Using a paper co-authored with a supervisor for a writing sample?

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

I am an international student. I have a paper published in a well-regarded journal, though not top-tier (I am the first author, and my supervisor is the second author. His contribution was to provide feedback and suggestions; the paper was written by me). Despite this, I intend to use this paper as my writing sample for application. I would like to know if this is acceptable.

I've heard many times that this is a very bad idea, as search committees want to evaluate the candidate's abilities, and this obscures them. Worst case scenario, I've heard that regardless of authorship, people may be liable to believe the supervisor did most of the important work. Finally, though I don't know all of the details here, from what the OP describes it's not entirely obvious to me that the supervisor should be a co-author here. Supervisors often provide a great deal of feedback and suggestions on their students' work, but my sense is that in the humanities at least, this isn't generally taken to warrant co-authorship--though maybe the the amount of and nature of the contribution here justifies it. But in that case, my first worry arguably applies all the more: the OP would be better served submitting a writing sample that showcases their own abilities, without the confound of co-authorship.

Anyway, what do other readers think about the OP's query?

Comments

[Search committee member]

I was on a search committee this year, and with only 2 exceptions, we immediately disqualified candidates whose writing sample was co-authored. (The exceptions were when the candidate had other single-authored publications in the AOS.)

[friend of SCM]

I agree with SCM, above. A committee cannot evaluate one as a philosopher on the basis of a co-authored article, and an article co-authored with one's supervisor is problematic in even more ways. You need to convince the committee that you can write publishable philosophy WITHOUT your supervisor. There are numerous cases of young philosophers struggling to publish once they no longer have their supervisor reading all their work.

[No winning]

@search committee member interesting. I'm curious to see what others say, but what you say is very disheartening and tells me why I've had zero luck, even though I have solo publications.

[academic migrant]

My PhD supervisor told me that they would not coauthor with me unless a) I have graduated for several years and b) have robustly demonstrated my ability to publish without them. The reason was that others tend to attribute the good of the paper to them, and the bad of the paper to me.

But to OP, is this your only pub? Try to use something else if you can. Of course, if you only have one pub in a good but not top venue, it is advisable to try to get a bit more pubs for independent reasons if you want to survive the brutal job market.

I've heard people saying that they screen out people without pubs, and find out the pile of applicants is still too big to be manageable. This is when they get really tempted to screen out people without 2 pubs. For context, I started getting multiple interviews once I had my 5th good but not top pub.

[Read carefully]

@No winning

It doesn't tell you why you've had no luck. SCM was explicit about why the two exceptions were exceptions.

[Michel]

Seems perfectly acceptable to me--but not advisable, for the reasons already cited.

[OP]

Thank you all for your responses! I am the original poster, and I apologize for not clarifying earlier—I am a master's student currently applying for PhD programs. My actual question is about what might happen if I use such a paper for my PhD application. Would it help if the recommendation letter explicitly states my contributions to the paper? I do have other papers, but their quality is not as good as this one.

[Thomas]

I see it as my job to "provide feedback and suggestions" on my MA and PhD students' work, and I'd never think that this should lead to me being co-author. Have norms changed on this in philosophy?

In any case, when evaluating PhD applicants, I want to know what they are capable of - not what their previous advisor is capable of. So I'd want to see a single authored writing sample. We receive too many over-qualified applicants to admit someone whose writing sample *may* not be indicative of their philosophical abilities.

[Mike Titelbaum]

This is a slightly more general comment, both for applying to PhD programs and applying for jobs: If you have any co-authored work, it's very useful if your recommendation letters clarify which parts of the writing were done by you. This is obviously easier if the letter-writer was one of the co-authors, but I've even seen letters from advisors who weren't co-authors explaining what they know of how the co-authorship went.

Many letter-writers already know to do this where relevant. But if you're in this situation, probably couldn't hurt to gently nudge your letter-writers to address this point.

[Michel]

Oh, I didn't realize this was for PhD admissions. In that case, I think a co-authored paper would be a serious mistake.

[cecil burrow]

Having served on PhD admissions for several decades at multiple R1 schools, I can say very confidently that a dossier with a paper co-authored with an advisor would not be taken seriously, and would almost certainly be discarded very early in the first cut.

[OP]

Thank you very much for your responses! I plan to use another paper to complete my application.

[RJM]

This all seems like sensible advice but these views about coauthoring strike me as bizarre. Why do so many philosophers think like this (again, not questioning that they do—all the advice here is good).

[Nuances]

Is there any significant difference between co-authored writing sample at mid/old-career stage vs co-authored with PhD advisor?

[Tamara]

Assuming you are in philosophy, I don’t think your supervisor deserved to have their name on your paper and in the future I would not allow them to do so if all they do is give you feedback (which is their job)

[Mover and shaker]

Nuances,
when you apply for mid-career jobs, you often submit 5 pulications with your application. It is highly unlikely, that anyone in philosophy would submit 5 co-authored papers. If you don't have 5 really good papers then you are not competitive for a mid-career move. Indeed, for such a move, more typically, one has a book, as well.

[Nuances]

Mover and shaker: thanks. Then maybe my question is more about the ratio solo vs co-author. Let's say you have to submit five publications: how many co-authored pubs are acceptable?

[Mover ...]

Nuances,
If making a mid-career move is a viable option for one, it probably does not matter what ratio of solo vs. co-authored papers. Mid-career moves do NOT happen that often. (Homework assignment: list 10 people in your subfield that made a mid-career move in the last 10 years ... it is a tough assignment). I am probably completely unknown to most readers of this blog (and other philosophy blogs as well). But my work is cited over 2500 citations. I am sure that is why I was able to move. I have both co-authored and single authored papers. I did not include any co-authored in the five publications I submitted as part of application ... but people can find them easily.