Colin Phillips
@colinphillips.bsky.social
Language scientist. Aging runner. Oxford, UK & College Park, MD, USA.
Good questions! The rules are in the Leverhulme call, they’re not our rules. I think applying before the defense is likely ok. UK connection seems to mean *some* UK degree, or currently working in the UK.
November 9, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Good questions! The rules are in the Leverhulme call, they’re not our rules. I think applying before the defense is likely ok. UK connection seems to mean *some* UK degree, or currently working in the UK.
So true! Great that you could join the fun!
October 7, 2025 at 10:34 PM
So true! Great that you could join the fun!
I have often wished there was a way to track reviewing - also as a way to reward thoughtful reviewing. Not too optimistic. ... But I tend to regard invitations as an editor's request for alternate suggestions. I often can't do the review myself, but I can point them to people they're not aware of.
September 15, 2025 at 7:25 PM
I have often wished there was a way to track reviewing - also as a way to reward thoughtful reviewing. Not too optimistic. ... But I tend to regard invitations as an editor's request for alternate suggestions. I often can't do the review myself, but I can point them to people they're not aware of.
Y’all do such good reporting. Why debase yourselves with this (repeat) slop? Oxford is a great place to walk! But the measure used here is not much related to what folks mean by “walkable city”.
September 6, 2025 at 4:32 PM
Y’all do such good reporting. Why debase yourselves with this (repeat) slop? Oxford is a great place to walk! But the measure used here is not much related to what folks mean by “walkable city”.
Yes, the detail is fabulous! The version at the National Library of Scotland is even better. Not only can you zoom way in, and also use a nifty side-by-side view to align with current satellite maps. maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/...
Side by side georeferenced maps viewer - Map images - National Library of Scotland
maps.nls.uk
August 22, 2025 at 4:33 PM
Yes, the detail is fabulous! The version at the National Library of Scotland is even better. Not only can you zoom way in, and also use a nifty side-by-side view to align with current satellite maps. maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/...
This is great ... and it feels like the seed for another series like Housing Week. Why can't the trains to Banbury run as often as the trains to Ely? Why (the heck) are different authorities handling the east and west sides of the station building? And so on.
August 8, 2025 at 12:30 AM
This is great ... and it feels like the seed for another series like Housing Week. Why can't the trains to Banbury run as often as the trains to Ely? Why (the heck) are different authorities handling the east and west sides of the station building? And so on.
Another department I work in uses letters very differently. They’re used as a source of often helpful “contextual data”. They’re rarely decisive for applicants who already have lots of advantages. But they often flag potential that might otherwise get overlooked. So, it matters how they’re used.
July 29, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Another department I work in uses letters very differently. They’re used as a source of often helpful “contextual data”. They’re rarely decisive for applicants who already have lots of advantages. But they often flag potential that might otherwise get overlooked. So, it matters how they’re used.
On further reflection, it makes a big difference how they’re used. One department I work in basically does a rough sentiment analysis on the letters and translates those vibes into a number for a scoring rubric. I think that’s a good use of letters at all!
July 29, 2025 at 7:54 PM
On further reflection, it makes a big difference how they’re used. One department I work in basically does a rough sentiment analysis on the letters and translates those vibes into a number for a scoring rubric. I think that’s a good use of letters at all!
My experience, from reading thousands of letters over nearly 30 years, in different countries, is that the vast majority of writers have integrity, and are not good at faking. Empty fluff certainly exists, but it is obvious to see, and easily ignored.
July 29, 2025 at 9:09 AM
My experience, from reading thousands of letters over nearly 30 years, in different countries, is that the vast majority of writers have integrity, and are not good at faking. Empty fluff certainly exists, but it is obvious to see, and easily ignored.
This seems to be a currently popular view. But it’s peer review. It’s what we use all the time in our professions. Why should it be uniquely ineffective when we are giving assessments of our students? Letters aren’t perfect. Nothing is. But they’re another useful tool.
July 29, 2025 at 6:22 AM
This seems to be a currently popular view. But it’s peer review. It’s what we use all the time in our professions. Why should it be uniquely ineffective when we are giving assessments of our students? Letters aren’t perfect. Nothing is. But they’re another useful tool.
We totally read the letters for applicants to our masters programmes. Some don’t know how to write informative letters. But the ones that do really help. We’re in a field where students come from very diverse backgrounds. That may make letters more useful.
July 28, 2025 at 9:00 PM
We totally read the letters for applicants to our masters programmes. Some don’t know how to write informative letters. But the ones that do really help. We’re in a field where students come from very diverse backgrounds. That may make letters more useful.
What’s the status of the £7M in funding that your earlier article said would expire in March ‘25?
July 28, 2025 at 6:20 PM
What’s the status of the £7M in funding that your earlier article said would expire in March ‘25?
So, if there is a potential red flag that you think is explainable, that's where your external expertise is most helpful. E.g., it's pretty normal for people starting an electrophysiology lab to have a publication gap, due to long lead times. I'll often contextualize things like that.
July 23, 2025 at 2:55 PM
So, if there is a potential red flag that you think is explainable, that's where your external expertise is most helpful. E.g., it's pretty normal for people starting an electrophysiology lab to have a publication gap, due to long lead times. I'll often contextualize things like that.
In most cases, it doesn't much matter where the endorsement sits on the scale from positive to glowing. Committees don't take the average temperature of the external letters. They won't say, "All were positive, just not positive enough." They give most attention to potential red flags.
July 23, 2025 at 2:51 PM
In most cases, it doesn't much matter where the endorsement sits on the scale from positive to glowing. Committees don't take the average temperature of the external letters. They won't say, "All were positive, just not positive enough." They give most attention to potential red flags.
Two easy ways to make this point.
(1) Say they would get this promotion at your own institution, ideally with real life comps.
(2) Say "This person compares favorably to X and Y, who were recently promoted to this level at institutions A and B (which the candidate's institution sees as a peer).
(1) Say they would get this promotion at your own institution, ideally with real life comps.
(2) Say "This person compares favorably to X and Y, who were recently promoted to this level at institutions A and B (which the candidate's institution sees as a peer).
July 23, 2025 at 2:45 PM
Two easy ways to make this point.
(1) Say they would get this promotion at your own institution, ideally with real life comps.
(2) Say "This person compares favorably to X and Y, who were recently promoted to this level at institutions A and B (which the candidate's institution sees as a peer).
(1) Say they would get this promotion at your own institution, ideally with real life comps.
(2) Say "This person compares favorably to X and Y, who were recently promoted to this level at institutions A and B (which the candidate's institution sees as a peer).
Thanks for this thread! A couple of my own takes.
If it's a straightforward positive case, your job is just to provide one or two pull quotes for the summary report. No need to overcomplicate. Committees want evidence that disciplinary standards are upheld, relative to institutions they respect.
If it's a straightforward positive case, your job is just to provide one or two pull quotes for the summary report. No need to overcomplicate. Committees want evidence that disciplinary standards are upheld, relative to institutions they respect.
July 23, 2025 at 2:40 PM
Thanks for this thread! A couple of my own takes.
If it's a straightforward positive case, your job is just to provide one or two pull quotes for the summary report. No need to overcomplicate. Committees want evidence that disciplinary standards are upheld, relative to institutions they respect.
If it's a straightforward positive case, your job is just to provide one or two pull quotes for the summary report. No need to overcomplicate. Committees want evidence that disciplinary standards are upheld, relative to institutions they respect.
Seems like we have shared history as lapsed believers with close family ties to Christian rock music. Though I wouldn't pretend for a moment to be a hipster. Gotta compare notes some time.
July 23, 2025 at 12:50 AM
Seems like we have shared history as lapsed believers with close family ties to Christian rock music. Though I wouldn't pretend for a moment to be a hipster. Gotta compare notes some time.
It’s interesting how the university is trying to wring as much publicity from this as possible. But uprooting one’s life is hard. And few will be able to move. The real action may be in the decisions of younger, less established, more mobile scholars. Less flashy. Bigger long term impact.
July 5, 2025 at 11:34 PM
It’s interesting how the university is trying to wring as much publicity from this as possible. But uprooting one’s life is hard. And few will be able to move. The real action may be in the decisions of younger, less established, more mobile scholars. Less flashy. Bigger long term impact.
£10 million at £2/night amounts to 13,700 overnight stays per day, 365 days per year. That’s about 5 times the hotel inventory in Oxford. Something doesn’t add up.
July 2, 2025 at 6:08 PM
£10 million at £2/night amounts to 13,700 overnight stays per day, 365 days per year. That’s about 5 times the hotel inventory in Oxford. Something doesn’t add up.
Some of my younger colleagues stay in college rooms a couple of nights per week, as they can’t afford to live locally. Would they face a tourist tax?
July 2, 2025 at 4:51 PM
Some of my younger colleagues stay in college rooms a couple of nights per week, as they can’t afford to live locally. Would they face a tourist tax?
You do great reporting at The Clarion. So why cite rankings based on dumb measures? “The 5 top attractions are close” doesn’t fit most people’s idea of “most walkable”. Oxford really is walkable. But not for that reason!
June 29, 2025 at 3:37 PM
You do great reporting at The Clarion. So why cite rankings based on dumb measures? “The 5 top attractions are close” doesn’t fit most people’s idea of “most walkable”. Oxford really is walkable. But not for that reason!
I tried out the County Council survey. A remarkably leading set of questions. If they are doing this to show that they are listening to residents, that plan might just backfire.
June 26, 2025 at 9:31 PM
I tried out the County Council survey. A remarkably leading set of questions. If they are doing this to show that they are listening to residents, that plan might just backfire.