In the TESOL community, the process of hiring a new faculty member can be daunting for administrators concerned about their ability to secure the best applicant pool and guarantee a fair evaluation process for all applicants. The more transparent and more clearly communicated the process and requirements are to applicants as well as search committee members, the greater is the likelihood that job announcements attract appropriate applicants and that the program finds a candidate who will be a good fit (Adler, 2013). We address this process from the perspectives of both administrators and applicants by discussing position announcements; challenging, yet reasonable, application requirements and compilation of successful application materials; the search committee’s fair and efficient process of reviewing applications and conducting interviews with finalists; and preparation for the interview and appropriate follow-up.

Position Announcement

From the administrators’ perspective, a successful hiring process begins with establishing minimum hiring criteria (required credentials, experience), a well thought-out job description, and a performance profile based on real needs in the program (Mader-Clark, 2013): What duties will the new faculty member need to fulfill and with which teaching techniques/methodologies must he/she be familiar? In our program, we prescribe specific elements that applicants must submit in a portfolio. We have found that our prescriptivism and rigor solicit carefully compiled portfolios that demonstrate applicants’ ability to pay attention to detail and follow instructions. Additionally, the benefit of specific required elements for application portfolios is that they allow for fair and efficient comparison among applicants. The position ad should be placed, with submission requirements and closing date, in relevant publications or websites. It is advisable to allow paper and web/electronic application options.

Successful Portfolios

Portfolios contain “documents and materials which collectively suggest the scope and quality of an instructor’s teaching proficiency” and professional activities (Rodriguez-Farrar, 2006, p. 3). Standard elements include a cover letter, CV, transcript, and references, but other items that can best “provide documented evidence of teaching from a variety of sources … and provide context for that evidence” (Teaching Portfolios, 2015, para. 1) may be included: a philosophy of teaching, sample course descriptions/syllabi, sample teaching materials and assessment instruments, a teaching video, and evidence of commitment to the professional field. Table 1 summarizes our recommendations for successful portfolio components.

Table 1. Recommendations for Successful Portfolio Components

From the applicant’s perspective, the successful application process begins with reading the position announcement thoroughly, researching the potential employer, and reflecting on the required elements carefully so that materials to be submitted can be aligned with the target program’s requirements, enabling applicants to portray themselves effectively. Applicants sometimes rush to compile a portfolio with readily available materials, ignoring what is requested by the program. Applicants should make a list of relevant documents and resources that they already have, that they have to gather, and that they have to create. It is critical that applicants follow instructions, are aware of deadlines, and allow themselves ample timefor completion and review of their portfolio as this is a time-consuming process.

Search Committee and Interview

The search committee needs to be formed well in advance of the search process. In programs in which new faculty are hired relatively frequently, it is wise to rotate search committee members while also retaining members familiar with the process. The makeup of the committee should reflect the culture of the program: It should include senior faculty with years of program experience as well as more recent program hires, and it should reflect the diverse pedagogical views of the faculty.

The committee needs to develop a rating rubric for submitted portfolios to apply the same evaluation standards to all applicants. Once developed, the rubric can be used in subsequent searches. For example, our program created a list of portfolio review criteria (e.g., breadth of experience; familiarity with communicative, task-based teaching; professional engagement), each of which is rated on a four-point scale. Committee members must review each complete portfolio and apply ratings for the established categories. During portfolio review, reference and background checks are typically conducted, including a check of the applicants’ presence on social media. This procedure and the ratings allow a short list of three to five candidates to emerge, who are then invited for an interview, which, depending on finalists’ locations, can also be easily conducted via Skype.

Interview questions should address core competencies required of the new faculty member as outlined in the advertised position and focus on behavioral questions related to past instructional performance. While some questions may address general areas, such as what makes an effective teacher and a good language program, most questions require the candidate’s concrete application of situations in his or her teaching; such questions might target implementing specific teaching methodology, using technology, dealing with diversity, handling lack of resources, or cultural challenges. Candidates should also be prepared to address their professional development and career goals. To establish a fair, objective interview process for all finalists, search committee members should ask the same questions of all candidates; moreover, each member should address the same questions in each interview.

In most teaching position interviews, such questions can be easily anticipated and, thus, answers can be practiced in advance. Candidates need to ensure that they respond to the questions asked and provide complete, concise answers. Finalists may also want to bring a copy of their own portfolio, to which they can refer as they respond to questions. Additionally, candidates should be prepared to ask their own questions, which should not duplicate what could be learned from the program’s website or other resources. Many candidates stumble because they have no questions. Candidates should take notes during the interview for possible follow-up questions. In general, good questions one can ask are questions about specific teaching assignments, course load, service responsibilities, professional development opportunities, teaching environment and resources, and advancement opportunities. Questions about benefits and salary are generally not asked during the initial interview.

Following the interview, it is essential that the candidate send a follow-up letter/email within 2 days of the interview to all search committee members (candidates should obtain the names of each committee member during their interview). In the follow-up, the candidate should reemphasize the skills and experience that he or she can offer, stressing how these fit with the program’s instructional goals and methodologies.

After all of the final candidates have been interviewed, the committee members must debrief, rate, and rank them, keeping the fit between the program and the new faculty member in mind. Typically, the committee engages in discussion about each candidate before determining the top candidate. Once consensus is achieved, the top candidate receives a job offer. Although the process may take several months, the identification of an instructor who will contribute to the goals of the program is achieved.

In conclusion, hiring is a process for both administrators and applicants. For programs, it is important to have hiring criteria, including portfolio and evaluation criteria, in place; for applicants, it is crucial to allow sufficient time for the application process and to display professionalism in the preparation of the portfolio and conduct during the interview.

References

Adler, L. (2013). The essential guide for hiring and getting hired. San Bernardino, CA: Workbench Media.

Mader-Clark, M. (2013). The job description handbook (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA: Nolo.

Rodriguez-Farrar, H. B. (2006). The teaching portfolio(3rd ed.). Providence, RI: Brown University Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning.

Teaching Portfolios. (2015). Vanderbilt University: Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/teaching-portfolios/

Teaching Statements. (2015). Vanderbilt University: Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/teaching-statements/

Sigrun Biesenbach-Lucas received her MAT and PhD degrees in applied linguistics from Georgetown University. She has taught ESL, linguistics, and teacher training courses, and she is currently teaching in the Intensive English Program at Georgetown University; she has also served as a site reviewer for CEA. She regularly presents at TESOL conferences; she has published articles on email communication, and she is the coauthor of Next Generation Grammar 4.

Deanna Wormuth is director of the Center for Language Education and Development and English as a Foreign Language at Georgetown University. She has extensive experience as a program administrator and has served as a CEA commissioner and site reviewer. She has also served as advocacy chair and president of University and College Intensive English Programs (UCIEP).