Blogging and the Chronicle of Higher Ed

Well, just as I'd convinced myself I'd found a reasonable educational use for blogging, the article in the Chronicle of Higher Education came out. Lots has been posted on this already, but suffice to say that the anonymous author warned potential job candidates about doing any blogging at all. And the problem is not just the potential for rants --which are an obvious no-no to a professional--but even the explorations of personal interest, the elaboration of research, and the like. All, he argued, reveal too much about a potential job candidate, and result in an almost inevitable disqualification from the pool.

Of course there was an immediate outcry from educational bloggers who believe absolutely in the effectiveness of the blog for encouraging student writing and critical thinking.

But the outcry is all beside the point, which is not that the author is wrong, wrong, wrong about the value of blogging, but rather that he (she?) may have been telling the truth about the nature of job searches. Though the author seriously misdirects the source of the blame (which, frankly, should not be on the bloggers but the reviewers), there is much to be said for acknowledging outright that reviewers are judgmental and may react very badly to discovering that their candidates have interests and viewpoints that inevitably differ from their own. This is the nasty truth of--probably--all academic job searches. Academics aren't looking for people who can do the job capably and well. They're looking either for allies, or for people who will fade into the background and never be heard from again.

Let's be honest.

In fact, I think this article is very valuable to us all--both potential job-seekers AND to reviewers. Job-seekers should know that their best prospects for hiring probably lie in neutralizing their personalities altogether. Go for the granny outfit, the de rigeur spectacles, the grim half-smile, the anemic body, the occasional self-deprecating-yet-assured witticism. This is what departments are looking for. Clothing should be plain and dark.

Reviewers should know, on the other hand, that anyone who appears for an interview modeling this ideal is faking it. And they should not be surprised when the hiree turns out to be radically different from that first impression.