A Contemplation about leaving a tenure track position

[the-tenure-track-prof]

At rural guy, I have not seen in this tiny program someone who does teaching well. In fact in the last teaching evaluation which includes 9 questions that determine the score of evaluation, the director of the program once again scored 2 out of 4 (he has been evaluated badly for 8 years now), while the only professor who is one year ahead of me scored less than I did in all courses that she teaches. My average score was 3.75/4 in teaching. That being said, this says nothing about the quality of teaching. The questionnaire is completely rigged and depends on so many subjective factors.
In terms of service, I`ve done already a lot of service and today I am still engaged in service. On a regular basis, I agree, smile, and continue to socialize with everyone. We all do that. On the inside, however, I am deeply unhappy in this position and yes I chose and accepted this position but I didn't know that there will be almost no research done on campus. Recently in fact in the program they were talking to me about opening a doctoral program and they want me to be one of the professors who teach in the program. This is a wishful thinking because there is no one to do appropriate planning for the program, and if accredited, from knowing the population here, who would apply to the program.

[Ruralguy]

You didn't look at the cVs of your prospective dept.? If you did, you didn't take them to heart, If you didn't,
then don't  make the same mistake again.

Apply out, but think of what you can do to improve the situation at your current place besides just
writing a lot (which is fine, but does nothing much if you stay permanently). That is, how can you change the environment?

[polly_mer]

Or just get out now.  Being a professor is only one of the many, many jobs in the world.

One possibility is figuring out what you like about research and then taking a job that has those same features.  For example, I really liked doing institutional research and assessment because they were problem-solving positions, unlike trying to teach people who resisted trying to learn.

[Stockmann]

I've been sort of in your shoes - it wasn't so much that the place was teaching-oriented (although in practice it is, they talk the research talk but don't walk the walk - they want you to publish, etc, but are unwilling to support research in any meaningful way) as that it was a toxic workplace that took a turn for the worse, and the place's financials also took a turn for the worse. I wasn't the only one in that department who quit. I now have a job at a much better institution in a location I prefer, albeit with no job security.

[Ruralguy]

Certainly just getting out of academia or at least professoring is an option. OP, save for your own research, you don't seem to like the job that much. It could be better at another type of school, but some of what you don't like would carry on to anywhere.

[polly_mer]

Certainly just getting out of academia or at least professoring is an option. OP, save for your own research, you don't seem to like the job that much. It could be better at another type of school, but some of what you don't like would carry on to anywhere.

New professors at research universities in my fields are often surprised by how little research they do because their job is to acquire funding and manage the research group, not to do the day-to-day research.  I've known several people who quit TT positions because those folks wanted to do the research, not do all the administrative work so others could do the research.

[Ruralguy]

For a long time, I knew a few people who left the academic track (tenured or tenure track) to work at long term, but not guaranteed, jobs at government labs. I think that's become a bit less common in recent years, but it had a long run.  Then again, I'm a bit less tuned into the pack that would be making such moves now, so maybe...

[polly_mer]

For a long time, I knew a few people who left the academic track (tenured or tenure track) to work at long term, but not guaranteed, jobs at government labs. I think that's become a bit less common in recent years, but it had a long run.  Then again, I'm a bit less tuned into the pack that would be making such moves now, so maybe...

Here at the government labs, it's still a steady steam of academic refugees.  It's not unusual to see applicants for postdoc and entry-level scientist positions who already have been tenure-track or even tenured.

[Hibush]

For a long time, I knew a few people who left the academic track (tenured or tenure track) to work at long term, but not guaranteed, jobs at government labs. I think that's become a bit less common in recent years, but it had a long run.  Then again, I'm a bit less tuned into the pack that would be making such moves now, so maybe...

Here at the government labs, it's still a steady steam of academic refugees.  It's not unusual to see applicants for postdoc and entry-level scientist positions who already have been tenure-track or even tenured.

At the government labs I'm familiar with, Congress has been maintaining solid appropriations, but the Administration has been creating hurdles. It appears to be because scientists keep coming out with information that contradicts policy or previous declarations. The mechanism is tricky. One is to leave key positions vacant. Sure you can do with a few vacant assistant-undersecretary slots and let the staff underlings make the decisions. But if the human resources department is empty, you can't approve any new hires in the actual laboratories. So we are seeing an unusual number of scientist vacancies there. But they are likely to be refilled quickly as soon as national HR is restaffed.