The Philosophers' Cocoon

Getting contracts for edited volumes?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, junior anon writes:

The blog has talked extensively about how to write and achieve a contract for a monograph. I wanted to know what the process is like for getting a contract for a volume. How does one start the process? Presumably one cannot have all the papers ready beforehand. Does one simply pitch the idea to a press (e.g. Cambridge), and depending on your expertise in the field they may bite? Does one have an introduction ready?

I'm probably not the best person to ask here, as I've only had papers in edited volumes, never proposed one. However, my experience as a contributor has given me a little bit of insight into the process. My sense is that individuals proposing an edited volume need at least three things:

1. A compelling introduction/overview of the proposed volume.
2. A list of contributors, including some established, well-known researchers.
3. A complete compilation of paper titles and abstracts from each contributor.

Then, of course, one has to put together a full proposal, based on the proposal forms that presses typically have on their websites (which require proposals to specify an intended audience, competing works, and many other things). Does this sound about right to people? It would be great to hear from people who have actually secured contracts for and published edited volumes. What does one need to do in order to put together and submit a good proposal?

European program-ranks and the market

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Amanda writes:

I have a friend with a BA from a Canadian institution, and MA in philosophy from a US institution, who, for compelling personal reasons, wants to do a PhD in Europe (non UK). They have US and EU (non-uk) citizenship. I am putting this here because I wasn't sure what advice to give. Ideally, my friend would like to create the best possibility of being competitive for US jobs once the degree is complete (they are not ruling out Europe jobs, but those are limited).

1.Is there a clear philosophy prestige hierarchy in Europe? If so does it carry over into the United States?

2. The vague impression I get is that search committees often treat all non-uk European PhDs the same, kind of like a low ranked US program, although there is often the disadvantage of lacking teaching experience.

3.Somewhat in conflict with what I just said, other times I get the impression that, especially at research schools, a European PhD is much preferred to a mid to low ranked US PhD. This seems to be because the former has a negative reputation (among elite research schools) while the latter really has no reputation. There is also some sort of plus from the mysteriousness of it all.

4.The more elite liberal arts schools often like the diversity this would bring, especially if you speak multiple langues (again, this is just my impression that is not based on anything known to be reliable.)

If anyone is knowledgeable about this, that would be great. Other things of interest are odds of getting accepted from the US (but with EU citizenship) and odds of getting funded, how long it takes to finish, etc.

I don't know the answers to these questions, but I think they are great ones to ask. Indeed, I'm very curious what the answers are myself, as I've recently noticed some people (including a few people I know) get great jobs in the US coming out of European programs. Anyone have any insight on Amanda's questions?

Seeking a UK PhD from a distance?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Bernardo Vargas writes:

I am recent graduate of an MA Phil. program in the US and I am looking at PhD programs in the UK. However, I am looking at distance-learning programs because of family circumstances such as the Uni. of Birmingham or Uni. of Leeds. However, from my understanding (and please correct me if I am wrong), programs like these in the UK are not funded. My question is, does anyone have any advice in regards to how to find funding for a PhD program in the UK given that I am a US citizen. Also, does anyone know of any programs that are funded (my interest is in philosophy of religion, aesthetics, and their relation to one another)? Thank you for any help or advice!

Amanda wrote in reply:

I hope someone can provide you helpful advice. But I would also recommend writing to the chair of the departments or graduate directors and asking. Each program will have some differences, so no one will know better than those currently working for the university.

I think this is a good suggestion, but I wonder what other people think. Does anyone have any helpful advice?

Prior credit toward tenure?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes:

I have a question about moving from a VAP to a TT-job. Is it possible, in your experience, to count the years you have been VAP in the tenure clock when you move to a TT-job? For instance, if you had been VAP for 2 years, then you get a TT-job and you can go for tenure after 4 years. I'm interested in this especially in terms of articles published during the VAP period. Thanks!

A very good question. It's important to know the answer to, and my sense is that a good number of job-marketeers don't know much about it. 'Tenured' answered:

The rules around "prior service credit" as it is sometimes called, vary widely. I was able to get some credit for prior service at other institutions - for 5 years, they gave me three years credit, the maximum the institution would give. It does, though, add pressure to you. You are expected to earn tenure on the publications you do AT the new job (at least at some places). But I have seen people told they cannot count post doc positions, and other temporary positions as prior credit. So some institutions only count years at another tenured positions, or years in full time employment (ie. where your title is Visiting Assistant Professor). So count on nothing. In fact, I was not told how much prior credit I would get until AFTER I started the job!

My experience is that Tenured is right on a variety of counts. Some schools have very strong policies against awarding 'prior credit'. They may have policies not only against cutting the number of years before one can go up to tenure, but also policies against counting anything you have done before being hired toward tenure. Other schools may be willing to shorten time to tenure, but still not count previously published work and the like. In cases like this, it might sound great if a school tells you that you can come up for tenure after four years. But in that case, as Tenured notes, you'll be under even greater pressure to publish a ton during those four years, since your previous publications won't count.

Query about relocation expenses

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Relocator writes:

This job-market season, I accepted a tenure-track job at a large state teaching-focused university. I am coming right out of graduate school. I was very happy that part of the offer included relocation funding.

But, the relocation funding is provided through reimbursement. This is a problem for me because I have been a graduate student in a major US city for the last 6 years and as a result I don't have the money to spend on relocation such that they can reimburse me.

Is reimbursement typical or standard in academia when it comes to funding moving or relocation expenses? If it is typical or standard, this practice seems to assume that graduate students have access to thousands of dollars of cash or credit.

Amanda then replied:

I dealt with the same problem. It is indeed typical to not pay up front and assume the hire has the money or credit to pay for everything. And this will most likely be true for everything in the future, notably conference travel.

When I signed my contract I was told it would be easy to get moving money paid in advance. I then followed up on this, and was meet with massive layers of bureaucratic red tape and apathetic administrators. In the end, it just wasn't going to happen. So I got rid of all my furniture. Put the rest of what I could fit in my car, and drove across the country staying in Motel 6's.

And yes, everyone assumes you have thousands of dollars on credit cards. They absolutely assume this, and they assume that if you don't, then you can apply for a credit card and get one...

I'm curious whether anyone else has experience with this, and particularly whether anyone might have helpful advice for Relocator. My own sense is similar to Amanda's: that universities typically expect you to pay for things first (e.g. on credit) and then reimburse you later. In the past, when I was in debt, this posed problems for me too. However, I had enough open credit to deal with it, so that's what I did. But, as Amanda notes, not everyone has access to credit. What should relocator do? Do universities ever give advances on relocation expenses?

Choosing job-talk papers

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes:

About the paper that you focus a job talk around. Suppose you have something at every stage of the pipeline - including, say, a manuscript that's not quite submitted for review, a manuscript that's under review, a manuscript that got an R&R decision, a manuscript that you've revised and resubmitted, and a conditional acceptance.

Are any of these options clearly a bad idea? On the one hand, as we get towards the end of the list, they're more polished, and you'll presumably look better presenting them. But also, as we approach the end of the list, they're more "done", and you run the risk of looking like you don't have new things coming.

'One-Time Job Candidate' then answered:

Just my opinion here, but I think the choice of topic for a job talk depends a lot on where you are giving the talk. If it's at a place with a PhD program, I would choose something new, interesting, ambitious, that may not be as far along in the process.

But at teaching-oriented places, I think it's better to give a safer talk in the sense that it's on a better-known topic which is accessible to a lot of people. At least, this was my experience with the job talks I had a few months ago. All were at teaching-oriented places, and none of the talks were based on a paper. Rather, they were overviews of my research program as a whole, tying my work into recognized and accepted philosophical problems that everyone can appreciate.

It was clear that the audiences appreciated this, including the undergraduates in attendance.

I found this interesting, as I would have thought the opposite to be the case: that it would probably be best to present something very polished at research institutions (given the concern for rigor in research, particularly in Q&A's), and something more ambitious at teaching institutions (that might excite the faculty and undergrads there, even if not terribly polished). But this is just my off-the-cuff reaction, and I don't really have much to go on besides my experiences and One-Time Job Candidate's.

What do you all think, particularly those of you who have done well on the market or been on the hiring side of things?

Taking time off work/the market for motherhood?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Anonymous writes:

Would it be career suicide to skip the job market and adjuncting for a year (or maybe even two) to expand my family and be a stay at home parent for a little while? I would still attempt to write, publish, and present at conferences (in fact I'd have much more time to attempt to do these things if I wasn't adjuncting and on the market while parenting a young child). I was on the market during my first pregnancy and adjuncted right up until my due date. I'm not keen to try that again while also parenting a toddler. I also don't want to put off having another kid until after I get a permanent job (since it may never happen anyway). Would schools consider hiring someone with this kind of gap in teaching? If so, would there be a good way to explain it in my cover letter and/or CV when going back on the market at a later time?

'B' then answered:

Make a point of listing it on your c.v. or in your letter that you were on maternity leave. There are civilized departments out there. Hopefully no one will ask you to show the placenta to prove it.

While I think this is right--and I think this is an important issue--I also think that whether Anonymous should bet on 'civilized departments' may be a difficult question to answer. Allow me to explain.

I have heard two things anecdotally from a number of people. The first is that search committees may have a tendency to look askance at 'gaps' in one's employment record. The second is that, at many places, there may be fairly clear discrimination against women on the basis of motherhood. For example, I have heard from women academics I know personally that things like the following have been said in their presence, "Oh, she just had a child. Say goodbye to her productivity." Not only that: there is plenty of empirical research showing a very real "motherhood penalty" in hiring and wages--whereas men actually appear to benefit in the workplace from being fathers (whereas motherhood is prejudicially associated with less productivity, fatherhood appears to be prejudicially associated with greater productivity).

If you put these two (very) unfortunate things together--the anecdotal possibility that hiring committees may hold 'employment gaps' against candidates, and real evidence that motherhood is used against mothers in hiring--then B's advice may, sadly, not be the best advice to follow (at least if Anonymous does not want to risk these things, as the concerns in her comment suggests she is concerned about). That being said, I am neither a father nor (obviously) a mother, so I cannot pretend to speak to Anonymous' situation beyond this.

What do you all think?

Query on transferring PhD programs

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

Is there any specific advice about how to write your application for transferring Ph. D programs other than the obvious — don’t trash talk your old program, etc.?

I don't know, myself. I did transfer successfully from one program (Syracuse) to another (Arizona). But I don't recall doing anything special, aside from getting good letters from the faculty in the first program (who were supportive of my leaving, given that I was leaving in response to four of our professors--all of whom I planned to work with--being hired away by other programs over the course of a single year).

Aside from trying to get positive letters, though, I guess I only have one other piece of advice. When I applied to Arizona, I initially used a 'safe' but (I thought) clear and rigorous epistemology paper as my writing sample (one I had gotten an excellent grade on in a grad seminar). At one point, a member of the admissions committee (David Chalmers) asked me if I had any other writing samples to consider (perhaps because the committee was not too enthused with the first - though I don't know for sure). In response I sent a much more ambitious paper (on vagueness) as my second writing sample...and I was accepted into the program later that same day. So, for what it is worth, my sense then--and my sense now, based on my experiences on the academic job-market--is that people may be much more interested in ambitious rather than 'safe' work. But this, again, is just a hunch.

Anyway, that's all I have. Do you any of you have any helpful tips for someone interested in transferring PhD programs?

To promote one’s work, or not?

Updated: 2:50pm, 6/4/2019

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes:

Should I be trying to get people to notice my papers in some way other than just publishing and putting them out there? Cold emailing relevant interlocutors, posting about them in a public Facebook post, something like that?

I think these are great questions, one's I've wondered about on a number of occasions given the visibility the Cocoon provides. Here, in brief, are the conclusions I've come to: some people may look down on promoting one's work - but I think there is nothing to be ashamed of in doing it, and it probably benefits the profession and individuals who do it, at least on balance. Let me explain why.

How can we help you? (June 2019)

It's been a couple of months since we've done one of these, so I figured now might be a good time for another one.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching
• Issues in the profession
• Work-life balance
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Given that the job-market gets moving in a big way in just a few month, now might be a great time for first-time job seekers and other job-marketeers to ask any burning questions they have. Fire away - we're here to help! 

Concerns about recommendation letters?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, James W. Quinn writes:

Would it be possible to discuss the letter-of-recommendation system and its moral, practical justification? I have been enduring horrible situations—from plagiarism and unpaid labor to sexual harassment—in order to be able to apply for some jobs that require three, if not five, letters.

I've long had concerns about letters of recommendation, and Michael Huemer (University of Colorado) wrote a piece a while back summing up a lot of them. There was some really good discussion of Huemer's piece at Daily Nous. However, James Quinn's comment above reveals another (much darker) side to the letter of recommendation issue that I have not seen discussed as much: the manner in which requiring letters of recommendation may empower bad actors in the profession to abuse their power over graduate students and job-marketeers.

I'm curious how wide-spread these kinds of cases are, as well as to hear what our early-career readers think of the letter of recommendation system in applying for jobs. Anyone have any thoughts or experiences they are willing to share?

Dissertations: monographs or three articles?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Busqueda writes:

I wonder what folks think about monograph dissertations in comparison to three-article model dissertations.

I wonder because it seems as if having three articles are more likely to increase once’s chances on the job market in comparison to a monograph.

I think this is a really interesting query, and I'm curious to hear what people have to say. Allow me to share a few thoughts.

Balancing frequent assignments with workload

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Michel writes:

It seems clear to me that students benefit a great deal from having many chances to apply what they've learned through frequent assignments, scaffolded essays, etc. I'd be curious to know how Cocooners with hefty teaching loads balance the desire to do all that with the demands of teaching three to five courses or sections a term. Do you stagger assignments between your courses and sections? Do you use a lot of peer-grading? What else?

Great questions, and I'm curious to hear what readers have to say! Here are a few of my own thoughts.

Earlier in my career (during my non-TT years and before tenure), I gave my students many frequent assignments while having a hefty teaching load. Students responded really positively--often saying in my course reviews that my courses were super challenging and full of work, but that it was worth it and they learned a lot. Unfortunately, doing that basically required me to work myself into the ground and wasn't very sustainable, at least not if I wanted (as I do) to maintain a modicum of personal well-being. So, ever since getting tenure, I have changed things a bit.

First, I've increasingly staggered types of assignments across courses, based on reflection on what I'd like students in different kinds of courses to learn. For example, some of my courses (lower-level courses for non-majors) tend to me more exam based, along with many frequent smaller assignments (e.g. 5 sentence reading responses and in-glass group assignments). The basic rationale is that my primary pedagogical aims in these courses are to expose non-majors--people who may never take another philosophy courses--to philosophical material, help them to understand it, and get them to think critically about it (both as individuals and in groups) on a daily basis. Conversely, in my courses in the major I want to focus less on exams and more on longer (1-page) reading responses, term-papers, and final presentations. In brief, this is because I think it's vital for majors in particular to learn how to think more deeply about the material, and to develop their ability to write about and present complex material and original arguments of their own. Long story short, I've found that staggering different kinds of assignments across courses (doing different assignment-types and lengths in different levels of courses) can be helpful for ensuring that students in all of my courses receive frequent assignments and feedback without working myself into the ground.

Second, I've begun staggering the timing of assignments within and across classes. For example, in my human rights seminar this Spring, I had students do 1-page reading responses each class for the first 11 weeks of the semester. However, the last four weeks of the semester they no longer have reading-responses due. Instead, they have term-paper workshops that require them to do some work at home (e.g. a paper outline, drafting their introduction, drafting their summary) and then bring that material to class for peer-feedback and submit to me for instructor feedback. I've found this incredibly helpful, as removing the reading responses frees up time for providing them feedback on their workshop assignments--and devoting the second hour of class to workshops lessens the amount of prep I need to put into my daily lectures. In other words, I "make room" for an increase in grading load (e.g. giving daily feedback on partial-drafts of term-papers) by lessening my workload elsewhere (no more reading responses to grade and shorter lectures). Similarly, because in my upper-division applied ethics courses I think it is pedagogically valuable to end courses with student presentations (followed by short group assignments discussing each presentation), I am able to end one course (say, Biomedical Ethics) with no lecture prep the last two weeks, thus again freeing up time for other things (grading final presentations, etc.).

In short, although I still do a lot of grading and have frequent assignments, I've been increasingly looking for creative ways to lessen my workload in one area (e.g. lecture prep, grading reading responses) whenever my workload increases in another area (term-paper workshops, final presentations, etc.)--so that I'm able to keep my students engaged with frequent assignments without working myself into the ground as much as I used to. In full disclosure, I think there are some pedagogical costs to some of the choices I've experimented with (viz. having lower-division courses more exam- and short-reading response based, instead of, say, having term-papers). Fortunately, though, as someone who is always looking for better ways to do things, the costs I've perceived here have led me to think about other approaches that I hope to experiment with moving forward--ones that I'm excited to try out! Indeed, if I've learned anything about teaching at all, it's that its often precisely these kinds of challenges--viz. balancing various pedagogical goals with workload, etc.--that inspire one to continually rethink and refine one's methods and keep things "new", both for oneself and one's students.

But these are just some of my thoughts. What are yours?

Reader query on coaching ethics bowl

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes in: Has anyone coached an Ethics Bowl team before? I just found out I will be next year, and I have no idea how to do it well.

I began coaching Ethics Bowl teams in my first job (a VAP at UBC), and have coached a team each of the past nine years at my current institution (a few of which have done quite well!). Let me begin by saying that it really has been one of the more rewarding parts of my job. The students tend to be really into it, it leads to good philosophical discussions that students learn from and challenge you to learn from as well--and when your team does well, it can be really gratifying to see your students shine (especially if, as is often the case, you've seen your students grow over several years). Finally, even in cases where your team doesn't do well, it can be a positive experience--provided you and your team members approach it as a learning opportunity.

Anyway, I don't want to give all of my team's "secrets" away (as my teams have worked hard experimenting with a lot of different things, some of which may not have worked for us but might work for other teams). So let me instead just outline how we prepare in general.

Transitioning to one's first TT job

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Eddie writes:

I would be grateful to read a post on how one coming out of grad school or a post doc should prepare for starting their new tenure-track assistant professorship in the states, with an eye toward getting off on the right foot for securing tenure painlessly.

'Excited new prof' then added:

My request relates to Eddie's. I was wondering if anyone would have advice about what (not) to do during your first year as an Assistant professor on a tenure-track. I'm starting this fall at a regional comprehensive in the U.S.

Great questions - and there has already been some good advice given, particularly Old Prof's:

What NOT to do in your first year: do not agree to do all sorts of committee work, and then not deliver on what you said you would do (be realistic); do not hide problems with your teaching until they are so big the dean hears about it (get help early); do not assume that your new institution works like the ones you have been at in the past (ask questions); do not stop researching (show that you can balance research with full time teaching ... it is also the only way to get out of a bad place if you need to leave); do not go out drinking with your students or say inappropriate things to them; do not trash your colleagues to other people on campus (wait at least a year for that ;).

But let me add a few more things before opening things up for discussion...

Query on SEP & Phil Compass articles

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, 'possibly unlucky' writes:

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I would love a discussion of the way in which SEP/PhilCompass articles are handled. I think most view a publication in SEP or PhilCompass quite favorably (I'm always impressed by such publications) and these publications allow the author to exert a fair amount of influence over the subfield (unlike traditional journal articles, these reference articles can be read by hundreds, if not thousands). Yet the process by which credit and influence are distributed is, to me at least, extraordinarily opaque. I've only had experience with PhilCompass, but my sense is that the subeditors have a tremendous amount of autonomy and so there is no standard practice. There's no review system or procedure in place, so those who don't personally know the subeditor may not be guaranteed serious consideration. In my own case, I had to just cold email the editors. In one case the editors told me to come back in a year (a year!) if I hadn't published my article and they *may* reconsider it. In another case, the editor just ignored me. Have people had similar experiences or am I just unlucky?

There was quite a bit of discussion about this query in that thread already, but let me say a few brief things. In reply to 'possibly unlucky', Amanda wrote:

My experience is that invited publications count for a lot, as much as peer-reviewed journals for lots of research places. It is all about proving you are a member of an elite club, not some impassioned judgement of who is objectively best.

I have to confess that I found this very surprising. As someone who doesn't work at a R1 institution, I would have thought that Phil Compass and SEP entries would not count as positively in a candidate's favor as traditional non-invited publications featuring original research. Indeed, my own experience (having served on four search committees) is that some search committees really want to see whether a candidate can publish original research consistently through traditional, anonymized review - and that if a candidate only has a few publications, most of which are either invited or literature overviews (viz. SEP or Phil Compass), then that could even count against a candidate.

But, like others, I am merely speaking anecdotally here. Any search committee members care to weigh in? How do you (or committees you've served on) tend to treat Phil Compass or SEP publications?

How can we help you? (April 2019)

It's a pretty busy time of the semester, and we haven't had one of these threads in a while, so I figured now might be a good time for one.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching
• Issues in the profession
• Work-life balance
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Fire away - we're here to help!

Moving from renewable lecturer to one-year VAP?

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

Is there is a situation in which it makes sense to leave a potentially renewable lecturer position with pretty bad pay for a better VAP position with much better pay?

Is the renewability factor too important to give up for the one year, non-renewable position that pays much better?

I'd be curious to hear what everyone else thinks, but here's my answer. Absent extenuating circumstances (e.g. the lecturer salary being too low to live a decent lifestyle, adequately support one's family, etc.), the renewable lecturer position seems the better bet. I spent seven years on the academic job-market, and for me time made all of the difference. I was lucky to be in a renewable non-TT position that I could stay in that entire time. Had I been in a one or two-year position, I doubt I would have been able to stay on the market as long as I did--which again, was as long as I ended up needing to get a tenure-track job. On the other hand, if the lecturer salary is really low (and one really cannot fathom remaining in that kind of situation long-term), then maybe rolling the dice with the VAP makes sense.

What do you all think? It might be helpful to hear more detail from the relevant reader to orient the discussion, as well.

Taking time away from research

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Ash writes:

I'm not sure if you've covered this already, but.... When do you think a person is "allowed" to take time away from research? My list of papers-in-progress is long and so I more or less always think I should be working on one of them, whenever I have a spare moment (i.e. a moment not devoted to fulfilling other obligations). But right now I have a couple of hours to kill and yet I'm not doing research. I'm tired. I have a young child. I had 4 campus visits this semester and each one was fatiguing to prepare for and to go through. I'm teaching (albeit with a light load). 
How do you decide when to rest and when to push through?

These are great questions, ones I have asked myself from time to time. In fact, I would be very interested to hear answers to them, as I haven't been able to answer them well myself.

Reader query about undergraduate research

In the comments section of our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, SSW writes:

As an undergraduate student, I wonder what is the best way to choose a dissertation topic? Since my department does not provide many courses on the topic I am interested in, I have to read something by my own. I have read some companions and Philosophy Compass articles, is there anything else I can/should do?

It's not entirely clear to me what SSW means when they ask about a 'dissertation topic.' For example, if they are asking about a PhD dissertation, then my answer is that it is probably much to early to think about that. On the other hand, if the question is about an undergrad thesis, then the question seems to me an apt one. Either way, though, I'm glad they asked these questions, as in thinking about them it occurred to me that I would advise something quite different than what they are currently doing.

Informing committees of job offers

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

I've just been offered a VAP at Institution X, where a decision is expected of me within about two weeks. However, I recently interviewed for a VAP at Institution Y, where I was told that they'd make a decision in about a month. I strongly prefer the position at Institution Y. How do I diplomatically reach out to Y in a way that might speed up their timetable, but not in a way that seems pushy or likely to tell me to PFO?

Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems to me pretty straightforward. Just write a polite email informing the search chair you have a job offer (without mentioning who the offer is from), maybe mention that you are still very interested in their job, and ask them what the time-frame of their search looks like. At that point the ball is in their court. If they are seriously considering you as a candidate but don't want to lose you, then they will make something happen. If not, then not: they'll give you a polite PFO and that's that. I don't see any other real options here. Finally, for what it's worth, I suspect a search committee is less likely to speed up its timetable for a VAP position--simply because VAPs are temporary positions (whereas there is probably much greater incentive to hire the committee's top choice in a TT job).

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours, particularly those of you who have served on search committees or engaged in this kind of negotiating as a candidate?

Why do journals not give comments?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, EL.DEE.ESS writes:

I have a question about the journal review process. I have run into the following problem in submitting to top tier journals, namely, that the journal gives a rejection without providing comments. It seems clear that it is not a desk rejection, as the papers were under review for several months, so it seems that the referees would have written down their thoughts on the paper. But the following justification is given for not providing comments: “We cannot provide comments on all rejected papers. We focus rather on arriving at a well-informed judgment without undue delay.” What is going on here? Are the editors simply refusing to provide comments because it takes up unnecessary time? Did the referees not write comments up at all? If there are no comments, on what basis is the rejection being made?

I know that the journals in question *do* occasionally given comments for rejected papers, so it is not as if they do not have the infrastructure or mechanism to provide them. I am wondering then why comments are provided on some rejected papers but not others. It is hard to see how simply *passing on* the comments for all rejected (but not desk-rejected) papers would make the process take longer or cause an undue burden in any material sense, but if I am missing something here, I would genuinely be curious to know. After all, having the comments can be extremely helpful. Any thoughts on what’s going here would be greatly appreciated.

This is a really great query - one that I have wondered about myself for quite a long time. I suppose it makes sense not to forward comments for quick desk-rejections. What does seem more puzzling is when a paper has been under review for a number of months (2-3+ months) but no comments at all are forwarded to the author. Assuming the papers did go out to referees, there seem to be only two possibilities: either the referees gave no comments, or the editors did not forward the comments to the author. However, both of these possibilities seem puzzling: if referees gave no comments, then there would seem to be no justification provided for a making a particular editorial decision--and if the referees did give comments, it seems strange not to let authors know what those reasons are. Finally, one further possibility is that the paper never went out to referees, but instead took 2-3+ months to desk-reject. But that seems strange too, to say the least--as it is hard to see why it should take so long to desk-reject a paper.

So I share EL.DEE.ESS's puzzlement. Anyone have any insight to share about what's going on in cases like this?

Prospective-student visits and PhD advisors

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Kent writes:

I'm a current MA student about to visit PhD programs, and I've realized that I have no idea what to say in meetings with potential faculty advisors. I've thought about trying to read some of their work beforehand, but I'm not sure how discussing that would help me (other than perhaps getting a handle on their methodological approach). I'm concerned about quality of advisement and so on, but I don't want to ask questions that might come off as indelicate or rude. Some guidance would be much appreciated!

Great query. In my experience, a student's eventual choice of PhD supervisor is absolutely vital. Some supervisors are effective, churning our successful PhDs and job-candidates left and right. Other supervisors, on the other hand, are truly awful--routinely having students who either never graduate or fail to be competitive on the job-market due to poor mentoring.

Negotiating tips, especially w/unionized schools

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes,

I would love some advice (and maybe even some sample language!) about how to negotiate effectively. Some background info: I'm a junior woman, and the institution that made me the (as yet unofficial) offer is unionized, which might affect how much room there is to move when it comes to salary. Thanks in advance!

The best negotiating advice I am aware of is by Karen Kelsky at the Professor Is In (see here and here). I won't belabor repeating all of her advice here, but let me discuss two things I think are probably vital to know.

First, I want to emphasize something vital that Kelsky emphasizes: your negotiating strategy needs to be in touch with the kind of job you have been offered. In brief, my experience is that although a lot of things are negotiable for R1 jobs, not much is for jobs at teaching oriented schools (e.g. liberal arts universities and community colleges). For example, asking for a reduction in teaching load or deferring your job for a year are totally fine at a research school. However, these are not things to try to negotiate with a job at a teaching-oriented school (e.g. a liberal arts university or community college). For one notorious horror story, see here. My sense is that at teaching schools, course-load reductions may never be given (or only given to department chairs), and there may never be pre-tenure sabbaticals nor (to my knowledge) job deferments. Indeed, my sense is that for jobs at teaching schools, the only thing one may be able to negotiate may be a modest salary increase. Candidates should be aware of these differences. Personally, when it comes to jobs at teaching schools, the safest thing to do is to probably just ask for a bit more salary, and the next-safest thing to do is to ask the chair of the search committee the open-ended question (after receiving the offer), "What, if anything, do you think is safe to ask for in negotiating?" My sense is that there is probably little harm in asking a question this broad, and that most people sincerely interested in hiring you will give an honest answer.

Second, there is the other issue Anon asked about: negotiating with unionized schools. Although I am no expert on unionization, to the best of my knowledge once a university is unionized US Federal Law prohibits one-on-one negotiations--as unionization is a legal status, entitling both sides (the university and its unionized employees) to collective bargaining. If I am wrong about this, please do let me know--but this is my understanding. 

Anyway, these are only my thoughts. What are yours, particularly those of you with experience negotiating (either as job-candidates on the hiring side of things)?

Addressing flight-risk in cover letters?

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, NotaFlightRisk writes:

I have a question about tailoring cover letters. I'd like to convey in my cover letter that I'm not a flight risk but I'm unsure of the best way (or anyway besides outright saying this) to do that. Any advice?

This is a great question, and I am curious to hear from people who have served on searches about what they think. But here are a few quick thoughts of my own...

Using older teaching letters?

Two readers wrote in this week about using "old" teaching letters on the market. One reader writes:

I've noticed that a lot of schools lately require a rec letter that addresses teaching. What do people do about these? I've been in the same job long enough that the people who've seen me teach recently are all colleagues who don't know I'm on the market, and I need to keep it that way. The only teaching rec I can get, then, would be [many] years out of date. I'm sure that's not an unusual problem.

And Anon wrote in our "how can we help you?" thread:

Normally I just use one teaching letter, from someone who saw me teach at my current job. I've come across something that asks for more than one teaching letter.

I do have another teaching letter handy that describes my teaching from the last job (it's on Interfolio). The thing is, it's "out of date" - but does that matter in a case like this?

I get that my research letters change from year to year, but this is just a letter describing what I was up to in the classroom at a particular time and place. So is it okay to use an old one or does it look weird?

I'm curious to hear what other readers think--but I'm inclined to think it's just fine. A search committee member might notice that the letter is a few years old, but for all that I think they are likely to be more interested in what the letter says than anything else. I think it probably is a good idea to get a newer letter if you can--but if you're in our first reader's position and that's not really an option, I'm inclined to think it's not a very big deal.

But I'm just one person, and may be idiosyncratic. What do you all think, particularly those of you who have served on search committees?

Preparing for structured interviews

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, anonymoose writes:

I have a practical question about interviews. It seems like there are two kinds of interviews--(a) those where the committee asks follow up questions, and (b) those where they don't. I assume (b) happens because of HR regulations, but I am really bad at these interviews. My answers tend to run short even when I have a lot to say. And that's bad, since a lot of fixed term lecturer jobs have (b) type interviews, and that's mostly what I'm competitive for right now. Should candidates plan responses to certain typical questions to fit a target time-length, so they don't run short? Or is it expected that this stuff happens? Is there some way to turn it into a conversation that I'm missing? There's often not even any nodding or eye contact during my answers, let alone follow-ups. Sometimes these interviewers skip important questions too, like "How would you teach Intro?" I'm pretty good at (a) type interviews, but utterly bewildered by (b).

This is an excellent query. My experience isn't that '(b) type' interviews tend to occur because of HR regulations. Rather, it is because science supports them. Allow me to explain, and then offer a few tips on preparing for such interviews.

Remaining research-active outside academia

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Worried philosopher writes, 

I am applying for a research position (in ethics) outside Academia. I want to remain active as a researcher (go to conferences, give talks, publish, review papers, etc.). I feel like I'll remain much more active with a research job than with a teaching position. Yet I'm worried: since the position I'm applying for is outside Academia, perhaps I won't be taken seriously by the rest of the research community. So, a couple of questions:

- Do journals care whether you hold a position in Academia or not?
- You see people at a conference with "private sector/government/public sector" on their name tags. Will you talk to them? Will you attend their talks?
- When browsing for papers on topic X, you notice that the author is not from Academia. The paper is published in a good journal. Will you still read the paper?

Great questions. I'm actually personally familiar with a few folks who have continued to publish successfully (in some good journals) after moving outside of academia. So I definitely know it can be done. However, I am not quite sure how to answer the specific questions Worried asks. I mean, I wouldn't treat someone differently at a conference on these grounds, and I would definitely read their paper if it looked interesting to me. But I don't know how others feel.

Anyone have any insight to share?

VAPS vs. Lecturers: do search committees care?

Update: comments open now!

In our newest "how can we help you?" post, anon writes:

Is there a meaningful difference between going on the job market as a lecturer and a visiting assistant professor or are both viewed equally?

Obviously, the institution where you're employed and other details have to be considered, but all things being equal, will the title alone confer or convey any meaningful difference or are both viewed as what they are: temporary, contingent appointments?

I honestly don't know the answer. Because I know Lecturer positions in the UK are basically equivalent to Assistant Professor positions in the US, my sense is that search-committee members regard them as basically interchangeable titles for candidates from the UK. In the US, however, my understand is that Lecturer positions can be any one of many things.

Search-committee prejudices?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Caroline writes:

A few years ago, before I secured a permanent position, I applied for a tenure-track position at the institution where I was on a year-to-year fixed-term contract. Department members seemed favorably disposed to my teaching, service, and research. When a tenure-track position in my AOS was advertised at the institution, I jumped at the opportunity to apply.

One member of the department sent an email to other members of the department indicating he was against my candidacy for the tenure-track position. According to the email, which one member of the department forwarded to me, his reasons were that people who obtain fixed-term contracts shouldn't be hired at those institutions permanently and that people on fixed-term contracts were less talented than those who get a tenure-track position directly out of graduate school.

You've discussed the precarious relationship between permanent department members and fixed-term contractors on this blog, but what should we make of this professor's behavior? Is it prejudice? Or is it mere preference?

I basically agree with what Craig wrote later in the comment section ("That seems like a gross prejudice..."). I've known a lot of excellent philosophers--including ones with some pretty astounding publication records--who have been stuck in fixed-term positions for a long time. And I think it is terrible that some people evidently hold this against job-candidates. But, assuming this is a problematic prejudice, this raises two questions:

1. What can be done about it?
2. What other prejudices do search committee members sometimes have?

Books: how short is too short?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes:

How short is too short for a book? To make it more concrete, I have a book idea, and am thinking it'd end up being around 50,000 words. I know that's quite short for a philosophy book, but short books are always better! Moreover, I can say what I want to say in that many words. (Why not do journal articles? I have. I'd like to do an elaborated defense of some things I've written on, as well as bring in new, related material.) Should I consider adding more material to make it longer, or should I try to swing it as a short book?

There were some very good replies to Anon's concept, such as this one by Harry:

Some publishers want book manuscripts of very specific lengths, say 90,000 to 110,000 words. So such publishers will generally not be interested in a short book. But there are now series devoted to short books, like Springerbriefs, published by Springer, of course. Some of the books in the collection are quite good. If you were already an accomplished author, then many publishers would publish whatever Bullshit you have (I hope this joke is not lost everyone).

Amanda's comment is also helpful: "Routledge has a series for short books. Some other publishers too. So you can make it work. You just have to find the right spot...". As someone who has written two books--a long one and also (presently in progress) a shorter one--allow me to add a few additional thoughts.

Dealing with unresponsive journals

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Anon writes:

(Part of the reason I haven't been super alarmed by this issue is that the paper in question is a short side project sort of thing rather than my main research project, which has been doing better than this paper.)

But anyways: say a paper of yours has been under review for about a year, and that you started checking in on its status after the four month mark, and you haven't gotten a reply to your 3-4 short, polite inquiries that you've sent since then.

Is it fine to just send an email saying "I am withdrawing this MS", and then to proceed as if the MS has been withdrawn? I get the impression I shouldn't expect a reply (or for anyone to read my email), which makes me a bit worried about effectively double-submitting when I resubmit the paper elsewhere. But on the other hand, this paper has probably just been "lost" this whole time.

This is a good (albeit distressing!) query. As far as I am concerned, the moment you send an email to a journal indicating that you have chosen to withdraw a manuscript, it is withdrawn, whether the journal responds or not. You do not have to wait for the journal to acknowledge your message, particularly if (as in this case) the journal has been unresponsive. Further, if any problems were to arise (i.e. a referee never being told by the journal and complaining about you engaging in double-submissions), then by my lights you would be "safe" as an author: as long as you have a copy of your email to prove that you withdrew it). Or so say I. What say you?

Handling 'split-verdict' R&R's

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, Mercado writes:

I wonder what folks think about the following publishing issue. I just received a second R&R from journal x regarding a particular paper.

This second set of referee comments is mixed. One referee’s comments are on the mark and helpful. But, the second referee’s comments are a bit off the mark, by my lights, and she or he recommends that the editor not publish the paper.

Now, the editor’s communication regarding this second R&R seems fairly positive because he or she uses language like “before we can publish your paper you must respond to these referee comments.”

My question is how much should I countenance or revise in light of the negative referee comments? I ask because seemingly the editor is not taking the second referee’s recommendation to not publish the paper.

In response, Tenured SLAC chair wrote:

This is a fine line to walk. I would say that in the event you do not make changes as per referee #2, that it would be wise to explicitly state why you do not feel they are necessary. This too requires a delicate hand. By the sounds of it, something like what I describe would satisfy the editor. Sorry for being so vague.

I'm curious what everyone else thinks. However, my answer is a bit different. I think what Mercado should do probably depends on what referee #2's comments were actually like. Allow me to explain.

How can we help you? (February 2019)

Now that it's a new month, it's time for another 'how can we help you?' thread.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching
• Issues in the profession
• Work-life balance
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Fire away - we're here to help!

Tips for negotiating spousal hires?

In the comments section of our "how can we help you?" thread, Job Seeker writes:

Do folks have any tips for how to negotiate a spousal hire? I assume the right time to ask is at the offer stage, but after that I'm not sure. Do you ask for a TT line specifically, or just ask what can be done for them? Would it be helpful to hire someone like the Professor is In team to help with negotiations?

Great questions - ones that I'm sure more than a few job-candidates could use good answers to! Unfortunately, I don't know the answers. Do you any of you? It would be great to hear from people who have experience on either side of the matter, i.e. people who have negotiated spousal hires themselves, or who handled spousal hires on the hiring side of things (as search committee members, Dean, etc.). Anyone have any helpful tips to share?

Retaining late-semester student engagement

In our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Josh writes:

My apologies if this has been covered before, but I'm starting my first teaching job this year and noticed that my classes seemed to suffer from intense mid- and late-semester fatigue. That is, during the first 7 weeks or so of the term, I would get (e.g.) multiple unprompted questions, consistent student-led "back-and-forths," etc. After that, however, class momentum really began to slow down (with some exceptional days sprinkled here and there, of course). I get that this is part of university life, but I wonder if folks out there have been impressed by this phenomenon enough to factor it into their pedagogical approaches (and, if so, how?). I teach a 3-3 here--all different courses--and this fatigue was painfully evident in all of them.

This is an interesting query. I will be honest: I really haven't encountered this issue before. In my case, I've noticed that student interest seems to wane a bit at the tail end of the semester--maybe the last two or three weeks (about the time I begin to feel run down from the semester too!). Anyway, my strategy for addressing this has increasingly been to have end-of-the-term final presentations, where students have to apply theories (of ethics, law, just war theory, justice, etc.) to outside, original areas of research (e.g. ethical problems not discussed in the course, Supreme Court cases in philosophy of law, etc.). I find this works like a charm, as students often present on unexpected, fascinating, and important issues--ones that other students are interested in, want to discuss, and so on. However, this doesn't address Josh's specific question, which seems be more about the second half of the semester more generally--and final presentations aren't always doable (in very large courses) or everyone's cup of tea. So unfortunately, I guess I'm not the best person to answer Josh's query. 

Do any of you have any helpful tips for Josh? Also, here's a question for Josh (which might help me better understand his situation): what is your general teaching style like--specifically, what do you typically do in the classroom on a day to day basis? 

Making the most out of visiting-positions

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, 'VAP' writes:

I'm a new PhD and a VAP at a teaching-focused, undergraduate institution. I find teaching meaningful, but I also found myself over-worked and under-stimulated. My students are great! But they're undergraduates. How do other people deal with this experience, particularly long term? Of course, more teaching experience/more experience with a heavier teaching load will, I'm sure, help - but I'm not sure how significant that help will be.

This is a great query. I was in VAP at my current institution for 6 years before being hired tenure-track, and I faced roughly the situation described here. In fact, I still face something like this situation now that I'm tenured--as I'm still a member of a very small (four-person) department at a school where most of the philosophical discussion I engage in is with undergraduates.

So let me offer a few suggestions on the basis of my own experience. I don't pretend that my strategies will work for everyone. But I hope they at least get a good discussion started, and I am curious to hear how others have handled similar situations!

Volunteering as a philosopher?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Asst Prof writes:

I would enjoy a post on "volunteering as a philosopher."

I am passionate about reducing climate change (for example), but I am not sure how to jump in and use my skills as a philosopher to advance this cause.

I could of course just volunteer "as a regular person", but I am curious if any philosophers have been able to link up with charitable or activist groups and use their skills as a philosopher specifically--kind of like a doctor or lawyer doing pro bono work.

If so, any stories or advice would be a helpful inspiration to me and maybe others!

This is a great query. In fact, it's one that I would afford to hear some good stories or advice about myself. My own experience 'volunteering as a philosopher' is pretty limited.

Tips for good teaching demos?

In our new "how can we help you?" thread, First time ABD writes:

I have had a few skype interviews now that have warned that if I were to get a fly out interview, I will have to do a teaching demonstration. So the more general question I have is, for those who have done a teaching demonstration, do you have any pragmatic tricks or tips to share, or experiences that you've learned from. For those on search committees, what exactly are you looking for in a teaching demonstration?

The more particular question I have is: I work hard, especially at the start of the year, in classes to structure my classes such that they will function optimally (for instance I make students sign up to email me reading responses the day before class which helps structure my lectures but also makes sure that I have 12/60 students ready to ask questions during the lecture). I feel like in a teaching demonstration, I'm being (unfairly?) parachuted down into a class where my structure is not there. Should I, as a part of my teaching demonstration, try to get the class structured, even just a little bit, to the specifications that I want? (I hope that second question made sense, it's a little vague)

This is a great query. I am curious to hear how people who have served on search-committees (or otherwise witnessed a teaching demo) respond. But here are a few quick thoughts of my own...

How can we help you? (January 2019 edition)

Now that it's a new year (happy new year everyone!), I thought now might be a good time for another 'how can we help you?' thread.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching
• Issues in the profession
• Work-life balance
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Fire away - we're here to help!

Work-life balance during the PhD?

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asked if we could have a thread on work-life balance during the PhD. I'm probably not the best person to give tips here. On the contrary, I'd probably benefit from such a discussion as much as anyone!

While I do have a couple of strategies for preserving some work-life balance--I never work in the evenings, and rarely on weekends--for the most I've never been able to achieve what I take to be a good work-life balance. During my PhD, when I felt like my life was too dominated by work and tried to cultivate a life and hobbies outside of academia, I ended up spending too much time on those things, and not enough time on work. Conversely, ever since I've become a faculty member, I've been on the opposite extreme, spending the vast majority of time on work, and not enough time (by my own estimation) enjoying life. In truth, I've never been very good at half-measures. When I do something, I tend to go "all in." I wish, though--especially here--that I could do better, and could have done better during my grad studies. 

So, then, do any of your have any good tips for work-life balance--specifically, during the PhD? It might also help to hear from people whether similar tips work for faculty!

How can we help you? (September 2018)

Now that the academic year and job market are in full swing, I thought now might be a good time for another monthly 'how can we help you?' post.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Graduate school
• Transitioning into a new job
• Publishing
• Teaching
• The profession
• Work-life balance
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Fire away - we're here to help!

Query on submitting extra application materials

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, anonymous writes:

I have a small question but it is one that I know a lot of people face. When applying for jobs, is it always best to send exactly what the department asks for? Or is it sometimes better to send more materials if you have them? (I think this has been discussed but I can't find where.)

Also, more specifically: if a job asks for, say, two research and one teaching letter, but it is possible to send them more (e.g. whatever system they are using allows for additional uploads), should you send them more?

My thoughts about this were as follows: it's probably different for research-focused and teaching-focused jobs, and you should try to identify which category the job in question falls into. I worry that sending additional research letters to teaching-focused jobs communicates that you think of yourself as a researcher/writer more than a teacher/philosopher, or perhaps that you are aiming to get a more research-focused job. But for research-focused jobs, you should send as many letters (within reason--once you hit six or so it's probably just annoying to have more) as possible, if you are sure that they are very strong.

This is a good query, one I wondered about a lot as an applicant and didn't get much guidance for. I'm curious to hear what readers who have served on search committees think. For my part, I'm inclined to think it may be good to submit extra materials (i.e. additional recommendation letters) when applying to research jobs. However, my sense is that it is probably not a good idea to submit additional materials for teaching jobs. Allow me to explain.

Query on length & structure of teaching dossiers

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, anon writes:

It emerged in discussions in recent-ish memory that some people have pretty short teaching dossiers.

How are those structured? When I put together just all my course evaluations, from about 12 courses, I have about 25 pages of material.

More generally, I guess I would be interested in hearing about guidelines for minimum and maximum lengths of the various sub-sections of the dossier.

This is a good query, as in my experience many candidates go wrong here. In reply to anon's query, 'On the Search' wrote:

Committees just do not want to see all your teaching evaluations. Let us imagine you submit 25 pages of evaluations. And let us assume that 120 people are applying for a job. That means there are 3000 pages of teaching evaluations. Do you think any committee will read this much?

Having served on three search committees now, I entirely agree...

Reader query on posting drafts online

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Jake Wright writes:

I'm curious about something in light of the recent posts regarding the peer review process and making it more like arXiv. Given the current peer review system we have in philosophy, warts and all, how would/do reviewers, editors, etc. respond to identifiable drafts posted to an archive like PhilPapers? I generally like the idea of moving towards a more identifiable preprint system for many of the reasons Marcus identifies, but I worry that posting my own work will negatively affect me by somehow impacting drafts once they are submitted. Am I right to worry about this? Wrong? How can one manage this, if it's a concern?

This is a great query, one I have wondered a good deal about myself. Indeed, it's the main reason I don't currently post unpublished drafts online, let along offer up drafts for feedback here at the Cocoon (which I think would be a great place for early-career philosophers to share and discuss drafts publicly). I worry that reviewers and editors may take openly posting unpublished drafts as subverting anonymous review, which might in turn influence review of the paper in a negative way.

Reader query about 'key selection criteria'

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, E writes:

Jobs in the UK and Australia often ask applicants to complete forms detailing how they satisfy "key selection criteria." They seem like HR documents that no one ever reads. And they're often _very_ lengthy. Should these be taken seriously?

As I don't work in the UK or Australia, I am probably not the best person to answer this question. However, my sense is that key selection criteria matter a great deal in these markets in the sense that, yes, one had better address them in detail somewhere (either in your cover letter or a supplementary document).

How can we help you? (August 2018)

Now that the academic year and j0b-market season are here, I thought it might be a good time to run another 'how can we help you?' post (I'm going to try to run one of these posts each month now, given the helpful questions we receive!).

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query.

Please feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Tips for starting a new job or grad program
• Publishing
• Teaching
• The profession
• Work-life balance
• More personal struggles
• Etc.

Fire away - we're here to help!

Reader query on reading vs. writing

In the comments section of our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, Amanda writes:

I guess this might help me in terms of understanding my own attitude toward the profession. I am curious whether most philosophers like writing or reading philosophy more? Also, I am curious whether most philosophers read things they like, or mainly read for the purposes of their own research. Either way, what percentage of the philosophy that you read do find intellectually fulfilling? 

I too am curious to hear people's answers. Here are mine...

Query on interdisciplinary job-marketeering

In the comments section of our newest "how can we help you?" thread, VAP of X at a SLAC writes:

My PhD is in philosophy, but my background in cognate field X is sufficiently strong that I'm now a VAP of X at a SLAC. I expect that at a handful of schools, separate tenure-track jobs may be advertised this year in both philosophy and in X. I'd like to apply to both jobs when that occurs, but I can foresee upsides and downsides of that strategy, and I'd like advice on how to maximize the upsides and minimize the downsides.

The main upsides I see are that I can teach interdisciplinary courses, conduct research with faculty members and students across disciplines, and foster student and faculty dialogue across disciplines. The main downside I see is being perceived as a unique kind of flight risk. Philosophers might think that I'll either leave for a job in X or, worse yet, use up a line in their department while only really contributing to X. Members of the department of X might have the reciprocal thought.

Am I overthinking this, overlooking other concerns, or both? And do you have any advice on how to navigate this situation? Thanks!

Good questions. I'm not very sure on what the best answers to them might be, but here are a few thoughts...

Reader query on choosing a PhD program

In the comments section of our most recent "how can we help you?" thread, AnonMA writes:

When choosing which PhD program to attend, is it more advantageous to choose a program based on the reputation of one's (presumed) advisor, or based on the reputation of the program itself? That is, when considering future employment prospects, is it more important that one's advisor/letter writer is a "star" scholar in their specialty, or is it more important that the overall rank of the program where one receives one's PhD is high? I am a recent MA who is interested in some PhD programs in philosophy that boast "star" scholars but not high overall rank.

I think this is a great query, one many prospective PhD students are likely to have--and I am curious to hear what readers think. My own initial reaction, to be frank, is to question a presupposition the questions seem to be based on: namely, that reputation (of a program or advisor) is the best way for prospective students to think about which PhD program to enter or what their "future employment prospects" are. Allow me to explain, and then give a more direct answer to AnonMA's query.