Phasing out letters from dissertation committees?

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Number Three asks: At what point should I stop asking dissertation committee members for letters of recommendation? Two years post-PhD? Four? More?

I will be curious to hear what other people think. However, my own thoughts (based on my seven-year experience on the market and time on three search committees) are these:

1. It is not at all clear to me that you should ever stop using letters from your committee.
2. But it is a good idea get additional outside letters to supplement them.

My only evidence for these two claims is admittedly anecdotal, but here it is...

First, at one point while I was on the market (my third or fourth year), I tried cutting out a couple of letters from my dissertation committee--because I had several outside letters and wasn't confident that one committee member had written the strongest letter anyway. That was my single worst year on the market (I recall getting no interviews that year). The next year, when I included those letters again (even though they were old), I got a number of interviews--and I used them for the rest of my time on the market, during which my number of interviews steadily increased. So, as a job-candidate at least, continuing to use letters from my committee never seemed to hurt me--but leaving them out did. In fact, it's entirely possible that some search committee members might have thought it a red flag of sorts, as in, "Hmm...why doesn't this guy have letters from all of his committee members? Did they not like him?"

Second, there is my experience on three search committees. I cannot ever recall thinking it strange that someone still had letters from their committee members. I might think it strange if someone who had been out on the market a while only had members from their committee--as getting outside letters is something candidates can do to improve their file. But even then, I'm not sure I would hold it against a candidate if they didn't. It is also good, of course, to get your letters updated if possible (it would be a bit odd to read letters written years ago, thought one letter like this appears to have worked for me!). Still, under no circumstances can I imagine myself as a search committee member thinking, "Why does this person still have letters from their committee?"

Finally, there is the vexing issue that many job-applications ask applicants to only supply three letters. If you have letters from your committee along with outside letters, what should you do? (For example, I had six or seven letters my last few years on the market). This isn't something I've ever heard a very good answer to, so if anyone has any helpful insight please do share! What I did, though, was include additional letters if an application portal allowed it (or if I had them sent from Interfolio), or alternatively, pick what I thought my three best letters were while noting in my CV and cover letter that I had additional references. This seemed to work just fine, though it was an annoying quandary to constantly find myself in.

Anyway, these are just my thoughts. What are yours on the reader's query, particularly those of you who have served on search committees?

Comments

[Another anecdote]

Perhaps in the first year or two after your PhD you should have your adviser and one other committee member, but after that it does not matter, and it is probably best to get others. It took me 5 years to get a tt job, and by that time I only had my supervisor's letter, and two other people - an expert in my area who was at a more prestigious university, and my then-boss, the chair of the department I was teaching in. I had a fourth letter available from another expert at a strong school, but her star had not yet risen.
Sitting on searches, though, like Marcus suggests, one does not dwell on where the letters come from. What is noticed is if you come from a non-ranked department (non-Leiter) or below 40 on the rankings, and all your letters come from your PhD institution. That is not impressive. When you have an outsider, then the letter seems more authentic. They have no reason to support you except that they think your work is good.

[Amanda]

Another anecdote - I think Marcus says he doesn't look at Leiter rankings at all...and this seems consistent with the hiring practices of many teaching schools, same with journal rank. Some teaching schools care about rankings of both, of course, but if you look at who gets hired it seems many teaching schools don't care much traditional prestige. If anything, prestige hurts you in the teaching job market.

To the post: I think there is a big difference between your chair and the rest of the committee. You should always have a letter from your chair, but the other members you only need your first year or two. I had a 5 person committee and in cases like that, it is unlikely you should have letters from all your committee members, because you want outside letters too. I've heard from a variety of people that not having a letter from your chair kills your chances. Of course, each search committee is different and there is no rule that will always be true for every search committee.

[Job seeker]

Anecdotally also, not having a letter from my chair didn't seem to harm me too much - I got 4 fly-outs the last time I was on the market, out of maybe 12 applications, with no letter from my chair and only one letter from a member of my committee, which I sent in for only jobs that allowed more than 3 letters. (My chair had recently been part of a high-profile scandal, though, and I guess it's possible the other member of my committee had mentioned that?)

[Marcus Arvan]

Hi Amanda: you’re right about my experience with Leiter and journal rankings. However, I’m less sure you are right when you say, “I think there is a big difference between your chair and the rest of the committee. You should always have a letter from your chair, but the other members you only need your first year or two.”

I had a three person dissertation committee. Two of them are influential figures in my AOS, the third was a well-respected person in another AOS. After a few years, I cut out the third letter in favor of some new letters from outside letter writers. That didn’t seem to hurt me as a candidate. What *did* appear to hurt me as a candidate a year or two later when I cut out one of the other two letters: from the person who wasn’t my committee chair but is a really influential and visible member of my grad department. That was the only year I got zero interviews—so at least anecdotally, it really hurt me. So I would say it is safer to keep using a letter from one’s dissertation chair but also letters from other important people on your committee it might look weird to omit. As I said, in my case I would not be surprised at all if search committees wondered why I didn’t have a letter from that person, and might have even inferred damaging things (like maybe the person didn’t support me).

[Amanda]

Yes, I suppose it does depend how influential/well known the members are.

[Amanda]

Job seeker if your chair was part of a scandal, I wouldn't infer a lot. My guess is many people had heard of the scandal, and understood why you wouldn't want to use the letter. This, of course, isn't to say some people are successful without their chair's letter, but I would want more evidence.

[Another anecdote]

Amanda,
Just to be clear, we do not sit down with the Leiter report as we reviewed files. But to put it bluntly, when you review an application from a candidate from Kentucky or Oklahoma, you are rather non-plussed when they have three letters (and only those three) from their teachers at Kentucky or Oklahoma. In most cases you have never heard of the faculty members. (Yes I know good people have taught there).

[Amanda]

Another anecdote: Okay....seems you are combining two issues. Letters and rank. So I agree that the less well known your writers on your committee, the better it is to have outside letters. Actually, I would say everyone should have outside letters, as your always want someone to support you who doesn't have a conflict of interest. This doesn't change the fact that people from non-ranked institutions are hired at teachings schools very frequently. (I come from a fairly well ranked school, so I don't have any personal eggs in this basket, it is just what I've noticed.) Anyway, it is interesting to learn how your department does things, but I would say it doesn't seem to be the norm. Or at the least, there are a lot of exceptions to this way of doing things.

[DS]

How have people sought to secure outside letters once they are in a TT job in order to change jobs/move up? I am well published in my area, but I have never been much of a 'networker' at conferences and whatnot. Do people just cold email senior people in their area or what?