next »

[eugenides]

We commonly presume that those who are postdocs produce have a lot of research done during their postdoc tenuure.
In MLA fields, these postdocs are reputed to write a lot, publish a lot, finish one (or two?) book manuscript.....

I believe many postdocs are as productive as imagined.

But I also wonder if it is more or less a myth.
Are there postdocs (in humanities, for example) who are dysfunctional, lazy (!!!), paralyzed, far from being producive during their postdoc tenure?

I guess there are some postdocs as such; after all, humans are human.

I also fear that those who have 1-year postdoc spend more time seeking TT jobs than preparing publications.

Is it a myth that postdocs write 5 pages a day?



--
This questioning of an alledged myth occurs to me,
for I find many teachers say:
"I cannot write because I am teaching now. As long as I have a postdoc, I can spend all my time writing and publishing."
I find this a bit... rosy.

[sirkdn]

I am not sure what the situation is in the Humanities, but if a post-doc in the Sciences did  not publish anything, they will have a VERY easy time on the job market - they will apply for jobs; the SC's will put their applications in the trash - very easy...  :)

[eugenides]

So those who have postdocs in science have to work very very hard.
They cannot invest their time MERELY on job applications.
I see.

I guess these people have no time dating either.

[smurfette]

Well, again, I'm in the sciences. But I would imagine that it is in the interest of postdocs in ANY field to be productive. A postdoc is not just a 9-5 job. I think SCs expect that if you did/are doing a postdoc, you'll have something to show for it (presentations, publications, etc).  Besides, you're going to need a letter of rec from your postdoc advisor. If you're lazy and do the bare minimum, do you want your advisor to say that in the letter?!

I'm not sure what you mean about being productive vs. investing time in job applications. Applying for jobs shouldn't deter you from being productive. Just fit it in somewhere, and if you travel for interviews, re-arrange your schedule so that you still stay productive. It's just like balancing anything in life. Finally, if you have a good advisor, your advisor will WANT you to get a tt job and be supportive about you applying. Just my experiece. But I have no idea if this answers your question!

[eugenides]

smurfette,
Thanks.
You gave very good advice.
In fact there is no single correct answer to the question.
Or, we all know the single correct answer already:
Work hard, and harder.
(In every field)

E

[sciguy]

I'm in the Sciences and while I worked hard during my postdoc, 2 years is hard to get something off the ground and I have little to show for it publication wise.  Even if I had great results, getting it written, submitted and accepted is quite difficult in that time frame.  I should get something published, but it may not come to fruition for over a year. 

If I wanted to work at an R1 or an Elite SLAC then I'd have to stick it out longer in my postdoc or find a 2nd postdoc.

Fortunately,  I have a good publication record from Graduate work - and my goal is to teach at a SLAC.  After a successful job hunt, I will be starting my new job this August.

[eugenides]

I guess I am more thinking about the pros and cons of postdoc than questioning anything....

I believe a postdoc is a honor, a prestige.
But this honor/prestige ENTAILS expectations.
These expectations can be heavy, or overwhelming to some academics.

A postdoc is certainly a nice opportunity. But it is not necessarily a blessing, for some people.

[porcupine]

Well I'm a postdoc in the humanities and I'd say I work hard. I'm writing two monographs and involved in three editing projects, not to mention articles and book reviews and conference presentations and administration and teaching and job applications... Oh, yes, there's a home life in there somewhere, too!

I would say two things, though. First, I have moved continent twice in three years as a postdoc. While this has given me an unbelievably rich and rewarding set of scholarly experiences, and I am incredibly lucky to have had these opportunities, moving like this is not only exhausting, but also time-consuming. As well as all the usual job application malarkey, I have to arrange visas and international removals (I have ended up giving away or selling most of my stuff but I still have to get my office stuff and books from A to B). I don't think most people realize that moving like this takes up a tremendous amount of time and energy that could better be spent in finishing off things for publication. If you've never moved internationally, imagine your worst ever move, and then quadruple the stress, administration and sheer unremitting exhaustion. Then imagine starting work at a new place the next day, and trying to shine.

Second, because postdocs are by nature impermanent, I spend a huge amount of time applying for jobs, time which could be better spent on research. I'm damned if I do this because it takes away time from my research, meaning I don't finish things quickly, but I'm obviously damned if I don't apply for anything and concentrate on my research instead. I seriously considered not going on the job market this year. On the other hand, I ended up going on the market because I wanted to have a better chance of putting a roof over my head next year!

So while I think I have good output, and that I generally work hard, I also think people tend to look at my CV and think, "She's a postdoc - so why doesn't she have more publications?". Not that I don't have quite a few, especially compared with people who graduated in the same year as myself - but I think far greater and more immediate/concrete publication expectations are attached to postdocs in humanities, perhaps greater than the benefits that such positions actually offer.  What would count as good scholarly activity for someone who's been in a VAP position seems automatically to be considered below average for someone who's been in a postdoc position, with no real awareness or consideration of the practicalities involved.

I'm not saying I have it worse than a VAP - of course I don't. Everyone has their own problems. Occasionally, I even suck it up and deal with mine instead of ranting about them here! I'm just trying to point out that a humanities postdoc is not as easy a ride as might initially be imagined.

Sometimes, Customs really does impound your homework...

[larryc]

In history the general expectation is that you use the post doc to turn your dissertation into a book MS. Then you can hold out the promise to TT search committees that if they hire you there will be a book in short order, glorifying their institution and making you a sure thing for tenure.

[reluctant]

Of course, as Larryc stated we are SUPPOSED to write a book, but as all dissertators know it can be a lonely and slow process. Perhaps Eugenides is referring to the possibility of devloping writer's block.  I can imagine this as a serious and legitimate problem.  One wins the elusive post-doc, then is weighed down with pressure.  Is it worth having if one if one can show nothing for it?  THat is an interesting point, eugenides.  I wonder if anyone has gotten a post doc and felt it backfired because they were unable to get enough done to show for it?

p.s. I find it odd that people are offering such literal answers to such a question

[eugenides]

Thanks to all.
Many of you shared your valuable experience (which cannot be found on the paper version of CHE, or not shared at cash box at conferences).

I believe humanities postdocs are sweet burden.
They are worth purusing, but we need to pay a price to enjoy them.

My initial question is based on 2 kinds of my observations
(I am somehow repeating myself).

(1) Many colleagues, classmates, and friends of mine (all of them are relatively fresh from graduate school) claim that they will write much more as long as they get postdocs. But I just do not believe that postdocs can automatically redeem us. It is not an easy redemption.

(2) I have known people who have been awarded humanities postdocs at the Ivy schools. Some prove to be very productive, publishing books at prestigious university presses and/or journal articles (on famous journals).

But I have seen many ex-postdocs add virtually nothing to their C.V.s. (of course, I am too modest to ask why they accomplish so little during their postdoc tenure). Some were VAPs before the Ivy postdoc tenure; they remain VAPS after the Ivy postdoc tenure, and/or are leaving academe altogether.

The world is a wonder.

[shamu]

There are a lot of factors that shape one's postdoc experience. Here are some:
1. Funding: if it comes from the mentor/PI, it usually means the postdoc will have to first do the work for that project, and no results => no continuation of funding; if the funding is vague and generous without proper checking mechanism, it is what the postdoc and the mentor (if any) make of it.
2. Previous training
3. Scope of the postdoc: is it for building a research agenda, working on a specific grant, teaching, or other

Best case scenario, the postdoc prepares the individual doing it for a successful and independent career in academia (usually for research/teaching careers). If an individual has little to show for the postdoc years, that will definitely hurt her/his chances of getting a job (as Sirkdn suggested). SC members will wonder what the postdoc did after getting the PhD, and even worse, it makes it look like the applicant is not capable of functioning independently as a colleague (i.e., suffers from perpetual student syndrome).

[overthinker]

It's possible to be both very lazy and get publications and conference presentations done of course. I've just finished a humanities postdoc and added substantially to my CV while being my usual lethargic self. Technically, I could have spent the entire time doing nothing, although at the risk of displeasing my advisor (there was no teaching component: where I am only full faculty hold classes). However one aspect of a two-year PD is that with the at-times glacial turnover of academic journals, your essays will not all be actually be published by the time it ends, so you might end up with most of what you did "in press" or "forthcoming". Which isn't ideal when SCs want to see samples of writing and you want to send your latest-and-greatest (or what should be).

I'm also puzzled by the emphasis on churning out a book from a PhD thesis. Most PhD theses in the humanities at least would be on rather obscure topics - "Some Considerations of the Development of the Gold Belt Buckle in Cowboy Fashion, 18902-1896" - and would hardly make for interesting books, surely. I know mine wouldn't be. Isn't it better to hold off until you can write a book that might actually be worth the ink used to print it? Or is it merely to have a book that counts, rather than how good the book is? If so, it seems like yet another way to avoid real decisions in hiring: Candidate A has a book based on his PhD thesis, so is by definition better than Candidate B, who has spent the PD time instead actually conducting original research....

[chineseliterature]

It's possible to be both very lazy and get publications and conference presentations done of course. I've just finished a humanities postdoc and added substantially to my CV while being my usual lethargic self.

O, I love this possibility, and this lethargy.
Lovely. :)

[reluctant]

I think in the current tight job market, many humanities PhDs, while remaining on "obscure" topics have to address the most current hot issues and therefore are usually worthy of publication.  At least in history, if you don't write a diss that might catch a publisher's eye, you have a hard time getting a job.