Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Gatorwild]

The post doc situation varies by discipline. In my field, there are very few post docs available- and when I say very few- I only saw two posted this year on the major websites. On the other hand, I have several friends in different disciplines that require you to have a post doc or two.

One of my professors started out in a smaller school and was able to publish his way out to a major R1 school. He says he was lucky, but since getting his PhD he has managed 10 publications a year (in top and well respected journals). We call him the machine because all he does is work- without a family it is possible.

It is possible to publish your way out, but the statistics aren't in your favor. For example, most of the professors at my school started out at Dartmouth, Oklahoma State, Nebraska, UNLV, etc. All of those are R1 schools. That one professor I was talking about earlier is the only person I know that did not start at an R1.

It is really fascinating how political everything is if you want to be a professor. There are so many obstacles to navigate. I will say this, you better have thick skin!!!! You leave every day feeling like an idiot, they work you like a slave, you are challenged for every thought (sometimes to make you better, but at times it seems some are trying to tear you down), and then you have to put up with the social justice cult of professors and students who call you racist if you challenge any of their ideas. You constantly tell yourself one of two things: 1) Why did I do this, and 2) Why didn't I do this online? (Not saying anything bad about online- just saying you can isolate yourself a little more from the bullcrap).

[PRagic]

10 articles a year for the hard sciences might be doable. They run multiple projects with a huge number of authors across several publications.

In the social sciences, trying to knock out 10 a year is a great way to have a coronary and get divorced. Well, probably not in that order. I've put our 4 or 5 a year the last few years, but I don't see myself continuing at that pace.

But every field has their iron prof competitors, those scholars publishing twice a productive load of articles while also penning a book or two. They generally are very highly specialized, at least in what I do.

One drawback to working abroad is a comparative lack of doctoral students. In the N. American system, you'd be guaranteed at least a couple of articles a year done with your grad students, on top of your own work; those add up fast.

[PRagic]

And, YES, you have to develop a very thick skin very quickly. Do not remove chip from shoulder, do not pass go.

It never stops. The journal publishing routine can be an emotional roller coaster. It's any given journal, any given editor, and any given set of referees any given day.

You never know what reaction you're going to get, but you do start to figure out how to write even more defensively after a while. Lately there has been a bit of a backlash, and referees are being asked to keep their comments constructive.

[Gatorwild]

[PRagic]

Poaching students like that for writing partners is generally frowned upon. Can make for some bad intra-departmental blood. Seen it first hand, though not at my current job. After they graduate, then it's cool.

And when you publish with students, you're second or third author, plus most articles are annotated as co-authored with students on CVs. They'll look at how many solo, first author, and peer co-written articles one has first. But, hey, if it's working for that prof, more power to them.

You're absolutely right about hiring committees, though none I've been on have been quite that brutal. That's precisely why I suggested initially that the OP go for the best program at the biggest name school possible.

TTompatz is correct that your publications and professional activity will be key barometers, but all things being equal, where you studied and the profs you studied under are going to count big time.

Most decent committees and potential chairs will ask you point blank why you want the PhD. Higher drop out rates negatively impact both departments and individual profs. Same for post completion placement rates. So if you 'just want one to have it' odds are no decent program will let you in to begin with.

[Trevor]

[PRagic]

Not necessarily, especially given the fact that most reviews are double blind. But you do have to be open to criticism, VERY open, and successful academics of all ranks try to address and/or work referee comments and suggestions into their final drafts.

Everyone gets rejections, everyone gets at least one referee who you'd swear didn't even read your work, and everyone has experience with referees who are so nit-picky that you simply can't address all of their concerns. Dealing with this crap is just part of the publishing process. One journal (editor and referees) might love a piece, while another might slash and burn it. Picking journals that might be more receptive to your work is an art form in-and-of itself for the most part. You just have to roll with it.

Presenting results, whether orally or in writing, means opening up yourself to the reality that others may have a different way of looking at the same problem. Sometimes you can make the case that your way works just fine, and, indeed, I've had editors side with me against referees in some cases.

Sometimes it just depends on the audience. I've had policy journals ask me to get rid of 'all the stats' and just cut to the chase, and I've had more quantitative oriented journals ask for more stats than I initially ran. In general, though, I've had a much better run with quantitative work one way or the other.

[Trevor]

How challenging this must be for you. It is amazing how much courage and perseverance you must have. Can you tell us more about how you navigate through the intricacies of so much academic rigour?

[PRagic]

Nah, I just responded to your comment. If you're looking to get into a personal argument or flame war, kindly look elsewhere.

[Trevor]

What happened to the thick skin you were talking about?

[PRagic]

My comment reflects having just such a thick skin, thick enough that people don't get under it all too easily.

[ttompatz]

[PRagic]

Agreed. This is why most programs are looking to admit people who have a topic, at the very least a general topic, already in mind. Remember that to get into a Ph.D. program, there has to be a prof in the department interested in taking you on. If you don't even have a general topic, you're a risk. In some cases, people choose to just expand upon their MA thesis.

Get a topic/subject. Find a theory. The lit review is critical because you have to read pretty much everything ever written concerning your subject AND chosen theory to determine if what you have in mind has already been done. You have to find a niche where you can contribute something new.

No new contribution, no dissertation. You won't make it past the qualifying exams, and you definitely won't pass the proposal defense. Then the race is on. One axiom is that if you think you have a great new idea, somebody has already thunk it or is thinking about it at the same time.

You need to finish and defend the dissertation and publish along the way or immediately afterward if you plan on hitting the job market. If somebody publishes something similar, you're almost dead in the water in terms of getting into a better journal.

Ttompatz is right. Only 30%-50% actually finish, and then only about 30% get TT jobs. If you can get one, then the pressure is on to make that first promotion (with tenure in the N. American system). It doesn't end. After that, you have to start REALLY putting in the hours if you plan on making the promotion to full prof. Pass rates for that promotion can run as low as 20%-50% depending on your university. Nothing is a given.

All in all, it's a journey of 15+ years from start of the Ph.D. to full prof. That may be a concervative estimate as it doesn't include a post doc or take into consideration that many postpone promotion and tenure reviews for several years at each stage or have a promotion package or two rejected.