The Philosophers' Cocoon

Including 'reappointment letters' and/or teaching observations in job market materials?

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

Is it appropriate to include reappointment letters (which specifically comment on my scholarship, teaching, and service from the Chair and Dean) and teaching observations in a job application? If so, where? Teaching obs could go in a teaching portfolio I suppose...Any norms here?

Teaching observations seem just fine to include in a teaching portfolio. But I don't think I've ever seen 'reappointment letters' in a dossier, and I think this would probably seem strange. 

What does everyone think?

How long to spend on a conference commentary?

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

How long should commenters spend on reading/writing commentaries for conference presentations?

Fair question, though I think it's entirely up to you! 

How much time do other readers spend on commentaries?

Sharing teaching 'breakthroughs'?

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

Some readers might remember a post I made a long while ago about how I have struggled with teaching for 10+ years, tried *all* sorts of techniques&adjustments and nothing really changed. But I think I *might* have made a breakthrough recently. The recent classes have felt different from all classes in the past, in that I observe that students became very focused during class.

The turning point was that I had to lecture on something that I didn't feel I understand well, and also didn't have the time to really figure it out, for the first time. So I just explained the literature as it is, without any layer of my original perspective or understanding. Somehow that ended up very positively. It has a consistently positive result since I followed that style. I just want to share this story with the readers of cocoon.

Another reader submitted a follow-up comment (which I don't normally allow, but did in this case since it is in effect an independent request for 'help'):

would you be willing to tell us a little more about what you mean, perhaps in a standalone post? As someone who is adjusting to a newly increased teaching load and is feeling very overwhelmed, this is very intriguing.

I'd love to hear more, both from the OP and from other readers.

What 'teaching breakthroughs' have you made, and how do you think they made you a better teacher?

Should CVs include every talk you've given?

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

Should CVs include every talk you've given? I'm embarrassed by some older talks, and I would rather not have them on my CV if I can help it. If I did a "Selected Talks" section and listed what I think are my best talks, would that raise red flags for committees?

Good questions. I suspect that over a 20-30+ year career, a CV that included every talk would become very bloated. Then again, depending on your university, until you're promoted to full Professor, it could be wise to list everything you've done. Not sure, but the OP sounds like they are on the job market, and if so, it seems to me they might be better advised to list every talk (unless, I suppose, there is something about the title or venue of the talk to be "embarrassed about", which I wouldn't know how to judge).

What do readers think?

Writing a review of a spouse's book?

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

Is it ethical to write a review of my spouse’s book? It’s a groundbreaking work related to my research. Is there precedent of other philosopher partners doing this?

I'm not entirely sure about the answer to either question, but I suspect it's probably imprudent, and as someone who thinks ethics reduces to prudence, that would constitute ethical grounds to avoid it.

Why do I think it's probably imprudent? In brief: there are social norms against nepotism, those norms exist for reasons (viz. conferring unfair advantages to relatives), and this sort of thing may be seen that way. Even if the work is groundbreaking, spouses aren't exactly known for being free from bias, and so I suspect it's better left for other professionals to judge the quality of the work. But maybe I'm seeing things wrong here? 

What does everyone else think?

How to get feedback on a book project?

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

What are some ways to get feedback on a potential book project? We usually present papers or book chapters at conferences, and I have never seen anyone presenting a book project. It is understandable since a presentation of a book project would probably be very general and sketchy without sufficiently substantive content. But suppose you have an idea for a book but are not sure if it is worth pursuing, and you really want some suggestions. How do you get this kind of feedback?

Good question! I once gave a talk at a conference in Beirut outlining what, in effect, became my second book, and I did get some helpful feedback there. I also briefly co-organized a reading group consisting of philosophers in the region to share and discuss each other's work, and I recall getting some good feedback on a book chapter there, as well. But, beyond that, I'm not sure.

Do any other readers have any helpful suggestions?

Changing a paper topic for an edited collection?

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

I've said I'll write something for an edited collection, and sent in an abstract. Now the time has come to write it, I've realised that a different paper (still within the remit of the collection) would be much more interesting. Is it too late? Or would it be acceptable for me to write the other paper, rather than than the one I said I would? I don't want to make a fuss or make life difficult for the editor. But if I'm free to swap plans it would make for a much more interesting paper!

I think the clear thing to do here is to ask the editor(s) of the collection. 

Does anyone else have any helpful tips or insights to share?

Job market reporting thread (2024-25 season)

For those of you new to this, each year the Cocoon has two different job-market threads: one for job market discussion/commiseration, and another for reporting job-market news (interviews, on-campus invites, offers, rejections, etc.). As noted in previous years, the reason the Cocoon has two threads is simple: some people only want to discuss/commiserate but not hear about interviews, offers, etc., other people only want news, and other people still want both!

So, please feel free to bookmark or otherwise follow this thread throughout the job season (this fall and next spring), and post any news you have! Also, please do feel free to report on news for jobs in other departments that philosophers can be expected to apply to (political theory jobs in political science departments, AI-ethics jobs in interdisciplinary departments, etc.). Just make sure you specify the institution and department so that other readers and commentators don't confuse them with jobs in philosophy departments.

One quick reminder: this thread is only for reporting news on the market (i.e. reporting interviews, flyouts, offers, hires, and so on), so please, report away! If you would like to discuss the job-market, please comment on the discussion thread.

Permalinks to both job threads will remain on the right side-bar of the blog through the end of the job season. Because of Typepad's functionality limitations (which only permits 100 comments before starting a new comment page), readers may elect to bookmark each new page of comments as each new page emerges. I recognize that it can be frustrating to scroll through page after page to get to new comments, and I think this is probably the best solution given Typepad's functionality limitations.

Finally, commenters are asked to please remember and abide by the Cocoon's supportive mission while reporting. Thanks, and best of luck to all on the market!

Asking an editor for an update because you're on the market?

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

Is it unwise to sending a polite email to an editor to inquire about the status of a manuscript with minor revisions? I am going to be on the job market this year, and deadlines are coming very soon. Given the very short turnaround time that they allotted me for the revisions, I was hoping the journal would also be relatively swift with the decision. However, the paper has been sitting at "editor assigned" for a few weeks. Given the real benefit that another publication would add to my dossier (if it were to be accepted before job deadlines), should I reach out? If it's relevant, the revisions requested were indeed minor and mostly took the form of suggestions (rather than actual objections).

Hmm...while I understand the temptation to do this, my guess is that's probably best to let the process play out in the normal way, and avoid inquiring unless the journal has had it an inordinately long time (i.e., many months). Maybe the editor would be sympathetic if you explained the situation, but on the other hand, some might be irked by what they might perceive to be a request for special treatment (compared to the normal review process). But I'm pretty cautious with things.

What do other readers think?

A Linguistic Inclusivity Project (Guest post by Yener Çağla Çimendereli)

Do Native and Nonnative English Speakers Face Equal Epistemic Challenges in Academic Philosophy?

Global linguistic justice in academic philosophy has been a topic of debate lately in academic papers and informal discussions (including a thread in the Philosophers’ Cocoon here). This debate mainly concerns whether or to what extent nonnative English speakers are structurally disadvantaged in academic philosophy, and whether there is anything we can or should do to mitigate these potential disadvantages. For example, the Barcelona Principles for a Globally Inclusive Philosophy, written as a manifesto by Filippo Contesi and signed by 756 people to date, identifies potential issues that nonnative speakers of English may face in philosophy in various contexts and commits to taking deliberate steps to address such structural disadvantages.

I have been involved in developing and maintaining the Barcelona Principles project since 2022 and have been working to promote BP both at individual and institutional levels together with others. I believe that the BP has been pivotal in the profession for starting an honest discussion about the role of English in academic philosophy, especially in analytic philosophy. However, I also understand that for some philosophers the lack of sufficient empirical data on this topic constitutes a worry against such initiatives. Although some analyses of the native-speaker status of authors in publications can be found (e.g.,  Schwitzgebel et al., 2018 and Marsili et al., in-progress), no systematic study has been conducted to collect data from native and nonnative English speakers about different challenges they may personally experience when doing philosophy in academic English.

I am now part of a team led by Uwe Peters (Utrecht University) that is trying to change this by running a large-scale, international survey to gather the relevant data. The survey, which is the first of its kind, asks you, for example, how long it may take you to read, write, or understand a philosophy article or presentation in English and in your mother tongue. The aim is to quantify and compare the epistemic efforts needed by native and nonnative English speakers to do philosophy at an international level. To get an accurate picture of these effects, no matter whether you are a native or nonnative speaker of English, we would greatly appreciate your participation.

To participate, you only need to have studied, be studying, or be doing research in philosophy. The survey is short, taking less than 15 minutes to complete, and won’t collect any identifying personal data. Your participation would be invaluable for our project and your responses could have a real impact in efforts to make the field more inclusive.

You can access the survey in English through a secure link here.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the project, please email us ([email protected]).

Thank you very much for your time and contribution!

How many hours to work per day on research leave?

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

How many hours a day is good to work on research? I'm a couple of years into a TT job, and have a semester of research leave. So for the first time since I was a grad student, I can (theoretically) devote all my time to research.

I know not to burn out, but I'm wondering how much "serious" research time (ie, reading and writing) to expect and plan for. I tend to use the pomodoro method, working in 25 minute blocks. I was thinking 10 of those a day, meaning 250 minutes or just over 4 hours. 5 days a week that would be 20 hours a week of solid research time.

Any thoughts? Too high? Too low? Maybe I should ease myself in?

Good questions. I think we've discussed similar issues before, and I recall hearing people say that 4-5 hours per day is pretty good. Some people may work more than this, but I've heard (and experienced myself) that after 5 hours or so, continuing to work can have diminishing returns. I guess I'd recommend experimenting a bit to discover what works best for oneself. Ideally, one should enjoy research leave, so maybe work as much as you enjoy?

What do readers think?

Tips for people pursuing 'couple-hires'?

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

Lots of people (reasonably!) have complicated feelings about couple hires – to be clear, the following questions are partly about strategy, but partly about how and whether this can be done in a transparent and upfront way.

If your goal is to get a couple hire, should both members of the couple apply for all the same jobs (when reasonable, like if both work in the same area or they’re open area searches)? If you do this, should you mention these facts in the letter?

Or should just one member of the couple apply – whoever has a better shot for whatever reason at some particular job, say, one’s from a “leiterific” program and the other isn’t, or one’s research aligns better – and bring up the partner if given an offer?

Do the answers to these questions change when there’s one job vs when a department is hiring multiple people?

Good query, and I don't know the answers!

Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

How are "research associates" viewed on the market?

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

How do TT hiring committees regard research stints on a CV, particularly for job openings at R1 schools? If one secures a postdoc but then becomes a research associate for several years, is that looked down upon in any way? Could it make one seem a less competitive candidate, beyond the obvious things like reduced opportunities to gain teaching experience? Also, does it matter for hiring purposes if the research position is unpaid?

Good questions, and I'm not sure. Are any search committee members or other people who have been research associates willing to weigh in?

Dissertation abstracts in CVs?

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

If a job doesn't explicitly ask for a dissertation abstract, is it okay (or even beneficial) to include one at the bottom of your CV?

Another reader seconded the question. I guess I think there's little risk of harm in doing this, but also probably not much upside. My experience is that committee members tend to use CVs to see whether a candidate has published, which courses they've taught (especially independently), and to see their overall accomplishments. When it comes to a candidate's original work, the research statement and writing sample seem to me like the main things that committee members will focus on.

But these are just my thoughts. Are any search committee members out there willing to weigh in?

How to list a book under contract?

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

I wrote a complete book draft. It was reviewed by an editor and two referees, it received generally positive reviews with some suggestions for revisions, and I signed a contract. There is, of course, language in the contract about if the book that is delivered is deemed unacceptable, they don't have to publish it.

I'm applying for jobs. How do I list this book draft. Under "Work in Progress"? Or can I put it under forthcoming publications with something like "(under contract, revisions pending)". Would anyone care, as long as its status is clear?

Good questions. I think as long as your CV is clear about its status, you're okay listing it either under Work in Progress or Books. But I don't think listing it under "Forthcoming" work is germane, since it's not technically forthcoming. The key thing, I think, is whether you list it under Work in Progress or Books, you should list it as under contract. If you'd like to say (under contract, revisions in progress), that could be helpful information.

What do readers think?

7 Years Later: Surviving Graduate School in Philosophy (2024 Edition)

By Trevor Hedberg

Back in 2022, I announced that I was working on a comprehensive guide to graduate school in philosophy. I am happy to announce that a full draft of that guide is now available.

You can read it here.

I had three main goals in writing this guide. First, I wanted to provide a cohesive and thorough overview of every major element of graduate school. To my knowledge, no such resource exists for the discipline of philosophy. The information that exists is mostly scattered across various philosophy blogs posted within the last decade. I believe this is the first time so much material and information has been consolidated into a single source.

Second, I wanted readers to be able to read about their topics of interest easily rather than having to hunt through the entire document. To facilitate this, I formatted the document using three layers of headings to create a robust, easy-to-navigate table of contents. Just click on your section or subsection of interest, and you’ll jump straight to it. As with most digital documents, the text is also searchable using the Ctrl + F command.

Third, I wanted the document to contain lots of references to additional resources. I did not want readers to be limited to just my perspective on these subjects. To accomplish that and avoid cluttering the text with formal citations, I primarily used hyperlinks in the main text and in footnotes to direct readers to other web pages and articles. For that reason, this guide is best read on a digital device connected to the internet.

My hope is that some of you reading this will give it a look at some point in the future. You might even have some suggestions for additions or revisions. If you want to provide any feedback on the guide, there are two ways to do so. First, you can send an email to [email protected] with the phrase “7 Years Later” included in the subject line. Alternatively, you can visit this Google Doc version of the guide and leave a comment at the part of the document where you think a change should be made. (The linked table of contents still works in this version but is a little clunkier than the other version.) I will be especially grateful for those who point out broken links – I am certain that some have escaped my scrutiny.

My plan is to gather all the suggestions for changes in Summer 2025 to update the content where needed. I do not expect a ton of you to read the whole thing, but if there’s a section that interests you, don’t hesitate to give it a look and drop a comment.

While I still have work to do on this guide, I hope it will nonetheless prove a useful resource for graduate students in its current form.

Do publication venues matter for many jobs?

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

I have heard that the venue of one's publications doesn't matter for many jobs. Is this true? I guess I have in mind TT (or otherwise permanent) positions that aren't R1 but which still have a research expectation. I am curious about this for both hiring and promotion reasons. Does publishing in, say, generalist journals outside of the top 20 or so look bad to a hiring committee? Could the venue of one's publications every be an issue for tenure or some other form of promotion? Is it better for junior members of the profession to publish anywhere rather than nowhere? Thoughts on any or all of these questions, especially from current faculty involved in these decisions, would be helpful.

Good questions - it would be great to hear from search committee members!

If you've hired before (or are hiring now), what kind of department/institution are you at, and how much (if at all) do publication venues matter to you (or committees you've served on) in hiring?

Submitting another paper to a journal after rejection?

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

an editor suggested me to not succesively send papers to one journal and to wait for (at least) a few months before submitting another paper. Is this the norm in most journals? (I am new to the game and trying to make sure that I know the rules which are not indicated in the instructions) Thanks so much.

Some journals have explicit policies about this, but I don't know if beyond this there are any unspoken norms. 

What do readers think?

Job-market discussion thread (2024-25 season)

Now that it's September, I figured now is probably a good time as any to open up this season's job-market discussion board. After all, readers who will be heading out on the market may already have questions you'd like to discuss (about application materials, the application process, etc.). So, please feel free to bookmark and visit this thread throughout the job season to commiserate with others, or just to see what others are talking about!

As many readers of the Cocoon may recall, each job season the Cocoon hosts two different job-market threads:

1. A job-market discussion thread (the present thread): to commiserate about the market, discuss particular job ads, the market in general, questions about application materials, interviewing, alt-ac opportunities, and so on.
2. A job-market reporting thread: to post news about interviews, on-campus visits, offers, rejection notices, etc.

This post will serve as the discussion thread, and as in the past I will open the reporting thread at a later date, around or after most job applications become due.

Because someone always asks, "Why two threads?", there are a couple of reasons. First, some people may want to discuss the market but not stress over daily news regarding which jobs they still do or don't have a chance for. Conversely, others may not want to discuss the market but just want news about the jobs they've applied for. Second, these threads can get very long already, so I think the best way for people to get the information they want in a well-ordered format is simply to have two threads.

A few final notes:

• This thread (the post you are reading right now!) will be the home of this year's job-market discussion thread. So, if you want to discuss this year's job-market, just comment below.
• Please reserve job-market news (i.e. interviews, on-campus visits, hires, etc.) for the job-market reporting thread, which I will open sometime in September.
• A 'permalink' to this thread will be on the upper right of blog's right sidebar for the rest of the job season. -->
• Because of Typepad's functionality limitations (which only permits 100 comments before starting a new comment page), readers may elect to bookmark each new page of comments as each new page emerges. I recognize that it can be frustrating to scroll through page after page to get to new comments, and I think this is probably the best solution given Typepad's functionality limitations.

Finally, as always, readers are asked to please bear in mind the Cocoon's supportive mission. I try not to moderate with too heavy of a hand, as I don't like to squelch reasonable discussion and debate. I also realize that the job-market can be an emotional roller-coaster, and that passions can run deep on job-market issues. But the Cocoon has always been intended to be an unique oasis of sorts: as a refuge for early-career philosophers to support each other and discuss issues related to their careers and the profession in productive, supportive way. So, I will moderate carefully to ensure that these threads remain a welcome environment for everyone--and, of course, if anyone has any concerns, please do not hesitate to let me know.

All that being said, discuss away!

How to Cold-Contact People to Learn about Getting Out of Academia (By Greg Stoutenburg)

By Greg Stoutenburg (@LinkedIn, PhilPeople)

A few years ago, I wrote a piece for this blog about my own transition out of academic philosophy and into a role in industry, in which I tried to provide a high-level overview of how to make the same transition. You can see it here: How to leave philosophy (Guest post by Greg Stoutenburg) - The Philosophers' Cocoon (typepad.com)

Having just read through it again, I’m struck by just how much is squeezed into those ~3,000 words. So, I wanted to write a follow-up about one part that surfaced in the comments for seeming particularly impractical or anxiety-provoking: cold-contacting people for the purpose of learning from them.

I’m going to now ignore everything else involved in a career transition from academia and focus just on this one thing.

What is a cold contact?

A cold contact is someone you’re contacting and have no prior relationship of any kind.

Why are we talking about cold-contacting people?

Because a conversation with someone in a job you may be interested in is a fast way to gain knowledge of that career path. At the end of that conversation, you may be much more enthusiastic about that path or have been successfully persuaded that you are not interested in that path. (For me, it was usually the latter.) Either way, you’ll have acquired that knowledge in about 15 minutes, which is much better than if you just tried Googling it.

Why do I need to cold-contact people?

Because you are an academic philosopher and you only know other academic philosophers, and you already know you don’t want to be on this path. So unless you have a source of contacts that someone can introduce you to – and that would be a ‘warm’ contact – this will be an important way for you to talk with people to gain the knowledge you're after.