Religion/Theology Academic Job Market

[Phenomenologist]

Hey guys, what is the religion/theology academic job market like?

While doing my undergrad in philosophy, when I was researching the philosophy PhD and job market, it was absolutely awful. 400+ applicants applying for one professorship, etc. New PhD grads were competing against other folks who already had taught for years and published material at less notable institutions. The market is so bad that universities can have their choice of only the best-of-the-best applicants, and only those who have the ultimate sweet spot in "fit" with the department.

So, what about religion/theology? I've heard mainline schools are all going down, but also Grad Cafe user highlanders said that Catholic universities are hiring. And how about those evangelical institutions? What about seminaries, in addition to university departments?

Any thoughts here would be incredibly appreciated .

Remember where the jobs are at: Catholic universities.

[Thanks4Downvoting]

Hey guys, what is the religion/theology academic job market like?

While doing my undergrad in philosophy, when I was researching the philosophy PhD and job market, it was absolutely awful. 400+ applicants applying for one professorship, etc. New PhD grads were competing against other folks who already had taught for years and published material at less notable institutions. The market is so bad that universities can have their choice of only the best-of-the-best applicants, and only those who have the ultimate sweet spot in "fit" with the department.

So, what about religion/theology? I've heard mainline schools are all going down, but also Grad Cafe user highlanders said that Catholic universities are hiring. And how about those evangelical institutions? What about seminaries, in addition to university departments?

Any thoughts here would be incredibly appreciated .

Here's the thing: it's bad in the humanities, period, but especially in our field. Now, how can we make ourselves more attractive? Well, while your Masters is going to be at a school with explicit faith commitments, your PhD doesn't have to be. Interested in Niebuhrian Christian realism in dialogue with liberationists perspectives? Consider a history or American Studies PhD. It makes you slightly more competitive. Also, this would make you able to teach at a seminary or secular university setting. Diversification is key. The more you matter, the more you're hired.

[Phenomenologist]

Here's the thing: it's bad in the humanities, period, but especially in our field. Now, how can we make ourselves more attractive? Well, while your Masters is going to be at a school with explicit faith commitments, your PhD doesn't have to be. Interested in Niebuhrian Christian realism in dialogue with liberationists perspectives? Consider a history or American Studies PhD. It makes you slightly more competitive. Also, this would make you able to teach at a seminary or secular university setting. Diversification is key. The more you matter, the more you're hired.

Yes, it's definitely bad in the humanities generally. I think some good programs would be the Religion department at Princeton University, or University of Virginia. University of Chicago would be cool, with the resources at the divinity school. Don't you think a PhD in American Studies is too niche? I can't help but think that will close many doors, rather than open them. But you're right about a history PhD or other subject areas: more open doors, less closed ones.

Although depending on the seminary, a degree from University of Virginia or Uni. of Chicago will close as many doors as open, depending on your target schools. I think a good idea is to look at your future career, and ask, "What type of institution would I like to teach at?" Seminary, university, liberal arts college, etc. Then figure out what types of degrees will be most appropriate for that route.

Here is a great post from someone in a different thread, which is a lot more particular about "Religion" jobs than merely "humanities" jobs:

...I would say more Catholic schools or religiously affiliated ones are hiring in more numbers than secular ones. The programs at these Catholic schools (and I would like to say the same for other religiously affiliated school but I don't honestly know) tend to higher more people who have just finished their PhDs and that includes Boston College, Marquette (kinda) and Fordham. It also depends on what you want to study - so I can't say that everyone who gets a PhD in Theology or Religion will be wanted by Catholic universities but Catholic universities are truly attempingt to diversify their Theology Departments. While there are Catholic scholars at these schools, there are also scholars in a lot of other religions with a lot of other focuses, modern, Buddhist, Islamic, feminist, protestant, etc. Lastly, Catholic schools (for the most part) put a lot of effort in their Theology programs and with reason. Unlike some other secular schools, these universities are never going to cut the theology program and their classes are never going to be cancelled because the idea of theology and the religious are tied into the school's identity.

[jacib]

Yes, it's definitely bad in the humanities generally. I think some good programs would be the Religion department at Princeton University, or University of Virginia. University of Chicago would be cool, with the resources at the divinity school.

I went to the University of Chicago as an undergrad. I can't tell you how it is now, but I know that one of my favorite TA's worked in a completely unrelated field for three years while he was ABD. I didn't pry as to why, but I know he's looking for a teaching job. Another one of my favorite TA's, who had a slightly niche topic in the History of Christianity, was only able to find a tenure-track job at a community college. I know the details of his job search a little better. I think he applied to both history departments and religion departments, and I'm not sure an official history (or American studies) degree gives you much more of an edge if you can already sell yourself as a legitimate (religious) historian. I know many of the graduates who are in the History of Religion track (that's where I primarily took classes) at the U of C Div School go on to work in History or South/East Asian Studies departments. So anyway, granted this TA had to go on the market in like 2008 or 2009 , when the market was at its absolute low point, but it's clear that things will probably never be as good as they were in the (semi-mythical) past. He also had a young child, so I think there might have been geographical restrictions on his job search (my father is a sociology professor at a small school and said that people wanting/needing to stay in the same region has really affected the job placement of his graduate students considerably.).

Still, I want to emphasize that even if you get a degree from Chicago (which admittedly has somewhat of reputation for overproducing PhDs in Religion), there's no guarantee of getting a good job at a college that your parents or friends may have heard of, especially if you can't do a national job search. Don't get me wrong, I think this guy likes his job, and is satisfied teaching there, but both TA's made sure I was aware of the reality of the job market before I was applying to schools, and their honest advice was one of several reasons I switched to sociology even though I had studied religious studies as an undergraduate (I applied to both sociology and religion programs with the same thesis topic and made my decision about which way to go only after getting acceptances and rejections).

Edited April 12, 2011 by jacib

[JonathanEdwards]

I haven’t gotten a faculty position, much less graduated yet, but I have come to understand (says ye wise old ‘mature student’) that it’s best to think about the end game as soon as possible. Consider that you will exit a doctoral program having become a noted expert in something. When you go to interviews seeking a faculty position, your expertise will be what you have to offer, not what your grades were. While the courses you’ve taken in your area will flesh that out somewhat, the biggest differentiator between yourself and someone else from a university of comparable quality will be your dissertation. Therefore, pick a dissertation topic that will be interesting, and make sure you have the best supervision and resources to hit that dissertation out of the park.

I know many brilliant individuals who landed on an obscure topic simply because it hadn’t been done and was ‘available.’ Imagine trying to convince a hiring panel that you can fill seats because you’ve made yourself an expert on some arcane aspect of Athenian clothing. All the humanities are suffering, and every department would like to bring in students from a broad range of backgrounds. Become an expert in something that will assist in that. Hint: if there are only a handful of people on this planet who care about your diss. topic, it won’t be of much help in that regard. It also might not interest you enough to persevere to the finish line.

I also know of many individuals who selected a topic just slightly different from someone else’s because they and their doctoral supervisor see the dissertation as a ‘research project’ box to be checked, not something to really advance knowledge and understanding. Imagine how you’ll sell a hiring panel on your ability to continue producing quality research when your dissertation appears to have been cloned off of your supervisors with one different variable that technically qualifies it as independent. You’ll be expected to publish or perish, and such a dissertation telegraphs that you won’t be an asset to your department.

Hope this proves helpful!

[sm2012]

I haven’t gotten a faculty position, much less graduated yet, but I have come to understand (says ye wise old ‘mature student’) that it’s best to think about the end game as soon as possible. Consider that you will exit a doctoral program having become a noted expert in something. When you go to interviews seeking a faculty position, your expertise will be what you have to offer, not what your grades were. While the courses you’ve taken in your area will flesh that out somewhat, the biggest differentiator between yourself and someone else from a university of comparable quality will be your dissertation. Therefore, pick a dissertation topic that will be interesting, and make sure you have the best supervision and resources to hit that dissertation out of the park.

I know many brilliant individuals who landed on an obscure topic simply because it hadn’t been done and was ‘available.’ Imagine trying to convince a hiring panel that you can fill seats because you’ve made yourself an expert on some arcane aspect of Athenian clothing. All the humanities are suffering, and every department would like to bring in students from a broad range of backgrounds. Become an expert in something that will assist in that. Hint: if there are only a handful of people on this planet who care about your diss. topic, it won’t be of much help in that regard. It also might not interest you enough to persevere to the finish line.

I also know of many individuals who selected a topic just slightly different from someone else’s because they and their doctoral supervisor see the dissertation as a ‘research project’ box to be checked, not something to really advance knowledge and understanding. Imagine how you’ll sell a hiring panel on your ability to continue producing quality research when your dissertation appears to have been cloned off of your supervisors with one different variable that technically qualifies it as independent. You’ll be expected to publish or perish, and such a dissertation telegraphs that you won’t be an asset to your department.

Hope this proves helpful!

Great point! Thanks.

[JonathanEdwards]

You’re very welcome, SM.

Certainly the competition for tenured teaching positions in the humanities is fierce, but I think that picture is a little clouded by the large number of people who have been awarded a PhD, but not made themselves a competitive applicant in the process (as well as those who have eliminated themselves by attending non-competitive programs, but that’s another thread altogether). Eight months on towards submission, I feel even more strongly that this aspect need to be better communicated to beginning students by their departments. I’ve tried to put this a little differently to new students this year, with more success.

Back in the day when I participated in strategic planning we could readily identify a difference between ‘process thinking’ and ‘outcome-based thinking’. If one thinks in terms of checking off all the boxes, that will come to pass, but without really addressing the big question ‘what are we trying to do here?’ It is entirely too easy to wind up your PhD having assumed that the goal was to Phinish the process, when really the goal was to use that process to craft you into a scholar, as demonstrated by your putting forward new knowledge.

Desired outcome: superior scholarship

Outcome measurements: ***knowledge-advancing dissertation***, peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers published as peer-reviewed proceedings.

Process outputs (not to be confused with above): completed coursework, high grades on coursework, courses taught on as a T.A., conferences attended, conference papers delivered, conference posters made, books reviewed, completed comprehensive exam, high grades on comprehensive exam, completed dissertation.

Best wishes,

W.

Edited December 17, 2011 by Westcott

[AbrasaxEos]

All good points thus far, but I'll add a few more from my own experience, as someone who has been involved (in a minor way) with a few academic hires at two institutions.

1. There were candidates who had impeccable credentials, went to top-rate programs, had great recommendations from well-known professors, but they had little or no theoretical knowledge beyond their subfield, which is what Wescott outlines above in some sense. With Humanities programs shrinking, if one at a small school is hiring a Religious Studies professor they certainly want them to have a specialty, but they also want someone to teach courses like "Religions of the West/East," "Theories of Religion," etc. If you come out of your PhD program in Early Christianity able to talk about every nuance of the Ophite diagrams, but unable to answer the question - "What is religion/how would you define religion?" in a cogent manner jobs will be tough.

2. In line with this, being able to teach a wide variety of subjects (and proving such through your teaching experience during your PhD) is a big help. It is for this reason that I decided against a New Testament PhD. There might be some justification in doing so if you really want to teach at a confessional institution or a seminary, but the wider you can cast your net, the better. This goes along with the above point, as it is even worthwhile to at least have the ability to say you could teach an intro-level course on Islam, or South Asian religions, or even something like Anthropology/Sociology of Religion.

3. It is sometimes about who your advisor knows, which is reason to work with an advisor that you both want to work with, and knows a lot of people in a lot of places. In one of the hiring committees, a big boost was given to a candidate because of their advisor being a close friend of two tenured members of the committee. The person was obviously well-qualified, but if comes down to only a few folks, such might make a big difference. There is a reason that the folks from the Ivies dominate in a many programs, and it isn't just name recognition.

That's all I have for now.