I was told recently by a somewhat newly minted professor that most people get professional feedback on their CV, Cover letter, and the battery of documents often required in US applications for academic jobs (writing sample, research statement, teaching philosophy statement, diversity statement, positionality statement, faculty development statement etc….) She cited ~$150-180/ per doc on average outlay for this service. She said this is a rampant practice.
Yet another invisible gate / pay-to-play hoop. It makes me feel like I can’t possibly compete against people who have used HE HR consultants.
Is this accurate?
Comments
Lord I hope not. That’s what your professor/advisor/cohort are for.
And I can say, from the hiring side, I haven’t seen evidence of this either.
Professional like from current faculty or friends or colleagues? Sure. Supervisors, letter writers, and, in some cases, methods or professionalisation course profs.
Professional like from someone grifting 150-180 bucks? Nope. I’m sure it exists, but that’s a very different scale. The question is whether you’re being scammed or it was just them.
That’s not really how it should work, but I wouldn’t be surprised to find out people find for-pay services. Your current PI/advisor should be knowledgable about faculty searches and have advice. A good lab that puts people into good positions may even build a repository of documents from successful individuals.
The point of hiring committees asking for these documents is to establish skills and perspectives of the applicant. The more generic they look, the less successful they likely will be.
Around academia there are lots of people on the fringes taking money for helping with things you shouldn’t need help with. This amount ($150/document) screams that. It is priced just low enough to not be totally outlandish, but significantly high enough to make you think you could use the help.
If you need to get help writing these documents, use your academic network – reach out to near peers that have been hired for their documents, reach out to former members of your current lab (or nearby labs), and speak with your PI. Get a sense of what others have said, and what you want to say, and then write that. Use your near peers to assess your writing and give feedback. Do the same for others as you advance.
You should DEFINITELY get eyes other than yours on your materials if you’re serious about your application. Minimally, I’d expect a supportive supervisor, a fellow postdoc, and perhaps another of your referees. This is a very valuable practice. They should be doing this for free. You should also be doing this for others. Fine and normal to stop here.
There are a few professional or consulting services that are actually useful for shaping your materials effectively. Your best bet with these to be people with PhDs and ideally faculty experience in your domain, like The Professor Is In, or similar. Ideally, you have your version of submission-ready materials that they can offer feedback on for polishing and effective presentation for your academic audience. Grantsmanship is a learned technique and pretty insidery, and your application for a faculty role has a lot in common with it.
If you want more of an English language, grammar, clarity, and readability review (particularly useful for English as a second language applicants), your institution’s writing center may offer services, or here it may be worth one’s while to get a paid writing or editing service involved. I do not think this is standard practice, but for many extremely qualified applicants there’s utility worth paying for.