Monday, 19 February 2007

Kremlinology

There’s something vaguely Soviet about trying to come up with a written plan of what one hopes to achieve over the next n years as an academic. Particularly when said plan is contingent on a hypothetical (like, say, being hired) that, while not of negligible likelihood, is certainly not a Sure Thing™.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m certain there is value to the exercise, if only because it’s useful to be able to rattle something off in response to a question on an interview.

6 comments:

Any views expressed in these comments are solely those of their authors; they do not reflect the views of the authors of Signifying Nothing, unless attributed to one of us.
[Permalink] 1. Michelle wrote @ Mon, 19 Feb 2007, 9:16 pm CST:

I can see why it seems a bit futile, but looking at it from the side of a prospective employer, it can provide some good information. For instance, it can help answer questions like, Is this person likely to run out of good research ideas now that the dissertation is done? Is this person’s future research interests likely to fit better or worse with our teaching needs and/or complement others’ research interests? Is this person’s future research likely to be the type that is publishable in mainstream or important journals?

While it’s always puzzled me (because I have TOO MANY research ideas…figuring out which are worth pursing is the problem), there are many folks who run out of research ideas, either because they are just incurious, or perhaps more often, because they get caught in some trap that every research idea has to be a HUGE contribution, and so they reject all their ideas rather than pursuing any of them. And, I’d guess that in part, figuring out which ideas are worth pursuing requires a little bit of initial work on the idea before you can really know whether the theoretical or empirical contribution will be worth the effort.

I think some of the folks in the latter category (who reject some of their own ideas as unworthy and so get stuck with no leads) are probably the same ones who think that a paper isn’t worth writing unless it will go to the APSR or AJPS and who think that it’s worse to publish in a second or [gasp] third tier journal than to not publish at all. Unfortunately, those can be some of the same folks who write tenure letters and/or sit on hiring or P/T committees.

I mean, even Clemens has pitched mediocre games, but he’s still recognized as one of the best.

Ok. That was a little off topic, but I can see the value of the ‘what is your research agenda down-the-road question’ and I’ve seen candidates be criticized based on their answer.

 

I don’t see it as futile… as an exercise, I can see its value in retrospect. But it does feel like a Soviet bloc 5-year plan, since I really doubt “what I will do next year” = “this plan” even if I do get the job, fate being what it is. From the (generic) search committee’s standpoint I can see “person who has some ideas, even if not all come to fruition” >> “person who has no clue what he/she plans to do next week, let alone to earn tenure.”

Irony of ironies, it’s actually part of an application for a position I’d give an important but sadly underutilized body part to have.

Maybe I’m just cranky today because I spent my weekend trying to figure out filing income taxes in three states. Oh, and I think I went 0–5 on the interviews. (On the upside, I guess that’s more motivation for the Plan.)

 
[Permalink] 3. Alfie Sumrall wrote @ Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 6:24 am CST:

The same exercises are there in the real world, as well. In the past couple months, I’ve had to fill out a “Career Development Survey” and I just got finished writing my own review which is centered in the past, but does have a lot of future stuff in there, as well. I thought that was odd and, obviously, it’s not taken as gospel, but it does give the person actually doing your review some insight. Plus, there is the whole thing about one being his own worst critic.

I wish you had some better news to report on your interviews. You know we’re pulling for ya!

 
[Permalink] 4. Michelle wrote @ Tue, 20 Feb 2007, 8:29 am CST:

I can imagine the interview fatigue…smiling non-stop, answering the same questions over and over and over, eating many meals with strangers, etc. Makes me have no desire to ever run for public office (or higher ed administration) EVER. Hang in there.

Sorry to hear about the interview outcomes. We’re keepin our fingers crossed for ya.

 

Well, I can’t guarantee it’s 0–5… just that everyone promised I’d hear something by now. So… either they’re really slow, or I’m not getting the offers.

 

I feel for you, man. Interviews are a pain. Just so tiring. And then there are the out-of-the-blue questions. On one interview back oh so many years ago, one of the senior members of the department suddenly asked, “so what is politics.” I stammered pretty badly trying to come up with a profound answer. I did not get the job. Of course, I got a much better one a bit later!

Anyway, good luck.

 
Comments are now closed on this post.