The Philosophers' Cocoon

Tips for going on the market as an Associate Prof?

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I could use some advice on navigating the job market as an associate professor. Unfortunately, my university is going through a budgetary crisis, and so I'm going back on the job market. This season, I applied to a few open-rank positions, but is it common practice for senior candidates to apply also to tenure-track jobs? Do committees hire senior candidates into t-t positions? Do they then grant those candidates tenure in the new position, or do the new hires have to start all over again on the tenure track? Thanks in advance for any advice you can give.

All good questions. Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

 

Two questions about grad school applications

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

With deadlines coming up for graduate programs, I am wondering if I, in my academic statements, should include professors that I would like to work with. I have got conflicting advice on this, some say "do not name drop" other say "name drop! So long as you know that they align with your research interests."

Second, on my application, I have been told NOT to add the schools that I am applying to, i.e., applying to UCLA, do not add that I am also applying to x, y, or z schools so that it either 1. build some competition or urgency at the school you're applying too? 2. It makes them think, "Oh well, they will get into x school. They will choose us." I have also heard naming other schools is good because they are more likely to choose you; they can have some sort of vision as to who they are competing with. Again, these are all things I have heard, and I have no idea what to do...

The second thing (mentioning other schools one is applying to) seems weird and off-putting to me. Anyone can apply to the best programs around, so why think anything of it? As for "name-dropping" faculty one would like to work with, I'm not sure!

Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

"Real" differences in teaching loads between R1s and teaching-oriented undergrad programs?

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I would like to hear more about the "real" differences in teaching load between a research-oriented program and a teaching-oriented program.

I am curious about this because I feel that the numbers of courses could be very misleading. I work in a teaching-oriented, undergraduate-only program, and the standard teaching load for us is 3/2. The typical teaching load in a research-oriented program seems to be 2/2 (I could be wrong though). However, I feel that my teaching load is way more than just one course, and I almost have no time doing research during the semester. I have never gone to more than one conference during a semester: simply canceling classes for conferences seems less acceptable in my institution, and I usually fell behind on grading/teaching if I went to a conference.

I have never taught in a research-oriented department, and my impression of the teaching load at such a place is mostly from my time in graduate school. It seems to me that professors at research-oriented programs usually have TAs for service courses, so they only need to teach in the classroom and done with teaching, leaving grading for their TAs. TAs can also cover classes so professors go to quite a few conferences during semesters. They can also teach on topics that align well with their research. So, the actual teaching load in a research-oriented program is way lighter.

Am I right? I would like to learn more about this. Thank you!

Good question. Teaching loads at my university are 3/3, and I find myself in a similar position with respect to research during the academic year--though canceling classes for conference travel aren't a problem and I'm able to get plenty of research done during summer and winter breaks. While my sense is that faculty in research-oriented programs seem to have far fewer teaching burdens with undergraduate courses (for the reasons the OP gives), I've wondered whether that is made up for by much higher demands with respect to graduate teaching and mentoring (including serving on dissertation committees for multiple students, reading and commenting on several-hundred page dissertations, etc.). 

Anyway, it would be great to hear from readers in different types of jobs. What are the "real differences" between teaching loads in teaching-focused versus R1 programs? What type of job are you in? What is the official teaching load, and how much time does it leave for research?

How can we help you? (December 2024)

Now that it's been several months since our last "how can we help you?" thread, it's time for a new one.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query. 

As usual, feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Issues in the profession (including issues of social justice)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching (including in the age of A.I.)
• Work-life balance
• Mental health & well-being
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Ask away - we're here to help! 

Finally, a quick reminder of the following RULE: Please do not submit replies to other comments in this thread. It makes these threads unwieldy and difficult for me to keep track of which queries I've posted new threads on. If you'd like to respond to a comment in this thread, please wait until I dedicate a new post to the person's query myself and comment in that thread instead!

‘Interpretability’ and ‘Alignment’ are Fool’s Errands: A Proof that Controlling Misaligned Large Language Models is the Best Anyone Can Hope For

Ever wonder why large language model AI (LLMs) keep threatening people or otherwise violating their 'guardrails' despite vast resources being spent on AI safety research?

My new paper, "‘Interpretability’ and ‘Alignment’ are Fool’s Errands: A Proof that Controlling Misaligned Large Language Models is the Best Anyone Can Hope For" shows that it is because AI safety researchers are trying to solve empirically unsolvable problems.

Abstract: This paper uses famous problems from philosophy of science and philosophical psychology—underdetermination of theory by evidence, Nelson Goodman’s new riddle of induction, theory-ladenness of observation, and “Kripkenstein’s” rule-following paradox—to show that it is empirically impossible to reliably interpret which functions a large language model (LLM) AI has learned, and thus, that reliably aligning LLM behavior with human values is provably impossible. Sections 2 and 3 show that because of how complex LLMs are, researchers must interpret their learned functions largely in terms of empirical observations of their outputs and network behavior. Sections 4–7 then show that for every “aligned” function that might appear to be confirmed by empirical observation, there is always an infinitely larger number of “misaligned”, arbitrarily time-limited functions equally consistent with the same data. Section 8 shows that, from an empirical perspective, we can thus never reliably infer that an LLM or subcomponent of one has learned any particular function at all before any of an uncountably large number of unpredictable future conditions obtain. Finally, Section 9 concludes that the probability of LLM “misalignment” is—at every point in time, given any arbitrarily large body of empirical evidence—always vastly greater than the probability of “alignment.”

Raising concerns about a referee to an editor?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Under what conditions is it acceptable to email some journals' editors to say that a referee did a really bad job? Top-3 specialist journal that prides itself on having really great referee reports.

I just received a journal rejection with a kind of experience almost everyone has had. I got 1 great report (not glowing, but they carefully read the paper and raised important objections). And 1 report that badly misread the paper. Given that this specialist journal prides itself on having great referee reports, I wonder if it would be worth it to say something.

What do readers think?

Reading suggestions for a homeschool philosophy course?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I am certainly out of my league here, so please bear with me. I'm a homeschool mom developing high school curricula for my kid. I want her to have an intro to philosophy... a full year course either in her junior or senior year. We read a lot and enjoy debating and discussing ideas and concepts. I think she would really enjoy a philosophy course. Can the experts tell me what they wish they had read or been offered when they were younger? Is there a favourite anthology for beginners you might suggest? Or perhaps some favourite books in general? I'm interested in covering an array of philosophers with world representation. And any female philosophers you can suggest would be wonderful. Thanks so much in advance.

Neat questions! Do any readers have any suggestions?

 

Workshop papers as "invited presentations"?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Suppose I'm invited to participate in (i.e., present a draft of a paper at) a workshop at an institution outside my home state. Should this go on my CV under "invited presentations"? The reason I ask is because (i) I wouldn't put a workshop I participated in at my home institution on my CV, since workshopping papers with colleagues at home is a rather mundane part of the research process; and (ii) listing it under "invited presentations" might be misleading, since it might give readers the impression that I was invited to give a colloquium talk or something like that. But since I worked so hard and travelled so far to give the paper, I feel it would be a shame not to list it somewhere.

It seems to me entirely right to list this as an invited presentation, as the salient difference to me is that it's at another institution--that one was invited to. I'd just be sure to list next to the paper title that it was a workshop. That seems to me to give the reader of the CV everything they need to know (it's not a colloquium talk per se).

What do readers think?

Visa-sponsorship issues for international job applicants?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

There was some discussion on the job market reporting thread about Wyoming sending emails to candidates saying that they did not meet the minimum qualification for the job. A commenter said, "I got a similar response (“you don’t meet the minimum qualifications”) from a smaller US college immediately after submitting my application. I followed up and they said I got disqualified because they don’t sponsor visas (I’m not a US citizen), despite not stating this in the ad."

This could be the case for Wyoming: I got the email saying I don't meet the minimum qualifications (I do), and I must have indicated that I will need visa sponsorship in the online application.

This is a bit frustrating because it seems like job ads really do not indicate whether or not they would sponsor visas. This means that international folks are needlessly applying to and getting rejected from jobs without any indication that this might be due to visa-related issues. People also don't really talk much about the hurdle of needing visa sponsorship when on the job market.

A question for folks at smaller colleges and universities: do you sponsor visas? if not, do you automatically remove any application from someone who indicates that they need a visa? how is this handled, if at all?

And for international folks who have been able to get sponsorships: any advice for people on the job market? are you honest and upfront about your needing sponsorship? has this ever been an issue while interviewing for a job?

All good questions. Do any readers have helpful insights or experiences to share?

Should R1 postdoc selection committees be more open to a wider variety of candidates?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Practically speaking, why are (mostly R1) postdoc selection committees not more open to the prospect of hiring VAPs, lecturers, or even t-t asst. prof. to their attractive postdoc positions when these folks have shown research aptitude on top of their teaching work? Why are the common candidates for most postdocs fresh graduate students who just had all the time in the world to do research?

This seems like an easy place where an equity problem could be effectively dealt with in academic philosophy. Let those folks who have taught, and who would value time to work on a research project, be considered seriously for your positions! [I think the APA should get on top of this, developing their own postdoc for those coming from teaching positions.]

The following strikes me as a worthy new perspective for postdoc committees to take: 'hey, look at this person's CV: they're on a 4/4, but they're getting research done; and oh look at their research proposal! It seems like with a full year or two for work, they have a really interesting project they could get off the ground. Let's consider them'. Whereas this does not: 'Oh look, here we have a fresh graduate student who looks to have been in a fellowship heavy PhD program. Oh, and seems they've already managed an article in PPR and Nous. Better give them another year to write even more'.

This is an interesting query, as I seem to recall coming across some research showing that it is very hard for academics to "move up" in the academy, i.e., from an initial placement at a SLAC or R2/R3 to an R1. Given how much luck seems to be involved in initial job placements (many have called the academic job market something of a lottery), it could be good for the discipline to reflect on and potentially address the situation in the way the OP raises. Then again, I'm not sure what the APA might do, or indeed, what anyone might do above and beyond "changing minds" through drawing attention to the issue. I also wonder whether, given all of the other serious issues facing higher ed, addressing these issues might seem to many like a pretty low priority.

What do readers think? 

External grad school funding sources?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

In the interest of spreading the wealth (literally), does anyone have recommendations for external grad school funding sources? I thought it would be helpful to collect them in one thread given how many people are applying to programs right now. Thank you!

Great idea. Crowdsource away!

How will the new PGR rankings affect job-candidates?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

With the new Philosophical Gourmet rankings coming out, I was wondering if folks could chime in about how they think the rankings impact, if at all, hiring PhDs from the ranked schools. I don't mean to reopen the question of whether they are good rankings or whether rankings are good at all, just the practical question of whether and how the ranking of a candidate's degree-granting department indirectly or directly affects a candidate's chances.

Good question. I suspect that a lot of people hiring at "non-elite" institutions probably don't pay much attention to these matters. But maybe people hiring at (elite) R1s might?

Do any readers have any helpful insights?

Getting organized: digital libraries and workflow?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I'm trying to get more organized, and I wonder if anyone would care to share their thoughts on managing digital libraries and workflow.

(1) A few years after my dissertation has been completed , I am left with a lot of articles from my classes and various research, along (legally!) downloaded pdf ebooks. Does anyone have any tips on organizing a unified digital reference library? I haven't really used Endnote, Mendeley, etc, but they seem to be geared at specific paper projects, rather than cataloguing one's entire reference library (or am I wrong?), and I'm also hesitant at some of those yearly price tags. Right now I find myself just using good old fashioned folders, labeled by author or category, but I imagine this is going to get complicated as time goes on.

(2) I love using Scrivener for writing, but there are so many other stages of project planning that I haven't quite figured out how to integrate with digital platforms (to-do lists, time management, project bibliographies, and note taking, larger brainstorming, etc). I'd love to hear about how people manage their digital workflow and what apps or tools they find most useful in doing so.

I have no experience with any of this, so unfortunately I can't offer any tips.

Do any readers who do have any tips to share?

Developing expertise & seeing oneself as an 'expert': a question from a graduate student

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I am in the middle of graduate school and I'm having trouble seeing myself as an "expert" in some very niche part of this field. While true, I'm still early in my career, but the jump from being a grad student to being a proto-colleague to my professors is intimidating and scary. I'm just having trouble figuring out what is required for "Expertise" in some field. Is it that I should be able to know relevant conversations? Is it that I should be able to contribute, in an informed matter, to conversations? I'm supposed to publish as a graduate student to get a job but I'm also trying to show mastery of some literature which, clearly, pull in different directions.

If I try to scour all of the relevant literature, I run the risk of not having any publications at the end of my time in grad school. If I publish extensively, then I run the risk of not knowing the relevant literatures required to be an "expert". I'm sure there's some balance in between that we must strike and that those who are successful do strike - but it just is so difficult to balance.

For those more advanced in this field, how do you define expertise?

As a former grad student, I empathize with the OP, but I wonder if they are overthinking things. I've never tried to define 'expertise' for myself, and throughout much of my early career in the field, I never felt like much of an expert. Indeed, my sense is that "impostor syndrome" is a common experience in grad school and among many early career faculty. Because of this, I've always just tried to keep learning, engage in (and learn from) conversations to the best of my ability, and produce the best written work I can given what I do know--again, with an aim of always improving. But, of course, this is just me, and maybe others have grappled with these kinds of issues differently.

Do any other readers have any relevant experiences or insights of their own to share with the OP? 

Jobs looking for "community engagement" and/or "impact beyond the academy"?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I'm increasingly applying to jobs that want me to explain how I do "community engagement" or have "impact beyond the academy." This includes some applications for postdoctoral fellowships, applications for UK lectureships under the REF, and sometimes applications for other professorships that have an interdisciplinary or applied focus. I'm looking for practical suggestions about how a philosopher who mainly sits at a desk and writes academic papers can do/claim they will do community engagement.

I'm not sure, but one plausible conversational implicature here to me seems to me that they may be looking for evidence of public philosophy, i.e. publishing in popular venues. Perhaps they are leaving it more open/vague than that, as there can be other ways to make an impact beyond the academy? I'm not sure.

Does anyone have any helpful insights to share?