportunities open within the US for which you would be qualified, regardless of your specialty area.

    2. You also wrote “% of unemployed 2.9 %”, referring to PhD-level physical scientists. It is already acknowledged that numbers reported from ACS statistics are highly unrealistic, because anyone who can’t find a long-term job which is commensurate with their qualifications will eventually leave sciences, thereby removing themselves from the data pool. The real number of PhD-level scientists who are not able to find employment as PhD level scientists is likely much, much higher.
    3. On the other hand, Your fear of having to end up as an adjunct per-fesser on food stamps is entirely justified. Indeed, my faculty applications are so far meeting the same fate as 99% of the rest of us. Before I run out of money, I’m even trying to volunteer with a company to get that missing industrial experience, make myself valuable and maybe even land a real job.

    Your plan of starting entrepreneurial research center research center is nevertheless interesting. Given, that the true number of unemployed scientists is much higher than your number, and that politicians are not prone to throwing money at problems, how would this idea be funded?

    I propose a self-regulating, self-sustaining mechanism to control the number of PhD graduates and also solve the employment issue for PhD-level scientists. It’s not perfect, but it’s a start: fund your proposed research centers from the budgets of NSF, DOE and NIH, and let the university faculty compete for what’s left over. This would prevent university faculty from amassing research groups of 10 – 30 students. Since the competition for research grants and the privilege of acquiring a PhD would both increase, this would also increase the quality of the research.

    The really wonderful thing about such a plan is that it takes into account that the total energy of the system remains constant.

  315. Orgchem Unjobber Says:

    I totally agree about the competition to obtain a faculty position is too fierce. I have even been told to stay another year as a postdoc to increase my chances. I personally think that would hurt more than help me since people do look at how long you postdoc for and I already published my “big paper” as a postdoc. I guess we’re all in the same boat.

  316. Anonymous Says:


    Chem Bio

  317. blarghoblag Says:

    are these updates helping people? Or making them more miserable.

  318. Orgchem Unjobber Says:

    @ blarghoblag

    It’s just like grad school – drowning in our misery with other people going through similar situations…except that we aren’t at a bar.

  319. anon Says:

    They’re helping! Please keep them coming. It really helps me to be able to cross things off the long list of places I applied and know where to focus my hopes.

  320. Misc Says:

    Gettysburg College has extended an offer.

  321. JayBee Says:


    Yeah, these updates are incredibly important, since they bring us back to reality. Otherwise we would all be sitting here thinking that the offer letter from Harvard must have been lost in the mail.

  322. Anon Says:

    I was contacted by UDel inorganic today for an interview.

  323. ChemBro Says:

    It is extremely helpful it makes things a little more transparent and that’s the direction we need to go. Otherwise it’s all gossip and uncertainty. I tend to liken the academic hiring to the way communist parities elect their leaders :-)

  324. Chemjobber Says:

    A department gathered together to make its pre-determined hiring decision.*

    The first professor was handed her voting ballot, folded in two. As she walked to the box she unfolded the ballot and started to look at it.

    The department chair said, “Say, what are you doing?”

    “I just wanted to see who I am voting for,” replied the professor.

    The chair slapped his forehead in exasperation, “You idiot! Don’t you know that this department are a democracy and that is a SECRET ballot?”

    /CJ’s Cold War nostalgia

    *NB CJ is making a joke, and it’s not actually like this.

  325. cko Says:

    Dear Chem Unjobber,

    Thanks for your feedback. In fact, I am working these days as adjunct faculty but I am trying to land a full time job in education and research at a four year university or work in a company. Irrespective of the number of applications which is very big I think we both agree as many others that for the many PhDs graduating a major part of them are left jobless. The problem with PhD/Postdocs/assist prof scientists is they get crippled if they don’t get a job relevant to their domain. The idea is that PhD/Postdoc/assist profs consider that they put too much time and effort to eventually finish working on something else that has nothing to do with science or their level of education. My proposal with these research centers (unlike the National Labs that are left for the elite and hyper security) are characterized by low budgets, low pay, and low profile in order to make them easily funded by the FED while at the same time has a major impact in terms providing a living for jobless scientists families and individuals while at the same time has the potential to launch startups either by its own scientists or by providing technical knowledge to people in surrounding communities. You know many ideas can be put forward on this regard but the problem who would listen. It is sad that ACS, NSF, and other government agencies are aware of the problem, talk about it, but the only answer you get is a boring article of one of them elite professors whose retirement is secured for the next three afterlives and knows nothing about the quagmire of jobless scientists.
    I suggest that we put forward a similar proposal with combined/agreed upon ideas, get it signed by many scientists and send it to all these agencies see if we can get things moving.

  326. Anon Says:

    I was contacted by UDel for an interview today.

  327. Chem Unjobber Says:

    A few responses:

    (1) >NB CJ is making a joke, and it’s not actually like this.
    No, CJ, it really is like this to a large extent, here are my own personal experiences: I’ve actually been the pre-anointed candidate for interviews, and I’ve also been the “dummy” who is brought in for the appearance of a fair competition. An undergraduate student in psychology has enough awareness to correctly interpret the interpersonal interactions which occur during the interview process. If asked to do so, then I would even testify before a congressional hearing in that regard. Your joke is nevertheless very funny.

    (2) >It’s just like grad school – drowning in our misery with other people going through similar situations…except that we aren’t at a bar.
    As a matter of fact, Orgchem Unjobber, this past Friday I was indeed at a dive bar. The difference is that the following morning, you tell yourself that you can’t keep on doing this – as opposed to re-applying for faculty jobs on an annual basis. The only consolation from the past Friday was being able to give some free chemistry tutoring to a cute co-ed undergraduate.

  328. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi cko,

    A few comments, also to the folks behind this opportunity to not only update the faculty searches, but also thankfully provide the chance for a de-propagandized discussion on the predicament for the 99% percent of us who are not “Tonkists”, and instead fall under the rubric of “it’s not what you know, but who you know that counts”.

    During the upcoming ACS meeting, where a session on the unemployment situation will be occurring, there is the opportunity to present ANONYMOUS posters on the situation, and make meaningful suggestions on how to correct it- that is what I am now (also) working on. How is it possible to present an anonymous poster?
    1. Contact a sympathetic ACS person and and start a discussion with them, also regarding the necessity of presenting anonymously (sorry, Ian, but you will just have to suck it up).
    2. Explain that, also due to your financial situation, you can not personally present the poster, but otherwise arrange for an anonymous e-mail by which you can take feedback.
    3. For your poster, present solid suggestions and a plan as to how they should be implemented, as opposed to ranting, which we all have the tendency to do. These posters will of course still have to be vetted before they are allowed.
    4. Also find non-ACS chemists (or those with chemistry degrees, ha-ha) who are in a similar predicament.
    5. Especially for your case, cko, my humble suggestion is to please use shorter sentences and bullet points, which will simplify bringing across your message.

    I will be back with more suggestions and also to mitigate direct communication at a later time. It is good to network with others who are in a similar predicament.


  329. Modestly Panicked Says:

    > “Tonkists”

    My god, Chem Unjobber. Either (a) give it a rest and stay on topic or (b) rant on your own blog.

  330. Chem Unjobber Says:

    “Modestly Panicked”, dude, changing the status quo is never easy. Especially regarding the relative situations of the “haves” and “have-nots”. As I have previously alluded to, just remember the FIrst Law of Thermodynamics.

    It’s time to turn off the browser again and get some serious work done :-)

  331. Drake Says:

    Ian Tonks be like, “I got enemies, got a lot of enemies, got a lotta people tryna drain me of this energy”

  332. Anonymous Says:

    > “Tonkists”

    LOL, this bashing of Ian Tonks is hilarious, but uncalled for. Perhaps it is time to stop this bashing.

    Academia is what it is, either compete or perish. It’s unfortunate that pedigree is more important than it should be. Some people can rise up against the odds and obtain great interviews without pedigree from a top ten institution. I have an interview at a university which is ranked number 1; my PhD is from a university ranked ~20. So far, I only have one interview at a top ten. Have I gotten rejected from some positions already? yes. I was also not chosen for interviews at some other top 10 institutions. Would pedigree from a top 5 institution helped me obtain more interviews in the top ten? absolutely. While pedigree is important, some top 5s can see past the bullshit and identify strong candidate (with no regards to pedigree). Too bad more universities are not following this trend. Honestly it’s their loss on not considering me as a worthy candidate because of my pedigree.

  333. Coffee_Master Says:

    > “Tonkists”

    LOL, this bashing of Ian Tonks is hilarious, but uncalled for. Perhaps it is time to stop this bashing.

    Academia is what it is, either compete or perish. It’s unfortunate that pedigree is a variable in the academic hiring process. Some people can rise up against the odds and obtain great interviews without pedigree from a top ten institution. I have an interview at a university which is ranked number 1; my PhD is from a university ranked ~20 (however, I only have one interview at a top ten.). Have I gotten rejected from some positions already? yes. I was also not chosen for interviews at some other top 10 institutions. Would pedigree from a top 5 institution helped me obtain more interviews in the top ten? absolutely. While pedigree is important, some top 5s can see past the bullshit and identify strong candidates (with no regards to pedigree). Too bad more universities are not following this trend. Honestly it’s their loss on not considering me as a worthy candidate because of my pedigree.

  334. Anonychemist Says:

    I agree with Modestly Panicked: “My god, Chem Unjobber. Either (a) give it a rest and stay on topic or (b) rant on your own blog.”

    I think we all have the gist of your views at this point, Chem Unjobber, and your long missives are cluttering up what should be a useful thread consisting of simple data points regarding job searches. I come here looking for facts (or at least rumors about facts), and that is all. “Changing the status quo” may not be easy, but I highly doubt this particular forum is a useful place for you to start. Please try to find another outlet where you can vent your pedigree-related frustrations. Thanks.

  335. VeryThankful Says:

    Fort Lewis college sent around rejects for the first screening of applicants.

  336. cko Says:

    Dear Chem Unjobber,

    Thank you for your valuable feedback. I will go ahead and start planning to attend the ACS conference but one major point that I am going to be weak on is to accumulate enough signatures about jobless or below poverty line paid PhD chemists. As I plan ahead your help on this regard is much appreciated. If you plan to attend ACS conference at a later stage maybe we can coordinate efforts.


  337. Anonymous Says:

    Update on PUIs in CA:

    -Cal Poly Pomona has had phone interviews for their biochemistry position, but not the organic position (
    -Cal Lutheran has at least had phone interviews.
    -Cal State, Bakersfield has had on site interviews.
    -University of Redlands has scheduled on site interviews.

    Anyone hear from Loyola Marymount (Biochemistry), Fresno State (Computational), or any of these “LPSOE” positions?

  338. Tonkian Says:

    What is an LPSOE position?

  339. Chemjobber Says:

    Lecturer with Potential for Security of Employment. It’s the UC system’s version of tenure for lecturers.

  340. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Cal State Bakersfield is interviewing? Shit. I applied there as (hopefully) a backup, since the only mass spec which they have is a GC-MS. But, their resident organic chemist seemed like a nice person.

    Does anyone have any news on Cal State Northridge?

    BTW, cko, I’m not planning on physically attending the ACS conference in San Diego, because (a) can’t afford the travel and expenses and (b) it would blow my Nom de guerre. But I will still be presenting an anonymous poster, along with an appropriate e-mail address.

    Speaking of Nom de guerre, while no one can formally accuse me of being a “puppet”, I have several non-overlapping aliases. It would be more appropriate to combine them into a single one, but am still debating the most ironic name. So for a laugh, I wanted to solicit opinions on the following three choices:

    a) Chem Unjobber
    b) Professor Ashley Madison
    c) The Chemist in the High Castle

    cko, if you wish to communicate, then please use

  341. Tonkist Says:

    I note for Prof Ashley Madison, or Tonkist(even though it’s not on your list of choices)

  342. Ian Tonks Says:

    The University of Memphis has a new opening up:

  343. Anonymous Says:

    @Ian Tonks

    thanks for the info. I heard that University of Minnesota contacted candidates a while ago. Do you know which divisions contacted candidates? Are interviews in inorganic materials/physical still on the table?

  344. Anonymous Says:

    An anonymous person said that Penn scheduled interviews on Nov 12th. Did you mean Penn State or UPenn>

  345. Kathaarian Says:

    You can see the list of candidates at Minnesota’s website. Same goes for UPenn and UT Austin. Penn State has definitely begun contacting candidates for interviews as well.

  346. Anon Says:


    Which divisions at Penn State have contacted candidates?

  347. Cat Herder Says:

    Anonymous @11/24 4:22 PM,

    All biochemistry candidates have been out to Loyola Marymount; I’m sorry if this is bad news for you.

    Best of luck to everyone!

  348. Ian Tonks Says:


    We have a totally open search (just looking for the best candidate; plus, our department doesn’t have divisions). As an aside, it’s worth checking out OXIDE to learn more about how open searches can benefit diversity, etc etc. I’m a big fan of the work that Rigoberto Hernandez and crew are doing with this initiative.

    I would be interested to hear others’ opinions on strategies for approaching interviews for open positions versus targeted/divisionalized positions–do/did you tailor your talks differently? My perception is that getting an offer is about coallition-building. You need to give the people who like you ammunition that they can use to convince your colleagues that you’re the right one. In a lot of cases, that’s more about presenting your research and ideas as a broader narrative that non-connoisseurs will be able to fully understand… even though it’s tempting to want to spend the time impressing the couple of faculty who are close to your research speciality.

  349. Applicant Says:

    I have some queries regarding the follow-up emails after the phone/Skype interviews.
    i) Should I send a thank you note to each member of the interview panel?
    ii) One of my phone interview was with a large panel of faculty and I have forgotten the identity of some of the panel members. Is it OK for me send “thank you” emails to all the faculty (individually) just to make sure I don’t miss anybody?

    Thanks very much in advance.

  350. Kathaarian Says:

    @Anon 11/25 11:10AM
    I wanna say organic, but I have to add that the people I know who’ve been contacted have been from organic background with additional materials/inorganic trainings

  351. Cat Herder Says:


    I think you should do what you think is best, knowing that there really isn’t a “wrong” approach. I did NOT send thank you notes after Skype/phone interviews, but sent personalized email messages to everyone I met (all faculty, regardless of department, as well as to administrators) during on-campus interviews. Please also keep in mind that the type (or lack) of response you receive from these thank you missives does NOT correlate with your odds of receiving an offer or campus interview.

  352. Applicant Says:

    @ Cat Herder
    I appreciate your advise. I found conflicting opinions on other websites regarding post-phone interview emails, but there was a consensus on sending “thank you” notes after campus visit.

  353. no name Says:

    It looks like Washington University has invited candidates.

  354. Ungrateful Says:

    Would it be regarded as negative not to send “thank you” notes?
    I feels like if you thank them during the interview in person, it gives more weight than an email after.

  355. Agreeable chemist Says:

    Anyone have any updates on U. Miami’s search?

    I also want to thank Chemjobber, Paul Bracher, and everyone else posting here for providing updates on all of the openings. It’s been a huge help to have this level of transparency during the application process.

  356. Dihedral angle Says:

    The College of St. Scholastica has finished phone interviews and has contacted candidates for in person interviews.

  357. candidate Says:

    @Agreeable chemist: I had a Skype interview with U Miami two weeks ago. I have not heard back

  358. applicant Says:

    No people from MacMillan this year on the market?

  359. anon Says:


    They usually go to Merck.

  360. Kathaarian Says:

    I think there should be an agreement here to not mention any PI or faculty prospective names as it would lead to too much gossiping

  361. Chem Says:

    Anyone wants to share an experience of Skype interview with UMass ? I heard it is much shorter than other schools ?

  362. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi – does anyone have any info on Duquesne U, Western KY, U Mass Lowell or San Diego SU?

    >I think there should be an agreement here to not mention any PI or faculty prospective names as it would lead to too much gossiping

    Fortunately, we do not live in a country where censoring is the accepted norm. Fortunately, too, the ability to freely speak one’s mind is a benefit of an internet blog (unlike some other countries which come to mind). Gossiping is par for the course, as long as no slandering occurs. So please just deal with it.

  363. no name Says:

    It looks like University of Utah (organic chemistry) has invited candidates.

  364. hypocrite Says:

    “Gossiping is par for the course, as long as no slandering occurs.”

    Haha! Says the one who using “Tonkist” as a derogatory term, when you don’t even know the guy and he hasn’t done anything to you. You’re a hypocrite, Chem Unjobber.

  365. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Of course I anticipated comments like yours. I only commented on details which were intentionally put on display for all to see. So kindly put your pants back on. And kindly stop the name calling…..

  366. tree Says:

    I agree with Chem Unjobber on the academic family tree issue. It would be very interesting to see this faculty opening list after the hiring committees make a decision. Young people will see how academic job market really works and maybe they can plan their careers accordingly.

  367. best people train best people Says:

    Lots of alumni from Caltech, Stanford, and Northwestern don’t find academic jobs. Kiessling and Raines, at Wisconsin, place their people at Stanford, MIT, and Harvard. Is it because Wisconsin is higher pedigree, or is it because the most creative PIs train the most creative scientists?

    Similarly, look how successful Chris Chang, a young scientist at berkeley, has been as compared to other young scientists at august institutions at placing his people.

  368. hypocrite Says:

    Chem Unjobber can’t handle it when the heat’s turned back on him! I was only commenting on details (your comments) intentionally put on display for all to see. So kindly accept your label. Classic internet troll, classic hypocrite.

    The greater tragedy of academic nepotism is how it bleeds into industry, IMO. When I was in grad school, I learned that big companies like Dow have a list of schools that the recruit at, and if you’re not at one of those schools then you’re SOL. I don’t care if schools only hire professors from places X, Y, and Z since the odds of getting those jobs are pretty much zero anyway since there’s so few spots. I DO care about getting a stable job in industry!!

  369. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Dear Hypocrite,

    What is the definition of a troll? IMHO, one of the basic criteria is anonymity. In fact, a number of folks who frequent the CJ blog know my real name, and to some extent my background (possibly even Paul B). How about YOU, my friend?

    That being said, from your overall comments, I think that you and I have more in common than differences. The only reasons (out of desperation) that I still apply for academic positions are (a) that’s where I’m best qualified, (b) as P.I., I’ve written some pretty cool research proposals – some of which have been funded, just not in this country and (c) I have virtually no industrial experience. Actually next week, I’m meeting people from a local company where I have offered to volunteer in order to get my foot in the door. Before I run out of money and land on the street or on welfare/food stamps.

    Of course, an elite pedigree does not guarantee a stable job. But it has unfortunately become a prerequisite.

    As I’ve mentioned elsewhere on this blog, an anonymous poster which discusses and proposes concrete measures to address the employment pyramid is currently in preparation for San Diego, and I welcome input and suggestions on it. For example, one suggestion is turning the contentious “pedigree tree” upside down: faculty should list a COMPREHENSIVE, and statistically meaningful long term employment outcome for their graduates…..what happens to them after being a post-doc becomes meaningless in terms of career development?

    If you wish to contact me over , then we can discuss and other topics in more depth. You would not even have to reveal your “real” name.

  370. Anonymous Says:

    Chem Unjobber-
    Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

    The rules to this game are obvious to some of us, so why complain if we choose to follow the rules?

  371. Chem Unjobber Says:

    University of Michigan Flint is advertising a TT OC position:

    Their departmental website doesn’t seem to list relevant equipment beyond a GC-MS and FT-IR. Does anyone know if they have a _local_ FT-NMR , a ES-MS or a MALDI-TOF MS?


  372. Anonymous Says:


    {Chem Unjobber-
    Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

    The rules to this game are obvious to some of us, so why complain if we choose to follow the rules?}

    If you know the rules why don’t you share with us?

  373. Anonymous Says:

    It’s been beaten to death on this page. Get your PhD at a top 10 school and postdoc at a top 10 school and you have a much better chance of getting a job at a top 10 school. Not saying it is fair or anything, that’s just how it is.

  374. 99% Says:

    “Get your PhD at a top 10 school and postdoc at a top 10 school and you have a much better chance of getting a job at a top 10 school.”

    WRONG. You mean:
    “Get your PhD at a top 10 school and postdoc at a top 10 school and you have a much better chance of getting a tenure track job at virtually any school.

    Get your PhD with the spawn of a top 10 school but at any other school, and you’ll likely end up helping someone else’s career career instead of your own.


  375. NonaBaBona Says:

    it also should be noted that — although some “know the rules” after their PhD & postdoc — nearly all students straight out of undergrad don’t have the foresight to make the proper moves (i.e., go to specific schools and work in a select few labs) to position themselves properly for a academic job search, which will be conducted approximately a decade later.

  376. disillusioned Says:

    @nonababona. Exactly! Nothing like having your career prospects slaughtered by ignoring those acceptances from top schools in favor of working in a lower tier lab where the research was more interesting to a new grad student. Hindsight is of course 20/20.

  377. NonaBaBona Says:

    Just to provide a survey of who gets academic jobs, I’ve selected (at random) schools from US News rankings and then looked at where the current assistant professors got their PhDs. Only assistant professors that were directly hired are listed (i.e., straight from their postdoc and not transferring institutions). I capitalized the ones that obtained their PhD at non-top 15 schools (based upon US New rankings) and then listed their postdoctoral school in parentheses.

    1. MIT (PhD)
    mit, columbia, berkeley (x2), wisconsin, princeton, chicago

    24. Minnesota (PhD)
    berkeley (x2), caltech (x2), wisconsin, IOWA (michigan)

    60. NYU (PhD)
    columbia, wisconsin, UTRECHT (NYU), MINNESOTA (MINNESOTA), mit

    80. Tufts (PhD)
    yale, wisconsin, ROCHESTER (harvard), berkeley

    106. Vermont (PhD)
    columbia (x3), wisconsin

    131. San Diego State University (PhD)
    yale, scripps, VANDERBILT (yale)

    NR. Portland State University (PhD)
    SOUTH CAROLINA (UC-DAVIS), UCLA (caltech), QUEENS (TORONTO), WASHINGTON (Howard Hughes Medical Institute), OTTAWA (harvard)

    NR. UNC – Charlotte (Masters)

    NR. Williams College (BS – Liberal Arts)
    berkeley, michigan

    NR. Community College of San Francisco (Associate)
    mit, berkeley, UC-DAVIS

  378. 99% Says:

    Your sampling was very helpful, thanks.

    Either your list or a comprehensive one should be on the syllabus for the final year of undergraduate chemistry. Especially for my former dreamy-eyed undergraduates, who stated that they, too wished to become faculty members. It’s otherwise a race to the bottom.

    BTW, pedigree was indeed briefly touched on during tonight’s CJ call-in session.

  379. Anon Says:

    NonaBaBona: Very interesting list!

    It would actually be pretty simple (and worth the time) to compile a more comprehensive list. A Google doc could be set up for say the top-50 Chemistry programs according to US News. If only 10 ChemJobber/ChemBark readers covered 5 schools each we would have all the information quite quickly.

    Perhaps CJ could set this up? Seems like something that would lead to some interesting discussions. Presumably, it will make it abundantly clear exactly how uneven the playing field is.

  380. Anonymous Says:

    I guess I’m screwed.

  381. Anon Says:


    I think ‘screwed’ is overstating things. Although the majority of faculty members at top schools came from the top-10, that is not exclusively true. I received a PhD from a school that barely breaks the top 50 (and did a postdoc at a top-20 school), and now teach at a top-20 school. There are always multiple routes to the (near) top, although some routes are easier than others.

  382. Anonymous Says:

    This happens in almost every field. Take a look at the scenario for law schools.

  383. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    The initiatives taken by NonaBaBona and anon 7:59 AM are very inspiring. I would be willing to donate enough time to provide this data for e.g. 10 universities.

    Another commenter from last night’s CJ discussion observed that while the correlation between pedigree and obtaining a TT faculty position did not have an R coefficient of 1.00, it was still very close.

    The other side of the coin is asking what DOES happen to those graduates who do not obtain the faculty positions to which they aspire.

    In that context, my previous suggestion that chemistry degree granting departments be required to provide comprehensive employment outcome statistics for their graduates would help. Salient points of such a study could include:
    (a) what are the actual, current outcomes over e.g. a five-year period after graduation at BSc. – PhD levels,
    (b) obtaining this data before people end up dropping out of the ACS,
    (b) presentation of these results in a readily accessible format on the internet,
    (c) regular updating of these results on an annual basis.

    Currently, departmental websites make boastful, undated and statistically meaningless claims regarding career outcomes of their graduates. This is not science, but rather advertising, and takes advantages of the dreams and hopes to which undergraduates (etc.) may aspire.

    The original purpose of this blog is very appropriate for focusing efforts on the Elephant in the Room for our predicament. My apologies to the aspiring acolyte tonkists. Your chat has been hijacked for the common good.

    Professor Ashley Madison = Chem Unjobber = Generic Chemist (my e-mail is already in this blog)

  384. Ian Tonks Says:

    Seriously. Stop the name calling and leave me out of this.

  385. Anonymous Says:

    Just want to share this article in “Science Advances” about hiring in academia:

  386. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    >Seriously. Stop the name calling and leave me out of this.

    Ian, you are not the problem, but rather you are symptomatic of the problem:

  387. Anonymous Says:

    Perhaps someone can suggest a better forum for these discussions? I’m just here for interview news and this topic is making the whole situation increasingly stressful/depressing/bleak.

  388. JobSeekingChemist Says:


    I am very excited about this thread for interview news but the side discussions are taking away for this blog IMHO

  389. Thirded Says:

    Amen, @Anonymous and @JobSeekingChemist

  390. Tonkist Says:

    I agree as well. The conversation was interesting for the first few posts, but now it’s quite repetitive.

  391. Anon Says:

    McGill has contacted candidates

  392. Fifthed Says:

    Ditto to above comments. I don’t care about this other nonsense.

  393. 99% Says:

    >Ditto to above comments. I don’t care about this other nonsense.

    Your sympathy to the situation of others is most appreciated. Hope that you don’t mind if I pass on your comments to the grad students at you B-level university who would be toiling away on behalf of your career.

  394. Sixthed Says:

    Prestige-based hiring is a problem; this, however, is not the place to discuss it ad nauseam.

    I have a question to those interviewing/preparing for interviews: what sorts of questions have you asked your faculty contact before the interview? My particular contact has emphasized that (s)he’d be happy to answer any questions I have before arriving, but I cannot think of too many apart from asking about the talk format. I don’t want to waste my contact’s time, but it seems that a question or two is expected.

  395. Anonymous Says:


    I don’t think questions are necessarily expected at this point. For places where the format/schedule are clear, I haven’t asked any questions of my faculty contacts.

  396. Anon Says:

    Sixthed: Questions at this point are not necessary. I suspect the person contacting you primarily wants to make sure you don’t have any logistical questions about your arrival/schedule/etc.

  397. Anxiouslywaiting Says:

    Has anyone heard anything about Ohio State or Chicago?

  398. Spartacus Says:


    Nope, I haven’t heard anything from them. Has anyone heard from Yale, UCSD(open) or georgs tech(renewable energy) positions?

  399. Zrrrr Says:

    @Chem Unjobber San Diego state U sent out phone interviews

  400. StayCalm Says:

    Hi guys. During the phone interview/site interview, when they ask you “Do you have any questions for us?”, what are some good questions should you ask them?

  401. Anonymous Says:

    @Zrrrr and Chem Unjobber: San Diego State U did skype interviews about 2 weeks ago, and have already invited candidates for onsites

    @Spartacus: I heard second-hand that UCSD(open) has also contacted candidates for onsites, but I don’t have confirmation on that one

    Wheaton College sent rejection emails today, indicating that candidates for onsites have been selected/contacted

  402. Spartacus Says:

    Has anyone heard from NYU or UVA. I know UVA rejected candidates, but have they scheduled interviews?

  403. Kathaarian Says:

    NYU has scheduled interviews. Or at least started.

  404. Spartacus Says:


    Which position has scheduled interviews?

  405. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >@Zrrrr and Chem Unjobber: San Diego State U did skype interviews about 2 weeks
    >ago, and have already invited candidates for onsites


    In my cover letters, I carefully refrained from from making statements like “I am confident in the ability of your department to think a little outside of the box”. But that seems to exactly be the issue.

    There must be some place else in the world where this is not the case, and yet carrying out modern research is possible…..?

  406. JayBee Says:

    Has anyone heard from Texas A&M, Pittsburgh, U of FL, LA State, and Wayne State?

  407. Tonkist Says:


    I haven’t heard from Texas a&m or Pitt. I didn’t apply to the other schools, so I don’t know.

  408. Anonymous Says:

    Apparently A&M is not bringing anyone in this year. All searches were put on hold until next year.

  409. Rejected/Dejected Says:


    LA State sent out “no thanks” emails today

  410. Zrrrr Says:

    anyone heard from Kansas State University?

  411. J. Shearer Says:

    I find this bashing, etc. of Ian Tonks to be completely bewildering and entirely uncalled for.

    As far as I can tell this all exploded with him making a post about phone interviews, and mentioning the number of on-site interviews that he had. This was offered as advice to show that there may be little correlation between the two (there is little because of the number of schools that do not do phone interviews BTW; however, I would be more concerned with a lack of any indication of an interview by this point though). This was not someone who was showing off, but someone who was driving home a point. If someone brings up the posting of an academic tree as bragging, be aware it is not. Some people have the motivations Ian mentioned, others find these things fun (I’m academically related to William of Ockham somehow, which I think is neat), just as some find Erdos numbers interesting (mine is 4).

    The fact that he got 6+ interviews is immaterial and not his “fault.” It is also not a fault of the system; that is unless you find the whole idea of a capitalist-meritocracy repugnant. There will always be people that are more sought after than other people. This applies to academic jobs as well as government and industrial jobs in all lines of work. Just to give an example, the year I applied there were ~5 of us in my field (inorganic chemistry) that had 10+ interviews (I had 12 lined up). There is a very good reason that a small number of people get a large number of interviews. We are ALL applying for the same positions; is it any wonder that the top candidates will get multiple interviews? If one school thinks a person is stellar than chances are others will as well.

    Now lets get into factors that lead to these interviews. Although pedigree has something to do with it (it will help get a foot in the door), there are other, more important factors that will lead to interviews and offers. Just so we are clear, if pedigree was all it took than I and many others that I know would not have been invited out for the number of interviews that we were. More important factors include, among other things, productivity and impact of papers published as a grad student/postdoc, whether or not you propose research in the “hot” area of the time, how well your application packet reads, and the nature of your recommendation letters. I cannot over emphasize the importance of the letters. There are many applicants that have outstanding CVs and very good proposals, but also that have red flags in their letters. Even if you have read your letters and THINK they are good, be aware that there is an art to writing a letter. What a candidate (or inexperienced faculty member for that matter) thinks is a good letter can actually be a bad one.

    Yes, many qualified people will not get an academic job. Then again, we are talking about a VERY small number of people that actually do get an interview (and ultimately a job) when compared to the overall number of applicants per position.

    To summarize, some people are more sought after than others. Is this fair? The answer is subjective, and I would argue yes to a degree. There are obviously attributes of a few candidates that multiple schools find attractive. Even if it is not fair, who says life is fair? My suggestion to all of those who have been posting these comments about Ian is to realize life is not fair, you are not owed anything, and grow up!

  412. StayCalm Says:

    I suggest that we should stop the discussion about the pedigree whether you think is fair or not. Otherwise, you’ll just keep feeding the internet trolls.

  413. StayCalm Says:

    Again: “During the phone interview/site interview, when they ask you “Do you have any questions for us?”, what are some good questions should you ask them?”

  414. no name Says:

    Did anybody hear from colorado boulder (physical organic)?

  415. bad wolf Says:

    Thanks for stopping by Professor #humblebrag. I remain somehow unsurprised that the lottery winners think that the lottery is perfect as is.

  416. Tay Tay Says:

    Haters gonna hate hate hate
    Players gonna play play play
    Unjobber gonna be jobless jobless jobless
    I’m just gonna shake shake shake, shake it off

  417. John Harvard Says:

    @bad wolf

    I would hardly call prof #humblebrag a lottery winner, he is at Univ of Nevada Reno….

  418. Anonymous Says:

    ^ Amen

  419. Anonymous Says:

    Spartacus — UVa has been interviewing already

    JayBee — Pitt has notified candidates (inorganic/materials)

  420. It's all relative Says:

    >colorado boulder (physical organic) ?

    Yeah I’m waiting for the news from there, too.

    prof #humblebrag ? Sorry but I don’t see that tag in the list of postings. Or am I missing something? Nevertheless, if s/he really is at UNR, then maybe s/he has some news about how their IC search is going (BTW I don’t share the opinion of “John Harvard”).

  421. bad wolf Says:

    Relative in the sense that someone can be waiting for a job at an R1 and still not know how to use Ctrl-F?

  422. Anonymous Says:

    for those interested in the progressing job market news:

    schools (PUIs) that have extended offers: Butler University, University of Richmond, Gettysburg College, Davidson College

  423. It's all relative Says:

    Hey bad wolf, were you one of those faculty on the CJ chat this past Friday who couldn’t think of a reaction which prominently featured sodium? I had to call in and save their asses….


  424. J. Shearer Says:

    As there seems to be some discussion on this concerning me, as opposed to my main point:

    1) I decided to take this position for geographic reasons (my spouse wanted to move to this location), and was lucky enough to be offered a position in an area I wanted to move to


    2) I am not concerned with the outcome of my research career to this point in general

    For the person concerned, we have made no decision on who to interview as of now.

  425. JayBee Says:

    Kansas State has scheduled on-site interviews.

    @Rejected/Dejected, @Anonymous – thanks!

  426. chem-chem-chem Says:

    LSU has sent rejection emails.

  427. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello all:

    1. The list has been updated. It stands at 429 positions, with 34 new positions added.
    2. I have opened a thread over at my blog ( I would strongly, strongly encourage all advice, questions and discussion to be done over there, so that this post can be only for the transfer of status updates.

    I don’t know about most of you, but I presume that many have the “notify me of follow-up comments by e-mail” post checked – I know I do. I presume many of you are on pins-and-needles with every new e-mail – I know I would be. Please think on that before you click “submit comment.”

    Best wishes, CJ

  428. Anon Says:

    @J. Shearer

    I mean this in the least contentious way possible, but my understanding of this entire debate is that the letters (which you directly mentioned) are the vehicles by which certain PIs exert their influence on the job market (specifically who gets interviews—not ultimately who gets offers). Many letters from well-known PIs include something to the effect of student Y is better than my previous student Z who got a job at this top 20 school OR something like student Y is of the quality of recent hires at the PI’s top 10 institution. These “green flags” are tremendously influential (and they can’t be given out by just any PI); how could they not be significantly impactful on who is selected for interviews? Do they get a candidate the job? No…Do they get a candidate an interview? Maybe so (if the candidate’s package is also solid). More importantly, do you think that the same few people would always be considered the “top candidates” if search committees’ only evaluated candidates’ CVs and proposals? Would it be as universally obvious who the “top candidates” were if all there was to go on was the merit of these candidates’ past publications/accomplishments and respective written visions for their future research? Honestly, I have my doubts. In my experience, the lines are just too thin, ultimately making the letters disproportionally important. When you read a lot of applications and letters, it’s much easier to gravitate to the one’s where a respected PI has written that this candidate is a sure thing. That’s not meant to take anything away from those who get 20+ interviews. I’m 100% sure those people have worked their asses off and are excellent scientists. However, I think it would be surprising to some to see just how many truly excellent candidates there are in large applicant pools. This doesn’t mean that the system is necessarily fair or unfair…it just suggests that the system might not be a complete meritocracy and, in fact, be much more hierarchical/political than one would assume. Also, there is a big difference between wishing the system was more transparent (so you could honestly evaluate your job chances) and the straw man position that everyone who is discussing this topic on the blog is a sore loser (or just feels like they’re being cheated). Lastly, it doesn’t necessarily mean that because someone got 5 (or 100) interviews that they’re the best candidate in the world (just take a look at the percentage—higher than 40% by my calculation—of people who interview at top 10 schools each year that end up not getting an academic job at any level)…nor does it mean that because another person didn’t get any call backs that they’re undeserving of an academic position (although it should be motivation to take a hard self-critical look at your application materials).

  429. Updater Says:

    Hamilton college – Onsite interviews
    Lebanon valley college – phone interview
    Cal Lutheran – phone interview

  430. Anon Says:

    Lehigh (bioanalytical) is scheduling on-site interviews

  431. I can has job? Says:

    A couple more positions to add:

    Northeastern Illinois (Polymer):

    New Mexico State (Physical):

  432. Anonymous Says:


  433. Annoym Says:

    “chem-chem-chem Says:
    November 30th, 2015 at 10:37 PM
    LSU has sent rejection emails.”

    LSU Organic? Those who have not received rejection emails are shortlisted for interview? Anymore information? Thanks

  434. chem-chem-chem Says:

    yes…LSU for organic position.

  435. synth2D Says:

    UConn has contacted for Skype interviews/

  436. monkaywhatagata Says:

    Has anyone heard from UCSD chemistry?

  437. Chem Unjobber Says:

    I believe that someone here already reported that UCSD has started interviewing.

  438. Anon Says:

    Yes just check their website under “special seminar” category

  439. ugh Says:

    Pitt pchem interviews scheduled

  440. Anonymous Says:

    Has anyone heard from the Georgia Tech Renewable Feedstocks position?

  441. Anonymous Says:

    Oakland has scheduled phone interviews.

  442. ok Says:

    Boulder is interviewing for the Phys Org position

  443. Anon Says:

    Has anyone heard from Yale chemistry?

  444. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Good morning,

    Is Montana State now interviewing?

    Has anyone heard back from Western Virginia U or Western Kentucky U ( both organic)?

    Also, in response to the question “Those who have not received rejection emails are shortlisted?”, my experience has been that rejection e-mails are not necessarily sent out at the same time.

  445. pchem Says:

    Utah Physical Chemistry has done phone interviews and decided on 4 candidates to bring out for in-person interviews. It also looks like U Toronto pchem has interviews on their seminar page.

  446. Anonymous Says:

    Ohio State has interviews posted on their departmental calendar.

  447. Anonymous Says:

    Is there any news floating around about UCLA, UCSF or Rockefeller?

  448. Anonymous Says:

    Emory has interviews posted on their calendar.

  449. Anonymous Says:

    >Is there any news floating around about UCLA, UCSF or Rockefeller?

    UCLA is currently in the middle of interviews with inorganic candidates

  450. Anonymously anonymous Says:


    I would appreciate if someone can enlighten me on this. What does it mean when on some applications it says Recommendation solicited:”No” Recommendation received:”No”?

    Does this mean the school did not ask for recommendation letters and therefore there are none?

  451. Chemjobber Says:

    Please ask (and respond to!) broader, academic job search related questions on the connected open thread at Chemjobber:

    Please save this thread for new job postings and interview progress reports. Thank you.

  452. Anonymous Says:

    ohio university is arranged their phone interview today

  453. Anonymous Says:

    Cal State LA (inorg) is scheduling phone interviews

  454. Anonymous Says:

    “ZAY Says:
    November 19th, 2015 at 8:55 PM

    For updating the google sheet purposes, here are confirmed updates on a few schools:

    Weill Cornell Medical (rejection letters sent via email)”

    “chem-chem-chem Says:
    November 30th, 2015 at 10:37 PM

    LSU has sent rejection emails.”

    => Are these schools doing interviews?

  455. un-un Says:

    @Chem unjobber
    two things to consider:
    1) Maybe you are working in an area that no cares about anymore. Honestly, so many people in science get tunnel vision about their little corner of the nano org. lett. tet. acta. rat race and lose the perspective that no one cares about, or wants to fund, their science. Science (chemistry) is moving away from this toward more interdisciplinary research – and given your whining you don’t sound very well-rounded.

    2) Applying year after year is a terrible idea. It may be all you have left, but the committees have seen your name, and your advisors’ letters still are not saying you are their top student/postdoc, so you will not rise to the top.

    You can complain and say a pedigree system is keeping you down, but I’d bet it all that it’s more #1&2 above.

  456. Chemjobber Says:


    Please ask (and respond to!) broader, academic job search related questions on the connected open thread at Chemjobber:

    Please save this thread for new job postings and interview progress reports. Thank you.

  457. Anonymous Says:

    Does anyone know if Auburn has set up their on site interview yet?

  458. Anonymous Says:

    University of the Sciences is scheduling on-site interviews

  459. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Any idea where the candidates from the U of the Science candidates are coming from? Are they local, e.g. U Penn? Their website has no details.

  460. Anonymous Says:

    @Chem Unjobber
    There doesn’t seem to be any geographical bias for the UScience candidates (that is, there are non-local candidates)

  461. californiadreamin Says:

    UCSD posted faculty candidate talks in organic.

  462. anyname Says:

    @Chem Unjobber Says:
    December 2nd, 2015 at 11:07 AM
    Good morning,
    Is Montana State now interviewing?

    How do you know? Do you have any information re. MSU?

  463. JayBee Says:

    Yes, Auburn U has scheduled their interviews, and so did U of Louisville.

  464. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi anyname,

    No, but I believe that the name “Montana State” cropped up earlier on in this thread. So you can now exhale :-)

  465. StayCalm Says:

    What area has Auburn scheduled site interviews?

  466. JayBee Says:

    Small molecule synthesis

    Also, Ohio University has scheduled phone interviews, and U South FL has requested rec. letters for their top choice candidates.

    Any news on Duquesne U, Temple U, Tufts U, U Chicago, Columbia, VA Tech, Yale, Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown U, UCSB, U FL, U NV Reno, and Wayne State?

  467. Chem Bio Says:

    Any news for IU bloomington (Chemical Biology) ? Have they scheduled interviews ?

  468. dude Says:

    It seems that U Chicago scheduled materials:

  469. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Duquesne U and VA Tech: no
    UNR: a faculty member there has already written extensively here and on the CJ blog that they have made no decisions.

  470. Anonymous Says:

    IU Bloomington has invited chem bio and materials (from website)

  471. Chemjobber Says:

    The joint ChemBark/Chemjobber 2016 Faculty Jobs List has been updated with all the updates we’ve received. It stands at 443 positions:

  472. Zrrrr Says:


    NV Reno started to invite candidates for onsite interview

  473. Biochemix Says:

    Thanks @Chemjobber for this great service and forum.

    What is the typical wait time between phone interview and on-site interview notification?

  474. Anon Says:

    IU Bloomington is having on site interviews as of last week (Chem Biol)

  475. Chemjobber Says:


    You’re welcome!

    Please ask (and answer!) broader academic job search related questions on the connected open thread at Chemjobber:

  476. Starbug Says:

    I had a phone interview with Marshall in WV in late October. The said that they were bringing in 3 candidates in November. Any word on status of University of Ottawa positions? What about the organic position at North Texas?

  477. Anonymous Says:

    Phone interviews reported for Boulder – Theory

  478. Anonymous Says:

    Boulder BioFrontiers Institute sent rejection letters

  479. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Just received a cloned rejection e-mail from Cal Staye Bakersfield today.

  480. Crixus Says:

    Has anyone heard from Yale or Georgia tech (renewable feedstocks)?

  481. Anon Says:

    Kentucky notified candidates today

  482. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Kentucky? Sorry, but can you please provide additional details: which sub-discipline? Kentucky or Western Kentucky?


  483. Anon Says:

    The University of Kentucky, I was not specified what sub-discipline. Likely the “Synth Biol” position.

  484. Anton Says:

    Texas A&M sent a letter notifying candidates that it has canceled its search for faculty due to budgetary circumstances.

  485. Anonymous Says:


    I haven’t received the letter. Is this for both open and organic positions?

  486. Anonymous Says:

    I also received the Texas A&M letter. I think it is for the open position.

  487. Anton Says:

    It was for the open position.

  488. Chem Unjobber Says:

    SUNY Oswego:

    “On behalf of the entire State University of New York at Oswego community and the search committee in particular, I want to thank you for applying for the position of Organic chemistry. The Department has selected another candidate and the search process has now concluded.

    We wish you the very best of luck in the future. Thank you again for your interest in the position and SUNY Oswego.”

    yada yada

  489. Anon Says:

    Both the open and organic searches at Texas A&M have been canceled due to budgetary circumstances.

  490. Anonymous Says:

    I keep on hearing that people know things from vines and stuff. I am just wondering whether schools share information of applicants with each other? That might not be good for the applicants.
    (Also, why is the chemistry academia world so gossipy? Like when I was in grad school, if someone (student, professor, or whoever) does something, the next day the entire department knows about it. I kid you not, a friend one time mentioned to me that he saw another grad student from a lab on the third floor often used the bathroom on the second floor, and I was like I don’t care where other people go shit!!) (I’m not sure I am ready to be a part of such a gossipy community)

  491. Anonymous Says:

    Sorry, I’ll repost the question on the Chemjobber site.

  492. Chemjobber Says:

    Please ask (and answer!) broader academic job search related questions on the connected open thread at Chemjobber:

  493. Chem-Agent Says:

    I have not received the letter from Texas A&M…Although I saw a missed called from a phone number with area code near Texas A&M. I thought the person was trying to inform me about some good or bad news!

    I m still waiting for responses from a few other institutions.

    I also think that institutions should be diligent by sending notifications to applicants that they are not being considered for the interview process. Among the 30 Applications I sent out, I found out (from chembark) that almost 90% of them have their interview scheduled. THIS IS NOT PROFESSIONAL!

    Also, I feel like this academic job think is very very very biased…If you have not gone through one of the 3-5 top schools and have not worked for some of the chemistry mafia, your chance to get the job is very slim.
    I came to realize that you either have to work for Swager, Buckwald, Chirock, MacMillan, Sanford on the East Coast or Grubbs, Barran, Overman, Bertozzi, Stolz, Houk… on the West Coast or for some of their lineages and closed friends in order to be get the job! What about those who are very talented, but did not make it to those groups or top universities.
    I feel like those whose applications will be rejected need to form a coalition and denounce this nepotistic way of hiring future academicians and scientists.

    I have devoted more that 5 months to carefully prepare my application package, but in finish it looks like I am not going to make it into academia, my dream job. I compared my accomplishments with my peers who are getting interviews, I can tell you that I have about the same number of publications (first authored) in prestigious journal as well…my proposed research is very different from my mentors works and very outstanding!

    Chemistry Academia World is Very Corrupt.

  494. Tay Tay Says:

    I think the first step to get consideration for academic jobs is to be able to spell those professors’ last name correctly

  495. Anonyomous Says:

    @Tay Tay please take your “insightful” comments elsewhere. Most of us are concerned about more serious matters than spelling.

  496. Anonymous Says:


    Please upload a copy of your CV, 5 most impactful publications and detailed description of your proposed research plans. This will allow the ChemBark community to best evaluate the “outstanding” nature of your package. Best,

    Prof. Buckwild

  497. Anonymous Says:

    I agree with Chem-Agent. Chem Academia is biased and selection of candidates is more pedigree based.

  498. Chemjobber Says:

    Please ask (and answer!) academic job search related questions on the connected open thread at Chemjobber:

  499. Anonymous Says:

    Chemjobber please stop posting (and re-posting!) links to your website. It’s OK if this thread has multiple discussions.

  500. Anon Says:

    I was wondering if there is any data on how many applications programs actually receive when they post a position? I know some one who is at non-PhD program, and they said an open search will get over 200 applicants. Does anyone have an idea for how many applications PhD programs received? What about top 10 schools?

  501. Chem-Agent Says:

    @ Tay Tay

    Let say you teach a chem course and most of your students mispronounce your name as “Tea Tea”, will fail the students who mispronounce your name?

    This topic is a very important one…I want the Chem Academia community to think about it. In my view, getting a position in academia nowadays is based on who you are, who you worked for and if your postdoc boss has connections at institutions where you are applying at!!!

    @Prof. Buckwild

    I understand you are trying to help…I am sorry I will not be able to post my CV and proposed research here on this forum…Instead of “outstanding” proposals, I should have said “unique and innovative ideas”: I gave my proposals to three established professors, they evaluated my ideas and gave me feedback and suggestions. This is why I believe that I am a very serious candidate.
    I am hopeful that something will pan out in the near future even if it is not in academia.

    Thank you

  502. Chem Unjobber Says:

    The topic is a (very) valid one, but I second Chem Jobber’s request to discuss it on the dedicated thread on his blog, at (as I have done). The purpose of this thread is simply factual. Please remember that CJ runs both of these sites (together with CB).


  503. anon Says:

    To answer anon 12/12/15, my doctoral school (top 25) received 300+ applications for an assistant professorship in the late 2000s. I do not know whether it was an open search or a discipline search.

  504. Anon Says:

    Chemjobber = Chem Unjobber 12/12 7:56pm

  505. Chem Unjobber Says:

    >Chemjobber = Chem Unjobber 12/12 7:56pm
    No, I just happen to agree with him. My alter-ego on the CJ site is Generic Chemist.

  506. Anonymous Says:

    University of South Florida is setting up their onsite interview these days

  507. candidate Says:

    U Miami is scheduling on site interviews

  508. Chemjobber Says:

    The joint ChemBark/Chemjobber 2016 Faculty Jobs List has been updated with 14 new positions and all the status updates we’ve received that are sufficiently clear. It stands at 457 positions:

    The open thread is still around and active:

  509. Anno Dominated Says:

    Has anyone heard from University of Oklahoma – Norman (Inorganic)?

  510. Chem Bio Says:

    @ Chemjobber,
    Has the U Pittsburgh scheduled interviews for all the openings, or just for the pchem track ?

  511. Anonymous Says:


    Which position at U Miami?

  512. candidate Says:

    materials/energy at U Miami

  513. Question_UofMiami Says:

    When are the U Miami on site interviews scheduled? This year or next year? (Position Energy/Materials)

  514. Anonymous Says:

    Which position at University of South Florida ?

  515. Question_UofMiami Says:

    The position at the University of Miami (Energy/Materials)

  516. Anonyomous Says:

    U of Notre Dame sent me a rejection today.

  517. Starbug Says:

    Montana State has faculty candidates for inorganic position posted on calendar. No word on organic position yet.

    Dec 02 – Inorganic Faculty Candidate Seminar
    A candidate for the inorganic faculty position in the department will be here to give a public seminar. 4 pm in the Byker

  518. Anonymous Says:

    University of South Florida is the functional material position

  519. Anon Says:

    Anyone have updates on current hires for this cycle?

  520. Chem Unjobber Says:

    This is a follow-up regarding your application for the position of Assistant Professor, Organic Chemistry at Western Kentucky University.

    Thank you for your recent application for employment for the position of Assistant Professor, Organic Chemistry. The time and effort you invested in completing the application process is appreciated! We did have several highly qualified candidates for the position and it has been a difficult decision, but we have chosen to pursue another candidate for this position who we feel is best qualified.

    Thank you for your interest in Western Kentucky University and we wish you the best in your future endeavors.


    The Department of Human Resources
    Western Kentucky University

  521. collecting rejections Says:

    Has anyone received any rejections from the following:

    Delaware, UCONN, Emory, Chicago (inorganic), Penn State?

    I’ve not had any interviews, or rejections, so am just wondering if anything was sent out, or if I am simply in the backup pile.

  522. Anonymous Says:

    Anyone heard from UMass chemistry ?

  523. Anonymous Says:

    @collecting rejections:

    UConn conducted skype interviews within the last few weeks, and is now in the process of scheduling onsites.

    As far as I know Delaware contacted candidates for onsites a while ago, don’t think they sent rejection letters.

  524. onymous Says:

    @Anonymous Says:
    December 13th, 2015 at 11:48 AM
    “University of South Florida is setting up their onsite interview these days”

    Any news on how many candidates they are interviewing?

  525. Starbug Says:

    Any word on the progress of the positions at the University of Arkansas (organic) or LSU (organic)? Thanks,

  526. Starbug Says:

    I noticed that one of the seminars for a candidate at URI was cancelled. Could they be starting another round of interviews?

  527. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi Starbug, you are not the only one who is smelling like desperation.

  528. StayCalm Says:

    Pacifichem is going on right now, and a lot of people are there. So I don’t think anything will happen until after New Year.

  529. Anonymous Says:

    Cal Poly Pomona is setting up phone interviews for after the new year.

  530. Anonymous Says:

    Anyone hear anything from DePaul or WKU?

  531. Applicant Says:

    Hi All,
    Hope your job search is going well. I was wondering if anybody has heard from LSU (Organic), Oklahoma State, West Virginia, North Texas, Duquesne and Montana State (Organic)?

    Someone mentioned here that that they received a rejection email from LSU (Organic). I haven’t received the rejection or phone interview invitation as yet. I am not sure if I am still in the running there.

    Thanks and Good Luck to you all!

  532. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Dear “anon 8:04 AM”, please search this list before asking. I’ve posted rejections to both DePaul and WKYU here.
    Dear “Applicant 10:01 AM”, I’ve heard nothing back from W Virgina or Montana State (organic).

    PS – the ratio of applicants to positions on offer means that we can’t all have good luck, sorry.

  533. NoInterviewsYet Says:

    Vanderbilt has candidates on the event calendar – a ultrafaster, an NMR-er and a superresolution guy

  534. Anonymous Says:

    Reed College (inorganic) sent a rejection today, saying that the position has been filled

  535. Anton Says:

    I got interview invitation from Northeastern U (computational).

  536. candidate Says:

    Does anyone know if UC Davis (materials) has scheduled on-site interviews?

  537. Anonymous Says:

    I heard from vines that UC Davis (materials) has already given an offer.

  538. no name Says:

    Has anybody heard about Johns Hopkins?

  539. dude Says:

    JHU has invited candidates for chem bio:

  540. Anonymous Says:

    Auburn is setting up their on-site interviews for scalable energy one

  541. Starbug Says:

    Montana State now has organic faculty candidate spots in their calendar for January.

    Wed 13 – Organic Faculty Candidate Seminar
    Plant Science Bld. room 108 2pm

  542. LiqC Says:

    Just got this lovely piece from Harvard (copied as is).

    The search committee for the faculty position in Chemistry and Chemical Biology has reviewed your application. The committee read files from excellent applicants with impressive qualifications. Ultimately issues of fit with our needs require us to eliminate from our short list many highly qualified persons. I regret that you are not among those we will be considering further for this position.

    On behalf of the search committee, thank you for the opportunity to review your materials and for your expression of interest in the . We wish you well with your future endeavors.

    Sincerely yours,

    Chair, Search Committee

  543. Chem Unjobber Says:

    “We wish you well with your future endeavors” = “good luck”. Did you know that if you get 20 good luck wishes, then you can trade them in for a job?

  544. Anonymous Says:

    Harvard Chem Dept didn’t even print the search committee chair name and title; conveys how much they care about rejected candidates.

  545. Anonymous Says:

    Has anyone heard from UMass Amherst and UMass Lowell ?

  546. Chem Unjobber Says:

    A while back, I received a “good luck” letter from UMass Amherst. UMass Lowell is still outstanding. Please see CJ blog for a few more comments on the latter.

  547. Heysus Says:

    Hmmm. I didn’t get a rejection letter from Harvard; does that mean in being considered?

    Ps. The captcha to submit this comment is 7ass lol

  548. Australia Says:

    I got the rejection letter from Hobart and William Smith Colleges.

  549. Australia Says:

    Another rejection letter from Florida Institute of Technology.

  550. Anon Says:

    @Australia: what does the FIT rejection letter say? Did they finalize the campus interviwees?

  551. Australia Says:

    @Anon: here is the email from FIT:
    I don’t know whether they finalize the campus interview. I got the rejection letter because I was not shortlisted.

  552. Reddington Says:

    I received a rejection letter from University of Toronto today.

  553. Anonychemist Says:

    LiqC – That letter from Harvard is just beyond ridiculous – truly shitty. Seriously, it needs to get out into the world for broader viewing so they can be called out for their staggering lack of respect.

  554. butt Says:

    I don’t think it’s that ridiculous. The committee is likely fielding hundreds of applicants, who they have to set aside time to evaluate on top of their own research, teaching, and other duties. Composing tailored rejection letters to many people (who the committee has likely never met) is honestly probably an inefficient use of their time.

  555. dude Says:

    The administrator most likely messed up. The professors don’t send these out.

  556. Anonychemist Says:

    Butt: I wasn’t suggesting they should use “tailored rejection letters”. Did you actually READ what LiqC posted? My comment was directed at the omissions, specifically:


    As “dude” said, it was probably the fault of an administrative assistant. Nevertheless, it is extremely unprofessional and reflects badly on the department and the institution.

  557. Anonychemist Says:

    Sorry, the section I pasted didn’t come through. I was referring to the sections of the letter that said:

    “…and your expression of interest in the . ”

    and also

    Chair, Search Committee”

  558. collecting rejections Says:

    At least some schools have the courtesy to send out rejection letters in a timely fashion, instead of making people hunt around on the internet and speculate based on upcoming seminars at the University.

  559. LiqC Says:

    If I’m allowed one off-topic comment — I’m going to start sending back the rejections of rejections [BMJ, link in my username].

  560. exhu Says:

    @liqc and others, you are grasping at straws complaining about how the rejection letters come back. realize that even when candidates go out and actually interview it is not uncommon for no one to contact them again if they are not in the running. this is not the norm, maybe 1 in 10. out of sight out of mind. you may wish it wasn’t so, but these postings are up to find the next crop of faculty, not appease those that are being rejected.

  561. StayCalm Says:

    This is cold!
    As a courtesy and respect for other human beings, who might end up as your colleagues somewhere else, this “norm” needs to be changed. This “norm” exists because people don’t do anything about it. If there are enough people wanting to change it, it will be changed.

  562. non-exhu Says:

    @staycalm, the end result is the same (you are getting a rejection letter), but in your version it gets your name exactly right, comes exactly on time and makes you “feel better” about being rejected??
    and the comments about providing feedback from some others here? give me a break. this is not a workshop, it’s a job application and yours is one of hundreds in many cases. if you are scientists you should be plenty used to the pragmatism in this industry.

  563. anonymous Says:

    @exhu and @non-exhu

    Timely sent rejection letters helps applicants approach their job search in a more pragmatic fashion. It’s not about “feeling better”. It probably would make applicants feel worse to have have dozens of rejections sent simultaneously, but at least, the applicants could plan accordingly. To put this in another light, let’s say I’m selling my home and you want to purchase my home. However, since I have a nice home, you know that a lot of others will also submit offers for my home. When would you want to find out that I didn’t go with your offer? As soon as I accept someone else’s (as is the practice) OR would you rather figure out months later when the new owners move in? The former let’s you move on asap with your home search, while in the latter system you might be lurking around (maybe even on message boards) trying to ascertain the status of your offer on my home. Common courtesy is a powerful tool for preventing wasted human effort.

  564. Chem Unjobber Says:

    OK, guys since you don’t want to use the CJ blog to “pramatic”ally (yes I’m talking about you, “non-exhu”) limit your discussions to the CJ blog, then I will make my comments here:

    (1) whether a computer program prints your name at the bottom of a rejection letter or not is completely irrelevant. Remember, the platitudes on that letter are 200% without meaning.

    (2a) “non-exhu”, you wrote ” if you are scientists you should be plenty used to the pragmatism in this industry.” Although you are correct in defining this undertaking as an industry, your observation on the definition of science deserves comment. I thought that science was all about collecting data, reaching unbiased conclusions from that data, and comparing those conclusions to a hypothesis.

    (2b) If you believe the preceding definition, then the ACS is ironically unwilling to collect meaningful and credible data on the employment situation for ALL chemists. This, IMHO is an example of an organization which is supposed to be representing the interests of scientists, but instead does so for a limited circle of specific people. Those people are research active faculty, whose careers depend on a steady supply of graduate students and grants to achieve their own career goals. The result is a severe imbalance between the numbers of people who are graduating with doctoral degrees and a lot of inspiration (I’m one of them) and the job market. This isn’t science, instead it’s an example of entrepreneurialism, at best.

    (c) Of course, in my own faculty applications, I lay a heavy emphasis on research. But my own teaching statements also contain a section on my ethical behavior, and I state the following principles: (i) I determine the career goals of my students, (ii) I provide them with specific training relevant to those goals, when possible, (iii) I only amass a research group in size which IMHO is commensurate to the capacity of the job market, (iv) I pro-actively support my former students with more than just “good luck” after they graduate and (v) I provide specific career councilling upon request.

    Perhaps that’s why, for me anyways, the results of the current hiring cycle have been so shitty.

    “good luck”

  565. non-exhu1 Says:

    @anon, nice metaphor, but the timing of job searches prevent it from applying here. in a home search, things happen in real time, so yes, it’s good to know quickly in order to adjust, move on or other. in faculty job searches, applications are collected, distributed to be read, short listed, more reading, discussed in sub-committees, further discussed, before finally making a short list to (maybe) interview. this is going on nearly simultaneously at all places. so by the time an application is not on the top of the pile at one place, that application has pretty much been decided upon at all other places (either good or bad). frankly, I don’t think anyone on this forum complaining about rejection letters would be turning down any offers for an interview, so I don’t see how getting the rejection letters in a more timely fashion or with your name just so is going to affect your job search.
    like it or not, you work on your apps, throw them to the wind and then see who likes it. by the time the rejection letters (or interview invites) start rolling in, the ship has sailed on changing anything.
    also, don’t be surprised if you are still be getting rejection letters until next august…state schools especially (not just harvard…)

  566. anonymous Says:


    Although the applications are sent out largely at one specific time, every applicant’s job search is happening in real time. In the interest of pragmatism, every person applying should have a backup plan if nothing works out. If you are single, then maybe you have more flexibility, but if you have a family, then you have far less. Not everyone has the ability to just continue in a postdoc for another year (e.g., for funding reasons), so this may mean immediately trying to apply for industry jobs or trying to line up adjunct positions or another postdoc or just something. Landing an academic job may (by necessity) end up being only part of a larger decision making process that leads to employment. Honestly, I believe most applicants are in that exact situation. You seem to be playing the “that’s life” card (which is fine). However, in a discussion of whether this policy is right or wrong, I don’t really see your argument because simply knowing your status would inform the real tangible decisions you make going forward. For example, if you applied to 30 schools and got 30 rejections by Nov 15th, then you would have to start making other arrangements. In the current system though, you may apply to 50 schools and get 5 rejections by Dec 15th…what do you do then?

  567. Agreeable Chemist Says:

    1. I think much of the griping regarding the Harvard rejection letter is not that it was not personalized, but that the “blank” parts of the form letter were not filled in with the department chair name, but rather “XXX.” I am in complete agreement with the “this-is-shitty” camp, especially given that Harvard of all places should exhibit even a small modicum of the perfection it demands from its current and prospective employees.

    2. Regarding timing… I appreciate rejection letters quite a bit given that they make clear what one’s (lack of) options are going forward. However, I have simply assumed that by this time, if I’ve not heard back, I will not hear back in the future, and am thus making decisions accordingly.

  568. Anonymous Says:

    Try not to take the letter too personally. The front office administrator at Harvard is very nice but known to be absent minded.

  569. StayCalm Says:

    Harvard sent out apology letter:

    “Please accept our sincere apologies for the unprofessional and impersonal letter of rejection you previously received. While we will not be moving forward with your candidacy, the form letter you received without proper salutations and signatures does not represent the care in which we viewed all applications and was sent out as a result of a system glitch. Thank you for your interest in our department and we wish you well in your career.


    Ted Betley

    Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology

    FAS, Harvard University

    Faculty Search Committee Chair”

  570. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Well it would have been a computer-generated name in any case.

    If it’s any consolation, then my application for a nice position in Brazil was not accepted, because I chose the wrong time zone down there. They are real sticklers for such things. It was a real drag to have to fight about the formatting of the proposal with MS Word last night. At 2:00 AM, MS Word won. So much for the attempt to escape the shitty US American system.

  571. Observer Says:

    I heard about the pedigree discussion on here. I read all the postings. The arguments on both sides have already laid out, so I’m not going to put in my opinion.
    I’d like to revisit a point that was briefly mentioned but no one has paid much attention to: it is true that this year, a group of 6-7 people from a few labs have blanketed the entire market of the top 10 schools. Though this is not new because it has always happened, it is just sad and ..uh inbreeding. What sadder is that schools in the top 20 are also trying to recruit this group. Schools in the top 40 are also trying to recruit this group. I even saw a school in the top 60 scheduling interviews for people in this group, knowing full-well that they will never accept an offer from that school and that they will receive and accept an offer from one of the schools ranked higher later. So, either this group of people should stop applying (which will not happen), or schools outside of top 20 should throw in the towel now and start looking at others candidates instead; otherwise these schools are wasting their time, this group’s time, and other candidates’ time.

  572. Observer Says:

    I know all schools are proud of their departments and think highly of themselves and believe that ranking is just a number. But you have got to be realistic. Been there, done that. There is virtually no chance that this group of candidates will flounder and accept anything less than the top 20.

  573. Mainer Says:

    University of Maine (Orono, ME)
    Assistant Professor of Organic Chemistry (tenure-track)
    First Consideration: January 25, 2016

    C&E News Ad:
    Department Ad:
    To apply:

  574. ex-hu Says:

    @observer, this is a good observation indeed, but it is more complicated than you represent here. first, many top (0-20) schools will interview even if they are not planning to make an offer to anyone or are only looking in a specific field. in this case they are getting a glimpse of the top candidates that will likely become their colleagues somewhere else, even if it is very unlikely they could make an offer. i have been on interviews of this kind where I was basically told coming in that there was no way I could get the job. this may seem counterintuitive, but it is very common. also, there may be other things going on in a department, like a senior hire, that complicate a junior search. so there may be a chance of a job, but contingent on other offers working out or failing.
    finally, you are looking at CVs and interview lists as the determinants of getting a job; this is not the case. once those people get there they are scrutinized deeply and all bets are off on actually getting an offer.
    i agree that it would be good for places to spread it around a bit more, but the alternative to your position is that perhaps these schools a looking for a specific bar and these are the only candidates that meet it. several top schools may only interview a few candidates a year, which is not because they liked them best in a relative sense, it is because those are the only candidates they liked in an absolute sense – they could certainly invite more than two or three.

  575. anonymous Says:

    Huh. I got this same Harvard apology letter, but I am not one of the ones who received the original rejection letter. I guess I will assume this apology-for-careless-rejection serves as the actual rejection.

  576. anon Says:


    I believe that everyone who is currently on this message board fully realizes that some schools at the top aren’t necessarily making an offer to any candidate (even though they bring several candidates out). My understanding is that some of these schools don’t make offers simply because they can’t reach a department wide consensus about the best candidate and/or just no one knocked their socks off — rather than they have no intention to make a hire in a given year. However, you indicated that you were “…basically told coming in that there was no way I could get the job.” I’ve never heard of search committee being upfront about the fact they are wasting everyone’s time. Could you expand (in an anonymous manner) on how they told you that you didn’t have a chance? Why would you still go on the interview if they told you there was “no way” you could get the job?

  577. Anonymous Says:

    I don’t know if I am in the “group” of candidates you mentioned, but I’d like to keep my options open. First, having 5-6 onsite interviews lined up so far doesn’t guarantee an offer. Second, it is particularly helpful during the negotiation process to have multiple offers.

  578. exhu2 Says:

    one example: state school, has open slot in particular field as a result of changes in faculty, mandated to fill that slot first, but still interviews in other fields where excellent candidates are apparent. however, very unlikely a second fte could be justified to administration and approved.
    this equals an interview, potential excitement about a candidate, but almost no prospects of a job, which some faculty may be honest with you about. and since (as everyone knows and discusses on this forum) you can’t just sit out a cycle to see what happens next year, there goes that opportunity.
    the take away message here is you have a lot in your control with your apps, interview etc, but it’s surprising how much is completely out of your control at the same time, which you don’t fully appreciate until you are on the other side of the committee.

  579. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Both of you are raising interesting points.

    Observer, IMHO while it may be true that a limited number of candidates are garnering virtually all of the interviews, I would be surprised their number would be as small as you claim. Since
    we are operating under the veil of a anonymity, are you willing to name them or at least their research director? For example, I’ve heard on this blog that there were several candidates from the same group who interviewed for the Georgia Tech position…possibly from Washington State U.

  580. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Both of you are raising interesting points.

    Observer, IMHO while it may be true that a limited number of candidates are garnering virtually all of the interviews, I would be surprised their number would be as small as you claim. Since we are operating under the veil of a anonymity, are you willing to name them or at least their research director? For example, I’ve heard on this blog that there were several candidates from the same group who interviewed for the Georgia Tech position…possibly from Washington State U.

  581. crabtree Says:

    Perhaps Harvard should start dispatching violins with their rejection letters. If that’s enough for you to get butthurt, you need to find a new career.

  582. Observer Says:

    @Anonymous (December 22nd, 2015 at 1:09 PM)
    True. I would do the same if I was in your position.

    @Professor Ashley Madison
    Pick a few schools in the top 10, go to their department websites, look at their schedules of seminars. I don’t list names on here.

  583. Anonymous Says:

    Perhaps not even top 10 or top 20. This year most top 50 or even top 100 schools tend to invite the same pool of candidates for on-site interviews. For example, one can easily check it out that the same girls from MIT/Stanford will be interviewed for the organic/biochem track opening or the open-track position at Princeton, UCSD, Georgia Tech, Rice University, all the way down to Notre Dame, etc. No matter what track, it is always that a few candidates book all the interviews for most top-to-okay schools.

  584. Anon Says:

    I’d really caution going down this road of pseudo-naming individuals. These people are looking for jobs after all, and it’s pretty clear that at least some professors (who could be involved in open searches) do look at this blog.

  585. rpv Says:

    It has been reported several times, can we please keep this post factual and move every discussion on the dedicated thread on ChemJobber’s website at ?
    Thank you!

  586. Anonymous Says:

    There is no posting facts posted these days, not for awhile until January.

  587. rpv Says:

    Still, I think there are many people that subscribed to e-mail comments notifications on this post exclusively for facts. No facts = no emails is surely better than receiving tens of e-mails per day for a discussion that they might or might not be interested into (or at least I know I am not).

  588. Anon Says:

    “girls” from MIT/Stanford? Seriously? If you have this attitude, you shouldn’t be training young scientists.

    The strategy of the “top 20” or “top 50” of interviewing “all the same” people seems to be working just fine unless positions are not being filled. Lots of people look great on paper, disappoint at top places, and then earn positions at lower ranked schools. Or they will have personal or geographic preferences to take a job at a department despite having offers at places perceived to be better.

  589. Anonymous Says:

    I must agree with Anon. It is discouraging given the number of applicants and the number of job,s but a bad attitude helps no one.

    I also second the call to keep this thread based on job facts (new jobs, interviews, offers etc). Not trying to upset anyone, I find this thread and everyone on it to be great and helpful; definitely makes the job search better!!

  590. Observer Says:

    @Anon (December 22nd, 2015 at 3:39 PM)
    I absolutely agree to not list names.
    Still, the schools’ schedules of seminars, when posted online, are public information. Search committees also look at other schools’ interviewing schedules as well, and they are very good at that.

    It’ll be fun to watch these schools scrambling for candidates towards the end of the year when it is their turns to get rejection. It is still everybody’s game. Good luck.

  591. anonymous Says:

    Western Washington has made an offer.

  592. TR Says:

    How does it feel to have these “girls from MIT/Stanford” beating you huh?

  593. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    “pretty clear that at least some professors (who could be involved in open searches) do look at this”

    SO WHAT? That is why we are anonymous. This is how shit gets exposed. For example, if it weren’t for anonymous posting, then Harran and the AAAS would never have come into the daylight.

  594. NotoriousBIG Says:

    I met those “girls from MIT/Stanford” and they are amazing not only as scientists but also as human beings. If you look at their track record (not only the school they attended) and hopefully to their proposals (if you are a search committee member) you will realize why they are chosen by most programs to get interviewed. After all, the final decision depends on many more factors than just the ranking of the department so who knows where they end up! Don’t you agree?

  595. anonymous Says:

    Please reserve this thread for factual information related to the current job search and use the connected open thread at Chemjobber for open discussion:

  596. Anonymous Says:

    The system is there, fair or not, not matter how people complain about it. BTW: Can anyone share something useful about chalk talk ? Is it so harsh as thesis defense ? Usually how many slides do you guys prepare ? Does it need to be as detailed as how to do the experiments ?

  597. Kathaarian Says:

    30–40 slides to make sure you leave enough time for questions/interruptions. It depends, it can be harsh. There could be faculty members who might try to unsettle you to see how you react to that. But it could also be pleasant and collegial, I’d say just be prepared for anything. You should probably focus on the big picture stuff, but have experimental details as back-up slides.

  598. Anonymous Says:

    @ Kathaarian

    Thanks a lot ! Appreciate the information.

  599. Ian Tonks Says:

    I would also recommend structuring and pacing the talk in such a way that you get to all of your proposals–it’s easy to get caught up on one idea, but you need to make sure to drive the discussion forward and cover all of your ideas to some degree. You don’t want to leave anything on the table!

  600. Anonymous Says:

    @ Ian Tonks

    That is a good call – many thanks !

  601. Anonymous2 Says:

    Thanks for the tips, Kathaarian and Ian Tonks. If I could ask a little more advice about the chalk talk – I’ve read mixed guidelines for how to structure it. Some say to structure it like an R01 proposal (or 2 or 3) – is that recommended for chemistry? Or is that advice perhaps more relevant to other fields like biology where new assistant professors might be taking projects from their postdocs with them…? For research institutions, do people want to see the chemistry chalk talk structured like a grant proposal(s)? Do they want to see specific aims, timelines, breakdowns of division of labor? (or are those things you should only comment on if asked?)

  602. Employment News in India Says:

    Good information to know and right to the point. Thanks for this well written post, i’ll follow up for more updates if you keep posting them
    Employment News in India

  603. Lyle Langley Says:

    RE: “Chalk Talk”

    Just my humble opinion regarding the “chalk talk” and how I’ve structured mine in the past. I took 3-4 proposal ideas and broke them out into small 5-6 slide short talks. I started with where I thought I would look for funding (specific RFA’s from the NIH, or foundation support, etc.) – I would have this on the title slide – and would include a couple of AIMS as well. Then go through a brief rationale, move on to preliminary data (if i had any) and then move to what I would like to accomplish. I would not only include the science, but also what I thought the students would accomplish, learn from the project. Also, if I have any larger equipment purchases in my start-up request, this would be a good place to say where equipment X would be helpful to have. This format would allow for 10 – 15 mins per project and allowed about 45-60 mins total with questions, etc. I’ve heard people not including the funding suggestions and that would then prompt a question they can quickly answer, but personally, I liked to have that on the slide showing I had already looked into where I thought my research would fit.

    In reality, as a new Professor, 3 – 4 proposals would be ambitious to get off the ground (even just submitting the grants with all the other responsibilities), but it does allow for some breadth in your research and where you could think about spending some of your start-up.

  604. Waiting and Wondering Says:

    Anyone have any jobs news? Probably going to be quiet for awhile…

  605. anon Says:

    CSU Channels Islands has issued an offer to their 1st choice.

  606. Anonymous2 Says:

    @ Lyle Langley

    Thanks!! That is a very helpful description of the chalk talk!

  607. Lyle Langley Says:

    And, I had one place that actually wanted me to give a chalk talk. On a blackboard. I persuaded them to let me use my slides with a white board for questions – which I did not get questions that required a white board.

  608. LTA Says:

    Has anyone heard from Marshall, OK state, Duqusne, WKU?

  609. Kathaarian Says:

    Wisconsin Bioenergy had their Skype interviews about a week ago and recently notified their final candidates.

  610. Starbug Says:

    FIT (Florida Institute of Technology) just sent me a rejection letter (organic).

  611. anony-mouse Says:

    @LTA This was posted previously, but Western Kentucky has already sent out rejections. Not sure if they’ve already conducted campus interviews though.

    Has anyone heard from Columbia? I haven’t seen anything on the blog and nothing listed on the department’s seminar page.

    Also, thanks to the people that posted advice about the Chalk Talk format. Information about the best setup of these proposal defenses is not that easy to come by, so any advice regarding what has worked well (or not worked well) is greatly appreciated.

  612. Waiting Says:

    I haven’t also heard from OK State, Duqusne. I am also waiting to hear from LSU, West Virginia.
    I did get rejection letters from WKU and Marshall. Not sure, why they are “selective” in sending rejection letters to candidates.

  613. Waiting and Wondering Says:


    What do you mean they are being “selective” sending rejections?

  614. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Here’s my current tally with regard to the positions currently under discussion:
    West Virginia U: no response
    Duqusne: no response
    Marshall: “thank you” e-mail arrived a while back
    15 10 21 U Mass Lowell: no response
    West Virginia U: no response
    U South Florida: no response
    Montana State: “thank you”…
    W KYU: “thank you”…
    U of the Sciences: “thank you”…

    there are others, of course but those are the ones currently in discussion.

  615. Anonymous Says:

    I have heard that U south florida has decided and notified their final candidates for on-site. It is the material position

  616. Waiting Says:

    @Waiting and Wondering
    It seems that the search committee’s are not sending rejection letters to everyone who is not shortlisted.
    Few instances:
    i) LTA hasn’t received rejection from WKU or Marshall, I received emails from them a while ago.
    ii) I haven’t received rejection from LSU (Organic). Chem-Chem-Chem mentioned thank you email from LSU on December 1.
    iii) Ashley Madison got rejection from UofSciences. I never did.

  617. Waiting and Wondering Says:


    That makes sense… Do we know that interviews (Skype or otherwise) were scheduled by WKU or could they still be shortlisting (new verb)? I never got a rejection from WKU.

  618. Waiting and Wondering Says:

    Sorry everyone, shortlisting is already a word.

  619. Anonymous Says:


    The fact that you haven’t got a rejection email from LSU or U. Sciences may suggest you are still under their consideration ? You may be either in their shortlist or the waiting list (for back up) ?

  620. Waiting Says:

    Thanks for this suggestion. I was under impression that the waiting list are used for making final offers to candidates who were initially invited for campus visit. The scenario that you mentioned could very well be a case at some schools.
    Someone posted here (on December 4) that UofSciences is scheduling campus visits, so I think I am out of the race there. I am hoping to hear something from LSU and few other remaining schools.

  621. Anonymous Says:


    I have heard from some faculty that in their schools, the faculty search committee will make a short list (eg. 8-10 people), then all the faculty in the department will review the files. Then after discussion, the department makes a final decision later to pick the final four for an onsite. So you may be in the short list now, which could be promising in the end.

  622. Waiting Says:

    Thanks for sharing this information. I hope this is the case !!
    There are a lot of things behind the curtain in academic job search. This blog and all the commentators have been a great help in staying sane during the last few months.

  623. TGIHiringSeason Says:

    USciences already had phone interviews many weeks ago.

  624. no name Says:

    KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken) just sent me a rejection.

  625. Anonymous Says:

    rejection letter Florida Institute of Technology

  626. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    KFC? Do you mean Western KY University? They deep-fried me a while back

  627. Chem Biol Says:

    Are those rejections by email or mail ? Sent in Christmas, huh ?

  628. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Finally, I am becoming a little smarter about the application process. Now, to determine if it makes any sense to invest the time in preparing a faculty application, I determine the pedigrees of a department’s current assistant professors. Here is a list of their most recent employers:
    1. PhD, Yale (2012)
    2. Industry (2014; before that was a postdoc at Yale)
    3. Princeton (2013)
    4. Berkeley (2011; that’s right, they misspelled the name of their postdoctoral university)

    No further comment needed.

  629. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Ops, the misspelling was my error.

  630. Pedigree-Master Says:

    Dude, just stop with this pedigree BS. I think everyone here gets the point.

  631. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    It isn’t BS. I’m making a real decision, because I don’t want to waste my time. Others may also wish to follow suite.

    -The Dude

  632. Hypocrite Says:

    I’m pretty sure that chem unjobber/PAM went to scripps for grad school and worked for MG Finn… so this whole thing is extra hilarious. Whatever it takes to justify the cognitive dissonance of “I think highly of myself” vs “No one wants to give me a job,” amirite? This is definitely a pedigree problem and not a you problem. I love this thread.

  633. ex-hu Says:

    @PAM/unjobber, where did you go to grad school/postdoc? or perhaps just share approximate rankings if this is really a pedigree problem-

  634. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Hmm. I will claim that own my own pedigree (or biography) is weird enough to not fit onto the ranking scale which you refer to. Explaining it would likely compromise my identity. Several people on the CJ blog know some of it. In retrospect, Hindsight is 20/20.

    It is nevertheless difficult to resist the temptation to conclude cover letters with something like “I hope that you can appreciate working with someone who “thinks outside of the box” “. Doing so would imply the inability of their search committees to think beyond their tribal inclinations. Another euphemism for autofellatio.

    My advice to my former undergrads who wish to become professors follows. In choosing a grad school, they should take advantage of the fact that current faculty can’t resist posting their …..backgrounds… on their own websites. Therefore, they need to do their doctoral theses with the same department as those faculty members. If the faculty search doesn’t work out, then I should stay alive by writing a book titled “So You Want to Become a Professor?”. It would be a hit among the aspiring and optimistic undergrads. Etc.

    By the way, the CAPTCHA Code for this comment reads “7DUH”. I kid you not.

  635. Anonymous Says:

    In his case, it’s not a pedigree problem. It’s a personality problem: (a) “autofellatio” about his own “cutting edge” research, (b) posting unprofessional messages about Chinese women’s looks as Generic Chemist on the ChemJobber open thread and choosing the handle “Professor Ashley Madison” (which I don’t even understand in the first place), (c) ascribing lower tier status to J Chem Ed and to certain PUIs, especially when they don’t have a lot of specific resources or the ability to publish a lot, (d) cyberbullying faculty members (who are otherwise being helpful) for posting their pedigree tree on their own website, (e) repeatedly hijacking this comment thread to go on a crusade about the inequalities of the academic hiring process while (f) having the gall to scold “non-exhu” for going off topic, and (g) having an overall negative, pessimistic, and confrontational attitude.

    Honestly, “Chem Unjobber”, you’re making all us applicants look like a bunch of whiny children (or the stereotypical entitled millennial), which has been picked up on and discussed by faculty members who are reading this blog. I’d almost rather you didn’t get a job in academia. I’m not sure you’re the kind of person I’d want training and overseeing future scientists. There’s more applicants than jobs out there, and I’d rather someone a little bit nicer and professional get the opportunity. It doesn’t even have to be me…

  636. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Dear December 25th, 2015 at 2:08 AM,

    You’re making some pretty wild accusations there, yourself. “Cutting edge research”? Huh? Since when did I ever say that? Actually, too you’re 100% wrong about my abilities to mentor students, as numerous recommendation letters from students in my classes will testify to.

    As I already pointed out, (a) I can’t reveal my professional background because it’s pretty unique and (b) I take full responsibility for the choices which I made earlier on in my career, even though, in retrospect, they were not conducive to finding a position under the circumstances which now predominate in the US. Please re-read what I wrote. I can also take a few minutes to explain the irony behind the choice of the name Professor Ashley Madison, or you can just google it.

    One thing I don’t do on the internet is slander people. The fact that you are willing to do so, says something about your own personality.

  637. Anonymous Says:

    Merry Christmas Dear All, wish you all good luck for the next year !!!

  638. walter Says:

    Merry Christmas, people!

  639. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    I wish us all lots of strength for the new year (honestly) !

  640. Anons Says:

    USC (Theory) has schedules on sites. No rejection letters sent.

  641. Anon Says:

    Utah Biochem (Chem Bio search) has sent out all on-site interview invitations. Two visited already.

  642. Hopeful-Chemist Says:

    Has Texas Tech made an offer to any of the first round of interviewed candidates or moving to second round of interviews? Is it time to expect second round of interview calls!

  643. Anonymous Says:

    I got a rejection letter by IUPUI (Indiana Univ Purdue Univ Indianapolis)

  644. Pins'n'needles Says:

    Anyone heard if about any offers made North Carolina State University (NCSU) for either position?

  645. Anon Says:

    I received a rejection letter for Colorado State University. They mentioned that 300 people applied for the position.

  646. NoInterviewsYet Says:

    I just got a rejection letter from Colo State as well – it was very polite and respectful.

  647. Anonymous Says:

    me too from CSM

  648. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi chembark, what’s the problem? I’m just being a scientist in using some data to decide where I will invest the time to prepare another academic job application. You can of course also erase this comment, as well.

  649. Colmere Says:

    A graduate student friend there told me NCSU was apparently still interviewing (Organic) the week of 12/14, so my guess is not yet. I didn’t ask about the Analytical position though, so I can only comment about the Organic.

  650. Waiting Says:

    Colorado State University was reported to schedule interviews back on Nov 15. I have not received the rejection letter yet. What does that mean?

  651. Anon Says:

    I think NCSU Analytical has determined their preferred candidate. No idea if an offer has been made or accepted.

  652. Anon Says:

    University of Louisville has made an offer.

  653. CareerPostdoc Says:

    Ones anyone know when the list of hires this year will be updated? I assume some of the offers have been accepted.
    Just curious.

  654. dude Says:

    Columbia posted interviews

  655. chem-chem-chem Says:

    Any advice on the second academic visit and what things to look/ask for?

  656. JobSeekingChemist Says:


    The “get a job ken!” and professor is in blogs are good resources.

  657. blarghoblag Says:

    I never recieved an email from Harvard either. I don’t know if its fields specific (Pchem here), or just that they are getting around to them as needed (or my email is wrong :) )

    best of luck all

  658. Anon Says:


    I am inorganic and have not reviewed notification either. My best guess is that we are probably on standby if there need a second round.

  659. Anon Says:

    Gah iPhone autocorrect makes me sound retarded.

  660. ex-hu Says:

    @anons, no, you are not on standby at harvard. they interview a couple a year in any given area. if you don’t know that you are one of these people in your field, then you are not someone they will be interviewing.

  661. Anonymous Says:

    Rejection from College of Saint Rose.

    Anyone else get any updates?

  662. Jerry Says:

    Did anyone know whether University of Louisville has made any decision or not?

  663. Anonymous Says:


    Anon Says:
    December 29th, 2015 at 6:33 PM
    University of Louisville has made an offer.

  664. Jerry Says:

    Did anyone know whether University of Louisville has made any final written offer or not?

  665. Anonymous Says:

    Did anyone know whether san Diego state university has made an offer yet?

  666. Yen Says:

    Official offer from SDU is made

  667. Anonymous Says:

    Does SDU mean San Diego State University?

  668. Yen Says:


  669. G. Whitesides Says:

    I’m really excited to announce that I have received an offer from the University of Phoenix, online! Good luck everyone!

  670. Chem Unjobber Says:

    The University of Phoenix? Uhhh……

  671. Anonymous Says:

    congratulations !

  672. Anonymous Says:

    The search committee of Bucknell University have made their selection for the position (materials Chemistry) and have brought the search to a conclusion..

  673. JayBee Says:

    So what’s happening with Louisiana State? Have they not scheduled interviews yet? Also, does anybody know whether Kansas State has given an offer already?

  674. LTA Says:

    Opening at Duquesne University, could be a reposting

  675. Anonymous Says:

    Are we going to get an update to the list soon? Seems like a lot has happened

  676. Anonymous Says:

    Rockefeller just sent rejection letters by email

  677. VeryThankful Says:

    Wilkes University and Austin Peay are both doing phone interviews next week.

  678. Waiting Says:

    @LTA and others
    Can somebody comment on whether the reposting of Duquesne position could be because they didn’t find good applications after their earlier posting or ii) that there might be problem in budgetary approvals?
    I didn’t receive any response to my earlier application to Duquesne and nor did anyone else (at least on this blog).

  679. Mike Says:

    West Virginia is interviewing candidates now…

  680. Waiting Says:

    Can you please clarify:
    i) Analytical or organic?
    ii) Are they scheduling phone or onsite interviews?

    Many thanks!

  681. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Thanks for putting the Duquesne position into perspective. Since I, too have not heard back from them, I had assumed the worst.

  682. Anonymous Says:

    University of Florida is doing on-site interviewing for the positions in Medicinal Chemistry.

  683. LTA Says:

    @ Waiting

    Even I am waiting to hear from Duquesne and today saw this posting. Thought of sharing on the blog to get everyone’s opinion.

  684. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Hi LTA,

    It’s hard to say whether the new advert from Duquesne is a real reposting, or just an internet ghost. There are a few such posting still floating around the internet from last year. The best way to get to the bottom of the matter would be to give them a call.

  685. Anonymous Says:

    The Duquesne University posting on C&EN has a submission date is Feb. 15.

  686. Mike Says:

    They are doing on-site interview for organic position

  687. anonymous Says:

    Anyone heard from UCF or UNT? Did they schedule on-site interviews?

  688. Anonym Says:

    How about Texas Tech?

  689. Waiting Says:

    Thanks for this info.
    Texas Tech has already conducted on-site interviews. See their webpage.

  690. Anonymous Says:

    Has anyone heard from Georgetown Univ (synthetic macromolecular position)?

  691. NMH Says:

    Read the first story of the front page about the history PhD trying to find an academic position. And you think we have it bad:

  692. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Wow. But the guy certainly has a skill for putting his thoughts to paper. He should try to get it published in a literary magazine, and perhaps earn a little bit of money that way.

    Myself, if Bernie Sanders is elected, then I will offer to be his Science Minister. Just like his response to the question if Wall Street would like him (‘no”) I will ask if the university faculty who depend on exploitation for their personal career will like me, I will say “no” as well.

    Back to my favorite Palo Alto bar….

  693. Ex-hu Says:

    Yet another fascinating comment from Chem-unjobber…any news on offers from Stanford (for those doing other things in Palo Alto)?

  694. Anonymous Says:

    So it seems like Stanford Chem is in the middle of interviewing still, so probably doubt they made an offer:

    Anyone know about ChEM-H? They haven’t updated any kind of interview schedule like last year..

  695. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Actually, Ex-hu, I mostly spend my time in Palo Alto writing a bona-fide, NSF-style research proposal, for whoever will look at it. In the UK, I won major money, had a track record of being P.I. on my own publications, and running my own research group. So I really do know what I’m talking about, even though I didn’t work at Harvard or Stanford.

  696. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    U Arkansas appears to be interviewing, as judged from their website’s front page.

  697. crabtree Says:

    @Chem Unjobber/Generic Chemist – you worked at Exeter, right?

  698. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Chem Unjobber/Generic Chemist – you worked at Exeter, right?

    No, but I worked with people there. After Exeter and then King’s College got axed, then it was pretty clear that my department’s not having already been closed was a minor oversight….at that time, there were a lot of academic “staff” in the water all over the UK. Other faculty from other places who I met at RSC conferences also warned me to already put on a life vest, if you see what I mean. Having an active EPSRC grant and an independent track record didn’t matter.

    For the record, my department killed itself. I got my job after the conclusion of a civil war, which chased off the defeated (i.e. the organic chemists; they wanted me for my publication record, since they had none to speak of, and had to submit for the RAE…). Being an optimistic “chap” ops I mean “Yank”, I tried to start a collaboration with a REALLY big pharmaceutical company. So there was a meeting between two nationally prominent chemists from said company, myself and the choleric HOD (that means Head of Department). During that meeting, the HOD got to his feet, turned red in the face and screamed at the top of his lungs “Forget about organic chemistry at [name of my university]!!”. During the following staff meeting, I related the incident to my colleagues. The HOD said “you’re taking that out of context”. Please reach your own conclusions after that.

    That being said, post-traumatic stress syndrome from the UK academic world is a real thing.

  699. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Where are the trolls, goblins and hobgoblins?

  700. hypocrite Says:

    If you’re looking for them, look in the mirror.

    Stop wasting everyone’s time with your egocentric rants.

    (although, it is reassuring/nice when you get rejected from jobs–keep posting those!)

  701. Anonymous Says:

    ChemUnjobber: “ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!?!”

    Everyone: “we aren’t”

  702. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Anonymous Says: January 11th, 2016 at 10:48 PM and “hypocrite” you are both wimps. Can’t you do anything else but try to attack others? But you aren’t even trolls….just goblins at best.

  703. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Dear Trolls,

    I have given your words and your attitudes some further thought. There are many things which can be said about them, but for the minute, I will limit my response to what I believe to be the most salient.

    Your inability to read, understand and empathize with others, combined with your derogatory attitudes leads me to question how you would treat your co-workers, assuming that you succeed in finding long-term academic positions, in the first place.

    For now, I will finish by pointing out that my real name is well-known to other readers of this blog, and the CJ blog (for example, CJ and I know each others identities, but of course do not disclose them). What about you two?

    Like I previously alluded to, I still have plenty of ammunition. Or you can scurry back into your holes. So, go ahead and respond to this. Make my day.


  704. Ex-hu Says:

    If you are pretending that the fact your identity is “well known to those on this blog” gives you some sort of moral high ground, then why not cement it and just state your identity again? Otherwise,
    Go do something useful and stop trolling this blog, which is supposed to be providing useful info to those in the job search. Just because you are bored and disenfranchised does not mean everyone else is.

  705. A Says:

    Has anyone heard from Boston University?

  706. sososo Says:

    So, Binyomin Abrams leaving BU – where to?

  707. sososo Says:

    Sorry, I would delete that above comment if I could. Just looked into it and I found no evidence of him leaving, bad intel.

  708. Angela Merkel Says:

    This entire thread is like a dick showing contest for people with micropenises. Or a competition to see who is the tallest midget or smartest retard.

    You know how you know if you are doing well or you are going to get an interview? You get one. Sure the deck is stacked towards people with the right pedigrees and/or that went to Harvard, MIT, Berkeley, etc., but honestly, isnt the chance to succeed for these people and then the university that employs them higher than to go with the rando from somewhere else? Its a fucked up system and a fucked up game, but if you play the percentages, I would imagine the interviews that are handed out and the jobs that are earned are in the best interest of the university and as fair as you can possibly make it given the shitshow that is today’s job market.

  709. StayCalm Says:

    Dear Chem Unjobber/Ashley Madison/Angela Merkel/other names you have used on here:

    I am saying this with the best intention and friendliest tone. In life, in whatever you do, although being persevere is a good thing, you have to set a time frame and a breaking point. This time frame and this breaking point is your own thing. Passing this breaking point is when you say, “being persevere is now no longer a good thing, it’s not worth it, time to walk away.” If you don’t set this breaking point, you will spiral into depression and bitterness, and you will not get out. Complaining about how difficult your life/situation and unfair job process may get sympathy/agreement from others (who also face their own difficult situations) the first time, the second time, and the third time, but after that it gets old and nobody cares about you anymore (see, it passes their breaking points on this subject).

    I wish you the best and remember to set your breaking point.

  710. NoChicago Says:

    I received a physical letter of rejection from U. Chicago yesterday.

  711. Lyle Langley Says:

    Well, this has turned into a really helpful comments thread. Really nice job.

  712. LTA Says:

    Any updates guys?

    Texas Tech has published opening for Research Assistant Professor positions.

  713. it's fine Says:

    Guys, it’s fine if you are anxious or bitter. I suspect lots of academics have OCD, or else they wouldn’t have made it this far. It will all pass eventually. Good luck! Thanks for this thread – very helpful!

  714. Anonymous Says:

    This is a pretty useful post, and one that mirrors what happens in Chemistry departments too.

  715. dude Says:

    There is also the Bertozzi perspective on “hunting season” in ACS central science. I love “collective angst”

  716. JayBee Says:

    For the past half a year I was calmly abstaining from pointless tangents in this thread, trying to focus only on the crucial interview/rejection info. Bertozzi’s article finally got me. Her perspective is a joy to read, and she is really good at convincing her readers. But one thing is consistently disregarded in all of these inspiring perspectives: the very basic hierarchy of human needs, best known as Maslow’s pyramid. Bertozzi is talking about people satisfied at the self-actualization level, the very top of the pyramid. Not having a job in the future threatens you at the safety level, which is the second level from the bottom. There idealized motivational speeches deny the most fundamental understanding of how people work.

  717. Anon Says:

    University of Georgia physical/analytical finished interviews

  718. no name Says:

    Just received three emails from Rice asking me to fill out some surveys about my veteran and disability status. Any ideas what that means? Did they finally decide on a candidate?

  719. JayBee Says:

    I have a question for those hiring committee members, that make it into this thread every once in a while. In general, how often are second- and third-round interviews scheduled? Is it a more general phenomenon, or do only departments that desperately need to hire someone do it?

  720. Anon Says:

    >no name
    Chill, maybe they’re just curious to know whether you’re a disabled veteran :) Don’t read too much into that.

  721. Anon Says:

    No name: Many schools do this to keep track of diversity-related issues. I would not read too much into the timing.

    JayBee: I think second round interviews are pretty typical. As discussed at length above, many schools are targeting the same limited number of candidates in the first round of interviews, so many schools are left without a viable candidate after the first round of interviews. As a result, at the R1 where I work we often bring in 1 or 2 people that just missed the original cut after we’ve been rejected by our first round choice.

  722. Anon Says:

    Never. Failed searches happen and are fine.
    This is from a top-ten R1.

  723. Starbug Says:

    I received a rejection email from Louisville today.

  724. Anonymous Says:

    ditto Anon: never seen 2nd round. (R1)

  725. Chemically yours Says:

    I also received the rejection email from Louisville.
    It seems that the search committee made an offer to a female candidate (their first choice). She declined the offer!
    They are finally hiring their second choice.

  726. Anonymous Says:

    Spellman Cillege is hiring now:;

  727. HandsomeDan Says:

    I was notified that Yale Chemistry decided for a senior hire instead of a junior faculty hire this year.

  728. chem123 Says:

    UC Merced has started on-site interviews for both positions

  729. @#$ Says:

    U Central Oklahoma cancelled their search.

  730. Anonymous Says:

    UC Merced and other schools do not show their interviewees on their seminar schedule. I wonder why dome schools are so secretive about whom they interview for faculty position? From what I see top schools MIT/Harvard/Yale etc always show their list of candidates while smaller schools tend to be more secretive as if they are ashamed of whom they are bringing :/

  731. Anonymous Says:

    More likely, they just don’t have a good webmaster like some of the bigger/top schools…

  732. hypocrite Says:

    I agree with anon @ 2:16. I don’t think you want to read too much in to whether or not schools post seminar schedules, send out rejection letters, etc etc. In a lot of cases, schools are lacking the resources or administrative assistance to keep up with all of these sorts of things. You’d think that “why not just hire an undergrad CS major to take care of it?” would be a solution, but of all the places I’ve been… that’s never worked as a viable solution lol

  733. aNoN Says:

    To be fair to the candidates, it is a kind move from Universities not to post those seminars. As an example why — the comments in this blog are notorious for ripping apart the CVs of women and minorities who are amongst those candidates.

  734. $%#%$# Says:


    From what I’ve seen the women and minorities’ CVs are mostly super-strong.

    I’d argue for the opposite if u know what I mean.

  735. ex-hu Says:

    i think this blog just rips on those that rise to the top and get the top interviews – mainly because they are the most visible and due to jealousy, that most basic human response to other doing well. nothing to do with the women/minority cvs being stronger.

  736. UPenn Says:

    UPenn starts interviewing candidates for the materials position.

    Good luck to my competitors
    May the best of us win!

  737. Anonymous Says:

    “May the odds be ever in your favor…”

  738. Anonymous Says:

    Received a ‘best of luck’ letter from UConn.

  739. californication Says:

    California State U Fullerton (Theoretical Physical) is scheduling onsite interviews.

  740. Anonymous Says:

    @ Anonymous:
    January 19th, 2016 at 11:40 AM
    Received a ‘best of luck’ letter from UConn.

    Did you participate in any phone/skype interview from UConn? It was reported on this blog earlier that UConn was conducting remote interviews.

  741. Anon Says:

    UConn has been interviewing on-site

  742. chemb Says:

    UCONN had Skype interviews prior to setting on-site interviews

  743. Anon Says:

    University of Rhode Island posted a second set of interviews on their website

  744. Anonymous Says:

    Any news about Univ North Texas?

  745. Anonymous Says:

    UNT has requested startup budget info from their short list.

  746. Anonymous Says:

    Does anyone know how the process typically works at this point in the game? Is getting asked for startup budget info necessarily a good sign? or is it just the natural progression?

  747. Anon Says:

    I think a request for startup funds typically means you are at least on the short-list.

  748. Anon Says:

    Anyone received an offer already?

  749. Loop Says:

    I am pretty sure many people have received offers..I have received one. However, I don’t think it will be wise or productive in any case to state which schools have made offers.

  750. Anonymous Says:

    I received two offers, and all other schools where I interviewed have made offers and secured their next faculty member.

  751. Anonymous Says:

    @ Anonymous January 22nd, 2016 at 11:00 AM

    Have you accepted one of the two offers? I just wonder if there are people just sitting on offers at the moment waiting to see if something better comes along?

  752. Anonymous Says:

    @ Anonymous January 22nd, 2016 at 11:00 AM

    Which division do you belong to? Organic, Inorganic, Materials, or Biochem? Thank you!

  753. Anonymous Says:

    Harvard (Chemistry) sent out another batch of rejection letters. The letter says they reviewed 180 applications.

  754. Redacted Says:

    I received a rejection letter via snail mail from Vanderbuilt.

  755. Anonymous Says:

    Minnesota made their offer.

  756. U_of_T_person Says:

    Wondering if U of Toronto made their offer ….

  757. Anonymous Says:

    I would caution speaking in absolutes (unless you are intimately involved) regarding offers. Some schools can and will make multiple offers from a single search.

  758. StayCalm Says:

    Does anyone who has gone to interviews have any advice or experience to share? Thanks.

  759. Chem1a-intro Says:

    Is there a dress code for second visits?

  760. Chem1a-intro Says:

    During visits, i suggest that you remain higly energetic and enthusiastic! Take advantage of bathroom…i went almost 8 times since it is the only time you can be alone and reenergize. Have a set of questions and its ok to ask the same questions to different faculty. Lastly, make sure you emphasize your strengths and background relevant to the position…DO NOT assume the faculty read your proposals in detail or your CV!! Best of luck!

  761. Anon Says:

    Does anybody know if Texas Tech has made any offers?

  762. @#$ Says:

    I agree with Chem1a-intro; I think one should assume they they read your application materials and have completely forgotten about it.

  763. Anonymous Says:

    I am rejected by Univ Mississippi biochem

  764. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Actually, I am not Angela Merkel (that’s really not very imaginative). I don’t know who is using that pseudonym. I haven’t been posting anything here for a while, because it has become a waste of time. Rather, since money will become tight in a while, I’ve been concentrating on other employment possibilities.

    Ironically, my own son is getting the equivalent of straight As in Chemistry, which quite difficult to do where he lives. While I have congratulated him on his achievements, and have told him that some knowledge of Chemistry is useful, that he should not major in this when it’s time for university. I think he gets the idea.

  765. StayCalm Says:

    @Ashley Madison
    Wish you best on other employment possibilities.
    Getting straight As doesn’t mean much: 1) it depends on what school he is getting straight As in, 2) it doesn’t translate to being a good chemist.

  766. StayCalm Says:

    Robert Woodward: “Another story is that his grades dropped so far that he lost a scholarship and had to go to work.”

  767. Angela Merkel Says:

    I am the Chancellor of Germany

  768. Chemperor Says:

    This might not be the best venue for this question, but here goes. I’ve received offers from a couple of the schools listed above, and I’m wondering if anyone has insight into typical startup funds.

    Here’s a general description of the school that I’m most interested in:

    – Midwestern regional public university (~20-30k students)
    – Non-PhD granting in Chemistry, but very active in BS and MS research. PhD’s are granted in several other STEM departments, so the school doesn’t qualify as PUI according to NSF
    – About 20 faculty members (about 10 active in research and the rest focused on excellence in teaching)

    Any ballpark ideas on a range of fair startup packages to expect at such a place? I know these things are touchy, but I’m just looking for some transparency through anonymity.

  769. Professor Ashley Madison Says:

    Hi Chemperor (that’s a good handle),

    The university which you describe sounds like the same one which has not yet bumped me.

    You may find my answer to your question to be frustrating: “subject to negotiation”. There are a number of factors which might sway the factors feed into your negotiation position; I won’t go into them.

  770. hypocrite Says:

    Thank you for another insightful and terribly self-centered response, Chem Unjobber.

    Chemperor: it’s my understanding that at this level, start up can vary *greatly,* from the $50k-$250k+ level, and it’s going to be very field-dependent! A good resource to look in to on this may be, and seeing if you can connect with anyone on there (maybe some of them also read chembark?). While it’s primarily a teaching website, many of the users are actively engaged at PUI-type institutions and might be able to provide some useful feedback.

    I would also advise you to take a hard look at what you want your program to look like–what’s the equipment you can’t live without? what equipment is available in the department? how much do students cost, and is any of this defrayed through university scholarships, etc? These latter 2 questions are good to ask the chair of the department before you submit a proposed budget. Plan for 4 years of funding your lab entirely off of startup.

    It’s also unlikely that a school would rescind an offer because you asked for too much (unless you’re being a total jerk about it). Don’t be afraid of floating a number to see what happens. Worst thing is they say no! If you have only a single offer you have little leverage; public schools also often don’t have a lot of flexibility in start up packages compared to private schools. Don’t take it personally you’re getting a hard line from the chair–keep in mind that they *want* you to succeed too, and you providing them with additional info allows them to go back to the college to try and get more money for you and the dept.

  771. Anonymous Says:

    I would suggest (as said above) it doesn’t hurt to ask politely. You only get 1 chance to ask in a startup. Dont forget about things the might not cost the department literal $ (although there is an associated cost with everything). I’m talking about things like NMR time, MS time,university computer time, or IT support, extra computer allowances (some universities have not insignificant outlays for CPUs) promises that you can submit for MRI grants. Lab space, and rennovations too. Sometimes if there is another young faculty member it might be good to ask then if they feel like there are any shared resources that you could ask for to lift everyone up, that is usually pretty good.

    Think creatively. AND – congrats on getting an offer! It is nice to see someone do something other than troll here.

  772. GC Says:

    My policy is to ignore attempted slags, etc., because I don’t have the time to deal with it. Chemperor, it wasn’t clear if you did get an offer. Was that the case?


  773. anon Says:


    My university (very similar to the one you describe) gives >150k to all new hires, but we can go up to 200k if instrumentation needs warrant the extra bump.

    I think people often forget that this is a negotiation. First, I’d just ask the chair what the typical startup is, so you’ll know a ballpark figure (that number should be the baseline). For the schools I was strongly considering when I was interviewing, I prepared a formal reply to their offer that included an itemized budget of startup funds (including personnel, instrumentation, consumables, etc.) with the total amount exceeding the baseline number I got from the chair. I also included (1) ~$5k higher yearly salary, (2) 2 months of summer salary for the first 2 years (because you aren’t applying for grants automatically) and (3) an agreement that any renovations to my lab space be done prior to my start date as well as paid for by the college (not from my startup). No Dean is ever going to just say “hell yeah, no problem!!!”, but you’d be surprised by how much they’ll move their original figures. In many cases, the Deans are negotiating with candidates from other disciplines where startup funds and salaries are much high than chemistry, so throwing a chemistry person a bit more (like an extra $2k in salary OR $10k startup OR a month of summer salary in your 1st year) isn’t really a big deal when factoring in the entire college budget.

    Obviously, you don’t want to make thing contentious (i.e., dig your heels in on a particular set of figures). In general though, people are pretty reasonable, and once they make you an initial offer, you have a lot of leverage.

  774. Chemperor Says:

    Thanks for the helpful feedback. In this case, I received a provisional verbal offer over the phone describing the salary and startup. The startup numbers are consistent with the range given by anon (8:17 pm). This was good to hear, because one always hears of such extreme examples of startups ($25K to $1MM) that it’s difficult to judge the attractiveness of the offer. Like many public schools, I’m sure the chair had to burn a lot of political capital to secure the resources that she was able to secure. A few of the schools that I’ve interviewed with –including the subject of this post– requested budget drafts in advance of the on-site interview and a review of the budget proposal was part of the research proposal seminar.

    I haven’t seen anything in writing yet, so I’m not sure about the disposition of “soft support” such as discounted instrument time, department-supported students, teaching load, tenure clock extensions, etc. I also haven’t had a discussion on summer salary. To be completely honest, summer salary is not as important to me as lab funding, as I tend to look at this through the lens of a startup CEO.

    I’m hoping that a formal written offer comes with an invitation to visit the campus again. Nothing beats face to face meetings to facilitate negotiations and compromise. With any luck, some of this will get cleared up in the coming week or two.

  775. Anonymous Says:

    Summer support is smart, pretty soon mortgages, car payments, everything else catches you. The added stress of being broke will detract from getting work done. Face to face is great, but get things in writing!! Chairs, deans change. People and your perspective will change also as you get to understand how your particular dept functions (or doesnt).

  776. Anon Says:

    Chemperor and others: Many of you are coming out of lower paying postdocs, such that summer salary might not seem important. But it is very common for a research university to cover that for your first two years, and you should absolutely ask for it and then take it. You will be working long hours to easily earn that money. You will be glad that you did, as you are in a period of your life in which your expenses are also likely to increase significantly (if not now, soon).

  777. public school out west Says:

    The public school that gave me an offer was not able to add more than the initial amount because of monetary constraints. I also asked for teaching relief and discounted/free spectroscopy time, but they were unable to accommodate those requests. However, there was a ~$30K instrument that I needed for my research that I realized would probably be useful to other faculty. So I asked if the department if they could purchase it for the spectroscopy facility for general departmental use. This was pretty much the only thing that I was able to “add” to my initial offer, but it was nice because it saved me money from my start up. Having it in the facility also ended up to be a good way to go; although I pay to use the instrument, it is maintained by the staff and they purchase all of replacement parts and supplies needed to keep it running.

  778. Anonymouse Says:

    @ Chemperor

    Opinions differ as to whether you should use startup $$ for summer salary. In fact, some schools require approval from the dean to release startup dollars for PI summer support. I’ve heard compelling arguments both ways (see anon’s comments), but at the end of the day it depends on your situation. Personally, I didn’t use startup funds for summer salary because I wanted to ensure that I had the critical mass of equipment and students to get external funding in as short a time period as possible. When the first grant came in, it gave me a nice raise. On the other hand, folks in the department who burned through their startups taking summer salary often had to take a pay cut in the third year when grants got sidelined. In your case, the cost of living in the midwest might be low enough to survive on a $60-$70k 9month salary (just guessing at the exact figure, correct me if I’m wrong). In other areas, you might need to draw summer support to survive.

  779. leave-a-reply-1 Says:

    For those that HAVE gone through a negotiation process WITHOUT competing offers: What was your experience on negotiating salary?

  780. AsstProfTop10 Says:

    Hi all,
    Assistant prof at a top-10 school here. A few things I’ve heard and/or experienced about negotiating salary.

    1) You are always better off framing the discussion as “This is what I need to perform the research that you are hiring me to do”, not “this is what will make this a better offer than another school”. Often you aren’t trying to convince the dept chair, you are trying to give them ammunition to convince the dean. If you really need enough money to buy X or the research program won’t work, it’s foolish of them to not give you that money. There is nothing more expensive (both in money and opportunity cost) to a department than a prof who doesn’t get tenure.

    1a) Framing it in that way makes it clear that this is just greedy haggling, it’s you wanting to come to that school and do good science.

    1b) In theory this also gives you a better negotiating position even if you don’t have other offers. I luckily had more than one so I wasn’t too terrified to make a stand with one school that they just weren’t giving me a startup package that was workable, even though I liked the school. Don’t know if I would have had the guts to do this if not.

    2) At every different place, different things are negotiable. My school publishes salaries, so the base salary wasn’t negotiable (or else it would cause unrest in the department that different profs hired the same year had different starting salaries). However, they could give me an additional year of summer salary, listed as “in case I don’t have full grant funding by year X”. There was also some issue of them not being able to give me a startup package higher than X, but they could give me a credit for instrument time and an additional TA line, since that comes out of a different pot.

    3) You definitely need to get everything in writing – by year 4 you will have a new chair, and the old chair will have forgotten he/she promised you that you would inherit some emeritus prof’s HPLC. Especially be sure to get any lab renovation requirements in writing, with as much detail as possible.

    4) Pay attention to how much things, especially students, cost. At a midwestern state school, you might only pay a grad student $25K from your startup funds (they tend to not charge tuition when you are paying from startup funds). At a coastal private school, you might be paying $75K per student even from your startup.

    5) Remember that this negotiation is business. This is momentous for you, but the school has done exactly this same negotiation for many people before you, and will do it again for many people after you. As long as you are reasonable (i.e. you know that the standard package is X and you aren’t asking for 2X), everyone will understand the choices you make and won’t hold it against you (I loved the profs at one of the schools I turned down and was worried I’d make them sad. I guarantee they’ve moved on)

    6) Talk to the other assistant profs at the school. They just did their own negotiations, and you can ask them what they asked for. As long as you don’t ask for actual numbers (which might seem nosy), they will tell you a lot (I didn’t think to ask for discounted instrument time till one of them said she had done so)

    Good luck!

  781. update Says:

    Any updates on offers/acceptances?

  782. Anonymous Says:

    Can the same person accept two offers and choose to go for the best school? Is it possible legally?

  783. Sisyphus Says:

    Oh the agony and ecstasy of it all. Don’t worry ladies and gentlemen this
    too shall pass and after all , persevering through countless failures necessarily
    accompanies the quest to attaining the highest level of achievement as both a scientist and as a human being

  784. Anon Says:


    This is exactly why the University should cover your summer salary separate from the startup accounts, so that it is not a choice between paying yourself a fair wage and the student costs. Working an assistant professor job at 70-80K unnecessarily is for the birds, particularly if you are thinking about buying a house and/or starting a family. If those things or other expense are on the horizon, do NOT shortchange yourself. You will be easily earning it by any rational standard. Much better to pay yourself in year 1-2, even if you have to take some sort of cut later if your fundraising does not pick up by year 3.

  785. Anonymous Says:

    So nice to see constructive comments and suggestions here, and one that are quite relevant to starting out. Makes wading through all of the mudslinging from earlier commenters worth it!

  786. HandsomeDan Says:

    @Anonymous 2/2 7:03pm- That would not be possible legally, but I have recently been learning that top 10 schools in general do not make a second offer if their first one is turned down. So that means if someone is hypothetically gets an offer at Yale, Caltech, and Stanford, if they pick one school the other two will usually just not hire anyone that year. Crazy right? So that means that not only are we competing for the top schools, we are really competing for the #1 choice because schools have no qualms about not hiring for a year. Yikes!

  787. Anonymous Says:

    Updates on things not yet reported:
    Rejection from Susquehanna
    Phone interview at U Minnesota, Morris

  788. Anonymous Says:

    Does anybody know the state of hiring in the top 10-20 R1 institutions…Looks like some of our colleagues got offers and do not want to disclose these info. I just want to situate myself…and see if I should stop being optimistic. For instance, I am loosing hope and getting ready for next year.

    Anybody else in similar situation?

  789. Anonymous Says:

    If you’re aiming at nothing but top 50, it’s possible nothing more is gonna happen if there hasn’t already been a campus visit. At this time most of the notifications I got are from PUIs or small doctorate department. Good luck!

  790. Anonymous Says:

    @HandsomeDan has a point I think – someone previously mentioned that top 50-100 schools compete for the same pool of candidates as top 10. Some departments have empty labs even empty buildings (a bit extreme) – that’s fine.

  791. Anonymous Says:

    Montana State filled the inorganic position with Nick Stadie. Any news on their organic Search?

  792. CareerPostdoc Says:

    IU made a hire

  793. Desperate Says:

    Anyone who only has gotten a couple of rejections and no interviews whatsoever?

  794. Anonymous Says:

    not a single rejection, and not a single interview, may as well have not applied!

  795. Anonymous Says:

    A lot of schools run the same search year after year looking for the right person. Also, if the department invests a lot of time in hiring their top choice, if the second choice was really good, chances are they will be hired by someone else by the time the first choice has decided. And it is really common to interview 5-6 people and only have 1-2 of them deemed a good fit (and often one has to get a strong majority of the entire department to agree). Unfortunately for the people applying, departments play the long game, there isnt the ticking bomb that applicants feel.

  796. Anon Says:

    I am in possession of an offer, but I still have one more interview two weeks from now. My current offer is not final (still negotiating) and they have not yet given me a firm deadline by which I must decide.

    What is the best way to convey to the offering department that I do not want to decide before my next interview plays out?

    My next interview is with an institution that would likely offer a better startup/salary, lower teaching load, and is closer to family. So it might be preferable if they were to offer.

  797. computer-rocks Says:

    If you have an offer and still negotiating I will continue negotiating BUT tell them a soon as possible that you already had a prior commitment with other schools. No need to tell them which one but just be frank with them. I will make sure that you are very enthusiastic about the current offer though.

  798. INO Says:

    Anon @ 2:04 PM

    Are you an inorganic candidate?

  799. JohnDoe Says:

    I am a science candidate.

  800. JayBee Says:

    Does anyone know what is happening at Louisiana State? Any interviews scheduled there?

  801. LTA Says:

    Any updates from WKU? Any interviews? Offers?

  802. Anonymous Says:

    I do not think LSU have scheduled any interview officially, but they do have a candidate already.

  803. LTA Says:

    WKU sent me an official rejection 2 minutes ago. Looks someone at WKU HR follows this blog.

  804. Anon Says:

    INO @ 2/4/16 3:25 PM

    No, not inorganic. My interviews have been for Biochem, Analytical, and Bioengineering positions

  805. INO Says:

    Thanks for the info.

  806. amy Says:

    Did anyone hear from UofL?

  807. LTA Says:

    U of L (Louisville) sent a mail few weeks ago saying that they have a candidate, search is closed.

  808. JayBee Says:

    >I do not think LSU have scheduled any interview officially, but they do have a candidate already.
    Oh well. Not that I expect justice in this world, but sometimes things just aren’t the way they should be. Thanks for the info though!

  809. AlSiPS Says:

    @JayBee and @Anonymous 2/5/16 9:30am
    Which LSU and which search? LSU Baton Rouge advertised 3 searches, and they have been interviewing.

  810. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Here is my proposed solution to the imbalance between the number of PhDs being produced and the job market:

  811. amy Says:

    LTA=> Did UofL give offer to anyone or any other detail you wanna share?

  812. LTA Says:

    Chemically yours Says:
    January 14th, 2016 at 10:13 PM
    I also received the rejection email from Louisville.
    It seems that the search committee made an offer to a female candidate (their first choice). She declined the offer!
    They are finally hiring their second choice.

  813. Anonymous Says:

    Why say “female candidate”? why not just “candidate”? That inference shouldn’t be made.

  814. JohnDoe Says:

    I agree…Not sure what you are trying to emphasize by ” a female candidate” but in all honestly this type of discrimination needs to stop.

  815. NoInterviewsYet Says:

    Now that things are winding down, and those of us that didn’t get any interviews are certain of our fate, I’d like to deeply thank Paul Bracher and ChemJobber for their hard work. I’m sorry you got chased off by the trolls, even when you attempted to oblige them by setting up a separate thread. I’ve spoken with some in other fields where they do not have a well-run rumor mill keeping track of postings, and the value you provide to chemistry postdocs cannot be overstated.

  816. amy Says:

    Finally I heard from my sources that Louisville has found a candidate who accepted the offer

  817. Anonymous Says:

    The position filled at LSU is inorganic chemistry. I heard that a friend’s friend got that position.

  818. Hihaho Says:

    Hi, did anyone hear from Reno Navada?

  819. Anonymous Says:

    Indiana sent a rejection email.

  820. Chem Unjobber Says:

    “Hi, did anyone hear from Reno Navada?”


  821. pieceofcake Says:

    No info about Reno Nevada. I have not heard from them either.

  822. herro Says:

    I have heard that UNR has called someone in my department for an interview

  823. Anon Says:

    Is there going to be a list of chemistry faculty hires?

  824. Hihaho Says:

    @herro @Chem Unjobber @pieceofcake for your reply

  825. Anonymous Says:

    Can I consider that I am dropped off from the list if I do not get any inform after 2 weeks from phone interview?

  826. Anon Says:

    Has anyone heard from NJIT?

  827. Anonymous Says:

    Yes, NJIT scheduled the web and onsite interview

  828. Anon Says:

    Just got a rejection email from harvard

  829. Anonymous Says:

    @Anonymous Feb 9, 3:13PM

    “Can I consider that I am dropped off from the list if I do not get any inform after 2 weeks from phone interview?”

    For one school, I heard nothing for over a month after my phone interview, and was then called for an onsite. The timeline can vary drastically between different schools

  830. Anonymous Says:

    @Anonymous Feb 9, 3:13PM

    somtimes it takes 3 weeks :)

  831. Anonymous Says:

    Got a rejections from Caltech.

  832. Anonymous Says:

    Azusa Pacific rejection

  833. Anonymous Says:

    Indiana University rejection

  834. Aaron Says:

    Anyone heard from Oklahoma State?

  835. Anon123 Says:

    University of Maryland has hired

  836. noname Says:

    at Anon123: University of Maryland College Park or Baltimore?

  837. Anonymous Says:

    Penn. State filled their position.

  838. Anonymous Says:

    Got rejection from Cornell and Penn State

  839. chemmajor Says:

    First of all, thanks to Paul Bracher and ChemJobber for this great and unique forum.

    1. I have been shortlisted for a position, and they want an estimate of startup costs in $, before
    the site visit. Equipment etc is the easy part, but how do I put the PhD student and postdoc support
    for 2-3 years in terms of $ as I don’t know the univ’s salaries for students/postdocs.
    I was able to get the fringe rate from their sponsored research website, but couldn’t find other info.

    2. Besides equipment and personnel what else is acceptable to include at this stage?

    3. And, what is the typical lump sum range to ask for? My equipment needs are < $100K.

    Any suggestions on any of these is greatly appreciated.


  840. Anonymous Says:

    UCSD rejection

  841. Anon Says:


    Depends on the school. I am assuming R1 here – PUI will be an order of magnitude less money.

    1. $100K seems low for equipment at an R1 university. It might cost you $10K (or more) to outfit a single fume hood with all new stuff. “Inexpensive” desktop instruments will run b/t $10-80K (and up). No idea of your area, but you might be underestimating this.

    2. I would just list the number of students and duration of time for which you’d like support. They can figure out how much that will “cost”. This is a way that schools artificially inflate the value of their offers. These TA positions already exist, so they cost the school nothing. All they are doing is committing them to a junior faculty member, which they should be doing anyway. So, if a school makes you a $1M offer for which $500,000 is earmarked as TA positions, you don’t really have a $1M offer.

    3. Ask for summer salary in the first two years, in an account separate from your research funds. You might ask for support for a postdoc for 2 years.

  842. anon Says:

    I think it’s difficult to get an accurate estimate until you do the campus visit and figure exactly what’s already available and what’s needed. even senior faculty may not have an accurate description of his own budget it’s so complicated it’s managed by specific staff. Just put a rough estimate (could be entirely useless) and dont ask for anything beyond their accommodation.

  843. Bnon Says:

    Does anyone know if UColorado Boulder has seminars scheduled yet? On their website I saw BioFrontier faculty search ones but not the ones in Chemistry. I wonder if they have even selected any candidates yet. Any info would be super helpful. Thanks!

  844. Achem Says:

    Does anyone hear from Northeastern’s onsite interview?

  845. antiaromatic Says:

    Boulder already contacted and had all of their on site interviews.

  846. Anonymous Says:

    CU Denver anyone?

  847. Anonymous Says:

    “Boulder already contacted and had all of their on site interviews.”

    And then they reposted the position for physical organic on multiple sites just a couple of weeks ago.

  848. chemmajor Says:

    Thanks to the two Anons for your very helpful replies.
    It gives me good pointers on how to proceed.

    If others want to add to it, please feel free to do so.
    I have some time to send this.

  849. Re:Achem Says:

    Which position of Northeastern do you refer to? Analytical Chemistry?

  850. Achem Says:

    I refer to Analytical Chemistry position.

  851. AnonOh-yeeeeahh Says:

    Chem major Say:

    If you have gotten an offer than take it as if your are the top candidate (which you are) and therefore the chair will try to accommodate all your needs to be successful. Hence give them your DREAM budget BUT always have a MINIMUM budget also to get your research done. The MINIMUM budget will help you negotiate if they don’t give you all.

    I will suggest to ask for 6 months salary (don’t put numbers)
    Don’t put ANY salary!
    Ask for 2 postdocs (3 years total time i.e., 1 for one year and another 2 years etc)
    Support for 5? or whatever number you want your group to be at steady-state. Make sure you look into other groups in that SAME school and how you compare. If all have >30 students then don’t ask for 5 grad students (and vice versa).

    Equipment: list all major equipment and costs (roughly the cost not actual numbers) i.e., glove box = $10,000 or 150,000 both sound ridiculous and will hint that you have no idea of the cost of the interments. (again have a DREAM glovebox and have a MINIMUM glovebox prices)

    Travel for XX conferences (2 per year) etc
    Chemical supplies (for 3 years)–it is assumed that you will get a grant by this time so don’t ask for chemical supplies for 7 years!

    Hope this helps.

  852. chemmajor Says:

    Thanks AnonOh-yeeeeahh!

  853. Anonymous Says:

    >30 students? Does that mean > 30 PhD candidates?

  854. Anonymous Says:

    Is this a serious question? student = PhD candidate

  855. Anonymous Says:

    >Is this a serious question? student = PhD candidate

    OK, so you have 30 people who graduate with PhDs. How many of them will be looking for looking for long-term jobs in chemistry?

  856. Anonymous Says:

    This isn’t some sort of debate. “AnonOh-yeeeeahh” was just being helpful with some good advice and using two extremes (groups of 5 and groups of 30) as examples.

  857. Anonymous Says:

    “This isn’t some sort of debate. “AnonOh-yeeeeahh” was just being helpful with some good advice and using two extremes (groups of 5 and groups of 30) as examples.”

    No, I’m not not really. I’m just trying to make some estimates. Can you help with the second question? Thanks.

  858. AsstProfTop10 Says:

    Two quibbles with AnonOh-yeeeeahh’s advice:

    1) the fact that some people at your hopeful new home may have 30-person groups is irrelevant to you – they have tons of external funding and a research infrastructure to support that. You will have trouble keeping track of even 5 students at the beginning. You should make a reasonable estimate of how many people you will have in your group by year 4 and ask for money/TA lines to support that many. Beyond that the school will assume you have gotten grant money. Also. note that TA lines are not free for the department. At many schools, the dept is given a chunk of money to teach its classes, but they then pay for the TAs out of that chunk. Even if they dept isn’t paying directly for the TAs, they will have a finite list of TA lines so giving them to you is taking them from someone else. By all means ask for TA lines if your school works that way (some just have policies that everyone TAs a certain number of quarters, no more no less, so that’s not negotiable), but know that it’s not free.

    2) Might be better to ask for 3 years of postdoc support instead of “two postdocs”. The former sounds reasonable to me but the latter sounds greedy, even though it’s the same cost.

    AnonOh-yeeeeahh is right on with needing to know how much things cost. One thing you might not have a good handle on is how much the equipment/supplies cost. Ask your advisor how much they budget for one student per year in supplies when they apply for grants.

  859. Anonymous Says:

    Is there a site yet for all the new hires?

  860. Anonymous Says:

    Fresno State has a very short list now.

  861. Anonymous Says:

    U of Oklahoma (Computational) chose their top candidate.

  862. Nicholas Nitrate Says:

    Now that the sun is setting on the 2015-2016 academic hiring season, I’m wondering if anyone would be willing to share statistics (anonymously of course) on their experiences this year. I’m always intrigued by the faculty hiring process, and as an industry guy moving back into academia I feel a bit isolated from the hullabaloo of the season. For example, I’ve heard that folks are applying to >20 schools and entertaining more than 10-12 interviews (Yikes!). In the interest of transparency, I’ll share my experience this year with the hopes that others might be willing to share as well.

    # of Tenure Track Applications = 4
    # Phone Interviews = 1
    # Campus Interviews = 2
    # Offers = 2
    # Formal Rejections = 1
    # Informal Rejections (i.e. no feedback) = 1

  863. amino-acid Says:

    # of Tenure Track Applications = 40!
    # Phone Interviews = 2
    # Campus Interviews = 7 (6 attended)
    # Offers = 3
    # Formal Rejections = NA
    # Informal Rejections (i.e. no feedback) = 2 (take the current offer and don’t wait for us to finish our search)

  864. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 40
    # phone interviews = 0
    # campus interviews = 1
    # offers = 0
    # formal rejections = ~5 (automated emails, obvi not at place i interviewed)
    # informal rejections = 1 (for the place i interviewed) and all others i applied

    Getting a job is hard.

  865. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 5
    # Phone interviews = 1
    # Campus interviews = 3 (2 straight to on-site, 1 after phone)
    # Offers = 2
    # Formal rejections = 1 (Took self out of running before search over since already accepted other offer)
    # Informal (no feedback) rejections = 2

  866. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 31
    # Phone interviews = 0
    # Campus interviews = 6
    # Offers = 1
    # Formal rejections = 3 from places I interviewed, 6 from places I didn’t
    # Informal (no feedback) rejections = everywhere else (waiting on results of 2 interviews)

  867. Anonymous Says:

    Did anyone receive any offer from VA-tech, Colorado-Boulder, Colorado State, or Montana State for organic/soft materials positions? Thanks

  868. Anon Says:

    # TT applications = 17
    # Phone interviews = 0
    # Campus interviews = 3
    # Offers = 1
    # Formal rejections = 1 from place I interviewed; 4 other automated emails
    # Informal (no feedback) rejections = Everywhere else. Awaiting result of last interview.

  869. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello! Long time no talk. Thanks to Nicholas Nitrate up there, I have finally gotten off my duff and put up a short Google Form for you to record your application/interviewing experience. It is here:

    Let me know if you have questions. As it is Google Forms and not SurveyMonkey, there is no recording of IP addresses and is completely anonymous. Please tell your fellow applicants about this informal survey.

    Best wishes and keep in touch, Chemjobber

  870. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 40+
    # phone interviews = 0
    # campus interviews = 1
    # offers = 0
    # formal rejections = ~12-15 (automated emails)
    # informal rejections = who know how many

    Waiting for the results of interview. There is still a hope!

  871. StayCalm Says:

    May I ask the people who only applied to 4-5 schools and got offers? What types of schools that you applied to and how were you so confident that you would get offers?

  872. Anonymous Says:

    I applied to few, but I was not confident at all that I would get job but I was only looking for only certain type of schools and geographic locations. You apply just like anyone else.

  873. Anonymous2 Says:

    If MacMillan likes you, you’re getting a job no matter what! But keep an eye on those he’s already sent to academia: wait for some time to see if he’s made a good choice!

  874. chemmajor Says:

    Thanks AsstProfTop10. Great advice.
    I have personally experienced group sizes spanning the ~5-30 range
    through my PhD/postdoc labs so I know what it takes for both.

    Thanks everyone for your responses.

  875. Nicholas Nitrate Says:

    @ StayCalm:

    Coming from industry, I didn’t have the luxury of doing more than 2-3 interviews over the course of 2 months. Instead of casting a broad net, I looked at locations where I would absolutely love living and wrote individualized research proposals directed at those specific schools. In some ways, I think it was actually harder to do it this way, because I ended up writing about 10 fully fleshed-out proposals, complete with figures, references, etc.

    As the old saying goes, “It’s a lot easier to look for a job when you already have a job”. A member of the search committee at one of the schools told me that they knew I was serious about the job because they know (roughly) my current salary and what I’d be losing by moving back to academia. Another faculty member claimed that they selected my application because they could tell that it wasn’t crafted as part of a mass-mailing campaign. Having been involved in hiring many new graduates over the years, I can confirm that resume screeners can often tell a customized application from a mass produced one.

    Just to be clear, I’d always recommend applying to as many positions for which you’d be willing and able to interview. Individual circumstances will dictate how many interviews you can do.

  876. Anon Says:

    Can someone start a thread compiling all of the 2016 chemistry hires?

  877. AlsoAnon Says:

    Re: Anon Feb 17, 9:47am

    I nominate you!

  878. Anonymous Says:

    I’ve got responses (interviews, rejections whatever) from only 1/5 of all applied universities yet.
    Do you think all the exciting season passed for now?

  879. Ackinase Says:

    Congrats on your offers and thanks a lot for sharing your experience. Did you apply from pharma/biotech? If so, chem or biochem? Just wondering which academic field is more accepting of this transition. Also, would you recommend transitioning early on ( <2 y in industry) or after significant industry experience? How would the hiring committees view either case? Thanks again.

  880. Acchem Says:

    I am also in the industry now (almost 2 years) – would like to try my chance in next year. If you don’t mind I would like to ask, how many solid paper (journal articles) do you have when you applied? (in industry it is often hard to publish, as you know).
    thanks and congrats

  881. Re:Achem Says:

    I have a very naive question: What does it mean to be shortlisted? Do committees tell you if they have chosen the top candidate but will offer you the job if he/she declines offer?

  882. Achem Says:

    Actually, I was told to be shortlisted, too. I am not quiet sure what it means. The committees did not mention anything about top candidate or waitlist.

  883. CareerPostdoc Says:

    I would assume shortlist means you are hireable, but not the top candidate. Some universities will justify a list of 2 or 3 and go down that list until they get their candidate. In some instances the candidates did not meet the qualifications and you should be outright told “good luck”

  884. anon Says:

    For those looking for hiring updates, chembark previously setup a page: . The comments section already details some big hires. Not sure if the top section will be updated with a proper list though….

  885. Nicholas Nitrate Says:

    @ Acchem & Ackinase:

    I’m in the materials chemistry industry (non-pharma/biotech) at a Fortune 50 company. Prior to entering industry, I had about 6-10 papers (depending on how you count 1st author vs 2nd author, vs 3rd, etc). No major journal articles in industry, but I’ve tried to stay active in trade meetings and file for patents regularly to maintain an active profile (Not ideal, I know, but it’s one way to produce open-source content that can be used in job talks).

    Based on my observations, you have an expiration date of about 4-5 years once you enter industry, unless you’re publishing in peer reviewed journals, which is becoming increasingly difficult for folks in industry. That being said, the window of opportunity seems to open again at about the 15-20 year mark for exceptional industrial scientists who have won major industrial awards or led larger research teams.

    I don’t know where either of you are at, but some companies have enough “brand power” to get the attention of search committees. Most Fortune 50 companies recruit exclusively at about 20-30 good schools and tend to be very selective, so a 2-5 year stint in industry can be viewed as a well-paying post doc appointment.

    One word of caution: The publication gap that you will have will raise red flags with funding agencies. I’ve been advised to hold off on writing grants for at least 1-2 years until I can generate at least a few papers or some compelling provisional data.

    Best of luck

  886. Anonymous Says:

    Shortlisted means you made it through the filtering process and are still one of several being considered. For example, you are short-listed with 20 others for a phone interview, then short listed again with 6 for on-site interviews, and then short listed as the top 2 candidates to make offers. It depends on what point in the process you are told you are short listed.

  887. walter Says:

    Can anyone report on what is the status of the search at UCONN?

  888. HeyAnonnyNonny Says:

    Rejections from Penn State and UT Austin

  889. Ackinase Says:

    @Nicholas Nitrate:
    Thanks again for your insightful comments. Definitely will keep eyes open on all the points you mentioned.
    Best wises

  890. Anonymous Says:

    Heard an offer has been made at UConn

  891. Anony Says:

    Anyone heard from Ohio University, Athens.

  892. Anonymous Says:

    Any info on what is happening at NCSU? Heard there was an offer for analytical, but no news in organic. Then they just posted two new TT assistant prof. positions in analytical.

  893. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, all:

    Feel free to record hires in the comments at SeeArrOh’s Chemistry Bumper Cars post:

    Best wishes, Chemjobber

  894. Anno Says:

    Can someone update us on the search at Univ. of Memphis, TN?

  895. Anon Says:

    @ Chemjobber:

    Is the link only for R1’s or is there interest in compiling info on all of the tenure track positions listed above?

  896. Chemjobber Says:

    All. (Should probably make that distinction, though.)

  897. Anonymous Says:

    U of Maryland has made an offer.

  898. Anonymous Says:

    > Can someone update us on the search at Univ. of Memphis, TN?

    Good question. But the application deadline was 1. Feb. So it might still be early days.

    In turn I was curious about CalState Northridge. Back in the middle of October, they surprisingly stipulated that application materials could only be submitted by snail mail.


  899. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Says:

    CalState Northridge also asked for the letters to be sent by snail mail too. What year is it? 1986?

  900. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Says:

    Anyone has any news on LSU and Auburn (organic)?

  901. Chem Unjobber Says:

    Yeah. I called them up, on the assumption that they had goofed in their advertisement! I don’t even have a printer any more. Had to run out to the local Kinko’s to get hard copies of the remaining application materials. The only excuses which comes to mind are (a) that they, too don’t have a printer any more, or (b) they are cheapskates.

  902. Anonymous Says:

    Throughout this thread, there are a few discussions about startup funds, but I haven’t seen any figures for new hires are large research schools. Does anyone know the approximate total amount that is typical for top 10, top 25 or medical schools?

  903. Kathaarian Says:

    I believe a typical startup package for top 25 is between 800k to 1.5M

  904. StayCalm Says:

    Does it include self-pay salary?
    What is the best strategy to allocate the budget here?

  905. Anonymous Says:

    Anno Says:
    February 20th, 2016 at 4:48 AM
    Can someone update us on the search at Univ. of Memphis, TN?

    Currently compiling their shortlist for interviews

  906. Anonymous Says:

    Thanks for the update on U. Memphis. When you write shortlist, I assume implies that they’ve already carried out their telephone interviews? As mentioned earlier, a VC from TN was checking out my LinkedIn profile. But shouldn’t have gotten my hopes up……

  907. Anonymous Says:

    I got a phone call asking if I was interested in the job and was told that they were compiling the shortlist for interviews for approval. Thats as far as I know.

  908. Anonymous Says:

    When I sent my startup request I had equipment and supplies totaled up to about $900K. I then added on a few years of summer salary and support for two postdocs. So although I don’t actually yet know exactly how much I asked for, my request is approximately in the $1.2-1.3M range and I plan on negotiating further when I visit.

  909. Anonymous Says:

    Anyone has any news on Cal State, Los Angeles?

  910. Anonymous Says:

    Any news about USciences (USP)?

  911. Anonymous Says:

    University of Maryland has announced their decision…

  912. Anonymous Says:

    University of Maryland has announced their decision….

  913. StayCalm Says:

    @Anonymous Says:
    February 22nd, 2016 at 2:58 PM

    Can I have your list of equipment and supplies that totaled up to about $900K? I am clueless as far as this go. I gave them a very low ball budget before (afraid that if I asked much, they will go to the next candidate), and people looked at me weird. I don’t want to do that again.


  914. StayCalm-respose Says:

    I suggest you go through the main equipment you need since YOU NEED TO DO THIS AT SOME POINT. Then ask current professors IN YOUR FIELD how much they spend per year on supplies/chemical purchases etc. IF you start adding items that you really don’t need then people are going to notice that you are just trowing equipment and costs at random. Spend 2 or 3 days ( i know it is very tedious but exciting too!) going through a lab like the one you want and then look up the costs.

  915. Anonymous Says:

    Any info on NYU Materials, CUNY Nanoscience, Montana Organic, and VA Tech Materials?

  916. Anonymous Says:

    Anyone heard from Drexel yet?

  917. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    Word on the street with regards to Drexel is that they will be hiring 8 – 10 faculty and building new chemistry facilities in the next 5-7 years. Considering the great location (Penn, Temple, top notch medical schools, and industry prescence) sounds like excellent opportunities are in the horizon! Keep your eyes open ladies and gentlemen, Chemjerbs are a comin’!

  918. bad wolf Says:

    Wow, 8-10 faculty! That will almost soak up the graduates from one top group in one top school.

  919. Anonymous Says:

    …….and still leave everyone else Shit Out Of Luck

  920. Anon Says:

    Has anyone heard anything about inorganic position at Boise State?

  921. chemchemchem Says:

    @Anon 7:34 pm

    Boise conducted their phone interview in December 2015.

  922. Anon chem Says:

    Any word on UT Arlington?

  923. Anonymous Says:

    NCSU announced that they hired two organic canidates

  924. Agreeable Chemist Says:

    It may be too late, but I found a job posting today from the New Jersey Institute of Technology:

  925. PCarlson Says:

    How do we get a job positions posted to this list.

  926. PatCarlson Says:

    Can I post a Job Opening this listing

  927. Bored Says:

    Rejection email from University of Nevada Reno (Computational). They made an offer to another candidate. UMKC is having onsite interviews.

  928. Meh Says:

    Any news from University of Tennessee computational position?

  929. Anonymous Says:

    Yeah, a good luck letter for the UNR IC e-mail just arrived yesterday. Back when I returned to the US and was forced to become a post-doc again, I had a better profile than their assistant prof at that time (7 years of being correspondence author, award of competitive grants and BTW 4 years of real teaching). My suspicion (which can’t be rigorously proven) is that they’re a little stuck up.

    On the funny side, the captcha code now reads “H2CN”. That’s an undergraduate error :-)

  930. Anonymous Says:

    I’ve been told by numerous well-respected faculty members all over the country that good ideas/proposals are a dime of dozen. A “better profile,” publication record etc. is not enough to obtain an academic position. Negative, envious or resentful attitudes along with sarcasm and/or cynicism, much of the attitudes seen on this thread, do not bode well when hiring junior faculty. One has to be charismatic, empathetic, genuine and truly care about mentoring the next generation of scientists. Think about it, do you want a Negative Nancy with a chip on their shoulder as a potential life-long colleague? Food for thought.

  931. Anonymous Says:

    Hi this is “anon 9:40 PM”

    Your point is well-taken. That’s why this forum is anonymous…

    Tthat being said, yes I realize that it’s also necessary to be a good personality match to be a successful faculty candidate. That is reflected (hopefully) in my cover letters. For that reason, I even take the teaching statement seriously, and discuss what my role should be in the best interest of students who will enter the job market (without going int the actual strategy, which might possibly identify me on this forum). Also about the tricks which I use to make even the students in Orgo I to like both me and the subject.

    Honestly, I have no idea whether anyone ever reads those statements or just raises red flags about employment circumstances which were quite honestly beyond my control. This is in addition to research proposals which (like everyone feels who reads this forum) we are all proud of.

    I would be happy to even be able to start over again at a place which supports the teacher-scholar model. OK, it would be nice to be recognized as an associate prof. for my achievements, but would even gladly settle for a job as assistant prof.

  932. fen Says:

    I have a TON of suggestions about upcoming positions in the next year….

  933. Anonymous Says:

    fen, there are a variety of interesting interpretations to your commnet…?

  934. Anonymous Says:

    Any news on………
    CUNY Staten Island (inorganic)
    Kennesaw State
    Texas A&M – Kingsville (they didn’t list a deadline)
    U Mass Lowell
    U Missouri Kansas City
    CalState Northridge (the snail mail folks)
    Arkansas Fayetteville


  935. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 29
    # Phone interviews = 8
    # Campus interviews = 3
    # Offers = 1
    # Formal rejections = 5 with no interview, 2 after phone interview
    # Informal (no feedback) rejections = the others…

    Mostly PUIs.

  936. g1s2w3 Says:

    # TT applications = 14
    # Phone interviews = 4
    # Campus interviews = 3
    # Offers = 2
    # Formal rejections = 2 with no interview, 1 after phone interview (These 3 rejections were in retrospect no surprise. Issues of fit/match)
    # No feedback = 8

  937. Anonymous Says:

    # TT applications = 37 (3 still pending)
    # phone interviews = 1
    # campus interviews = 2
    # offers = 0 (2nd choice both times, but makes sense as I wasnt the best fit, open positions, both hired in very unrelated area to my work)
    # formal rejections (20, only 1 this year, seems places were much more polite in turnaround last year)
    # no feedback = the rest

  938. Anonymous Says:

    U Missouri Kansas City sent a rejection e-mail. I was nevertheless flattered, since it was clearly personally written to me, as opposed to being boiler plate text.

  939. Anonymous Says:

    2:44 PM// How can you tell that? I always see “you received strong consideration, but…”
    It does not mean that it is personal rejection letter, right?

  940. Anonymous Says:

    Hi 3:48 PM,

    Your question is a reasonable one. Without revealing my identity, I would mention having previously exchanged e-mails with someone there who had published a very funny front page on his website. He also explicitly thanked me for taking the time to specifically identify the areas where I would work with specific faculty. I found a pretext to contact him about an unrelated issue, and he took the opportunity to mention the outcome of their search.* Of course, you could still argue that such sentences were still boilerplate.

  941. Anonymous Says:

    Is it normal to write to search committee after on campus interview and after their estimated decision time to ask about the status when you have heard nothing from them?

  942. Anonymous Says:

    It is normal because you have a right to know. The reality is that you are likely not their choice and they are likely waiting for their first choice to either accept or reject their offer so they can decide what they want to do with the rest of the candidates.

  943. Anonymous Says:

    Thank you for your answer, I really wanted to hear that. They said they will make decision in three weeks and a month has passed already and I hear nothing. I think it would have been better to let candidates know instead of just letting them guessing in the dark. It would be totally okay to be told that you are on waiting list or something. Scientist of all people should be all about efficiency and transparency.

  944. StayCalm Says:

    How long after the faculty meeting to discuss about candidates would it take until they send an offer? (Would it be by email or mail?)

  945. Anonymous Says:

    Every instance of an offer I’ve heard of has been by phone. They’ve varied from a few days to a few months after a meeting.

  946. Anonymous Says:

    Offers are also made via email, but the email usually contains a sentence to the effect…”When would be a good time to reach you via telephone?”

  947. walter Says:

    Rejection received – position(s) has/have been filled.

    University of Arkansas
    Assistant Professor – Chemistry (Two Positions)
    Department: Chemistry/Biochemistry

  948. Anonymous Says:

    U of Arkansas is hiring two positions as you indicated. You meant you received rejection email/snail mail from them? Because I am not getting any yet.

  949. Anonymous Says:

    Any news from positions at Northeastern? UC San Diego? UCLA?

  950. Anon Says:

    Drexel has hired.

  951. walter Says:

    Anonymous @ March 4th, 2016 at 4:36 PM – here is what I got from UARK by email:

    Dear Dr. [Walter]

    Thank you for your recent application for employment. Our records show that you applied for the following position:

    Working Title: Assistant Professor – Chemistry (Two Positions)
    Department: Chemistry/Biochemistry

    Please be advised that this position has been filled.

    We hope you will consider other employment opportunities with us by logging onto our career site,, to review current opportunities that are available.

    Thank you again for your interest in the University of Arkansas.”

  952. chemchemchem Says:

    illinois college cancelled their search

  953. Anonymous Says:

    @ StayCalm: Usually you’ll be given some timeline for an offer (if one is going to be made.) For two of my interviews, I was the last to visit on campus and was told they would meet within 1-2 days to take a final committee vote as to who to send an offer to. There’s some bureaucracy to deal with (offers usually come from the dean), so that takes a few more days. I would say if you don’t hear within 1-2 weeks, you probably weren’t their first choice. After 3 weeks, I had to inquire to get any info, which they may or may not be able to give to you (depending on how secretive the search is). At that point, I knew I wasn’t getting an offer, but a clean and quick rejection is preferable to being strung along for an extended period of time.

  954. walter Says:

    Has anyone heard from UT Arlington?

  955. StayCalm Says:

    Thank you. I knew I did well at the interview, but this waiting period makes me anxious.

  956. Anon Says:

    Has UT Arlington scheduled on-campus interviews?

  957. LTA Says:

    Rejection email from Syracuse (Organic). The position has been filled.

  958. Anon Says:

    Hi All,
    I am currently evaluating a job offer from a relatively low tier private research university. When I started my job search in last fall, my goal was to get a TT position at a decently sized university with good resources for research, however, my campus/phone interviews has landed me just this one opportunity that involves research but also places high emphasis on teaching. I have two options now:

    i) Accept this position and try to publish well/get grants in the next few years. Then look for better places.

    ii) Reject the offer, stay in my current postdoc, publish more and try higher ranked universities next year.

    I know that people who are denied tenure tend to end up in lower tier universities, but I am curious if anybody had success with the other way – moving from low tier to higher university on the basis of publication record/grants obtained in a tenure track job.

    Any comments are welcome.

  959. Anon Says:

    @ 10:34

    Tough call on this one. It really depends on how confidant you are of getting a “better” offer. There are many more qualified candidates than there are TT positions. Many “low tier” schools have the luxury of hiring “high tier” candidates in this employment market. Unless you absolutely hate the location and don’t have an appetite for teaching, I would seriously consider taking the position. I mean no offense, but if you are as good as you think you are, you should be able to get tenure without any problems. You can then start networking and searching for other positions from a place of security. At my school (state university in a flyover state), we often try to find candidates who have a connection to the area and desire to live in the state. I’d rather grant tenure to someone who I know will stay in the department for 30 years than someone who obviously sees the position as a stepping stone. It’s usually not hard to see when someone’s heart isn’t in the job.

  960. Anon Says:

    @Anon March 8th, 2016 at 10:34 AM:

    I would take option i). At least you’ll have 1 foot in the door and a better chance to move up, and you’ll have a secured position for 5 years. It’s not guaranteed that you’ll have a better shot next year (even if you publish a couple papers more next year, the expectation of publications for a long-term postdoc is also much higher). Also, after one or two semesters of teaching, you’ll realize that you enjoy teaching more than you know now.

  961. Anonymous Says:

    @Anon March 8th, 2016 at 10:34 AM:

    I think the question is how low is low? Is it a top 50, 100, or not even ranked? The lower you start, the harder it will be to jump up.

  962. Anon Says:

    At 10:34 am:

    I will take the offer and make the best out of it. In my university (top 25) we recently hired a faculty that came from a lower tier school because of the excellent publishing record, grants, etc.

    During my interview process this year, I was asked about my previous year ( I applied to the same school) and it started the conversation that UNLESS you really have solid reason as why NOT to take the position given (not being a top school is the or not liking the area are the worst excuses you can find) then expect to be able to answer this question. Also, the chemistry community is very small and if you are given an offer and yo decline then it is expected that you have a better offer.

    Further, staying another as a postdoc does not guarantee a position as mentioned previously. IF you have groundbreaking papers about to be published then they were probably already mentioned in the recommendation letter by your PI. A few years ago we had a postdoc that was given an offer and declined hoping to get better position the following year…it took additional 4 years of postdoc to finally land a job and to be honest it was not all that better than the previous university.

    Also remember that given the competitive climate, chances are next year there will be even more postdocs applying. If you look at those being hired, sometimes they published only 1 or 2 papers as postdoc within the first year and landed top-50 positions. This shows that productivity is not the only factor but just a factor.

    At the end…trust your instincts.

  963. Anon@10:34 AM Says:

    @ Anons who replied to my query:
    Thank you for your constructive comments and advise. You have shared many insights that I hadn’t thought before!
    I am also veering towards taking up this offer and start a new journey. Life is all about taking calculated risks and I hope this decision will turn out to be good in the long run.

  964. AlsoAnon Says:

    Don’t take a job you don’t actually want to do. You can publish a lot more next year as a postdoc than as a junior faculty – you’ve got nothing else to do as a postdoc. If you take the job, there’s a good chance you stay there. However, If you can see yourself doing this job and being happy with it, go ahead and take it.

    I guess the question is: what if you take the job, but fail to get poached by another school – do you take tenure and stay there for a career, or leave academia? If you’d rather leave academia than work at the low-tier school long-term, then don’t bother accepting their offer.

  965. Anon Says:

    This is a terrible advice. This smells like a person who has no offers yet and tries to sabotage the ones who do.

  966. Anonymous Says:

    I would take the offer for sure, best of luck whatever you decide!

  967. Anonymous Says:

    If they made you an offer, take it. Otherwise, why did you even apply?

  968. Anon Says:

    I agree with 5:25pm. It is really a waste of time to you and to the people reviewing/interviewing you (not to mentioned a waste of money) if in reality you were not even interested in the position. Previously, it was mentioned that applying to a lot less number of schools (2-5) and focusing on proposals specifically for those schools seemed to be a great strategy to get a job. If you decide not to accept the job make sure that next time you narrow your focus to only those that you will consider.

  969. Kathaarian Says:

    The other thing you need to consider is that people talk. If you decline this year, and reapply next year, there’s a chance that other schools get wind of your decision to decline this year, and that, to them, could be a deterrent to inviting/hiring you

  970. Anon Says:

    AlsoAnon’s advice is poor – more papers published during an “extra” postdoc year aren’t going to make you a significantly better candidate unless you make a significant discovery. At that stage, you improve your application much more by writing creative and well crafted proposals.

  971. Anon Says:

    I work for one of the big 3 chemical companies and lead PhD recruiting for our division. We evaluate hundreds of applications from top 25 schools every year and interview dozens of outstanding PhD and postdoc candidates, many of whom have pedigrees and CV’s worthy of getting TT positions at top schools. The candidate pool is INSANELY deep right now, and excellent candidates really are a dime a dozen.

    @ March 8 10:34: I’d be very careful about “holding out” and adding years to a postdoc. It sounds like you’re determined to work in academia, but you should know that extended postdocs will hurt your chances of landing an industry job as well. I can’t even begin to tell you how many awesome candidates I have interviewed who have tried and failed to get TT jobs and are now trying to get into industry, only to find that the bar is just as high (or higher, if you look at soft skills). You obviously want to minimize regrets in your life, but you have a chance at 5 years of guaranteed job security. That’s more than I have now, and certainly more than most will ever have. I’d hate for you to regret passing up what could be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

  972. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    March 8th, 3:01pm has an excellent point! A bird in hand is worth more than two in the bush! “A Small but certain advantage than a mere potential of a greater one.” Also see Proverbs 49. You can see the trend here March 8th, 10:34 am…we are rooting for you and wish you the best in your new academic position! We will soon see good science coming out of your laboratories!

  973. Nick Says:

    @ Anon 7:49am

    Can you provide a specific reason(s) as to why an extended postdoc will negatively impact the chances of landing an industry job? You also seem to imply that soft skills are somehow degraded by doing a longer postdoc (maybe I misunderstand your statement) – in your experience, how do you assess the soft skills of a candidate with a post-doc compared to those of a candidate with “only” a Ph.D.? If the candidate with an extended postdoc (i.e. broader knowledge, and more training/experience) is not getting the job, who is?

  974. Anon@10:34 AM Says:

    To all the folks who replied to my query:
    Thank you very much for your extremely constructive suggestions. I had a hunch that it will be a mistake to pass up on this opportunity but I was still undecided. The different viewpoints mentioned above has allowed me to put things in perspective and make a judgement.
    I have also been looking up on various illustrious chemists who progressed higher up in the ladder due to their excellent record (e.g. Kendall Houk: LSU to Pittsburgh to UCLA). I am sure there are many more inspiring examples.

  975. Anon Says:

    @ Nick:

    1) Can you provide a specific reason(s) as to why an extended postdoc will negatively impact the chances of landing an industry job?

    Having a multiple post-docs or a post-doc lasting longer than 3 years begs the question: Why has no one else hired this individual? We could argue all day as to whether this is a fair question, but I have seen applications dismissed based on uncertainty in this area alone. Fair or not, it happens. The current (and projected) job market is a “buyer’s market” and institutions really do have the luxury of passing on any candidate about whom they might have the slightest inkling of doubt. Again, we can wish that this were not the case, but doing so does not make it any less true.

    2) You also seem to imply that soft skills are somehow degraded by doing a longer postdoc (maybe I misunderstand your statement) – in your experience, how do you assess the soft skills of a candidate with a post-doc compared to those of a candidate with “only” a Ph.D.?

    I don’t believe that extended time in academia erodes “soft skills”. In fact, I actually believe that the soft skills prized by many professional organizations are actually part of an individual’s makeup and are quite difficult to develop and cultivate if they are not already present. I will argue that academia generally does a poor job of helping grad students and post-docs recognize career-limiting behaviors or career-making talents when it comes to soft skills. For example, I’ve seen many examples of PI’s yelling at or berating grad students or post-docs during reviews of industry-sponsored projects. Such behavior might get a wink and a nod in academia, but that PI would be meeting with HR by the end of the day in my company. Being a gifted scientists with a pile of papers just isn’t enough to guarantee a successful career outside of academia. Again, I’m not making any value judgements, just trying to provide a realistic perspective.

    3) If the candidate with an extended postdoc (i.e. broader knowledge, and more training/experience) is not getting the job, who is?

    As I mentioned earlier, the talent pool is much deeper than most people really want to admit. The assumption that you’re making is that an extended postdoc confers broader knowledge, training, and experience? Does it, though? Most of the post-docs I look at are working in areas that could reasonably be considered extensions of their thesis fields, and those few who have stepped out of their comfort zone to get broad experience are generally able to demonstrate their talents within 3 years. Many of the post-docs in their 2nd or 3rd appointment are basically acting as the “synthesis expert” in a non-synthetic group. I’m not trying to disparage the post-doc experience whatsoever. Just recognize that post-doc is not always synonymous with terms like “more” or “better”. Sometimes post-doc is just a synonym for “holding pattern” or “cheap labor”.

  976. Chemjobber Says:

    Congratulations, Anon749a, you’re the inaugural winner of the Banholzer Award for Truth-Telling in Chemical Employment:

  977. Cat Herder Says:

    Is there any interest from this readership, and from Paul, See Arr Oh, and/or Chemjobber, on a new discussion thread for those of us who are trying to set up labs? It would be nice to discuss experiences with different vendors/products, strategies for stretching startup money, etc.


  978. Anon Says:

    @ Cat Herder:

    PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE! That would be awesome. I’m in need of some advice in that area, too.

  979. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    There is a huge interest in advice on how to go about setting up a lab! All input would be greatly appreciated!!! Many thanks in advance!

  980. Anon Says:

    Re: Setting up a lab
    If you are attending the ACS meeting next week, go to the expo and talk to vendors! Almost every vendor I bought equipment/supplies from offer some kind of new faculty discount, and don’t be shy about asking them about it or requesting an ‘additional’ discount. I was able to get an additional percentage off or free stuff ‘add-ons’ from about a quarter of vendor just by asking. Even if they couldn’t go lower on price, many agreed to extend the new faculty ‘discount’ period to 1 or 2 years, which is great if don’t have an exact idea of how much stuff you will need yet.

  981. Nick Says:

    @Anon 3:23 pm

    Thanks very much for your detailed replies.

  982. chemchemchem Says:

    regarding to the one who got an offer from “a relatively low tier private research university”. I am glad that life has worked out so well for you…

  983. Chemjobber Says:

    I bequeath to you an open thread about lab setup for new PIs:

  984. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    @Chemjobber…Many thanks sir!

  985. Anonymous Says:

    I’m going to guess this relatively low tier private research university is Drexel? The timing would make sense, as is the description of the place. I could be wrong.

  986. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    Regarding multiple postdoctoral appointments, there will always be exceptions to the “rule,” advice must be taken with a grain of salt and on a case by case situation. I will mention two examples of chemists who decided to take on multiple postdoc appointments. Sharpless, back when postdoc stints were not as popular as they are today. A more modern example is Watson at Delware. There are many more in industry as well. Like in chemistry, science, and life in general, “rules” are meant to be broken and theories can be disproven/discarded at any given moment.

  987. StayCalm Says:

    @Anonymous 10:23pm
    You got Drexel from the description “relatively low tier private research university”? Nobody in their right mind will answer this question of yours, which will definitely reveal the identity of this person. Stop fishing for specific details and stop playing the game of guessing! This is a constructive forum that helps candidates, not puts them in harmful ways by asking absurd questions like this one.

  988. StayCalm Says:

    Sorry, I meant @Anonymous 10:14pm

  989. Anonymous Says:

    with regards to multiple post-docs:

    I think the notion of staying in a post-doc while something better comes along can work, but it does not represent a risk free scenario. Projects may not work as well as expected, papers may get held up, and suddenly the influx of great new things you were expecting for your resume may not come around for the next hiring cycle. All the while the pool grows deeper with qualified people vying for the same jobs you want.

    Alternatively, you publish a string of high end papers, and a series of high profile positions for which you are ideally suited come up and you happen to be a top candidate.

    Its not a fun world out there, and risks are associated with every avenue. Though postdocs, particularly high profile ones represent a nice safe zone. You work in a well funded lab, and if you are reasonably skilled, work hard, you will be kept around, after all, at most high end places, you likely cost your PI less than a grad student.

    Roll the dice either way. The old notion of going to a good school, working hard, building up a strong resume, and then having that land you a job is pretty much out the window unless you went to the select top 5 schools and your PI has backed you for a TT position. The pool is incredibly deep with people from top 20 schools scrambling to land spots at places they likely never heard of until the ad came up on this website!

  990. Anonymous Says:

    From a more optimistic perspective, the thrill of uncertainty is an adrenaline rush for many of us! The world is an amazingly fun place to live in indeed!

  991. anon Says:

    “We evaluate hundreds of applications from top 25 schools every year”

    I hope people who plan to go to grad school or do a post-doc read this very carefully. You want to have a well-paid industry job? Go to a “top 25” school or they won’t even review your application.

  992. Chemchem Says:

    Could anyone give me a crash course on direct cost, administration cost, percentage bonus, unrestricted portion of funding, etc. when we get a grant? I am very clueless on this.

  993. Anonymous Says:

    @ Chemchem

    Your chair should be able to break that down for you.

  994. Anonymous Says:

    @chemchem perhaps you could get your question answered on this thread?

  995. Anonymous Says:

    Also, ChemBark had a long thread going a few years back when he started up his lab. There’s a lot of great advice in there, and I personally would like to see the conversation continue there, so that all the relevant advice is in one spot.

  996. Anonymous Says:

    rejection email from Swarthmore, the position (joint inorganic/environmental) has been filled

  997. Chemchem Says:

    @Anonymous 11:43 AM: Thanks.

  998. Anon Says:

    Boise State has closed their search :(

  999. HandsomeDan Says:

    Received Rejection letter from MIT.

  1000. Anony Says:

    MIT is still hiring? I thought they decide not to make an offer this year!!! I am curious!

  1001. MITpostdoc Says:

    They suddenly became interested with this one guy i believe.

  1002. Anon Says:


    who are they considering?

  1003. YoYo Says:

    Any news what happened to the/comp chemistry searches at U Col Denver, Boulder and Northeastern?

  1004. Anon Says:

    And what ever happened to Marquette?

  1005. randomguy Says:

    Marquette University has closed the search

  1006. HandsomeDan Says:

    @Anon Oh that might very well be the case that they are not hiring this year. I know that they interviewed some people but that is the extent of my knowledge. Crazy that so many of these schools can afford to just forgo hiring if they don’t get their top pick, I know Yale and Northwestern did a similar thing.

  1007. Anon Says:

    HandsomeDan Says:

    Mmm…Northwestern made their hired.

  1008. dude Says:

    NW made two offers. The other offer wound up somewhere else.

  1009. Chem-Bio Candidate Says:

    The chem bio position in Utah Biochem got no one this year. Was told they will search again this coming fall. They have been hiring for the past 3 years and hired 2 chem bio people.

  1010. Anonymous Says:

    Yeah, from the Northwestern search Kalow ended up there and Woo ended up at Harvard.

  1011. Anonymous Says:

    It never made the list, but Bradley University has reposted its positions for an organic chemist and any area chemist.

  1012. Anonymous Says:

    Any news to Florida state university ?

  1013. job tracking software free Says:

    Its interesting article thanks for this Great post, and Have look to this Applicant tracking system, in this blog can get best and useful offers on jobs and employment and more useful things are available here all job seekers can take them

  1014. Anon Says:

    Kristie Koski and Alexander Dudnik joining UC Davis chemistry. (

  1015. californication Says:

    Rice University BioSciences Department sent rejection letters.

  1016. Anon Says:

    Does anyone hear anything from UT Arlington?

  1017. Anon Says:

    Has anyone heard from Duke Biochemistry or Maryland-Baltimore County?

  1018. Anonymous Says:

    What is the background of the UCD hires?

  1019. Apex Says:

    For the two positions at Bradley, does anyone have an inkling what happened to the initial search?

  1020. Anonymous Says:

    An update on the search process:

    # TT applications = 9 (mixture of chemistry/medicinal chemistry departments)
    # Phone interviews = 4 (3 resulted in on-site invitations, 1 had not contact after the phone interview, still waiting to hear…)
    # Campus interviews = 7 (5 accepted and declined 2)
    # Offers = 4
    # Formal rejections = 0
    # No feedback = 1 (see above)

  1021. Anonymous Says:

    @Apex, Re: Bradley… phone interviews for the organic position were in December, but didn’t hear anything beyond that.

  1022. Anonymous Says:

    rejection Chem H Stanford

  1023. bad wolf Says:

    Looking at the results some of you have done far better than the hypothetical average of hundreds of applications, no response (although that’s undoubtedly hyperbole). Any of the successful ones from this year care to share some stats that might be useful to gauge our own situations relative to this, like total # papers, # first author, # glamour mag, top-ten undergrad/grad/postdoc, hot topic; stuff like that?

  1024. Apex Says:

    Interesting point about the first author papers. My post-doc was with a faculty member who always insisted on “alphabetical order”. Guess whose name always came first?

    In my most recent paper as “real” P.I., I (foolishly) did that, too, which actually put me in third place. One of the people ahead of my name, who was also counted as a P. I., even told me that I really should have pushed my name to the front…

  1025. Anon Says:

    I do not believe that the numbers posted on this message board are representative of the average applicant. The vast majority of people who posted their numbers also received an offer. Whereas in real life, I’ve seen dozens of really qualified people (from top institutions as well) that don’t get any interviews. However, if you were to believe the currently posted data, people apply to only a dozen schools, they’ll get interviews from 25% of them, and almost everyone gets a job. That, my friend, is false.

  1026. Anonymous Says:

    I don’t think position in the author list matters when you have the “*” by your name.

  1027. Anonymous Says:

    Applied: 30 schools
    Interviews: 1
    Offers: 0
    Publications: 30 over 8 years of work since undergrad (17 1st author, 13 in top general chemistry journals, the rest in top ranked field specific journals).

  1028. Anonymous Says:

    Applied: 22 schools
    Interviews: 1
    Offers: 0
    Publications: 25 (15 1st author, 0 in glamor mags, 14 in top general interest journals)
    Undergrad at top 200 school
    PhD at top 25 school
    Postdoc at top 5 school

  1029. Anonymous Says:

    Applied: 15 schools
    Interviews: 1 video conference, 2 phone, 3 on-campus
    Offers: 2
    Publications: 19 (10 1st author)
    Postdoc: 1 in Europe, 1 in US

  1030. Anonymous Says:

    Applied: 40 schools
    Interviews: 1
    Offers: 0
    Publications: 11 (9 1st author, 4 in top general and all first author)
    PhD at top 25 school
    Postdoc at top 25 school

  1031. Anon Says:

    Applied: 21 schools
    Interviews: 3 phone, 1 skype, 4 on-campus (and declined 1 on-campus interview)
    Offers: 2
    Publications: 21 (10 1st author, no “glamour mags”)
    PhD at top 100 school
    Postdoc at top 50 school

  1032. Anon Says:

    Applied: 33 schools
    Interviews: 1 phone resulted in 1 on-campus interview
    Offers: 1
    Publications: 21 (14 1st author, 1 in “glamour mag”, 3 in top chemistry journals, most of the rest in top ranked field specific journals)
    PhD outside of US/Europel
    5 year Postdoc at top 100 school

  1033. Chemjobber Says:

    Purely for my curiosity, when people reference a “top X” school, please provide a link to which ranking (NSF funding, Times Higher Ed, USNWR, etc.) you’re referencing.

  1034. Cat Herder Says:

    Another request to search stats posters: specify your subfield (materials, chem bio, physical, organic, organometallic, etc.). Average publication count varies widely between subdisciplines, so without this piece of context claims about publication count are nearly meaningless.

  1035. Anon Says:

    I think posting the details about the applicants is useless and a waste of time. Probably is better to look at the CVs of those that got hired and go from there. If their CV seems “weak” then they probably had stellar non-CV credentials (proposals, letters of recommendation, interview day, interpersonal skills). If they seem strong then can almost assume that their non-CV credentials were great if not stellar as well.

    If you have great CV-creditals (schools attended, well known PIs, 1st author publications, high number of publications, etc) and did not get an interview then you need to work on polishing your proposals and work with those writing you the letters of recommendation to be make sure that they are doing their part in helping you land an interview.

  1036. Anonymous Says:

    @ April 4th, 2016 at 4:40 PM
    That is really great advice!

  1037. walter Says:

    …another important factor to consider when trying to find out why some (veritably talented) people have not been successful is what departments are “really” looking for.

  1038. Career postdoc Says:

    Applied: 30 schools
    Interviews: 4 in person
    Offers: 0
    Publications: 12 (7 first)
    PhD at top 25 school
    Postdoc at top 5 school

  1039. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    Area: Synthetic Organic Chemistry (Total Synthesis PhD, Methodology Postdoc)
    PhD: Top 100 school
    Postdoc: Top 20 school
    8 publications (4 first-author JOC, 2 first-author OL, 1 first-author JACS, 1 second-author JACS)
    Year #1 Applied: 38 schools, 2 on-site interviews (2nd tier schools), no offers
    Year #2 Applied: 33 schools, 2 on-site interviews (1st tier schools), no offers
    Year #3 Applied: 29 schools, 2 on-site interviews (top 20 program, and second tier school), 1 job offer….took it!
    Grit, a dash of luck, and dealing well with disappointment is key, best of luck to all!

  1040. Anonymous Says:

    Area: Physical Chemistry
    PhD: Outside of the top 100 (

    Postdocs: 2 in Europe, 2 in the US
    24 Publications (9 first-author, 2 Corresponding Author, 1 last author)
    This year applied to 33 schools, 4 phone interviews, 3 on-site interviews, 1 job offer.

    I will admit that I applied to some schools, just because… knowing that I would not get a phone interview. In the end, I began to target what some will consider second tier schools and also PUIs (in part because of my specific research). One of my phone interviews was a R1 school and I was completely surprised by getting a phone interview. In my opinion, to land that assistant prof. position requires a bit of luck and determination.

  1041. Anon Says:

    Disclosing the stats isn’t going to shed any light on whether or not academia is a true meritocracy, but it is useful to give aspiring candidates a realistic view of what to expect when applying to schools. Many thanks to those willing to disclose the details of their job hunting.

    Walter’s comment above about what departments are “really” looking for is spot on. I went to a solid grad program, but worked in a small research group where most people published just 2-3 papers during their time in grad school, with most of these papers being 2-author publications (i.e. just the student and the PI). When I got my faculty position, I was very surprised because I don’t have the strongest CV. Compared to other folks applying to the same position, I would not have expected to be as competitive for the position. About a year after starting on faculty, I had to get a letter of support from my chair for a grant, and she basically gave an overview of all the reasons that they hired me in the first place. Interestingly, prior industry experience and growing up in the region were highlighted above all else.

  1042. Anon Says:

    Thanks for sharing your job hunting experiences; this is very helpful to get a feel of the job market. Can you please clarify whether your first attempt (year 1) was after postdoc or straight after completing your PhD and how much total postdoc experience you had when you got your job offer?

    Others on this blog: I am wondering if its a fairly common practice to try more than one academic season for job hunting? Can anyone else share their experience in succeeding after applying for more than one year?


  1043. Anon Says:

    Area: Analytical
    Undergrad: top 100 (USNWR national universities ranking)
    Ph.D.: top 25 (USNWR chemistry ranking)
    Postdoc: top 25 (USNWR chemistry ranking)
    Publications: 35 (10 first author)
    Applications this cycle: 25
    Interviews: 3 on campus
    Offers: 1. Took it.

  1044. Anon Says:

    Area: Organic/ChemBio
    Ph.D.: top 5
    Postdoc: top 5
    Publications: 6 (5 first author)
    Applications: 42
    Interviews: 1
    Offers: 1

  1045. Anon Says:

    Area: Inorganic
    Ph.D.: Ranked 20-30 (US News & World Report)
    Postdoc: None; 3-5 years industry experience at Fortune 50 company
    Publications: 5 (3 first author)
    Applications: 4
    Interviews: 2 on campus
    Offers: 1 (Took it)

  1046. LoveScienceLoveLife Says:

    @Anon 11:22am

    My first year on the job hunt was at the end of my second year as a postdoc. I was at my fifth year when I was offered a position. I would say that apart from good science and a top notch interpersonal skills, one needs to have 100% support from postdoc advisor. My postdoc advisor’s letter and phone calls were key in landing me those interviews, 5 of 6 without a telephone interview.

    Once you have your foot in the door, it’s up to you to hit a homerun. Both the PhD/Postdoc research and Proposal (Job) talks need to be polished and practiced in front of an honest and critical audience, perhaps some of your fellow lab mates and advisor.

    Going on the job hunt three cycles was demoralizing and brutal, nevertheless it challenged me to become better each year was a great life lesson/experience. I polished and refined my proposals and talks each cycle and the interviews themselves provided great ideas for my research projects. Along the way I got the opportunity to meed some amazing people doing great science at different universities around the country. Best of luck to all!

  1047. Anon 11:22am Says:

    Thanks for sharing this additional information.

    I have just completed my first (unsuccessful) job hunt season and debating whether to try next time or join industry. I landed 5 phone interviews and 1 on-campus this season and no offer. I am amazed at your “stamina” as I feel somewhat demoralized at this point. Your story surely gives lot of motivation to folks like me!

    Wish you good luck with your new position!

  1048. Anons Says:


    Thank you for sharing your story, goes to show that if you are determined and focus on doing good science everyone will fall into place eventually. This was my second attempt and despite a couple promising interviews, I ended up with no offer again. Will give it y best shot this year again.

  1049. Anonymous Says:

    Did Texas Tech ultimately find anyone?

  1050. Anon Says:

    @Anon april 6th raised an interesting point, “…Interestingly, prior industry experience and growing up in the region were highlighted above all else.”

    both my campus visits came from the area I did my undergrad – glad with the homecoming. I didn’t have much luck with schools from areas I’ve never been to, or without much enthusiasm moving to. Might as well save time not applying them to begin with but who knows…

    Perhaps the SC has frequent replies (rejections) from candidate who places location as a top consideration for accepting an offer.

  1051. Anon Says:

    We’re hearing several accounts of heroic efforts to secure faculty positions as well as some rather soul-crushing stats being reported from the less-fortunate. For those happy few who do secure a tenure track position, what percentage of assistant professors actually end up getting tenure? I’ve tried to find reliable stats for chemistry faculty, but have come up short. Does anyone have any statistical or anecdotal information? Is there a significant difference in the tenure grant rate at R1 vs PUI schools?

    I’d like to think that the tenure grant rate for chemists is >75%, and that getting in the door is really the best indicator of future success, but I have no idea. If the tenure rate is <50%, all of us should have serious concerns about this line of work, especially those who are in their third or fourth application cycle.

  1052. Anon Says:

    “Serious concerns about this line of work.” The risk associated with this line of work is what is so attractive to many. It’s akin to starting your own business. Life is a risk!

  1053. Anonymous Says:

    @ Anon 11:36: at the risk of being rude, that’s just idiotic.

    What is attractive to most people about this is being your own boss while pursuing scientific interests. The ability to have creative and executive control over a research program of your making.

    The risk is an unfortunate side effect. There’s not one person I’ve talked to that is enamored with the pitifully low chance of success. Especially with the current job climate.

    So keep telling yourself that if it helps you get through the day.

    I think PI’s should do a better job at preparing their students for the harsh reality if they want to pursue academia…. instead, many take it as an opportunity to work these students extra hard while dangling the hope that if they are successful (ie make the PI successful by pumping out publications), they will get a position of their own.

  1054. MIT-trash Says:

    What strikes me as the most absurd in this ob hunt search is that there is not a well defined criteria for being hired. Yet there great number of people with strongly opinions ready to justify in retrospect, mind you, why certain someone did or did not get a job. There is always an explanation ready, like “Well he worked for Prof X at MIT” or well “His/her proposal must have been great” etc etc. Obviously there are some common sense metrics like having a solid publication record and ability to communicate well and it is something that we all os more or less spent our time working towards..

    However we overlook a simple fact that this is system run by a people without any policing so you end up with a highly corrupted and de-regulated oligarchy that think of themselves very highly as the vanguards of what is right and wrong to them. Therefore I see some of you guys feeling bad, understandably but reminder the system is not perfect, and it is most likely not your fault. heck look at the presidential elections, are these the best candidates :p I know it won’t comfort many of you, but please keep your heads up and let us change the system for the better.

  1055. Poor-pdoc Says:

    If you were to make it to the other side of the desk you would realize that most of the people complaining about the system, like you are right now, are propped up by the lab around them and have little chance of creating a unique, independent research program. The reality is that not matter where you are training, most of the people in your lab are not really cut out to run their own. Doing good science in an established system is not the same, nor maybe correlated, with building and running a new system. The notion that there should be “well defined criteria” shows you are missing the point. These committees are looking for people that by definition want to do something new – so there can’t be a “criteria.” The best metric is repeated success at a high level. That does not mean X number of Jacs papers that look just like those coming from your hood mate. One paper that is truly new and that you really had something to do with creating can trump all of the lists above with 15 first author papers…sorry but this is reality

  1056. MIT-trash Says:

    @Poor-pdoc you raise some interesting points, however i can not disagree with you more as you in fact suggest a criteria Yourself which is based on novelelty of the work! How is that not a well defined criteria? It is a very good one and i agree that if you make a novel discovery that’s very impressive and it is what science is all about! People that do novel creative work should be given an opportunity to repeat their feat. What do you think those “jacs” papers are trying to accomplish? Please get off of high horse and realize that a novel work is often build upon a lot of hard earned results and by discouraging people by saying you are not cut out to be independent and your jacs paper is not novel enough because i said so attitude is very damaging to science. How do you know weather someone is not able to be independent? I know great many world class fampus sciientists who started their career by doing solid work and having breakthrough later in their careers. And as a counter example i know of many hires at top schools who got jobs because they happened tp be in the lab doinng fashionable at the time work but which since then lost appeal and they pretty much becoming administrators and riding on the backs of talented grad students. See it is not so black and white as you thinkg. Also notice that i am not saying i have a perfect criteria or a solution just pointing out that current system has become disfunctional and less encouraging for young scientists.

  1057. chembio-rules-the-world Says:

    In my opinion, I think it will be great if those recent hires shared their discussions with the chair of the committee AFTER they got hired.

    I recently got hired and decided to have a frank conversation with the chair of the committee. I asked what did they see in me that they decided to hire me versus all the other very (much more than me-if you look at their CV) talented postdocs interviewing. I was told that they liked the direction of proposals although in all honesty there were still a lot of questions. Nevertheless, they believe that IF successful I will do science in very unique way. Although I am sure the letters of support where crucial for me to land the interview at the end it comes down to the 2-day interview process.

    In all, I interviewed in many places (over 10) over several years (this was not my first attempt at academia) and was always worried about finding a place where I will “fit.” I can honestly say that I have found the place where I have full support of my colleagues and the chair.

  1058. poor-pdoc Says:

    agree with all of this. on this, and back to mit, the judgement of what is novel, doable and all that is very subjective. Some think C-H activation work is the greatest thing ever, while others feel that the chemistry never actually gets used by anybody other than the group that developed it, thus is kind of a waste. Some people think nanoparticles and supramolecular chemistry are the cutting edge, others realize that like 200 nanoparticle companies have been formed to “cure” diseases and basically none of them have done anything but lose their seed funding. On and on. No way around it. The key thing that most are missing in their perspective, and that I too was missing while going through it, is that most committees at institutions that expect a high level of research output actually do have a pretty good way of telling if someone was in the right lab at the right time, or if they have really contributed and done something novel and therefore seem likely to continue that trend. there is such a big difference between the two. But it really does come down to convincing them of this during that two day interview. Keep at it and good luck to all

  1059. Anon Says:

    Dont propose C-H activation, propose “Bioconjugate/bioorthogonal reactions for early cancer diagnosis” Dont propose nanoparticles, propose “Excitons in MOF/MSN”

    You’re welcome.

  1060. Poor-pdoc Says:

    Sure, you can give them those titles, but if you are doing C-H activation and giving it that title, the committee knows you don’t know what you are talking about. It’s a stretch at best.

  1061. Anonymous Says:

    I think we scientists we wish there was some objective formula for success in seeking employment, but it’s a very subjective process. Your proposal might be met with folks who think your field is a waste of time (we all have our own biases.) Something as simple as that will get you written off for sure. At the top levels, there’s a handful of jobs available, and a new crop of superlatively qualified individuals pumped out every year hoping to snag one of those positions. Certainly compared to many of the folks posting here, my stats are lacking… sure I went to a top 10 undergraduate and top 10 PhD, but my postdoc is nowhere near as high profile. My publication record is mediocre-average. But I targeted positions carefully, was genuinely interested them, and ended up snagging an offer from one of my top choices. It was something intangible that lead to the offer, not my CV. Such is the process of finding a job.

  1062. Anonymous Says:

    I think perhaps Anon was being sarcastic?

  1063. auburnification Says:

    The Assistant Professor position in Computational Chemistry at Auburn U has been filled.

  1064. Anon Says:

    Just a ray of hope: top schools aren’t necessary to land R1…

    Undergrad Top 150 worldwide
    Grad Top 150 worldwide
    Postdoc 4.5 years total at one unranked school and one top 200
    Pubs 16, 10 first authors-mid rank journals for the most part
    Applications: 80 over 2 years
    Phone interviews: 5 (over two years)
    Onsite Interviews: 5
    Offers: 3

  1065. chemchemchem Says:

    @anon of ray,

    Nice post! :)

  1066. ANON Says:

    Heard that MIT made some super low quality offers this year. Shocking.

  1067. Anon Says:

    Has anyone heard who was hired for any of the openings at MIT biology (Broad, WI or Building 68)?

  1068. Anon Says:

    @ ANON 10:58

    What do you mean by “low quality offers?” Does this mean lower-than-average salary and startup funds, or are you implying that the candidates were of low quality. If you meant the former, that’s not surprising. Startup funds have really gotten out of control at R1’s.

    If you meant that the candidate was “low quality”, shame on you for making that call. That’s the kind of elitism that will one day kill academia.

  1069. chem-phys Says:

    I will with previous comment…if the “low quality” refers to the candidate the person blogging is clearly arrogant and ignorant. I highly doubt you were in the search committee and hence don’t know ANYTHING about the proposed work. There have been a number of candidates that could be deemed “low quality” based on their pedigree and/or publication record that have been hired in top-20 programs. In most cases these candidates turn out to excel as independent scientist (the same can be said about “high quality” hires who failed to have their independent programs take off and hence denied tenure).


  1070. ANON Says:

    No no no, I said “low quality offers” meaning quality of the offers were low, candidates are all decent, can’t vouch for the science not even in my field. But my PI says these guys would would have much less resources than would have been the norm. I think times have changed and the glory of the “good ole top schools” is changing. People still value pedigrees and working for big shots and such but I think over time the field would be leveled. Now doing science at a “what would be considered a top school” no longer gives you such an extra advantage.

  1071. Anonymous Says:

    I heard that Mat. Sci. at MIT made someone an offer last year that was about 1/3 the offer that the candidate got from a Texas school. MIT’s response? “Well this is MIT”. They didn’t negotiate and he/she took the offer.

  1072. Anon Says:

    “Well this is MIT” now has a whole new meaning I guess.

  1073. curious Says:

    @ ANON Any idea whom MIT’s making offers to? Or at least their subfields?

  1074. Lyle Langley Says:

    @Anon, 10:58 AM,

    Well, I’m glad to hear the “candidates are all decent”.

  1075. Anon Says:

    Auburn and IIT have made their hires.

  1076. Anonymous Says:

    Did TTU find anyone to fill their soft-matter position? They have been searching for ever.

  1077. Anonymous Says:

    Anyone heard about University Missouri – Kansas City?

  1078. Anon Says:

    Area: Biochemistry/Chemical Biology
    Undergrad: top 100 (USNWR national universities ranking)
    Ph.D.: top 10 (USNWR chemistry ranking)
    Postdoc: top 10 (USNWR chemistry ranking)
    Publications: 12
    Applications this cycle: 50
    Interviews: 2 on campus
    Offers: 1

  1079. alphar Says:

    anyone get an offer from cal state university northridge (csun, the snail mail one)? thanks!

  1080. anonymous123 Says:

    After a top choice refuses his/her offer, how do most departments proceed?
    Do they consider the next person on their list?
    And how long do they wait to make that offer?

    Would appreciate if any of more experienced people know how it works.

  1081. chemchemchem Says:

    depends on the school. For top schools with nothing to lose chances are they’ll just wait for the next year, and the pool gets better, as it gets larger over the years.

    for US-News near and above 100 the chance seems higher that they will go down the list in order to hire someone.

    The top candidate will be given much greater consideration and respected more. According to a chronicles article, a dean tells their chair that just don’t “go down the list” if the top candidate didn’t come….for various reasons in addition to the obvious one.

    Good luck!

  1082. Anonymous Says:

    @ anonymous123: like chemchemchem said, it depends. They may have a solid second choice and will make an offer there if they feel both candidates are good. If they don’t have a second choice coming out of on-campus interviews, if it is early in the season, they may invite another round of on-campus interviews and make decisions from that pool. Odds are that in the top 10 of all applicants there are a number of candidates that would be successful going through the on-campus interview process, selection is a lot about splitting hairs. Or they wait until next year, though just like perennial candidates who are searching for a position for years, you have to wonder about those departments perennially searching for someone to fill a specific position.

  1083. Cyberchemist Says:

    I received a thank you/rejection mail from Georgia Tech this morning.

    Here is my reply to them:

    I thank the search committee for evaluating my application…I’d like to congratulate my chosen colleague competitor and wish you and him/her the best of luck.
    I also want to inform you that I recently accepted an offer from a top 20 institution and not longer interested in your position.


  1084. Anonymous Says:


    Congratulations on being offered and accepting a position at a top 20 institution. You are probably a great candidate that was not the right fit for the position at Georgia Tech. Your response sounded a bit snarky and immature (the equivalent of sticking your middle finger up at them). In the small world of academia, I’d be careful on how you respond to others. Never burn bridges… you don’t know when you’ll need them in the future.

  1085. anon non douche Says:

    Cyber sounds like a douche.

  1086. The Iron Chemist Says:

    I’d also recommend caution Cyber. You don’t want to piss off the wrong people and end up back on this list in six years. I was labmate with a guy who enjoyed burning bridges and he’s in pretty dire straits right now. You’re counting on strangers to review your grants and manuscripts and to invite you to give seminars.

    With respect to what schools do when the first choice declines, I was just part of a search committee where we went back to the pool. We had difficulty selecting our first on-sites and felt that the next two or three choices were comparable. I’ll caution that that was a fairly unusual set of circumstances.

  1087. Freelance Says:

    I also received the thank you letter from Georgia Tech. I simply replied with a “Thank you for keeping me posted” I will probably apply again next year. Keep watching for my application.

    @ Cyberchemist, you may be right replying like the way you did. Sometimes, some institutions know who they will hire, but simply put up the announcement out there to make the process looks like faire and open. But, you have to be careful in the academia world, as some of your colleagues in your current department might have friends and connections at Georgia Tech.

    I will say, you are one of the luckiest candidates this season, and wishing you a successful career. Keep up with the good work!

    Can others update us on the state of this year hiring?

  1088. Georgia tech rejection Says:

    I also replayed like cyber above telling them I have accepted a position at a top 20 institution so they should close my file. Below is the email

    The Faculty Search Screening Committee has completed its initial survey
    of candidates for the faculty positions in the School of Chemistry and
    Biochemistry and has narrowed the list to include a limited number of
    individuals for further consideration. Although the committee was very
    impressed with your credentials, I regret to inform you that your name
    was not on that list. We will keep your file open, in the event that we
    are able to revisit the applicant pool. However, I cannot provide any
    assurances that this will be possible at this time.

    I do not in any way wish to discourage you about your candidacy and
    potential as a scientist. Given the large number of applications, our
    considerations were based not just on the letters and academic records
    of the applicants, but also upon considerations such as specific
    research areas and their relationship to our current programs. I thank
    you for the time and effort you put into preparing your application, and
    for your interest in Georgia Tech.


    Michele Yager for
    M. G. Finn
    Professor and Chair
    School of Chemistry and Biochemistry
    Georgia Institute of Technology

  1089. Anonymous Says:

    It’s the indication that you “accepted a position at a top 20 institution” that is the problem with your answers. It easily reads as “I got into a school higher ranked that you, go eff yourself.” Since they do not need to know your new position is at a top 20 school, this is an extra description that you put in there solely for your own pleasure. The best and most polite way to respond would be:

    Thank you for the update. As I have accepted another position, please close my file. Best wishes, Anonymous.

  1090. Georgia tech rejection Says:

    I didn’t specifically say top 20, but I did say the institution I am going to. I don’t see a problem with mentioning the institution I have accepted the offer from. Everyone here is so sensitive; by your metric Georgia tech essentially said you are trash. That’s clearly not what there email means, just as mentioning the institution I’m going to implies what you are saying.

  1091. Georgia tech rejection Says:

    *doesnt imply what you are saying.

    I’m on an iPhone, please excuse my typos.

  1092. anon Says:

    @cyberchem, i hope you didn’t use your “real” email.

    karma’s a b****

  1093. Cyberchem Says:

    @ anon

    I did replied with my real email. I don’t see why can’t I mention to them that I am no longer interested in their position. I am sure you will be also frustrated when you applied to the same institution twice and receive this rejection email. @freelance made a very interesting point.

    I am not trying to be snarky and can’t play the hypocrite!!!

  1094. Georgia tech reject Says:


    Did you get the same email as me? Or was it worded differently?

  1095. Cyberchem Says:

    I deleted mine; but, it looks like the same wording!
    Let just close this topic. Let focus on our future endeavors!

    Best wishes

  1096. walter Says:

    Walter received exactly the same email from gtech.

    On the same note, UCSD sent their rejection letters.

  1097. job-alert Says:

    Myles Poulin hired at UM

  1098. Anon Says:

    phys org position at Colorado, Boulder has been filled.

  1099. Anon Says:

    I think ranking should be taken with a grant of salt. The names of schools factor in big time, but more often they don’t reflect the quality of the environment. Also, it doesn’t cover some specific fields; for example, medicinal chemistry in pharmacy schools should be considered under pharmacy program, which includes pharmacology, pharmacognosy, toxicology, etc. When you choose a department to work in, the supporting and collaborating nature of the department, as well as a friendly environment, should be on your mind. If you are a lone wolf, you will not have enough data for good publication, and you will blow through your startup really fast. A department that gives you a big chunk of money and says, “Here you go, be on your own, we prefer you to start paying yourself soon”, without following up with what you will need later to be successful, doesn’t sound like a good environment to work in.

  1100. Anonymous Says:

    It is amazing.
    Regarding that people who landed some places posts their successes here, wow….
    # of application: 50
    and then offer: 1
    That is reality.
    I presume that…. most of us did not get any one offer.. No, even an interview offer.

  1101. nononono Says:

    Any news on Colo and Northeastern?

  1102. Anon Says:

    Area: Theoretical Chemistry
    Undergrad/Master/PhD: Europe
    Postdoc: Top 40 school (USNWR chemistry ranking)
    15 publications (8 first-author)

    Year #1 Applied: 11 schools, 1 on-site interview, 1 job offer, which I accepted it.

  1103. John Snow Says:

    Area: Materials chemistry (solids)
    PhD: top 21 usnwr
    Postdoc: top 3 usnwr

    Applied: 35
    Interviews: 8
    Offers: 3

  1104. Blah Says:

    USC sent rejection letter. They suck :p

  1105. Anon Says:

    U of Idaho (in Moscow) just opened a TT position in inorganic chemistry.
    Interesting that Boise State also filled an inorganic chemistry faculty position this cycle. What are the odds of two TT positions opening up in the same state in the same year in the same discipline. Mind. Blown.

  1106. ANON Says:

    Re: Anon@1:24 Are we gotten so desperate to look for chemistry positions in Russia? No way :)

  1107. Cyberchemist Says:

    Anon @ 6:55

    FYI, there is a town named Moscow in Idaho:,_Idaho
    Perhaps you should study the USA cartography before applying for faculty position this coming season.

    Best of Luck

  1108. Anonymous Says:

    it was a funny joke

  1109. anon Says:

    It was, but some people are just dense and have no sense of sarcasm.

  1110. Anonymous Says:

    yes but dont forget, Cyberchemist accepted a job at a top 20 institution, I believe this was largely helped by his/her knowledge of US cartography.

  1111. Cyberchemist Says:

    Anonymous @4:24 PM

    :) I love your sarcastic comment! How come by knowing the US cartography led me into the top 20? Perhaps it helped strategizing the type of school to apply to! :)

  1112. Squirrel tech Says:

    Damn, I thought there was an opening at squirrel tech in Moscow

  1113. Anon Says:

    Virginia Tech (Biochemistry) gave an offer but got turned down, so they canceled the search. Ha.

  1114. Anon Says:

    It’d be a shame if VaTech canceled their search, as I’m sure there are several people who would be overjoyed to have that position.

  1115. Anohni Says:

    Well, clearly VaTech is not overjoyed to have that position filled by those people.

  1116. Anon Says:

    @Anohni: Ouch…

  1117. Anonymous Says:

    Nobody was overjoyed to join ttu, fsu, or uark. Could be the same for vatech. Some of the departments have the nastiest politics and good candidates do avoid them if they have other options.

  1118. Anon Says:

    Did chem unjobber ever get a job?

  1119. Joe Says:

    @Anon, the answer is yes and no. #academia

  1120. Anonymous Says:

    The ones who are hired recently, did you have external grant at the moment applying?
    It seems K99/R01 is pretty general requirements when it comes to biochemistry dept for research schools.

  1121. Anon Says:

    While K99/R00s seem to help a lot of people get their foot in the door, there simply aren’t enough of those grants to account for the number of people who got jobs (nor on the market). Anecdotally, my peers have been about a 50/50 mix of have/have-not’s of K99s. I was a have-not, but managed to get 2 on-campus interviews and 1 offer from an R1.

  1122. Anon Says:

    Finally received a wonderful generic rejection letter from HR at UKy after being on campus for an interview. One would think the search committee could let people know personally, as opposed through a mass email. (Although, I wasn’t shocked at the result given the lack of communication.)

  1123. mohd. suhail Says:

    toooooooooooo good

  1124. Vincent de Paul Nzuwah Nziko Says:

    follow up

  1125. lodha bellezza Says:

    Awesome Blog. Informative Post.

  1126. Australia Says:

    Received the rejection letter from UC Merced (theoretical/computational chemistry) recently.
    Is there a new list for 2017 Chemistry Faculty openings?

  1127. Fil Says:

    Great blog! Will there be a 2017 Chemistry Faculty Job List? That would be terrific! Thanks

  1128. bad wolf Says:

    Are people expecting more effort/attention from Paul? He has someone doing his teaching for him now and there’s no publications for two years from Bracherlab so i guess it’s possible, but let’s not get our expectations up. I’m going to guess he’ll pop up like Phil the Groundhog around Nobel time and that’s the last anyone will see of him here.

    I was going to suggest someone (Chemjobber?) look into setting up an online forum instead. Maybe if there were different discussion threads available Old Man CJ wouldn’t have to come in and yell at people for getting off-topic all the time? Anyway I know i’m no expert but it seems there are software options available and they look not much different from blogging itself.


  1129. Andrew Spaeth Says:

    I loved the 2016 version, so I’ve started the 2017 one. I would love to see the CJ/CB communities take it up again, as it is such a great resource.

    Good Luck

  1130. ZD Says:

    great blog! very helpful!

  1131. Agreeable Chemist Says:

    Hi Andrew,

    Thanks for taking the initiative for a 2017 list. Some of us (myself, and I’m assuming others?) fit somewhere in between chemistry and (materials/chemical/etc) engineering departments; would you mind adding a separate tab for openings in engineering? Perhaps someone else (I’m happy to volunteer) could curate that list.

    Thanks again,


  1132. Andrew Spaeth Says:

    I’m happy to open a new tab. I personally only follow the chemistry market, but you are more then welcome to curate a related engineering list. Email me at my gmail account…adspaeth (spam proofing activated).

  1133. Acchem Says:

    Hello, great blog.
    I just wonder, where can I find some sample research proposal and teaching statement documents? any web sites/hints are appreciated.

  1134. applicant tracking systems Says:

    It’s very useful to all and us , I am very much impressed with your thoughts. I got the best information from this site of the blog, That article was amazing. Thanks for sharing this post.

  1135. gangotri dey Says:

    Is there a similar list for 2016?

  1136. Online Grocery Shopping Says:

    Awesome Blog.Informative Post.

  1137. Chemjobber Says:

    Hello, all:

    As you may know, Andrew Spaeth has taken on the hard day-to-day work of putting together the 2017 Chemistry Faculty Jobs List, and it is available (just like last year) on Google Docs:

    I’ve also embedded the spreadsheet (and it will update live) at my blog here – this can also serve as an open thread:

    Best wishes for your job search. Cheers, Chemjobber

  1138. web designing in hyderabad Says:

    Informative Post.

  1139. bad wolf Says:

    I’m going to guess he’ll pop up like Phil the Groundhog around Nobel time and that’s the last anyone will see of him here.

    my bad, total failure all around

    RIP chembark 2006-2015, not noticed until 2016

    even Jennifer Roizen finally published a paper

Leave a Reply