next »

[tedbear09]

So, what's the ideal # of publications for graduate students? Of course, it will depend on the field, so let's kinda break it down into Engineering, Social Sciences, Humanities, and Mathematics/Sciences. And also say, the timeframe is by the time you get your PhD, which would be 4-5 years in most fields?

I'm in the social sciences, and it seems like that in my field (sociology to be specific), 3 or 4 would be a good number, with 1 or 2 in top journals, if you can. But of course, some people have more, some have none, depending on your skills, advisor and your school. But what would be the "ideal" number that you all aspire to? What about in other fields?

[katherineparr]

In history, I'd say the ideal would be 2.

This is presuming the ideal for the purpose of getting a job. Applications without any pubs often don't make the first cut, but no one expects a grad student to publish that much. So you want a happy medium: a few book reviews, a few conference presentations, a few outside fellowships (outside your home institution), and one or two published articles in decent journals.

On several searches I've observed/participated in, these are the files that make it to the top.

[balancing_act]

In history, I'd say the ideal would be 2.

This is presuming the ideal for the purpose of getting a job. Applications without any pubs often don't make the first cut, but no one expects a grad student to publish that much. So you want a happy medium: a few book reviews, a few conference presentations, a few outside fellowships (outside your home institution), and one or two published articles in decent journals.

On several searches I've observed/participated in, these are the files that make it to the top.

I'm in history and we've been warned not to do book reviews until we've become established to some degree. The advice is based on the faculty's own stories of reflection-- when they look back at what they wrote in graduate school, they realize that they would have written very differently today. In other words, criticizing established scholars as a graduate student might not be a great idea. Only praising established scholars' work looks shallow.

Their advice: a few journals and conferences.

[dundee]

In my MLA field, 3 or more peer-reviewed journal articles seems to put one in the top tier of candidates, although I know people with more than half-a-dozen.

[2nd_career]

And also say, the timeframe is by the time you get your PhD, which would be 4-5 years in most fields?

ahhhhh.... well,

On average, its just a bit more than that... here's Sociology at U of Mn.:

http://www.grad.umn.edu/data/stats/pr/1086800.html

For the 1999/2000 cohort of 13: 2 finished after 6 years, and 2 more after 7 years with another 7 ABD at the point.

You can back up from that link to a list of all their programs. Humanities I think tends to run toward 7-9 years, engineering and some sciences will be closer to that "ideal" of 5.

As to publications... that will vary greatly by field and the "quality" of the graduate program and the individual student's advisor. At my school (where I'm finishing up my BA in Classics) one or two articles plus a couple conference presentations seems to be "normal" for Classics and related fields. However, our grad program is pretty awesome - the ABD's I've gotten to know well enough to talk about it have all gotten TT jobs their first or second time out.

I am told that the main thing is to get one's diss into book form ASAP after getting that job and be rolling on new work...

So, concrete example: one of those folks I know had a co-authored book chapter and one article when he went on the market. Got the TT job at state flagship uni. In the 3 years since, he's had a review and three articles published or forthcoming and his diss. was "requested for review" at top tier press.

[croaker]

Even as graduate student publications in some fields are increasingly becoming a requirement for job hunting, I'd be concerned with going for quantity over quality.

A couple senior doctoral students in psychology I know went on the market this year.  Both were from the same program. The first had only 1 publication, but it was in a "high B" journal. The other had 5 pubs, but all were in low Bs/high Cs.

The first got a LOT more attention on the market.  One interviewer actually commented to the second that they were concerned that, because of their large number, the lower pubs were considered more indicative of hu's potential.

[epistephiliac]

This is going to vary a lot even within the categories you've created. I gather that psychology is a field that tends to produce a lot of publications, often multi-authored. In my field--also a social science discipline--it's rare to have more than two or at most three authors (most articles have a sole author), and unusual for a grad student to have more than one or two journal pubs by graduation.

[katherineparr]

I'm in history and we've been warned not to do book reviews until we've become established to some degree. The advice is based on the faculty's own stories of reflection-- when they look back at what they wrote in graduate school, they realize that they would have written very differently today. In other words, criticizing established scholars as a graduate student might not be a great idea. Only praising established scholars' work looks shallow.

Their advice: a few journals and conferences.

I was also told to be careful in my reviewing. That is, you don't want to needlessly criticize senior people in your field. You certainly want to think carefully about what you say and how you say it.

However, no one advised me to avoid book reviews, and I think it's not very good advice, anyway. Grad students certainly have the skills and wide-ranging knowledge to review many books, especially those in specialized fields germane to dissertation research. Grads aren't likely to be asked to review major books by senior people in major publications anyway.

I've read one or two reviews I thought were poorly done, and in a couple of cases those reviews were the work of grad students. But plenty of bad reviews (both in the sense of ill-conceived and in the sense of incorrect) appear with professorial authorship.

Anyway, in multiple searches I've seen a number of applicants with book reviews. No one ever said, "oh, how inappropriate" nor did we read them, nor did we ever hear of anyone in trouble because of them. However, we counted them toward the applicants' publication record.

[nanoo]

In my social science field, ABD and recent grads (1 year out) with 5 pubs have a hard time getting campus interviews. Of course it depends on journal and authorship order, but the pressure to publish as a grad student is definitely on in my field.  Nearly everyone goes the postdoc route to have time to submit as many manuscripts as possible before doing a full tt job search.

[minorleaguer]

On the subject of the number of publications.  Even in history there are differing opinions on whether or not one should publish at all while in grad school.  I'm of the mind that yes, you should publish 1-2 quality articles while in grad school in history.  I think most graduate advisors these days agree with that (at least that is my impression as a grad student).  Others think that the strength of your diss and the names sitting on your committees should be enough to get your a tenure track job (and yes, I've seen this happen).   

I think most of the people I've seen with what I consider to be desirable jobs have an article in a decent journal, book chapter, and maybe an encyclopedia entry or book review.  Conference presentations, I think are equally important at this stage.

On the subject of reviews.  It really depends on WHAT you review.  I would really think long and hard about reviewing a book that you don't feel very qualified to write about.  A large number of people on here think that book reviews are a big waste of time.   

[locutus]

The ideal number is, as it always will be; more.

[ahhh_history]

A couple of us asked the faculty grad advisor for my humanities PhD program about this, and she said to not worry about publishing for now.  She said it would be better for us to focus on finishing quickly (we were both first year at that point, so she wasn't hinting at anything), and worry about publications later.  (Truthfully, this makes me a little nervous, and I feel like I should have at least one or two, but I see hu's point.)

[crazybatlady]

A couple of us asked the faculty grad advisor for my humanities PhD program about this, and she said to not worry about publishing for now.  She said it would be better for us to focus on finishing quickly (we were both first year at that point, so she wasn't hinting at anything), and worry about publications later.  (Truthfully, this makes me a little nervous, and I feel like I should have at least one or two, but I see hu's point.)

If you are in a crowded MLA field, this is the absolutely WRONG thing to do, although it's frequently recommended by faculty who are so many years from being on the job market that they don't know what it's like anymore.

Publish in graduate school--at least a well-placed article or two--even if that means using up all of your funded time. There's no need to rush out into the market when you're not really marketable without pubs.

cbl

[dr_crankypants]

I think focusing on a number is the wrong approach.  It's a good idea to try to publish in grad school, but many people I know published more than they should have--either by taking a quick publication route at a lesser journal, or by publishing stuff that really wasn't ready, or by taking too much time away from the dissertation.  I've seen grad students with long lists of publications get no jobs, while ones with no publications get research university jobs.  Publishing is important, but it's more important to have good publications.

[kissa_mau]

The best thing to do is take a look at people who have recently been hired into the type of job you want. How many publications did they have? And in what kinds of journals?

Not every faculty member you ask is going to give great advice on this one- they may be very far from their own job hunt, and at a different type of institution than what you have in mind for your career.

And dr_crankypants is totally correct: you want good publications. When you don't have very many, because you're starting out, you don't want your list to be half crap.