Non-standard publications and the market

In the comments section of our most recent 'Ask a search-committee member' thread, anon writes:

What would publications from https://1000wordphilosophy.com/ look like to a potential search committee members?

The editors do come right out and say

"We publish approximately 10% of essays that are submitted, usually after substantial revisions and editing.

Most, but not all, of our published essays are by professors of philosophy or advanced graduate students in philosophy.

Essays published at 1000-Word Philosophy are peer-reviewed publications. "

I realize not as much weight as journal articles but I 
am still curious.

Anonymous then chimed in as follows:

Hi anon--just one perspective here but my guess it is somewhat representative of folks on research-focused hiring committees: having a publication like this would make no difference to me one way or another when assessing a file. My guess is that some faculty at research-focused would (unjustifiably) count it as a very slight negative, because it makes you look "less serious" as a researcher or something, and that some would count it as a slight positive (but not much of a positive). I have no idea what people in other kinds of institutions/departments would think.

As far as research schools go, this sounds right to me. Research-focused departments are looking for top researchers, where is this typically understood as original work in top-ranked journals, book presses, etc. Since short 1,000 word introductory anthology pieces don't speak to that, my sense is that Anonymous is right: one of these publications is liable to make little or no difference in how anyone evaluates a file (and it could indeed be a minor negative). But what about more teaching-oriented departments?

My sense is that publications like this could well be a mild or even moderate positive for 'teaching jobs' (i.e. SLACs, CC's), provided one is otherwise an excellent candidate. Here's why. At teaching schools like mine, people care about whether a new hire is going to publish enough to get tenure. Since one is almost certainly not going to get tenure on the basis of articles in 1,000-word philosophy, it won't count for much if one doesn't have other, more standard peer-reviewed journal publications (viz. more substantial, original work). However, suppose you do have a fairly good peer-reviewed publication record in more standard types of journals. In that case, might a 1,000-word philosophy entry be seen as at least a minor positive? My sense is: absolutely! Indeed, there's a particular reason for this.

A number of years ago, a friend of mine at a SLAC mentioned that, in the tenure process, their article that received the most positive reaction from the tenure committee and dean was a chapter in a book in Blackwell's Philosophy and Pop Culture series. Apparently, this paper was singled out, far more than the person's peer-reviewed journal publications. Why? It might sound odd to a lot people--specifically, because we are socialized in grad school to think that "good research" is publishing in Phil Review and whatnot. However, my sense is that for at least some SLACs, provided one also published more standard peer-reviewed research, 'non-standard' publications tend to be looked upon pretty favorably. The reason for this, or so I gather, is that people at SLACs--particular administrators--can look favorably on things that give the university a good public face (i.e. visibility outside of academia). Publications in Blackwell's pop culture anthology do this, as (plausibly) do entries in 1,000-word philosophy--since it is a venue intended to introduce a general audience to philosophical issues! 

Anyway, long story short, even at "teaching institutions" I expect that entries in 1,000-word philosophy may not be looked at as a huge positive. Still, provided one otherwise has a more standard publication record, I think it is not at all implausible that publications like this may tend to be looked at as at least a mild positive--as more "popular" publications can potentially make you look like a more interesting candidate who does philosophy in a way that may engage more with students and the general public.

But this is just my sense. What is yours?

Comments

[Paul]

Assuming your pubs are probably organized into subsections (blind reviewed journal, edited collections, invited pubs, etc.), I don't think its a problem but I would put it under "other publications" or something like that. I realize it says its peer-reviewed, and I would note that on my CV, but I wouldn't try to stick it in with other journal pubs. That is what, in my experience, can be off-putting to both search and tenure committees.

Do NOT lump all your pubs into one long list, especially for research jobs. Perhaps Marcus can chime on whether the situation is different for teaching jobs.

[Cleverly Disguised Mule]

Note: I've never been on a hiring committee; barely have a job.

Would it make more sense to call these things "public philosophy" or "public outreach"? They look more like if you wrote something for, say, Quillette, The Conversation, or made a video for Wi-Phi something like that. And I reckon some committees might like that you're doing something for a public audience, and you're aware that it's not peer-reviewed rigorous scholarship.

Can others confirm/deny this hunch?

[Mike Titelbaum]

Coming from the perspective of an R1 tenure-track search committee member, something like this wouldn't hurt you in my eyes, and I would think it's kind of cool that you're up to such things. But I'm evaluating your cv by looking at your substantive papers in major journals, and that's what's ultimately going to play into my decision.

[Anon]

I don't know why this would hurt candidates especially with the discipline moving toward more respect for public outreach/philosophy.

[Sam Duncan]

I think that publishing in either one of the pop culture and philosophy books or on 1,000 Word Philosophy could be a pretty big positive if one were applying for community college jobs, but one would need to present it in the right way. This is especially true for 1,000 Word Philosophy. One of the things my institution is really pushing, and I think this is true for CC's generally, is open educational resources to replace traditional textbooks. Now technically the essays at 1,000 Word Philosophy aren't OER due to the fact authors retain copyright, but writing an essay like that would show that not only is one committed to finding free educational resources for students but that one has experience *creating* such resources. I think that would be a big deal. Given that it's web based one could also pitch it as a use of educational technology since all things tech are trendy. And with the pop culture and philosophy I think that one could definitely sell that as proof that one has experience relating philosophy to issues students care about and are interested in and so as some evidence of an ability to motivate student interest. One thing I would say is that I wouldn't necessarily assume that hiring committees at CCs, or I would wager smaller teaching schools, will now what 1,000 Word Philosophy or the pop culture and philosophy series are, so one might need to explain them and their significance.

[Sam Duncan]

Also, in response to one earlier comment that mentions "Quilette:" I would be very careful about where I published any public philosophy. Rightly or wrongly, and I'm sure a lot of people are going to tell me how wrong I am, I think of "Quilette" as bordering on a "men's rights" or even an "alt-right" forum. For me at least publishing there would be a red flag. For what it's worth publishing in say "Jacobin" might give me similar pause; that might not be red but it borders on yellow and for someone more politically conservative it might even be red. Publishing in any forum associated with the ideological fringes of either side might not be a great idea. Anyway, I'm already anticipating blowback on this, but fair or not it's true. If you're stepping outside the normal journals or the really established popular press like the NYTimes, Wall Street Journal, or the Atlantic be aware of the public perception of the venue you're thinking of publishing in (whether you think that perception is fair or not). In a lot of cases they probably don't have a lot of promise of helping you and they may have some real threat of hurting you.

[Nathan Nobis]

As an editor at 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology (who just ran across this post on 3/20/19!), I agree with Marcus's sense that "provided one otherwise has a more standard publication record . . publications like this may tend to be looked at as at least a mild positive" in job seeking.

I think this is especially true when it's a teaching-oriented job, and/or a job in an interdisciplinary department, and/or the hiring committee is not composed solely of philosophy professors, and so the non-philosopher on the committee might not be as interested in the candidate's "pure" research or writing samples, since they don't know the field. A 1000-Word Philosophy article will be very accessible (for them) and provide evidence you can communicate effectively with a general audience, including students.

[sm]

Any thoughts about the impact of publishing in Think-Philosophy for Everyone (Cambridge University Press)? Would that be similar to publishing in 1000-Word Philosophy?