The Philosophers' Cocoon

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?

Pros and cons of posting unpublished work online?

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

Is it advisable to post unpublished manuscripts online (assuming one has already perfected them based on much feedback from many colleagues)? I have noticed that some philosophers do this, but most don't. What are the pros and cons?

Good questions, and I'm not entirely sure.

What does everyone think?

How do search committees perceive non-philosophy teaching?

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

I am curious about how non-philosophy teaching on a CV is perceived by search committees.

In other words, is teaching a person may have done in other disciplines irrelevant or is it seen as a positive indication of teaching experience that gets lesser weight than philosophy teaching experience? In particular, I am curious about a scenario where a person might have more teaching experience in a different discipline than in philosophy. Is that person evaluated only according to the philosophy teaching experience or is the non-philosophy teaching experience also factored in somewhat.

I suspect it probably depends on a case-by-case basis. For example, some universities have general education or honors programs with interdisciplinary courses taught by multiple faculty in different disciplines. For jobs at places like these, I imagine non-philosophy teaching experience could be helpful. But I don't know how common this situation may be, and I suspect that by and large search committees are simply looking for evidence of good teaching abilities simpliciter.

What does everyone else think?

Drawing from previously published work in a (first) book manuscript?

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

I’ve been told that this early-to-mid-career time is when you should start thinking about a book project, and that you should have some publications out in support of your book project.” I can see that often whole chapters of books are drawn on material from published papers. But how many papers should one draw on? How do you know when you have an established enough body of work to satisfy a well-regarded press?

Good questions. My experience is that different presses can have different policies on this. For example, I seem to recall one press I've worked with require that no more than 10% of a book be based upon previously published work. Alternatively, I've heard that some presses have policies that focus on chapters (e.g., no more than two chapters of previously published work). But, of course, I expect that as with many things in book publishing, some of this may be negotiable depending on how invested the press is in publishing with you.

Do any readers have any helpful tips or experiences to share?

Predicting a candidate's chances on the market

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

Preparing myself for the market next year. Wondering if anyone could give me their sense of my chances based on my overall profile: PhD candidate from a top-10 leiter program, 2 publications in good, but not tip-top journals, and a person of colour.

Personally, I'm not sure that it's possible to predict a person's chances on the market with much (if any) reliability, particularly with this kind of broad information. In my experience serving on a bunch of search committees, some good publications and PhD program reputation can get your file taken seriously. But there's virtually always a large number of similarly qualified candidates with similar profiles for the same position. So, things really come down to the details of a candidate's dossier (their writing sample, research statement, teaching dossier, etc.), perceived "fit" for the position, idiosyncratic views and preferences of search committee members, etc. So, if I were a candidate, I wouldn't focus on trying to predict anything. Instead, I'd just focus on presenting myself as the best candidate possible and see what happens.

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours? 

Listing a paper under external review as an MA applicant to PhD programs?

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

I am a masters student in philosophy and I currently have a paper under external review at one of the "top-25 general philosophy journals" listed on this webpage:
https://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2022/07/best-general-philosophy-journals-2022.html

Of course, I am happy and excited and nervous and somewhat terrified about this at the same time! And I have a couple questions about this kind of experience:
1. Since I'm applying to PhD programs in the upcoming cycle, I wonder if it would be appropriate for me to list the paper in the "under review" section of my c.v.? (I've seen many early career philosophers do that, so I was curious.)
2. If the answer to the previous question is affirmative, then what is the best way for me to do that? (I.e., should I list the journal title? should I indicate what stage it's in?)
3. How do I cope with the anxiety associated with waiting to hear back from the journal? Any tips, advice, suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
4. Lastly, what does it mean to have a paper under external review at a journal at the Masters stage? (I know that there are many people who have done this, but I just don't know any of such people personally, and so I was hoping to get a better, general sense of what this whole publication thing means at this stage in my career/life.)

Thank you so much in advance!!

First of all, best of luck to the OP with both the paper and PhD program applications! In terms of their questions, I'm not sure about (1), (2), and (4), as I don't know how much can be inferred from a paper being sent out for external review at a journal. Then again, I've never served on a PhD program admissions committee, so I don't have any inside insights on matters like these. 

In terms of question (3), I don't have many tips for coping for anxiety other than this: I try to put submissions as far as possible out of my mind. One must always remember that selective philosophy journals tend to have rejection rates of around or over 90%, and peer-review can take many months. So, unless you want to remain stressed out, my suggestion is simply to try to focus on other things. That's what I try to do, at any rate! 

Do other readers have any helpful answers for the OP?

How do sabbaticals work?

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

How do sabbaticals realistically work? It seems like almost everyone goes to visit another institution for a long time, but I don’t see how that’s feasible if you’ve got young children, or a spouse or partner with location-specific work, or elderly family to take care of. I also do not understand if these visits are typically like “official” visiting positions or something less formal. When I have asked about this, I feel like I do not get the kind of detailed answers that would be helpful for planning.

Good question. I've had one sabbatical, and although I would have liked to visit another institution, that was out of the picture for me for the kinds of reasons the OP mentions. At my university, one has to submit a detailed sabbatical application on the project(s) one plans to complete, and then document what one has done after the sabbatical is over. But that's about all I have to offer!

Do other readers have any helpful insights on sabbaticals, including visiting other institutions?

Which generalist journals are the best fits for "specialist" papers?

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

As someone who writes mostly in a "specialist" field of philosophy (in my case, philosophy of religion), I was wondering if anyone out there has good thumb rules about what kind of "specialist" philosophy to send to generalist journals and where. Obviously the material needs to be understandable to non-specialists, but maybe someone can say more?

Do any readers have any helpful tips/rules of thumb?

Overcoming fear of judgment in a harsh field?

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

Philosophy is such a harsh and judgmental field and as an early career philosopher, it's debilitating to think that I am constantly being nitpicked at when I apply to jobs, submit to journals, give talks, etc. (I have friends who are scarred from hearing faculty discuss job candidates). Can anyone give me tips on how to overcome this fear of judgment, especially since this is what makes/breaks your career?

This a good question, albeit a tough one for me. I have to confess that this is something I've long struggled with, and continue with to this day. Although I've been in the profession for many years now, I still dread opening decision emails from journals, as like most people I've received my share of brutal referee reports. I've also had rough talks and Q&A's that left me incredibly discouraged. Having witnessed my spouse's career in a different academic field, attending some of her talks and dissertation defense, my sense is that some other fields can be far less harsh than philosophy. Some research suggests this too. And wow, did I sure have some bad experiences on the job-market. 

My only real strategy has been to inure myself to harsh judgment as much as I can and "keep on keeping on." I just take my lumps, so to speak, and try to enjoy the good moments/successes when things go better. But, in all honesty, this has been one of the more difficult ongoing parts of a career in the field for me. There's so much about doing philosophy that I love, but this is one of the areas that I don't. So I'd be keen to hear strategies that other people have come up with, and how they work.

Do any readers have any helpful tips to share?

Norms for co-authorship in philosophy?

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

I would like to hear people's opinion about co-authorship in philosophy. To make my question more concrete, let me cite a specific example. In a manuscript by Samuel Elgin (https://philarchive.org/rec/ELGTGO) who is the single author, Elgin says in a footnote that "I am especially indebted to Pauliina Rumm, who first raised the puzzle of the grounds of nonground to me. Though the theory I develop here is my own, credit for identifying the puzzle goes entirely to her."

Elgin is very generous to give the credit for identifying the puzzle entirely to Rumm, but I was wondering whether Rumm deserves to be listed as a co-author. If the above information is not enough to answer the question, then hypothetically, what kind of contribution to the paper is sufficient for Rumm to earn a co-authorship in philosophy? What do people think?

PS: I notice that Pauliina Rumm had given a presentation earlier in July at the International Wittgenstein Symposium entitled "A Puzzle About Grounding and Specification" (https://centerforgermanphilosophy.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/International-Wittgenstein-Symposium-Program.pdf). But I didn't attend the Symposium so I don't know what Rumm has said in her paper. Perhaps someone who's attended the Symposium can provide some more information.

Because this comment singled out his paper, I reached out to Elgin, who said he's happy to see the issue discussed but shared the following for context:

A bit about this particular case: when I started writing that paper, I reached out to Rumm to ask if she would be interested in coauthoring with me. (In my view, coauthorship would be appropriate given the sizeable impact she had on my thinking).  She declined, because she thinks that I am wrong - and (quite understandably) didn't want to attach her name to a theory she believes to be incorrect.  She may well be developing her own, competing account - but, if so, I do not know what that account is.

This seems like exactly the right thing to do. My own view has always been that if any of the main ideas for a paper come from someone (including, say, a problem the paper addresses), then they should be a co-author--unless, as in this case, they decline because the main line of argument/theory isn't theirs or one they would endorse. I'd add that in general, one should always play it safe and err on the side of offering co-authorship, particularly (though not only) when someone more junior is involved. 

What does everyone else think about norms for co-authorship? 

Kindly giving a 'D' to failing students...and end of the semester "begging" emails?

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

Grading with a straight bat? I have a couple of students this semester who have been completely dire; numerous absences, zero participation, no posts on the discussion board, late and poor writing assignments. On paper, based on the syllabus, they should get Fs. It’s an intro class that is required for all students. Am I a teddy bear for wanting to just give them Ds and send them on their merry way?

Relatedly, any advice about the “end of semester begging email” - this other kid last attended 10/31 then emails me to say that they’ve been struggling mentally, that a friend of theirs died. Hard to verify any of these claims, or what to do if true. Another kid emailed me to say that their parent had died, another that their parent was sick in the hospital, etc.

Hmm... this seems obviously inappropriate to me. If a student hasn't done passing work, they haven't passed the class. My syllabi require documentation of serious personal emergencies, etc., in large part to preempt end of the semester emails like these. But my sense is that some (many?) faculty are way more lenient than I am.

What does everyone think?

Obtaining a philosophy job with a PhD in another field?

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

First-year PhD student here. What are my prospects for academic employment in philosophy at R1 institutions given my PhD in social sciences from a top 3 globally ranked university? Would publishing 2–3 papers in leading political philosophy journals before graduation outweigh the lack of a formal philosophy PhD? Also, how might publishing in non-philosophy journals be perceived—would it strengthen my interdisciplinary appeal or work against me? For context, I hold a master’s degree in philosophy, but my undergraduate degree is in another field.

Hmm, I don't know. The philosophy job market is so competitive that I'm not sure how competitive someone might be with a PhD from another field. I also know that some (many?) job ads state explicitly that a PhD in philosophy is expected or required. But maybe exceptions may be made for exceptional candidates, particularly if they've published in excellent philosophy journals and have a philosophy MA? I'm not sure.

Do any readers have any helpful experiences or other insights to share?

Crowdsourcing essay competitions?

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

I've been having difficulties tracking essay competitions in Philosophy. Although I already receive some updates from the Philosophy e-mail list, many of these competitions are annual and sparse throughout the internet so it would be interesting to have an idea about when they are receiving papers to better organize myself.

I think it would be great to crowdsource a list here. Please feel free to list and link to essay competitions (or compendiums thereof) below!

Asking for feedback from a search committee?

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

Is it ever okay to ask a hiring committee (e.g. the chair) for feedback on your job market materials if you were denied an interview? Here's the scenario I have in mind: a school posts an ad which is a very good fit for you, you spend a significant amount of time on your materials (e.g. tailoring cover letter to the job, etc.), but they don't even interview you. In that situation, is it okay to ask the hiring committee for feedback and advice, purely in the spirit of trying to improve your materials? Or is that too much of an ask?

Hmm...I've heard of people asking for feedback from committees that interviewed them, which I'd be curious to hear people's experiences with. But I don't know if I've heard of people asking for feedback when they weren't interviewed.

What does everyone think?

Tips for going on the market as an Associate Prof?

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

I could use some advice on navigating the job market as an associate professor. Unfortunately, my university is going through a budgetary crisis, and so I'm going back on the job market. This season, I applied to a few open-rank positions, but is it common practice for senior candidates to apply also to tenure-track jobs? Do committees hire senior candidates into t-t positions? Do they then grant those candidates tenure in the new position, or do the new hires have to start all over again on the tenure track? Thanks in advance for any advice you can give.

All good questions. Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

Two questions about grad school applications

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

With deadlines coming up for graduate programs, I am wondering if I, in my academic statements, should include professors that I would like to work with. I have got conflicting advice on this, some say "do not name drop" other say "name drop! So long as you know that they align with your research interests."

Second, on my application, I have been told NOT to add the schools that I am applying to, i.e., applying to UCLA, do not add that I am also applying to x, y, or z schools so that it either 1. build some competition or urgency at the school you're applying too? 2. It makes them think, "Oh well, they will get into x school. They will choose us." I have also heard naming other schools is good because they are more likely to choose you; they can have some sort of vision as to who they are competing with. Again, these are all things I have heard, and I have no idea what to do...

The second thing (mentioning other schools one is applying to) seems weird and off-putting to me. Anyone can apply to the best programs around, so why think anything of it? As for "name-dropping" faculty one would like to work with, I'm not sure!

Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

"Real" differences in teaching loads between R1s and teaching-oriented undergrad programs?

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

I would like to hear more about the "real" differences in teaching load between a research-oriented program and a teaching-oriented program.

I am curious about this because I feel that the numbers of courses could be very misleading. I work in a teaching-oriented, undergraduate-only program, and the standard teaching load for us is 3/2. The typical teaching load in a research-oriented program seems to be 2/2 (I could be wrong though). However, I feel that my teaching load is way more than just one course, and I almost have no time doing research during the semester. I have never gone to more than one conference during a semester: simply canceling classes for conferences seems less acceptable in my institution, and I usually fell behind on grading/teaching if I went to a conference.

I have never taught in a research-oriented department, and my impression of the teaching load at such a place is mostly from my time in graduate school. It seems to me that professors at research-oriented programs usually have TAs for service courses, so they only need to teach in the classroom and done with teaching, leaving grading for their TAs. TAs can also cover classes so professors go to quite a few conferences during semesters. They can also teach on topics that align well with their research. So, the actual teaching load in a research-oriented program is way lighter.

Am I right? I would like to learn more about this. Thank you!

Good question. Teaching loads at my university are 3/3, and I find myself in a similar position with respect to research during the academic year--though canceling classes for conference travel aren't a problem and I'm able to get plenty of research done during summer and winter breaks. While my sense is that faculty in research-oriented programs seem to have far fewer teaching burdens with undergraduate courses (for the reasons the OP gives), I've wondered whether that is made up for by much higher demands with respect to graduate teaching and mentoring (including serving on dissertation committees for multiple students, reading and commenting on several-hundred page dissertations, etc.). 

Anyway, it would be great to hear from readers in different types of jobs. What are the "real differences" between teaching loads in teaching-focused versus R1 programs? What type of job are you in? What is the official teaching load, and how much time does it leave for research?

How can we help you? (December 2024)

Now that it's been several months since our last "how can we help you?" thread, it's time for a new 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. 

As usual, 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.)
• Issues in the profession (including issues of social justice)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching (including in the age of A.I.)
• Work-life balance
• Mental health & well-being
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Ask away - we're here to help! 

Finally, a quick reminder of the following RULE: Please do not submit replies to other comments in this thread. It makes these threads unwieldy and difficult for me to keep track of which queries I've posted new threads on. If you'd like to respond to a comment in this thread, please wait until I dedicate a new post to the person's query myself and comment in that thread instead!

‘Interpretability’ and ‘Alignment’ are Fool’s Errands: A Proof that Controlling Misaligned Large Language Models is the Best Anyone Can Hope For

Ever wonder why large language model AI (LLMs) keep threatening people or otherwise violating their 'guardrails' despite vast resources being spent on AI safety research?

My new paper, "‘Interpretability’ and ‘Alignment’ are Fool’s Errands: A Proof that Controlling Misaligned Large Language Models is the Best Anyone Can Hope For" shows that it is because AI safety researchers are trying to solve empirically unsolvable problems.

Abstract: This paper uses famous problems from philosophy of science and philosophical psychology—underdetermination of theory by evidence, Nelson Goodman’s new riddle of induction, theory-ladenness of observation, and “Kripkenstein’s” rule-following paradox—to show that it is empirically impossible to reliably interpret which functions a large language model (LLM) AI has learned, and thus, that reliably aligning LLM behavior with human values is provably impossible. Sections 2 and 3 show that because of how complex LLMs are, researchers must interpret their learned functions largely in terms of empirical observations of their outputs and network behavior. Sections 4–7 then show that for every “aligned” function that might appear to be confirmed by empirical observation, there is always an infinitely larger number of “misaligned”, arbitrarily time-limited functions equally consistent with the same data. Section 8 shows that, from an empirical perspective, we can thus never reliably infer that an LLM or subcomponent of one has learned any particular function at all before any of an uncountably large number of unpredictable future conditions obtain. Finally, Section 9 concludes that the probability of LLM “misalignment” is—at every point in time, given any arbitrarily large body of empirical evidence—always vastly greater than the probability of “alignment.”

Raising concerns about a referee to an editor?

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

Under what conditions is it acceptable to email some journals' editors to say that a referee did a really bad job? Top-3 specialist journal that prides itself on having really great referee reports.

I just received a journal rejection with a kind of experience almost everyone has had. I got 1 great report (not glowing, but they carefully read the paper and raised important objections). And 1 report that badly misread the paper. Given that this specialist journal prides itself on having great referee reports, I wonder if it would be worth it to say something.

What do readers think?

Reading suggestions for a homeschool philosophy course?

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

I am certainly out of my league here, so please bear with me. I'm a homeschool mom developing high school curricula for my kid. I want her to have an intro to philosophy... a full year course either in her junior or senior year. We read a lot and enjoy debating and discussing ideas and concepts. I think she would really enjoy a philosophy course. Can the experts tell me what they wish they had read or been offered when they were younger? Is there a favourite anthology for beginners you might suggest? Or perhaps some favourite books in general? I'm interested in covering an array of philosophers with world representation. And any female philosophers you can suggest would be wonderful. Thanks so much in advance.

Neat questions! Do any readers have any suggestions?

 

Workshop papers as "invited presentations"?

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

Suppose I'm invited to participate in (i.e., present a draft of a paper at) a workshop at an institution outside my home state. Should this go on my CV under "invited presentations"? The reason I ask is because (i) I wouldn't put a workshop I participated in at my home institution on my CV, since workshopping papers with colleagues at home is a rather mundane part of the research process; and (ii) listing it under "invited presentations" might be misleading, since it might give readers the impression that I was invited to give a colloquium talk or something like that. But since I worked so hard and travelled so far to give the paper, I feel it would be a shame not to list it somewhere.

It seems to me entirely right to list this as an invited presentation, as the salient difference to me is that it's at another institution--that one was invited to. I'd just be sure to list next to the paper title that it was a workshop. That seems to me to give the reader of the CV everything they need to know (it's not a colloquium talk per se).

What do readers think?

Visa-sponsorship issues for international job applicants?

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

There was some discussion on the job market reporting thread about Wyoming sending emails to candidates saying that they did not meet the minimum qualification for the job. A commenter said, "I got a similar response (“you don’t meet the minimum qualifications”) from a smaller US college immediately after submitting my application. I followed up and they said I got disqualified because they don’t sponsor visas (I’m not a US citizen), despite not stating this in the ad."

This could be the case for Wyoming: I got the email saying I don't meet the minimum qualifications (I do), and I must have indicated that I will need visa sponsorship in the online application.

This is a bit frustrating because it seems like job ads really do not indicate whether or not they would sponsor visas. This means that international folks are needlessly applying to and getting rejected from jobs without any indication that this might be due to visa-related issues. People also don't really talk much about the hurdle of needing visa sponsorship when on the job market.

A question for folks at smaller colleges and universities: do you sponsor visas? if not, do you automatically remove any application from someone who indicates that they need a visa? how is this handled, if at all?

And for international folks who have been able to get sponsorships: any advice for people on the job market? are you honest and upfront about your needing sponsorship? has this ever been an issue while interviewing for a job?

All good questions. Do any readers have helpful insights or experiences to share?

Should R1 postdoc selection committees be more open to a wider variety of candidates?

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

Practically speaking, why are (mostly R1) postdoc selection committees not more open to the prospect of hiring VAPs, lecturers, or even t-t asst. prof. to their attractive postdoc positions when these folks have shown research aptitude on top of their teaching work? Why are the common candidates for most postdocs fresh graduate students who just had all the time in the world to do research?

This seems like an easy place where an equity problem could be effectively dealt with in academic philosophy. Let those folks who have taught, and who would value time to work on a research project, be considered seriously for your positions! [I think the APA should get on top of this, developing their own postdoc for those coming from teaching positions.]

The following strikes me as a worthy new perspective for postdoc committees to take: 'hey, look at this person's CV: they're on a 4/4, but they're getting research done; and oh look at their research proposal! It seems like with a full year or two for work, they have a really interesting project they could get off the ground. Let's consider them'. Whereas this does not: 'Oh look, here we have a fresh graduate student who looks to have been in a fellowship heavy PhD program. Oh, and seems they've already managed an article in PPR and Nous. Better give them another year to write even more'.

This is an interesting query, as I seem to recall coming across some research showing that it is very hard for academics to "move up" in the academy, i.e., from an initial placement at a SLAC or R2/R3 to an R1. Given how much luck seems to be involved in initial job placements (many have called the academic job market something of a lottery), it could be good for the discipline to reflect on and potentially address the situation in the way the OP raises. Then again, I'm not sure what the APA might do, or indeed, what anyone might do above and beyond "changing minds" through drawing attention to the issue. I also wonder whether, given all of the other serious issues facing higher ed, addressing these issues might seem to many like a pretty low priority.

What do readers think? 

External grad school funding sources?

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

In the interest of spreading the wealth (literally), does anyone have recommendations for external grad school funding sources? I thought it would be helpful to collect them in one thread given how many people are applying to programs right now. Thank you!

Great idea. Crowdsource away!

How will the new PGR rankings affect job-candidates?

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

With the new Philosophical Gourmet rankings coming out, I was wondering if folks could chime in about how they think the rankings impact, if at all, hiring PhDs from the ranked schools. I don't mean to reopen the question of whether they are good rankings or whether rankings are good at all, just the practical question of whether and how the ranking of a candidate's degree-granting department indirectly or directly affects a candidate's chances.

Good question. I suspect that a lot of people hiring at "non-elite" institutions probably don't pay much attention to these matters. But maybe people hiring at (elite) R1s might?

Do any readers have any helpful insights?

Getting organized: digital libraries and workflow?

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

I'm trying to get more organized, and I wonder if anyone would care to share their thoughts on managing digital libraries and workflow.

(1) A few years after my dissertation has been completed , I am left with a lot of articles from my classes and various research, along (legally!) downloaded pdf ebooks. Does anyone have any tips on organizing a unified digital reference library? I haven't really used Endnote, Mendeley, etc, but they seem to be geared at specific paper projects, rather than cataloguing one's entire reference library (or am I wrong?), and I'm also hesitant at some of those yearly price tags. Right now I find myself just using good old fashioned folders, labeled by author or category, but I imagine this is going to get complicated as time goes on.

(2) I love using Scrivener for writing, but there are so many other stages of project planning that I haven't quite figured out how to integrate with digital platforms (to-do lists, time management, project bibliographies, and note taking, larger brainstorming, etc). I'd love to hear about how people manage their digital workflow and what apps or tools they find most useful in doing so.

I have no experience with any of this, so unfortunately I can't offer any tips.

Do any readers who do have any tips to share?

Developing expertise & seeing oneself as an 'expert': a question from a graduate student

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

I am in the middle of graduate school and I'm having trouble seeing myself as an "expert" in some very niche part of this field. While true, I'm still early in my career, but the jump from being a grad student to being a proto-colleague to my professors is intimidating and scary. I'm just having trouble figuring out what is required for "Expertise" in some field. Is it that I should be able to know relevant conversations? Is it that I should be able to contribute, in an informed matter, to conversations? I'm supposed to publish as a graduate student to get a job but I'm also trying to show mastery of some literature which, clearly, pull in different directions.

If I try to scour all of the relevant literature, I run the risk of not having any publications at the end of my time in grad school. If I publish extensively, then I run the risk of not knowing the relevant literatures required to be an "expert". I'm sure there's some balance in between that we must strike and that those who are successful do strike - but it just is so difficult to balance.

For those more advanced in this field, how do you define expertise?

As a former grad student, I empathize with the OP, but I wonder if they are overthinking things. I've never tried to define 'expertise' for myself, and throughout much of my early career in the field, I never felt like much of an expert. Indeed, my sense is that "impostor syndrome" is a common experience in grad school and among many early career faculty. Because of this, I've always just tried to keep learning, engage in (and learn from) conversations to the best of my ability, and produce the best written work I can given what I do know--again, with an aim of always improving. But, of course, this is just me, and maybe others have grappled with these kinds of issues differently.

Do any other readers have any relevant experiences or insights of their own to share with the OP? 

Jobs looking for "community engagement" and/or "impact beyond the academy"?

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

I'm increasingly applying to jobs that want me to explain how I do "community engagement" or have "impact beyond the academy." This includes some applications for postdoctoral fellowships, applications for UK lectureships under the REF, and sometimes applications for other professorships that have an interdisciplinary or applied focus. I'm looking for practical suggestions about how a philosopher who mainly sits at a desk and writes academic papers can do/claim they will do community engagement.

I'm not sure, but one plausible conversational implicature here to me seems to me that they may be looking for evidence of public philosophy, i.e. publishing in popular venues. Perhaps they are leaving it more open/vague than that, as there can be other ways to make an impact beyond the academy? I'm not sure.

Does anyone have any helpful insights to share?

What to do when journal referees don't appear to have been invited after 5 months?

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

I have a paper under review that hasn't changed status in five months. (According to the displayed status, the journal hasn't even invited anyone to review it yet.) I've reached out to the handling editor twice through the journal's online submission portal to inquire about this, but I haven't received a response. I'm now wondering what other means of inquiry would be appropriate. Should I email the handling editor directly, rather than through the submission portal (their identity is visible to me)? Or is there some other way to go about doing this?

Hmm... my sense is that some journal manuscript systems don't update properly, but the fact that the handling editor hasn't responded to inquiries after 5 months is concerning. Not sure what the OP should do: reach out to the Editor in Chief?

Do any readers have any helpful insights? 

Applying after "full consideration" deadlines: a waste of time?

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

Q: Is it a waste of time to apply for a job after the “deadline for full consideration” but still accepts applications until the position is filled?

I came across a few job ads that are great fits, but there are so many more still to come that I don’t want to waste time on a lost cause when I could put energy into apps that will be given full consideration. Has anyone had a positive experience applying late anyway?

Related Q: How do committees view these late submissions?

In my view, the market season needs to stop clustering deadlines all on the same days, e.g., 10/31, 11/1, 11/15, 12/1, etc. Interfolio can’t even keep up! Are committees understanding about this, the possibility of finding a job ad just a little too late, or “life happens”-type considerations? (I assume it’s best not to give an explanation so as to not call further attention to the lateness of the submission…)

Or, is it always best to keep working on the job ads coming up?

Good questions. I suspect many committees meet to discuss candidates soon after the full consideration deadline, so in some cases it could be a waste of time to apply after it. But I'm not sure whether this is always the case.

What do readers think? It would be great to hear from some search committee members.

What are R2 jobs like?

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

I'm currently in a teaching-only position with a pretty manageable workload but no research funding. The role has good job security from what I can tell. My long-term goal is to publish enough to eventually get a SLAC or R1 TT job. I am currently (selectively) on the market, and I am wondering whether I should be applying to R2 jobs (think 3-3 load with multiple preps, regional state schools, etc.). Do these jobs typically come with some research funding to be able to attend conferences, even if it's modest? In the short term I think I would have more time to publish if I stayed put at my teaching-only job, but is it worth it to try to get a TT job with a heavier workload for the boost that seems to come from applying to a TT job when one already has one?

Good questions. I'd be curious to hear about this too, as I suspect that like many people, I probably don't know much in detail about how jobs at R1's and R2's differ.

Do any readers have any helpful insights to share?

Good international conferences?

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

I’m a grad student interested in applying to international conferences, but I'm unsure which ones is the best fit. Unfortunately, I don't have much guidance from those around me, as they don’t have much experience with international conferences. So, could anyone recommend conferences known for their prestige, quality, or any other standout features that make them a valuable experience?

Hmm...this is a really broad question (the OP doesn't mention their AOS), so it may be difficult to answer. Although there seem to be some dicey conferences (where it's unclear what type of peer-review/quality control exists in putting together the program), for the most part I just submit to CFPs for international conferences that look good to me. Still, are there any particularly notable international conferences the OP should be aware of? 

What do readers think?

Noting your writing sample as an R&R?

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

I just got an R&R on my sample. Would it be a good idea to include this at the top of the sample? Or would this be a violation of peer-review practices?

I honestly have no idea. As with many job-market and publishing-related things, I suspect there's likely to be some diversity of views here, though maybe I'm wrong. 

What do readers think?

Withdrawing a journal submission: prudential and moral considerations?

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

Whether and when to retract a journal submission? Is delay, silence a good enough reason? How much delay is enough? Prudentially? Morally? Will it be held against you?

I'm pretty sure we've discussed the first question on several occasions. But I don't know if we've ever exactly examined moral and prudential considerations per se. 

Do any readers have any helpful insights?

Is it bad not to publish from one's dissertation?

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

is it a bad thing if one does not publish from their dissertation? (recently I heard that some people are doing just okay if they moved on and did not publish anything from their dissertation, but i feel like this is not common maybe?) what do you think? thanks!

I expect this may differ across institutions, but also that a lot may depend on what one does publish. For example, if you don't publish from your dissertation but you are able to place a number of articles in good journals, you may have a good enough publishing record to get a job, receive tenure, etc. But maybe at other institutions it's expected that you will publish from your dissertation? I don't know. 

Do any readers have any helpful insights?

Exile in 90sville: a podcast on 90s culture & philosophy

Peter Westmoreland (St. Petersburg College) writes in:

Looking for a podcast about philosophy and the 90s?  Peter Westmoreland Podcast has you covered with Exile in 90sville on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Exile in 90sville uses philosophy to talk about the 90s.  It also surveys 90s philosophy.  Arranged like a CD, I publish a new “track” every week addressing a unique topic: punk rock values, postmodernism, time consciousness, technology, authenticity, epistemic violence, and more.

The best part: each track has a “B-side.”  B-sides consist of interviews with specialists that take us from the 90s into the present.  Some are professional philosophers/ academics who lend us their expertise like Laurie Shrage on feminist philosophy, Wendy Steiner on aesthetics, Steve Gimbel on philosophy of humor, and Brad Rosenheim on environmental science.  Others are non-academics who work in the area like investigative journalist Zeke Faux on financial scams, brewer Davin Bartosch on beer, urban designer Josh Frank on city planning, and Ben Kirby on working in the Clinton White House.

Why a podcast on the 90s and philosophy?  A few reasons.

Life as adjunct faculty: can adjuncts flourish?

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

I am generally curious about the life of an adjunct, and in particular adjuncts who have other jobs and teach philosophy as a way to supplement their income (i.e., who are not trying to make a full-time living as an adjunct).

How much do adjuncts make per class? (I know it depends, but I couldn't find much info about this online surprisingly so more info would be helpful)

What other jobs have people combined with adjuncting?

Has adjuncting been meaningful? Demoralizing? Both? So demoralizing as to make it not worth considering at all?

I ask because I could see myself perhaps pursuing multiple part-time/freelance jobs in various fields to make ends meet if I don't get a full-time academic job, and I wonder how feasible/prudent it would be to consider adjuncting. Does the flourishing adjunct exist?

These are all good questions. Are any current or former adjunct faculty willing to weigh in?

Tips & resources for autistic members of the profession?

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

I'm an early-stage PhD student and I've recently realized that I'm autistic. (Official diagnosis is pending, but it explains a lot.) I think this is one of the many reasons I've been drawn to academia as a profession: it's a space where I'm valued for my special interests and so can be myself. At the same time, I think it's clear that being myself has its limits! Specifically, I think there's evidence that I've had a harder time than neurotypical others when it comes to the social side of academia. And those social challenges can have considerable impacts on my professional success more generally.

I can't find anything in the archive about this, so I wanted to ask: Any advice/resources/experiences from autistic people in the profession that they would be willing to share? Among the things I'm curious about: Have you had to mask certain parts of yourself to succeed socially in academia? How do you avoid burnout from masking, especially given how social academia can be? Would you advise disclosing that you are autistic in select professional contexts, or is the risk of stigma too great?

(N.B. Obviously not asking for general life advice, as this wouldn't be the right forum for that. I'm asking about how to succeed as an autistic person in the specific social/professional world of academic philosophy.)

These are all great and important question. Do any readers have any helpful insights or resources to share?

Struggles talking about your dissertation?

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

I hate talking about my dissertation/research and wish it felt easier. I like my topic, but when people ask me about it, I get defensive even though people usually ask out of good will, interest, or politeness. The fact that it's somewhat upsetting for me to be asked about it makes me not want to discuss it because I don't want to accidentally be rude. I don't know if I'm just sick of my dissertation at this stage, if it feels more vulnerable because I'm more attached to the project, or if I'm overly anticipating combativeness. This even comes up when people outside of academia ask me about my dissertation. Has anyone had this experience and worked through it?

Good question. I recall struggling with this too, though I'm not sure I ever came up with a good solution other than simply practicing (very reluctantly) with grad faculty, other grad students, and later, my spouse. 

Do any readers have any helpful tips to share?

Accept a TT job at a struggling college or stay in grad school?

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

I have a scenario for which I would like some advice. Let's say you're ABD, and have just a couple (just OK) publications, though with a lot of teaching experience. The remainder of your papers are still under review, and you expect one or two to wind up at more prestigious journals over the next year.

You get a TT job offer, but at a small & struggling liberal arts college, and with less than competitive compensation. You could take it and attempt to move laterally, or push your defense back a year, and use your final year of funding, going on the job market again. Is there any scenario where the latter course of action would be advisable?

This is a tough scenario, but if it were me, I'd take the TT job and try to move laterally. To me, the job-market is simply too unpredictable to pass up a TT offer. There's no guarantee you'll ever get another one, and you could spend years suffering on the market trying to get another one, especially given a "just OK" publishing record. Of course, there's also no guarantee that you'll be able to move laterally, or that the struggling college you go to won't cut your position at a later date. But at least this way you've secured something and given yourself some time in a full-time tenure-stream job (which is good experience on a CV) to find something elsewhere.

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?

Major Medieval Philosophy Journals/Rankings?

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

Does anyone know what the major Medieval Philosophy journals are? Or a resource for ranking (though I understand the great limitations to ranking)? I not so much asking about the main History of Philosophy journals, but specifically the "area" journals for Medieval Philosophy. Thank you all!

I don't work in history of philosophy, so I have no idea. Do any readers?

Examples of good job-market materials?

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

I know that one or two recent job market candidates (for example Elise Woodard) have shared examples of their successful materials, and I was wondering if there was anywhere a compendium of others who've done the same. I find the concrete examples exceedingly helpful for writing cover letters & research/teaching statements (significantly more so than generic advice).

Does anyone have any examples (or a compendium) to share?

Conversations on academic writing: Nathan Ballantyne's 'Workbench'

This is just a quick note that Nathan Ballantyne (Arizona State University) has a really interesting site, The Workbench, which features "a series of conversations about the craft of academic writing."

Here is a wonderful interview on "Relentless Adjuncting, Existential Graphs, and Non-Rejection" with philosophers Richard Atkins and Charlie Lassiter.

Changing job-market conventions and applying to senior-level jobs?

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

How have the requirements for job documents changed (if at all) in the last decade? What should documents for associate professor positions do differently than documents for assistant professor positions?

Some context: I'm a TT Assistant Professor who is readying documents for promotion to Associate, and also applying for jobs. In preparing my applications, I noticed that the most cited advice for job application materials is the same (e.g. Karen Kelsky) as when I was as a graduate student. Kelsky's "The Professor is In" is almost a decade old now, and it regurgitates blog posts that were out for several years prior. A lot has changed since then. The book is also written specifically for newly minted PhD's, and gives little to no advice on how job documents should change as one progresses in their career. Can you say how conventions have changed since TPII was published? What conventions exist for those applying for jobs later in their careers?

All good questions. Are any readers in the know able to weigh in?

Desk-rejection boiler-plate from editors?

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

As an early career scholar just starting to publish, does it really mean anything when you get a desk rejection and the justification emphasizes it's not about quality but scope? Or is that just boilerplate?

I sent a paper to a journal the publishes specifically on X philosophy. My paper dealt with that, but could also be said to deal with Y philosophy and the editor felt it was more a Y paper than an X paper--which is fair.

I'm just wondering whether I should put any stock into "the topic's important" and the emphasis it was not rejected because of quality only scope.

Hmm...not sure. I've had plenty of desk-rejections accompanied by boilerplate that sounds a lot like this. But, from the OP's description, it seems like the editor may have said something more specific.

What do other readers think?

Handling journal reviewers who request a book's worth of changes?

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

How does one handle reviewers asking for so much information it would take a book to address it?

I asked one person that, and they half-jokingly but entirely seriously said, "Maybe it's a book project and not an article."

But the paper states as clearly as possible that the article is concerned with a specific portion of Famous 20th century Philosopher's argument, but the reviewers throw in vague objections from the philosopher's corpus. Neither reviewer actually touched what the actual paper said.

Has anyone deal with the issue where you're dealing with a particular part of a famous philosopher's thought, but it feels like reviewers go into rebuttal mode instead of analysis mode?

Hmm...in this case it sounds like the OP had this experience with a couple of reviewers at a single journal. If I were in their position, I might revise the paper to address any objections that seem like good ones, and then just send it to another journal. Hopefully the next set of reviewers will be different! But what if they're not? What if the same thing occurs? Then I'm not quite sure. 

What do readers think?

Navigating departmental culture as a junior faculty member

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

This might be an odd question but I’m relatively new to a smallish department. I want to have collegial relationships with my colleagues in the philosophy department and would love to have support building my teaching skills. I can’t get a handle on the culture, though, and it seems the current department members operate largely independently. What kinds of support can I directly ask for that would be socially appropriate even if they all seem quite busy?

I would love to sit in on their classes for observations and have them sit in on mine, I would also love direct feedback on my syllabi, rubrics, and assignments, but they seem so busy and I don’t want to make waves. In the long term I’d love to organize philosophy specific talks to the wider college, book circles, events etc. But so far I’m just getting a general sense of…. I don’t know. Maybe it’s that they were understaffed before my hire so they are all tired.

Is there a low stakes way to reach out and make it clear I’m interested in collaboration without putting pressure or making it come off as criticism? Or should I seek support elsewhere in case my hunch is right that they prefer to work independently? This might be an odd question since it’s about social norms, I’m not sure if this is unique to our discipline or if any small department would have this sense of uncertainty.

These are great questions. As a member of a relatively small department myself, my sense is that it may be good to begin by simply having an honest conversation like this with other faculty the OP senses they have a good and supportive rapport with (hopefully there are some!). It could well turn out that the "culture of working independently" really just is something like people having too much on their plate, perhaps both at work and at home. For example, in my own case, my spouse and I welcomed our first child into the world 14 months ago. Since then, my life priorities have been basically (A) meeting my professional obligations (viz. teaching, service, research) while (B) devoting every other spare minute to child care and being a good father and spouse. Similarly, I know other senior colleagues who have teenagers, etc., and I can only imagine how much of priority their children are to them.

Anyway, I suspect that in a lot of cases, faculty in small departments would love to do things like organize talks, book circles, etc., but may simply not have the bandwidth to do these things. So, I suspect they would have no problem at all with a junior faculty taking the initiative on these kinds of things, while being honest about what they (the colleague of the junior person) can do. Which brings my back to my initial suggestion to the OP: just try to approach faculty you are comfortable with and have an honest discussion about what you're hoping for, while recognizing that others in the department may for whatever reasons have limits on the kinds of things that they can do. At least in a healthy department, I am pretty sure that faculty would take no offense to discussing the kinds of things the OP mentions, and probably love a junior colleague with so much passion and initiative for taking part in and supporting a collegial life in the department!

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?

Do's and don'ts for applying to grad programs in philosophy?

A reader writes in with the following anonymous query:

I've a student who is applying to grad programs in philosophy and I wonder if you'd post a question about general dos and don'ts for that. I write a lot of recommendations for scholarships, internships, and our own competitive admissions programs like those in health services. But by the very nature of our institution this is a new one for me.

I'm not sure whether we've ever run a thread on this before, so I'd be keen to hear people's responses too!

Do any readers with experience in philosophy grad admissions have any do's or don'ts to share, or other tips?

How to interact with observers during teaching observations?

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

How should you interact with faculty visiting your class to evaluate your teaching?

Should you pretend they are not there, or should you invite them to participate in in-class activities?

Hmm...I've seen both done, and I'm not sure it makes all that much of a difference. Maybe ask the observer how they'd prefer you to go about it?

What does everyone think?