Notes from Rising Star Workshops for Academic Job Search

October 2025 · Simran Khanuja

Schedule for the workshop:
https://risingstars-eecs.mit.edu/current-workshop/?tab=schedule&schedule-day=1

Panel #1: Application Materials and Where to Apply

Question: How many schools do we apply to?

Answer: Consensus was to apply broadly. Most people applied to 30ish schools. Some applied to more, some less, but mostly they emphasized how luck plays a major role and we should cast a wide net because there isn’t much extra effort you need to put in for more apps. A common theme amongst all responses was how they all felt they got lucky and did not expect top-X or feel prepared enough.

Question: What does the admission committee look at for first contact?

Answer: A senior prof mentioned they look at publications, citations, whether your research area is relevant to what they are hiring for, and they said this isn’t necessary but grant writing experience can bump you up by A LOT!

Another prof mentioned that there can be multiple ways to evaluate but if something stands out it's good. Like something unique or something important / competitive that you’ve gotten, you should highlight that. She also mentioned that letters are very very important. Later in the process, they like to go into one paper in a lot of detail. They also mentioned that certain senior faculty evaluate over a time period, for example they’ll say things like, X is or should be the best in a field as seen in the last 5 years let's say.

Another prof mentioned it's not well defined. Some others talked about how the candidate plans to mentor is important. If they are interdisciplinary, they look at how the candidate plans to effectively bridge multiple disciplines and work at an intersection. They also mentioned that in general, reaching out to people and networking is important so your application won’t be missed. Another prof mentioned that your CV is important. Something that people see first.

Question: How to go about planning your letters?

Answer: First, letters are very important, emphasized by most people on the panel.

• One prof mentioned that letter writers should highlight different dimensions of your qualities. Give materials in advance and ask them to focus on specific things. Different writers should ideally talk about different things.
• Share drafts way in advance and help them to give the best letter they can. Remember that they are on your side but you need to give them as much input as you desire to get the best output that you want.
• For senior faculty, if they have an admin you can be in touch with, that would be great. They may sometimes miss deadlines unintentionally but the admin will keep things on track.
• Work in advance, build a close relationship, if you have multidisciplinary interests, you can get people from different disciplines to write one for you.
• You could also communicate the style of letters universities in certain countries expect. For example, someone mentioned that they ask one of their letter writers from Europe to write using superlatives and slightly exaggerated language because that's the style of letters people receive in US universities.

Question: How to go about planning your research statement?

Answer: Research statement should have a vision, very important.

• Aim for 4-5 pages. One prof mentioned that their future research was only half a page, but another mentioned that it should be substantially larger, maybe 1/3rd to ½ of the statement.
• It can be moonshot-y or unrealistic but needs to be supported by things in your past. It should reflect you and your authenticity. HAVE GOOD VISUALS. It should stand out, make it super simple to go through and understand. Keywords should be highlighted but don’t go overboard and highlight full sentences.
• Get feedback from people not in your research area because a lot of people in the committee may not be from your field.
• Find someone who recently got a job, especially in your dream schools and look at their statements.
• Things to focus on in your statement – Who you are, what is the value of your work, how your work fits into the department, future work/research vision, who you can collaborate with in the dept.
• Highlight your uniqueness!! A lot of the panelists emphasized this, like something novel, original, unique, I think what this is can vary across individuals.
• Highlight receiving awards, especially if they were competitive. You need funding for your work and need to apply for several competitive grants so knowing that you can apply successfully for these things helps, it doesn’t necessarily need to be monetary, just being able to thrive in competition.
• Showing potential for getting grants, being able to bring in unique, new, impactful directions of research, are crucial. Aim to have 2-3 future research directions / intentions.
• “Every part of your application is an opportunity to show you — don’t rehash your CV — show uniqueness”
• Having a peer group you go through this process with can help significantly!! Do it with your friends :)

Question: How do we talk about our diversity efforts?

Answer: Unfortunate that we cannot highlight it but work it in in the teaching statement — it's important because it shows how you care about the community but probably be mindful of your verbiage.

Miscellaneous:

• Customization: customize the cover letter, customizing the research statement too much is not necessary. Customize the teaching statement if you have some information on what the university is looking for.
• Mention personal reasons like proximity to partner/family/friends (if you want). It would help the university know that there are personal reasons that will make you feel happy in that place and that really helps.
• Make them feel like you want to come there.
• NEGOTIATE!!! (we will touch upon this later)

Panel #2: Zoom Interview and Campus Interviews

Question: Zoom interview structure and expectations

Answer: A Zoom interview is like a pre-interview. Post-COVID, it typically lasts 30mins to 1.5 hrs.

• According to one faculty member, they typically ask 5 questions to everyone — a) what’s your research interest; b) describe one project in detail; c) what's your teaching experience; d) how have you contributed to DEI efforts; e) why this institution?
• Some universities may ask to bring slides but if not asked to bring slides, don’t bring them. Stick to the time limit they give you since they would have planned time for questions and other things.
• The main goal here is to test the authenticity of your research statement. They need to see how genuine you are and how well you can communicate the vision / ideas you present in your research statement.
• They could ask broader research questions here. Can you zoom out of your niche and think more broadly about open, important questions in your field? What are some of the biggest challenges there? Who are your peers in this broader area? Are you excited about the institution?
• If possible, don’t pull up a script. It's best if these conversations flow naturally. You can have some talking points on the side especially if it's some info about courses they offer and those you want to teach etc.
• They could also ask you about what courses you want to teach. Who would you want to work with in different institutions?

Question: In-person structure and expectations

Answer: The in-person days can be intense and exhausting.

• They typically can last for 1-3 days, be prepared.
• During your visit, feel free to take a bunch of breaks, bathroom/water etc. Those small breaks are a nice reset.
• Typically, most places start with your job talk followed by 1:1 conversations with faculty, dean, head of department. There will usually be some engagement with students through a lunch or 1:1s.
• Some universities do mock teaching. They might also do a chalk talk where they make you explain things on a chalk board? (didn’t understand this properly)
• ASK FOR SCHEDULE EARLY!! Every university may have different things planned like these chalk talks or mock teaching things. Having the schedule earlier will help you seek clarifications or prepare for things beyond the job talk.
• Some questions you can be asked: If you were to give 1-2 projects to your students, what would they be? A lot of the interview is meant to be future looking, strong research vision helps.
• The time between Zoom and in-person interview can vary widely across applicants / universities. Don’t be discouraged and don’t read into it too much, it's all admin stuff.
• For 1:1 conversations with people, understand what ppl are working on but don’t go too deep in their work; focus on your work; do they need this + are you the right person to work on this? You have to convince them that you are the right person — don’t focus too much on what they’re doing — talk more about your vision and prepare early.

Question: How do you prepare yourself for these Zoom / 1:1 conversations?

Answer: Some people focus on not overpreparing and really just doing things that will help you get in a flow and have a comfortable, exciting, open conversation. Some others gave some tips as below:

• One panelist talked about how they struggled with knowing how much depth to go into when asked to describe a project. For them, they ended up being more descriptive / giving more details so that they simply have more info about you and have more content to bounce off some ideas or thoughts etc. and also to show your technical depth.
• There are a bunch of surveys / resources online in CS communities which can be helpful. Do some mock interviews and get your friends to play different personas hehe. Practice with people who are not in your area to understand how to speak to a mixed audience. When talking to someone not in your area, ask questions and find points of contact to bounce off of. Finding a flow and having a natural, easy conversation is most important. Sometimes people not in your field can give you fresh perspectives and challenge you both to meet in this plane of generality.
• An important thing to remember is that there needs to be a mutual match!! So you must also judge how comfortable you feel throughout because you don’t want to be working in a stressful environment. This is hard but remember that you are evaluating their fit for you as well.
• Also remember that awkward conversations are totally okay and silences too!! Don’t feel guilty / beat yourself up over it. And it doesn’t ruin anything.
• When talking to people outside of your field, what matters most is just thoughtfulness, how people think about problems, whether they are just nice to talk to. A bit vibe / gut-based.

Question: How do you prepare for your job talk?

Answer: One panelist really focused on how job talk is the most important thing in your visit.

• If the slot is for 1 hr, prep for 40-45mins and if it's 1.5, prep for 1 hr.
• START EARLY! Do multiple rounds of revision and practice. You almost always scrap the first 2-3 revisions of your job talk.
• Remember that most people don’t work in your area. One panelist gave a good tip – Don’t aim to target everyone or even the average. Aim to target the 1-3 people who are closest to your work and 1-2 people who are farthest away. If the ones farthest away are convinced of the importance / novelty / impact of your problem/research, they turn to the experts to vet the technical quality of your work.
• Sequence your interview days if possible to keep your dream schools somewhere in the middle so you have at least some practice but are not completely exhausted.
• How do you deal with aggressive / tangential questions? Be polite and friendly. There is a thin line between aggression and curiosity so be happy that someone is really taking interest in your work. Feel free to say that you can discuss it offline.
• Encourage questions in between, they can be good for engagement.
• You can tailor the job talk a little to the department.

Miscellaneous:

• Post interviews — Some sent thank you emails but others said it doesn’t matter much for evaluation; You should wear your researcher cap here and follow up on specific things like sharing a paper if you said you would etc. Keep it natural/organic.
• 2 body problem — only bring it up during/after offer; preferably with dean / head of department;
• Look at non-tenure track positions too, they can often be converted to tenure track in a couple of years depending on the school.

Panel #3: Second Visits—What Can Be Negotiated

Question: What should you look for in a second visit?

Answer: Second visit is when you are strongly being considered, need to assess fit, your needs etc. (need to confirm whether you’ve gotten the job and just need to decide)

• Several panelists suggested that you should ask to meet junior faculty. Understand from them how much support they are getting. Or any other pressing questions you may have. Also meet with other graduate students, see how they work, assess how happy and supported they feel.
• Location is very important since you might live there for a long time. See if you like the neighborhood, housing situation, proximity to loved ones etc.
• Ask how the admin department is. A good fiscal officer team would make your grant writing and funding things much smoother and easier to work with. Understand the admin infrastructure for grants and acquiring other resources that you may need.
• One panelist talked about how they focused on two aspects – am I going to be happy and successful here? Assess whether you feel like you can be a part of the community, what the work culture is like, how many resources you have and whether they are sufficient for you to build your career.
• Some panelists talked about space and how that can be a limited resource in some universities. Check out your office space, ask whether your students will be sitting close to you or have office spaces of their own etc.

Question: What all can you negotiate for in your startup package?

Answer: Be smart and remember that almost everything is negotiable!!

• Everything except your base pay 🙂
• Some panelists negotiated for more compute by justifying that they will need to train more models for their research etc.
• You could also potentially negotiate the amount of your startup package with valid reasons. One panelist was transitioning from one university to another and their startup package only allowed support for the student they were transitioning to but they wanted to hire a new student in the new university as well. Reason and negotiate.
• They can also be flexible about when your startup package expires. For example, if you have some funding you can use now but want to save the startup fund for use when you don’t have as much funding.
• Remember that the chair / head of department is usually on your side. One strategy is to tell them what your problems are and let them come up with solutions. There might be solutions to certain things which you may have never known about.
• You can show other offers and use that as leverage.
• Prioritize what is important to you in your negotiation. For example, if proximity to industry matters they can help you build connections with industry. If you are planning for kids, have them put daycare slots on your package.
• Be very specific in your negotiation. Make it very detailed. It can be monetary or non-monetary like space, housing, discretionary funds etc. If you ask for a lump sum amount you most likely won’t get it but if you have detailed itemized budgeting, they can’t say no.
• You can also discuss and negotiate your tenure timeline. Especially if you're moving from one school to another you can ask for previous school years to be counted. Another panelist was up for a promotion in their previous university and decided to move only if the new university is willing to make them go through the promotion cycle that year as well.

Miscellaneous:

• If you are already faculty and transitioning, they might evaluate you a bit differently like how many students you’ve supervised, how you’ve raised money, whether you have multiple research tracks to hedge and account for risks etc.
• You can ask for more time before making the decision. Ask for the second visit at a time that suits you. Use your offer to go back to your top universities and ask them to get back sooner etc.

Panel #4: Managing Your Work Life Balance

[Missed first 10 mins]

Question: How do you manage your time and multiple responsibilities as an academic?

Answer: TLDR is prioritize, focus on 2-3 things per semester, build a strong support system, SAY NO!

• Prioritize and focus only on 2-3 things that really matter at the time. This can be both personal + professional. You have control over your time and lots of freedom + flexibility. For example if you have some personal responsibilities like childcare etc it's ok to want to prioritize that + research for a semester. Universities are also very helpful in offering teaching relief and other benefits to support you.
• Every semester doesn’t need to look the same. You may have more output in one and less in another and that is ok.
• Building a strong support system both personally and professionally is very helpful. Lean on them when you need and take support.
• Saying NO is very important. A lot of panelists emphasized this. You will be asked to be a part of 101 things. Remember that you are not obligated to say yes to everything. Some tactics you can use to navigate this:
  • say yes to things which you think are good opportunities for you, will benefit you in the long run and won’t drain you.
  • You can say no and direct people to someone else who you believe might benefit from the opportunity + might be a better fit, that way you don’t feel guilty and are helping others too.
  • Say no if it is going to sacrifice your physical / mental health.
  • Say no until you absolutely have to say yes 🙂
  • Keep yourself 80% committed and leave some room because there will almost always be another last minute request you may be obligated to fulfil.

Question: How do you structure a typical workday?

Answer: Exercise!

• Finding what works for you overall when you structure the day is very important. For example, a couple of panelists said they work really well in the morning so they reserve the morning 3-4 hrs for deep work and no distractions and just for themselves.
• EXERCISE!! A lot of panelists focused on the importance of physical exercise and its multiple benefits to your focus, mood, energy and overall health. Reframe it as something that is absolutely essential and actually something that adds time to your research and productivity given its benefits, rather than subtracts it.
• Panelists also focused on the importance of having some ME time. Carve out a part of the day where you have no personal + professional duties and you can do just something that you like and energizes you.
• They maximize efficiency when they structure their day. For example, combine exercise with meeting a friend on a walk or time with kids etc.
• Teaching takes up ⅖ days in a week for some panelists.

Panel #5: Recruiting and Working with Students and Postdocs

Question: How do you evaluate what students to give admissions to?

Answer:

• One faculty member mentioned that they work on theory and a mathematical background is necessary for their research. However, multiple students fit that criteria these days. Hence after that they mostly look at whether there is a fit/match in personality and working style. How they decide that is through the interview and it’s a bit intuitive/gut feeling based.
• Another faculty member mentioned that if it's younger students like undergrads, they see if the student has made an effort in taking relevant coursework, engaging in class discussions etc.
• Another faculty member mentioned that they mostly want to look for hard-working + ambitious students, students who want to grow beyond the PI + lab env. Students who try to assess whether the lab and PI can give them sufficient resources for their own growth + success. Hard to see this potential on paper, you can get a sense through in-person interviews but even then this can be tricky to evaluate.
• If you can work with a potential student beforehand through an independent study etc that would be great because things turn out to be different when you work with them.
• Be wary of students who want to work with you for the wrong reasons
  • For example, some students are just looking for supportive, kind people who can play the role of a therapist and coddle them. Say no.
  • For some you may be their last resort in a rotation program and they might have to leave university otherwise. It's unfortunate but say no.
  • There can be multiple other reasons. Make sure they want to work with you for your skills as a researcher.

Question: How do you navigate things going wrong / not working out?

Answer: Consistent communication, like in any relationship.

• Laying out expectations initially is very important. Keep communicating what is lacking if anything. Re-evaluate every semester / 2 semesters. Have concrete points that way it is easier to provide reasoning / justification when you have to make tough decisions.
• Oftentimes it can also be that the student is good but the fit may not be right so you help them find a better fit.
• Involve your department sooner rather than later. They should know your side of the story otherwise you may fall into trouble if things get ugly.
• Most times if the student is hardworking and willing to put in effort then people almost always find projects for them.

Miscellaneous:

• Collaborations help students and make them feel less isolated in research. One thing that worked for a senior faculty member was making students work together in their office. Many others echoed that an in-person culture really helps.
• The more creative freedom students have, the better it may sometimes be (based on their ideas/seniority etc., all these things vary across profs/students).
• The spaghetti – pizza – drive test. A faculty member shared a fun way to evaluate skills they look for in a PhD student :’)
  • Ask them to heat spaghetti with sauce on top in a microwave and see how they do it.
  • Ask them to order pizza for the group and see what questions they ask you.
  • Ask them to plan a cross-country road trip and see how they do it.
  (Not sure if they do this but it was a fun way to end the panel :))

Panel #6: Funding

Question: What are your funding options/sources as young faculty?

Answer: DIVERSIFY YOUR SOURCES!

• There is your startup package but there are also many other funding programs / awards etc for early career / junior faculty.
• There is NSF CAREER which has a relatively higher acceptance rate though still not very high, but better than the rest. It's not a lot of money, probably enough to support 1 student, but it is prestigious, everyone should apply. There is also an Air Force Young Investigator Program.
• For all of these, it would be great to have someone senior / well-known back you up and vouch for how exceptional you are. Hence networking is very important.
• NIH typically you can assume that they are 10 years behind. Not the best source for cutting-edge / moonshot kinda things.
• For NSF, they love talking and want to know you. You should reach out for a chat. Most people in the committee have been profs before so they know the struggle.
• You should know about internal fellowships and funding your students can get from the university.
• You should know about seed funding options. MIT for example has a sizeable amount of seed funding. It is typically for junior faculty, new collaborations, and research directions that benefit the university and their causes.
• Industry has great funding options. While you are on your seed funding, you can set up longer-term industry engagements / funding before the seed funding runs out.
• There are multiple grants you can get from agencies outside of the US through their international funding efforts. Some panelists had funding from Canada, UK, Netherlands etc.
• When you are awarded a gift, ask for a % match from the university.
• You are also allowed to do non-university work for 8hrs/week. Use that for consulting / some company engagements etc for extra funding.
• There is also an option to buy out your teaching duty for a semester. If you get an industry gift/grant use that for these things if you want to spend more time on research.
• Diversity is key for funding. Diversify across industry, philanthropic efforts, government funding etc.
• Network a lot, give talks, try to be known for a few things. Apply for all the fellowships/awards, they may not be a lot of money but they bring prestige which helps later on.
• Most panelists don’t plan too much in advance, typically 2 years out.

This blog was written entirely by me, and the frontend design was by Claude. All credit for the content goes to the wonderful panelists of the Rising Star Workshops (I simply made notes 😊 )