Will anybody actually read your research and teaching statements?

Question

When applying to faculty jobs, how much weight is given to your research/teaching statements? Talking with a few folks on admissions committees at Very Good Departments in Big Research Universities, I was told in no uncertain terms that

• your letters get you the interview,
• your talk and individual meetings get you the job,
• nothing else really matters,

where "nothing" includes your research statement, your teaching statement, the content of your publications, or your hairdo. Of course, I am working with a very small sample here. How true is this sentiment? (And if it is true, why keep asking us young folks to write these hackneyed teaching statements that nobody ever reads?) More importantly,

Question: For those who have been on faculty hiring committees, what are the actual criteria you use to invite applicants?

By actual (in bold and italics) I don't mean "what the job posting specifies" or "what the department charter says you're supposed do," but rather "how you actually make these decisions in a meeting right before lunch while preoccupied with a grant proposal due at midnight and the fact that the cafeteria is going to fill up with noisy smelly undergrads if you don't get there soon."

Answer 1

I am the chair of the faculty recruiting committee in a Very Good Department at a Big Research University. I read research and teaching statements.

I need to know that you have a compelling agenda for your future research; your letters won't talk about that at all. I need to know that you can describe and motivate your research agenda well enough to attract external research funding. I need to know that you know why (not just "that") your work is interesting, visible, important, and likely to have high impact. I need to know that you communicate clearly enough to be a good teacher, and that you care enough about teaching to formulate a coherent teaching philosophy. I need to know that your research, teaching, and career goals—as you describe them—match those of my department. I need to know that you are taking the recruiting process seriously.

In the long run, your publications (which I also read) and your recommendation letters are probably more important. But saying that your statements have no importance is a dangerous exaggeration.

Also, I don't eat in the cafeteria.

Answer 2

I agree that letters are by far the most important part of an application, but there's a big difference between not reading something and not having it be the deciding factor. Your research statement is needed to describe your research agenda; if you don't do a good job of this, you are unlikely to be hired. However, there's only so much one can learn from a research statement. For example, some people describe ambitious plans they cannot actually carry out successfully, some are very good at making incremental work sound exciting, and some may work in an area nobody on the hiring committee can evaluate confidently (perhaps that's why the department needs to hire in this area). The top candidates all have impressive research statements, and the differences between them are generally not compelling enough to matter compared with what the letters reveal. On the other hand, it's certainly possible to write a bad research statement, for example by giving the impression that your greatest ambition is to refine your thesis work forever. If you do that, you'll discover that someone was reading after all.

Teaching statements are a messier subject, and nobody can quite agree on what should even be in them. Search committee members at research universities differ in how they evaluate them: some read them very seriously, while others use them for nothing but filtering out applicants who might provoke a student uprising through incompetent teaching. I think you'd be surprised at how many people care about teaching, even in departments that are not known for teaching excellence overall, and even people who don't care about teaching know they need to maintain some minimal standards and put on a good show for the administration.

Of course, all this depends on what sort of job you are applying for. There's enormous variation, not just via the obvious categories (research universities, comprehensive universities, liberal arts colleges, community colleges, etc.) but also at the departmental level or just based on who's on the search committee. There are overall patterns, such as the importance of letters, but there is no agreement on things like whether cover letters matter.

Answer 3

It's certainly true that publications, letters and your performance in an interview are far more important than research or teaching statements; I'd much rather be on the job market with latter weak than the former. That said, I think you're conflating two things here: most applicants' research and teaching statements never get read. But if you get the job, it's pretty likely they were. Between TT and postdoc searches, my department currently has 623 applicants in our MathJobs queue; that's way too many to read all the research statements of. But eventually things will get narrowed to a shortlist, and then documents will get read.

Answer 4

As a member of a hiring committee in a small department at a primarily undergraduate institution, I read both statements.

For the research statement

I need to know that the research planned by the candidate is feasible at my institution. If he/she needs access to one of only five specialty instruments in the world, then I am suspicious that the candidate may not be happy at my institution and will likely want to move on in a few years. I also want to see projects that look like they are friendly to undergraduates. Finally, since I am in a small department, I want to see research that somehow balances our desire to find someone who complements the types of research we are already doing while filling in voids in our expertise.

For the teaching statement

Since teaching will be the majority of what the candidate will do, I read this statement for a few key items.

1. Is the statement cogent and organized? I do not care what the teaching philosophy of the candidate is so much as I care that the candidate has clearly thought about how they would approach teaching and learning.
2. Does the statement contain more specific examples than fluffy buzzwords? Even if the candidate has limited teaching experience, specific examples from classes the candidate has taken again demonstrate that the candidate has thought about what good teaching might look like.
3. How long is the statement? Half a page means the candidate put no effort into the statement. More than three pages means the candidate does not have focused thoughts on the matter.

Ultimnately, I make certain to read both statements carefully for the same reason I read the letters carefully. I want to make sure the candidate is the best possible match for the job.

Answer 5

Yes, people like to rant about the current state of the system, and most often over-exaggerate the importance given to this or that item. Some people find it sounds better to say “the system is rigged/stupid/corrupt, all that counts is whom you know” than “it's a pretty tough job, and we need that much information to make the best decision”.

I think the simplest way to make the point is this one: with the huge amount of competition and pressure on that particular job market, hiring committees use all the information they can get their hands on to make the best decision.

Going to the extreme, even things like your hairdo, your clothes and your language style do convey information to your interlocutors: does the guy know how to adhere certain basic social conventions, for one thing? It sure is a minor element compared to your publications, but it may come to play a role, because, well, plenty of other applicants will have stellar publications!

Answer 6

I sat on a hiring committee last year. We read all the research statements. Candidates didn't submit a separate "teaching philosophy" but did discuss teaching experience/perspective in their cover letters.

I would bet that it depends on the job. If the job is narrowly targeted toward a specific research area, your research statement is more likely to be similar to those of many other applicants, so it may carry somewhat less weight. For the committee I was on, the job ad was very open-ended, so the research statements carried considerable weight in weeding out people whose research didn't jibe with the department's goals.

At least in my experience, it is quite untrue that the letters are the only thing that gets you the interview. In our discussions, letters were among the least discussed aspects of the applications. Committee members would not if a particular letter seemed especially glowing or damning, but that was about it.

One thing you don't mention is your CV, which I found to be one of the most important factors. We spent a lot of time discussing the research output of the candidates.

In general, my impression is that it is (unfortunately) much easier to shipwreck your prospects than to boost them. We definitely had people who gave poor interviews, or poor job talks, and thereby took themselves out of the running. So, even if people don't give the research statement immense weight, it's worth your while to make it decent, because if it is noticeably sucky it could torpedo your chances.

Answer 7

Every time I do an interview I see the interviewers pull out a folder and read my research statements right in front of me. So yes, I am pretty positive people read them.

Answer 8

I have been on search committees. I have made decisions (usually decisions about who goes on my short list) on the basis of the research statement. So make an effort to have it readable and accurate.