next »

[porcupine]

I posted this question on a previous thread and got a nice reply from Eugenides (thanks!), but am hoping for additional feedback. So here it is again.

I have a campus visit coming up at a SLAC. As well as teaching a class in my subfield, they want me to send one of my papers (under 20 pages) to them in advance. The research presentation will consist in me introducing the paper briefly, then the audience (SC and any interested faculty from other depts.) will discuss it with me.

I really want this job and don't want to send the wrong thing! I have four options regarding papers and would very much appreciate advice on which to send:

1. Paper currently in press, in area of subfield on which I'll be teaching (but over 20 pages);
2. Paper currently in press, straddles two subfields including one new and underrepresented and one I'll be teaching on (under 20 pages);
3. Published paper under 20 pages, but not as relevant as first two;
4. Polished paper in progress (has been given at two conferences where it went down very well, will be given as research paper the week before campus visit) on 2 subfields relevant to SC members own work and subfield I'll be teaching on (and under 20 pages).

The fourth option is currently my favourite - is it wrong to send work-in-progress?

[trabb]

If I were in the audience, I'd want #2. 

Paper #1 may be too focused.  After a full day of interviewing, you and everyone else may be tired of talking about your work in the specific subfield in which you're teaching.  It's also longer than they've asked.  If this were your only published piece, I wouldn't worry so much about the length, but since you do have other pieces more in line with what they've asked, why run the risk of pissing off some old fart who thinks you can't follow directions?

Paper #3 I think you answered yourself - "not as relevant."  If you have something more relevant, why send one that isn't?

Paper #4 would be my second choice, but I see two potential problems.  First, it hasn't survived the rigors of peer-review in quite the same way as numbers 1 and 2.  Second, I find that, no matter how often I've presented something, I feel like I can speak more authoritatively on pieces that have been accepted for publication.  Maybe it's a mental thing, but I've seen a lot of folks mess up badly with works in progress at job talks.

Above all, I suspect that your choice of which piece to send will be of negligible importance (unless you were to send something on, say, Shakespeare when you're being hired to teach in the field of new media).  What will determine your success or failure on this job will be how you handle yourself in the conversation; the written piece only serves to provide a foundation for that conversation.

My $.01 worth - I think I don't get two cents worth until I actually land a TT job, at which point my advice may double in value.

[jrscholar]

I'm no expert on this, but am willing to support your choice of option 4.  Since it is the project you are currently most involved with, it is probably the one you the most excited about and sharpest on at the moment.  This is especially true since you have presented it a couple times and will have presented it just the week before.  At the same time, the presentation will still have some of the "exciting new work" feel for the audience, especially if you make it clear you are still working on it.  I've been to talks where the person simply presents a "finished" work, and the discussion never seemed as fresh.  Remember, the audience doesn't need to know that you have presented this work a couple of times; when you tell them it is a work in progress, they may be impressed that your presentation is as sharp as it is.

Had you never presented this work before, I would probably suggest you go with something more polished, of course.  Nothing scarier than someone presenting completely new work that has never seen the light of day with his/her future up in the air.

[porcupine]

Thanks, trabb and jrscholar!

No. 4 is my preferred choice because it's uppermost in my mind at the moment and because it's gone down so well in the past (even people who usually hate my approach liked it!). Plus, it's on more accessible and entertaining material - the research session is going to be the last thing on day 2 of my visit, and by that point, I know I will certainly be tired (the SC will probably be sick of me by then!).

I do take the point about peer review. I'll give it a bit more thought - thanks for narrowing the options!