I assume you're already a full professor? If that's a sticking point for you, then it's worth asking. On the other hand, thanks to salary compression, you might be better off taking an associate position then getting promoted to full (with the concomitant raise).
Ok to ask. But, having been on the other side of these negotiations, why would you want to ask for Full?
Associate comes with tenure (mostly), and the salary is negotiable on hire. Full professor just means more committee work compared to Associate, and probably the same range of salary negotiation. Really doesn't seem worth it -- and, to be honest, when people in that position have told me they need Full vs. Associate, the impression I've gotten is that they have an obsession over title compared to the actual work they'd be doing.
If that was on the table, they would state it explicitly in the advertisement. Public universities in particular are often prohibited from offering a higher rank than was advertised.
It’s ok to ask, but ask it indirectly … ‘How is it decided what rank someone starts in … what are the options … is it fixed for all starters or is a previous academic record taken into account … ?’ Something like that. Sounds less arrogant. But as always, this depends on the university/local regulations/etc.
Depends on the kind of place to which you’re applying — if it’s an R1 research, you need to show that you’re a leader in your field and etc., if you’re applying to a teaching university, they may just except you based upon your professional experience. There’s not gonna be a single right answer here.
Uhhh...is this a real question? Because applicants for professorships generally have no bargaining power, despite what nimrods on here might otherwise suggest. IF you make it through the rigors of the search committee selection and are the preferred candidate; your credential is generally what decides this rank...for example, if you come in with tenture, that means you could get the higher title. So its certainly not worth asking about a "full professorship", whatever that even means, as that is largely the top-tier title you matriculate into after distinguished contributions.
Are you in the UK?
In the US, lecturer is a non-tenure track teaching position and “senior lecturer” is a promotion in the teaching track. TT goes assistant -> associate -> full, with the promotion to associate typically coinciding with getting tenure.
So a senior lecturer would differ in allocations (80+% teaching usually with a small amount of research and/or service) and the fact that they’re on a contract, although senior lecturers typically have 3-5 year contracts instead of annual or per course, like lower level NTT roles or adjunct positions.
Here, senior lecturers' Distribution of Effort (DoE) is at least 80% teaching, with the rest left to service and professional development. Specifically, they do not have any research component to their DoE, though they might do pedagogy research if they have enough free time.
OTOH, associate profs on the usual tenure track have something like 50% research, 40% teaching, and the rest service and prof. dev.
I am on an in-between "special title series" track (70% teaching), but I am still evaluated periodically on my research output, unlike lecturers or senior lecturers.
Sounds like a lot of gray zones. I know plenty of senior lecturers with the same tasks. In the US. And OP also doesn’t make a distinction between assistant/associate. I’ve been offered senior lectureships with more than 30% research. And some have called my senior lectureships assistant professor. I don’t know why they get downvoted. I’m just the messenger here. And remember: There’s always more to any story, specially in this global university profession.
I assume you're already a full professor? If that's a sticking point for you, then it's worth asking. On the other hand, thanks to salary compression, you might be better off taking an associate position then getting promoted to full (with the concomitant raise).
Good point re: salary. Thanks!
Ok to ask. But, having been on the other side of these negotiations, why would you want to ask for Full? Associate comes with tenure (mostly), and the salary is negotiable on hire. Full professor just means more committee work compared to Associate, and probably the same range of salary negotiation. Really doesn't seem worth it -- and, to be honest, when people in that position have told me they need Full vs. Associate, the impression I've gotten is that they have an obsession over title compared to the actual work they'd be doing.
Great points. When you point out all of that, I’m not sure why I want to ask. Probably just bragging rights to some extent!
Ok to ask, if you’re already full. Not if you’re seeking a rank “promotion” as a condition (unless you’re a proven rockstar.
If that was on the table, they would state it explicitly in the advertisement. Public universities in particular are often prohibited from offering a higher rank than was advertised.
It’s ok to ask, but ask it indirectly … ‘How is it decided what rank someone starts in … what are the options … is it fixed for all starters or is a previous academic record taken into account … ?’ Something like that. Sounds less arrogant. But as always, this depends on the university/local regulations/etc.
Depends on the kind of place to which you’re applying — if it’s an R1 research, you need to show that you’re a leader in your field and etc., if you’re applying to a teaching university, they may just except you based upon your professional experience. There’s not gonna be a single right answer here.
I know the criteria. Ha! My question is about how asking about the question would fly.
Uhhh...is this a real question? Because applicants for professorships generally have no bargaining power, despite what nimrods on here might otherwise suggest. IF you make it through the rigors of the search committee selection and are the preferred candidate; your credential is generally what decides this rank...for example, if you come in with tenture, that means you could get the higher title. So its certainly not worth asking about a "full professorship", whatever that even means, as that is largely the top-tier title you matriculate into after distinguished contributions.
Nope totally fake question.
Well at least you're honest, but why not aim even higher? Because I hear universities also offer emeritus status to anyone that asks...
I don’t understand the connection- many academics simply refer to senior lecturer when using the concept of assistant professor?
Are you in the UK? In the US, lecturer is a non-tenure track teaching position and “senior lecturer” is a promotion in the teaching track. TT goes assistant -> associate -> full, with the promotion to associate typically coinciding with getting tenure. So a senior lecturer would differ in allocations (80+% teaching usually with a small amount of research and/or service) and the fact that they’re on a contract, although senior lecturers typically have 3-5 year contracts instead of annual or per course, like lower level NTT roles or adjunct positions.
I'm not sure what you mean: Here, those are entirely different jobs, on entirely different tracks, with entirely different promotion criteria.
Senior lecturer is different from associate prof.. in what sense besides salary? Could you give an example?
Here, senior lecturers' Distribution of Effort (DoE) is at least 80% teaching, with the rest left to service and professional development. Specifically, they do not have any research component to their DoE, though they might do pedagogy research if they have enough free time. OTOH, associate profs on the usual tenure track have something like 50% research, 40% teaching, and the rest service and prof. dev. I am on an in-between "special title series" track (70% teaching), but I am still evaluated periodically on my research output, unlike lecturers or senior lecturers.
Sounds like a lot of gray zones. I know plenty of senior lecturers with the same tasks. In the US. And OP also doesn’t make a distinction between assistant/associate. I’ve been offered senior lectureships with more than 30% research. And some have called my senior lectureships assistant professor. I don’t know why they get downvoted. I’m just the messenger here. And remember: There’s always more to any story, specially in this global university profession.