My Notes (so far) on Faculty Applications

 For context: I applied for assistant professor positions in Europe, Canada, and the United States of America in 2023. That year, I got two Zoom interviews (one went well, and one went very poorly to the extent that it was unclear to me why I was being interviewed), no on-site interviews, and no offers. I skipped the 2024-2025 cycle and am in the middle (well, closer to the tail end) of the 2025-2026 application cycle. As I write this (16 January 2026), I have had four Zoom interviews, one on-site interview, and no offers (update 24 Febrauary 2026: I had my second-ever on-site interview last week). This cycle I have applied to universities in the United States of America and in Europe (a total of 16 applications submitted so far). I received my bachelors degree in chemical physics from Centre College in 2015 and my PhD in physical chemistry (advisor: Marina Guenza) from the University of Oregon in 2021. I was a postdoctoral associate in the Institute of Physical Science and Technology at the University of Maryland, College Park (advisor: Pratyush Tiwary). I am currently a postdoctoral associate in the department of biology at the University of Copenhagen (advisor: Kresten Lindorff-Larsen). Legally, I am a citizen of the United States of America.

Okay, here's what I got:

1. Be abundantly clear with your advisor/supervisor regarding your interest in applying for faculty jobs. Generating the application materials takes a lot of time and effort, especially the research proposal. For me, writing my initial proposal took about three months -- then there were some refinements and changes after that. I was working on it at least hjalf-time (I think) for the whole three months. Even then, I struggled to get arouond five pages of material. Then, the second time I applied two years later, I re-wrote two-thirds of it. I didn't allocate extra time for it (I did it on the side), but it didn't take as long since I was already more familiar with that branch of the literature.

• More notes on the research proposal: I think figures are worth their weight in page area, even for    applications that have hard page limits (in my experience, most applications don't have an upper limit for page counts. Some are also quirky in other ways -- references may not count toward the page limit; you may need to include an executive summary or a summary of past research; you might need to include a second document outlining the rough budget of the proposed research, etc.) However, anything above eight pages is probably too much (i.e. the committee will not read all of it).

• For the proposals that are more than just future research aims, the extra bits can be annoying to generate, especially when the advert appears close to the submission deadline and you are back to working on research full time and have other applications to submit. But it's good writing practice.

• For the teaching statement, I don't know what committees are looking for. I included a statement on mentorship and teaching practices I have used previously. I also mentioned what some students that I mentored are doing with their lives now (at least from a professional or educational standpoint). Mentorship statements are hard because, at least for me, I am applying for the faculty position so that I can be a mentor in a professional and official capacity. If you have other leadership or mentorship experiences of signficance outside of academia (i.e. coaching, president of a club, union leader, etc.), it is perhaps worthwhile to explicate how those experiences have changed or affected what teaching or being a mentor is to you. This statement is also difficult if, like me, you have not lead an independent teaching section since your PhD. I also emphasized goals I have for my students/mentees, namely that they learn to become interdependent learners/collaborators

• Notify letter writers as soon in advance as possible to ask for letters to be written (I am generally non-confrontational and therefore bad at this -- apologies to all those I have asked for letters of recommendation). I think most submission portals will notify the letter writers for a letter, but some will not -- in that case, the letter might need to be submitted the day the entire application is due.

2. For Zoom interviews -- there is a general of set of questions that is usually asked (for R1s: how can you involve undergraduates in your research? what is your mentorship style? who will you collaborate with in the department? what classes will you teach? why did you apply for this job? how will you fund the research? which proposed project will be pushed first? how will you push (hire a postdoc first? can wet-behind-the-ears graduate students do the proposed research off-the-bat?) These are usually scheduled for 20-30 minutes, so it's a short time to make as positive an impression as possible. Even though the set of questions seems standard, there are inevitibly curveballs thrown in -- these must be fended off with grace. In general, every interaction in the Zoom interview should be very positive -- as few hesitations as possible, and there must be a clear, definitive answer to every question, even if it is just politicking.

• Invitations to the Zoom are generally given with a week-or-so notice (can be less for the earliest slots). I would advise dropping everything and doing as much research into the department as possible (classes, department mission statement, faculty research, connections to local national labs and industry,...). The department website should be scoured for any percieved short-comings or red-flags -- be sure to bring these up as questions when they ask for questions at the end.

• Ask good questions at the end! I.e. how big is the department, how do students choose research groups, will they help new faculty build their groups (do not ask about start-up money! if you have no grant money, but they are interviewing you, then there is start-up money! It will be negotiated by the chair at a later date!), how long does the PhD typically take, how involved are undergraduates, can you recruit students from other departments,...The more you know about the department already, the better. 

• Sometimes the interview starts with an overview of past, current, and future research, and sometimes it doesn't. You should have a slide summarizing research ready; however, the committee may not allow you to use it. They may or may not follow up with specific questions regarding what you have presented

• For the proposed research, they may nor may not ask specifics. If they do and there is an expert on something you have propsed in the audience, you had better have done your homework. You have better have done your homework, anyway. 

• The committee may or may not have read your statements in detail. Assume they didn't. Don't say things like "well, as I wrote in my teaching statement..." It may feel like a waste of time for them to ask questions that can be answered by reading the submitted documents, but, again, these people are busy (and might want to see how you respond to check if or how much of the statements you wrote yourself).

• Believe it or not, it is a two-way conversation. They recieved a lot of applications, and, if they didn't think you were a potential fit, these busy people would not take the time to talk to you. You need to feel them out just as they are feeling you out. If the interview doesn't feeling equitable in that way, you probably have not done your homework and aren't prepared. While they have leverage in that they will be paying you, you will also be paying them scientific prestige and colleagial interactions in the future. Right now, it is just an advance on a loan you will pay back later. 

3. If the Zoom interview goes perfectly, they might invite you for a campus visit. I have done one of these now, so I am an expert (not). They are flying you out (potentially across the world) and putting you up in a hotel for a couple of nights and allowing you to give the department seminar in front of their students. They are really serious about you now. At this point, the committee will have read your material in detail, as will other members of the department, perhaps in including some of your papers. For me this was strange -- after living a fairly anonymous scientific life, senior faculty suddenly were interested in my research. They will ask you about your papers from your entire career -- for old or obscure ones, you yourself may have to brush up. I think it is key to connect with everyone in the department in some way, even those whose agendas are seemingly far afield from your own (again, these people are potential future colleagues -- you will have many department meetings and seminars with them in the future). It's something like two days filled with meetings, talks, and meals with faculty and junior scientists. The entire time you are in the presence of a member of the department (junior or senior), you are on being evaluated: you are on trial. You will probably have less than a month to prepare.

• For the seminar, you can present whatever you want. These is a trade-off between covering everything (this is just about the only opportunity you get to present PhD and all subsequent research together) or focusing on a few projects (there should be something for everybody!) It will be between 45 minutes and an hour. 

• There will also be a future research talk -- I think this is the hardest part. Again, if there are experts, you better have done your homework. You will be busy when you start, so they will want to know who will do th research, how it will be funded, and how you will recruit people to work on it. You need to be specific -- what systems will you work on and how will you model them? Do you need experimentalists to verify your models (the answer is always "yes" -- and they will want to know who you can ask to do that for you. Oh, and what experiments are useful and why? Again, you better have done your homework). For me, this is like an advancement to faculty exam. The audience will be probing and rigorous (that's their job -- they are vetting you!), but, again, they have already invested time, money, and effort in recruiting you -- they don't want you to fail.

• Although you are on trial, you are also innocent until proven guilty, and the exchanges are equitible -- the department is on trial as well! During the faculty meetings, the faculty will give you as much information regarding how the department works as possible (again, do you see yourself fitting in there?) and they will want input as to how you can help shape the department (how can they help you recruit the students that you can graduate through them completing the research agenda you have proposed?) It is a lot of information and active interactions that can be very fatiguing. If you need a break, just ask, and they should accomodate you. Aim for no dead interactons, e.g. even with faculty whose research is far abroad, there should still be good scientific or career conversations between the two of you. If nothing else, ask things like what was the tenure process like? how is going from associate to full professor different from the tenure process? why did THEY choose to join department X and university Y? how did they get their first grant?...

• Don't be weird, and if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all.