Alt-ac: how our profession can do better?

In recent years, my primary focus on the Cocoon has been to help early-career people navigate the profession, particularly the job-market. To this end, Helen and I did things like the Job-Market Boot Camp and Job-Market Mentoring Program. Although I plan to keep doing these kinds of things--as a number of readers have said they find these kinds of things helpful--from time to time some readers in comments sections have been critical of these endeavors, saying that they don't do anything to deal with the deeper problems grad students and job-candidates face: specifically, features of the profession that put grad students and job-candidates in such awful positions to begin with. If, as appears to be case, only something like 35% of job-candidates can get permanent academic jobs at all, what does job-market advice really accomplish in the end...besides helping out this candidate or that candidate, while still leaving 65% of job-candidates without jobs? Ben Sheredos' paper on the phenomenology of professional failure really drove this point home to me: that for all too many candidates, all of the well-meant advice and encouragement in the world (viz. "You can do it...if only you improve your dossier materials and interviewing skills!") may not only ring hollow, but may even be harmful in a hard-to-quantify way (by perhaps fostering false hope, followed by many hours harder and harder work to become a better candidate, only to again be met with failure in the end). In this way, Ben's paper made me begin to reevaluate what in the world I am trying to do here at the Cocoon.

Ever since beginning this blog, my aim has been to make it a helpful and supportive place. By and large, I think we have done well. But Ben's paper made it clear to me that we are not doing enough--or least, that I am not doing enough. If we just sit here--those of us who were lucky enough to get permanent jobs--and do little or nothing to make conditions in the discipline better for grad students and future job-marketeers, then we are quite simply failing the most vulnerable people in our discipline, both now and in the future. Now, of course, some may say it's not our job (morally speaking) to take responsibility for other people's choices--as one might say philosophy grad students should know the risks of seeking entry into this profession. Maybe. But, for my part, I want to be a part of a profession that doesn't leave 65% of its members to suffer from serious underemployment, at least not if we can take reasonable steps to prevent it. 

What steps might we take to improve the profession? I hope to think (and write) about this a lot more moving forward--including ways to improve the job-market itself--but let me begin with a couple of quick remarks I first broached in the comments section here. One of the most basic things I think may need to change in our profession is how graduate placement directors and institutions (such as the APA) go about supporting alt-ac opportunities. I am glad the APA put together this brochure on opportunities outside of academia. I am even happier that the brochure's authors wrote the following:

While our placement officers work closely with graduates to prepare their academic job talks and applications, we tend to leave those of our students who may not enter the academic stream to their own devices...The role of department chairs and placement officers in providing information and guidance for graduates considering their career options is a crucial factor in their being able to find positions that suit the range of their interests and talents. The attitudes of the graduate faculty towards students—the ways they convey expectations—can enhance or cripple confidence and initiative. The worst thing faculty can do is imply that opting out of academic life is an indication of their failure as philosophers; the second worst thing they can do is imply that non-academic life is second best. (pp. 4-5)

However, aside from noting that "we might do well to broaden the graduate curriculum and to present students with a richer, more diversified picture of the opportunities that a degree in philosophy can offer" and offering a few suggestions for how this might be done (p. 5), it seems to me there are some very basic things department placement officers, the APA, and other institutions could be doing to make the 65% of job-candidates who won't get permanent academic jobs feel left adrift and more able to transition effectively into well-paying alt-ac jobs. As I am sure most readers know, it is estimated that between 70-80% of all jobs are obtained through networking. Because it is clear that a large number of people with higher degrees in philosophy (MAs and PhDs) end up in non-academic industries, one of the simplest things grad programs and professional institutions could do is cultivate contact lists of philosophers in industry and maintain personal contact with them. For example, I posed a simple question to graduate students here. I asked whether their grad program placement director even has a readily accessible contact list of former grad students who entered industry, let alone a list of former graduates in industry that they keep in regular contact with for networking purposes (viz. finding grad students alt-ac jobs). Nobody answered my question--but, as I said there, my guess is that few grad placement directors do anything of the kind. Am I wrong?

Although it's been quite a while now since I was in grad school, my sense is that programs have typically considered it the role of their placement director to focus on academic jobs. This may be in part because it is what they know best (they may have little or no experience in industry)--but, even so, simply staying in touch with past students who entered industry seems like something that they could be reasonably expected to do. Alternatively, if it's too much work for any one person, it's something that dissertation advisors to do: keep in touch with their former students who left academia and entered industry. Finally, by a similar token, the APA could hold industry networking events at each meeting of the APA, inviting former philosophers in industry and HR representatives of businesses in the area to attend and have tables in a banquet hall to meet potential job-candidates. I know that other academic disciplines do this, and given how talented philosophy grad students and job-marketeers are (in terms of being all-around very smart people), I see no reason why it shouldn't be possible to set things like this up.

But these are just a few initial thoughts. What do you think? Do you have any better ideas?

Comments

[Amanda]

I think these are all great ideas. I get frustrated when, after brining up the need of philosophy departments to be supportive of alt-ac careers, so many people respond with, "well philosophers don't understand non-academic careers so there is nothing they can do..." You just provided great examples of very simple ways grad school professors can make a big difference, i.e. just by maintaining a contact network, and maybe at the larger scale holding some networking events.

[A Philosopher]

I like all these ideas. For what it's worth, when I left the profession, no one in my department kept up with me to find out where I was. A few of my close personal friends, and my advisor, did, but so far as I know none of that found its way into any information kept by the department itself in a form that was accessible to other graduate students.

That brings me to another point: it really helped me that a few people did keep up with me. So, it would help current graduate students to have access to those who have left the profession, but in many ways keeping in touch with those who have left is helpful. I know this can be awkward, for all sorts of obvious reasons, but it is helpful.

An APA industry networking event also strikes me as an amazing idea. Along with the networking necessary to get a job, it's also helpful to know which HR people and hiring managers are open to the idea of hiring a philosopher. This is super hard, or impossible, to figure out in most cases. Bringing those people to an APA meeting cuts out the problem and would give grad students a chance to practice talking to someone in business (which is not an easy skill for most). It also would give permanent faculty, placement directors, etc, a chance to talk to those in industry and learn more themselves.

Now to beat a dead horse: My only other suggestion is to make the application process for jobs easier. Yeah, yeah, I know that search committee members have strong views on what sort of information they find helpful, they need ways to differentiate candidates, etc, but give me a break. There's simply no way (no way) that the utility calculation falls out so that the good of burdening candidates with compiling elaborate application portfolios outweighs the harm it does to those compiling these portfolios. As it stands now, making a real run at the job market means spending --- what? 20%? 50%? ---- of your time preparing applications and tailoring them to the idiosyncratic whims of a few dozen search committees. A reasonable suggestion (often made) is to just request CVs from candidates, and perhaps one other piece (a sample syllabi or writing sample?), and then collect more materials from those actually on the short lists. If companies in nearly every other industry (from McDonald's to Apple) can make first-cut hiring decisions based on a 1-2 page resume, philosophy can make do with with 10 page CVs.

[Paul]

Marcus, I absolutely agree about the networking that departments and the APA can provide should be provided. I also think that departments should include bright undergrads who have gone on to good careers.

One other thought: my spouse is an upper level administrator (staff side) at my university, and she often says a major problem is poor interviewing skills. She may be the exception, but for her it is *not* about who you know, but the skills you bring to the table (she has 92 full time employees under her), and how well you problem solve and deal with unique challenges, and it is very important that you can demonstrate this (or at least provide some indication that you can do it) during the interview. So, I really think grad departments should additionally provide interview training (and business resume construction - its very different from a CV!) for grad students. This can also happen at the university grad *college* level, which my university is starting to do. And this strikes me as something the APA could also facilitate...

[Mara]

Thank you for these great ideas and this important post! Another thing departments could do is foster connections with their institutions' teaching centers, and to stay informed about the professional development opportunities those centers might offer, directly or indirectly. There is a surprisingly large job market in educational development for people with PhDs and teaching experience (and a genuine interest in pedagogy...), though I would never have known about it had I not worked as a graduate student consultant for my university's teaching center.

[postdoc]

I remember at a conference for early career philosophers and graduate students they put together an alt-ac talk. I don't remember much about it other than that it wasn't helpful and some of their suggestions were artist, photographer, and movie director--Movie Director! I remember thinking facetiously at the time, "great, if philosophy doesn't work out I can just be a movie director!" Just sharing that funny story. I agree we need to do better!

[A Philosopher]

postdoc, thanks for the laugh. That is a good story.

[reluctant]

Although I do think talk about alt-ac is mostly well-meaning, I cannot help reminding myself that some people will see it as bad old exclusionism...