The pandemic has put a halt to a lot of hiring in the academy. Of course, higher education is not the only sector facing the challenges of hiring during a pandemic. Many other sectors are responding by implementing innovative alternatives to traditional hiring practices–and so too should academia.
In this two-part series, we offer some suggestions for conducting the second-round or “on campus” interview remotely. Although there are many benefits to meeting job candidates in person, there are also many exciting possibilities that emerge with the available technology. In this first post, we offer some general considerations for conducting a virtual or remote second-round interview. In the next post, we will focus on the central elements of the interview and offer some suggestions for creatively re-imagining them with technology, identifying the goals of each part of the interview along the way.
The academic job market traditionally includes at least two rounds of interviews. The first-round interviews largely moved to virtual formats a few years ago. Departments routinely use Skype, and now Zoom, to conduct 45- to 60-minute interviews with a short list of candidates.
The APA Best Practices for Interviewing emphasizes the importance of consistency and fairness in the first-stage interview. First-stage interviews should follow a structure in order to make sure that all candidates are given the same opportunities. As the APA explains, “Candidates should be asked the same kinds of questions in the same order. The basic idea is that structured interviews are crucial for avoiding unintended bias.…Structured interviews do not require that all the questions be identical, since in the normal interview there will certainly be questions that need to be tailored to the specifics of a candidate’s research interests, past teaching experience, and so forth.” The scripted or structured interview ensures consistency across candidates and provides the interviewing department with clear points of comparison. Interviewing departments might also consider using rubrics to evaluate first-round interviews as another means to mitigate the introduction of bias into the process. Recording remote first-round interviews—with the express permission of the candidate—aids the search committee as well. Long days with more than four interviews can be taxing and having the ability to review the interviews is helpful. Moreover, sharing the recorded interview with departmental colleagues who are not on the search committee but who will be involved in hiring helps to create a transparent search process and, arguably, facilitates better departmental discussions around hiring.
The question, however, is whether it is possible to conduct the all-important second-round on-campus interviews remotely? Brian Edwards offers a compelling argument that it is not only possible, but that a virtual search can eliminate “aspects of academic hiring that…replicate forms of privilege and implicit bias.” The structured virtual search, he reports, allowed them to leave out elements of “cultural self-replication” that tends to bias searches, and instead “focus more on the talents of the candidates and the likelihood of their success in the job.” He also acknowledged that “the so-called ‘wining-and-dining’ stage can go awry and privilege social niceties over academic and professional credentials.” Structured, multi-layered, virtual interviews with systemized feedback mechanisms that require depth of judgment democratize procedures and decreased the influence of bias or intuition, Edwards argues.
Conducting an on-campus interview during a pandemic is not easy. For a variety of health, practical, and personal reasons, some candidates may be unable to travel for an interview. (Those that can travel might well be uncomfortable doing so.) Departments ought to strive for the fair and equal treatment of candidates. Having some candidates come to campus while others experience a remote on-campus interview allows for bias and informal judgments to enter the process. Instead, hiring departments should decide early in the process and ensure equitable treatment among all candidates. Even if candidates are offered the choice of interviewing remotely or in person, they are likely to be unfairly pressured into the latter option. Given the pandemic, and given the uncertainty of travel and varying state regulations or travel restrictions, that likely means that, this year, “on campus” or second-round interviews ought to be remote.
The APA Good Practices Guide and the APA Best Practices for Interviewing offer excellent advice for arranging an in-person on-campus interview. We adapt and augment that advice to the remote environment.
Importantly, whether the interview is in person or remote, the itinerary ought to be provided in advance, candidates should be told who will participate in what aspect of the interviews, and ample time ought to be allotted for breaks. The need for breaks is especially important in the remote environment as both candidates and hiring department members will experience the added fatigue that accompanies staring at a screen for extended periods of time.
In addition, the remote interview requires some attention to timing as candidates may be facing added burdens because they are interviewing from home rather than being able to separate for a few days and focus on the interview. Some candidates may have familial responsibilities that must be accommodated. Some candidates may not have access to dedicated space for their remote discussions. These, and other logistical issues such as connectivity and format, should be sorted out ahead of time between the hiring coordinator and the candidate. Hiring departments may not ask about family responsibility or accessibility; candidates are left to take the initiative if issues are present. For this reason, hiring departments, through the department chair or hiring coordinator, should provide all candidates with information and opportunities in a uniform manner.
Throughout the hiring process, the APA Good Practices Guide reminds, “special measures may need to be taken to ensure equal accessibility for candidates with disabilities, and the availability of such accommodations should be indicated to all candidates as a matter of routine so that the burden of initiating discussion of accommodation is not placed on the candidate.”
We list here some suggestions to consider in planning for the remote on-campus interview. Readers are asked to review Section 5, Appendix A: Some Recommended Practices for Phone and Internet Interviews of the APA Good Practices Guide.
- Consider which parts of the interview are essential for “live” conversations and what might be prerecorded or written responses.
- Determine how best to ensure consistency, fairness, and accessibility.
- Consider conducting the interview according to local time for the candidate.
- Consider scheduling the interview between 9:00 am and 3:00 pm, with multiple short breaks and a break for lunch, to allow for familial responsibilities, video conferencing fatigue, personal needs, and related matters. Ensure that numerous and substantial breaks—time away from the virtual format—are included in the schedule.
- Consider, too, how to ensure that hiring departments evaluate each candidate carefully and what format best conduces to that. E.g., should hiring departments and universities focus on one candidate at a time (as in the traditional interview)? Should the interviews be mixed to allow comparison between candidates? Could, for instance, the administrative interviews all occur on one day?
- Determine whether the interview will be over one or two days or spread out across 3-4 days.
- Ensure that the candidate has access to video conferencing software. Hiring departments may need to pay for access for some candidates.
- Encourage candidates to read the APA Best Practices for Interviewing, especially the section on internet and phone interviews. Among other suggestions, the hiring department should ask that the candidate to use a wired connection to best facilitate uninterrupted communication.
- Determine what, if anything, will be recorded. The candidate needs to be made aware of recording and to provide permission for any element of the interview that is to be recorded (e.g., casual conversations, the research presentation, the teaching demonstration).
- Ensure that confidentiality is maintained through all processes.
Choosing a colleague is always a difficult process. Thinking creatively—with an eye toward accessibility and detail—the “on-campus” interview can be done remotely. Hiring departments may even find that their attention to detail, fairness, and consistency creates a better set of tools for evaluating candidates. Perhaps, in other words, we can use the necessity of remote interviewing during the pandemic to drive change and create more equitable interviewing practices in the profession. Of course, we should be viewing the current situation as evolving. Rapid changes in technologies and strategies will inform hiring practices going forward. Given this, it would benefit the profession as a whole for hiring departments to share the successes and failures in the remote-hiring process. Further, we shouldn’t be afraid to look outside of academia for creative ideas and practices.
In the next installment of this short series, we offer some suggestions for creatively accomplishing the goals of specific elements of the traditional on-campus interview remotely via video conferencing, written response, and recorded videos. We hope the suggestions will spark additional creative ideas. With this post and the next, we invite hiring departments to share their own successes and failures, or candidates to express their anxieties and thoughts about some of the techniques proposed.
The guidance is approved by and was developed in consultation with the APA Committee on Academic Career Opportunities and Job Placement. Peter Koch, Davey Tomlinson, and Sam Cowling offered helpful comments and discussion for this short series.
Featured artwork by Tessa Kilby/Graphics by Chuck Francisco
Sally Scholz
Sally Scholz is Professor and Chair of Philosophy at Villanova University. She is a past chair of the APA Committee on the Status and Future of the Profession and Committee on Lectures, Publications, and Research, as well as a former member of the APA Committees on Women and Inclusiveness.
