next »

[lodore66]

I recently had an article accepted by a fairly prestigious journal, but in an area that is about as far from my 'official' subject as can be and still remain in the general area of the humanities.  So good for me, you might say  The thing is, though, that I was talking to a (relatively) senior colleague recently who suggested that having a publication CV that lacks consistency in this way isn't necessarily a good advert when applying for jobs, tenure and the like.  Somewhat naively, maybe, I'd always thought that being able to publish in more than one field testified to intellectual versatility, rather than a lack of focus.

Seeing as I'm applying for a number of positions at the moment, I wonder would I be best advised to leave this article out?  It would be gutting, as it's probably the best thing I've written, and certainly my highest profile publication.  Any thoughts gratefully appreciated . . .   

[larryc]

I could not disagree with your colleague more. Include the publication, and perhaps frame it in your cover letter like so: "Though Wombats are the overwhelming focus of my research and publication, I do explore other areas as well. I recently published an article about whales in the Journal of Really Smart Sh*t About Whales."

[the_wombat]

A fine area of study it is, too!

(waddles out of burrow to greet expert)

[prof_tournesol]

I agree with Larry C. Breadth is a great thing. See if there is a way that you can make a connection between your various interests in your cover letter, or, at least, in the job talk

[englitprof]

I would only be concerned if your CV as a whole showed research interests that are too diffuse to allow for depth of expertise.

[sciencephd]

Your senior colleague is simply jealous or bitter or both.  Hard to imagine any context in which this paper would not be an advantage.

As an aside, I don't think leaving any peer-reviewed publications off of a CV is an option, unless the section is entitled "Selected Publications".

[onestep]

OP,
Seems like you're new on the job market?  Not sure about your field, but in mine it's not unusual for a new person to have some variation in their publications.  The most important thing, as several here have said, is to be able to pull your interests together, even if they appear diverse on the surface.  Better to publish on a few things that might require some explanation than to publish nothing at all. 

[science_expat]

Yep to all.

List the d@mn thing and congrats.

[lodore66]

Many thanks for the comments/congrats folks -- it's more than a little relieving to have my instincts vindicated on this one.  I'm certainly new-ish on the job market, and part of the problem with asking current colleagues for advice is that it pretty much advertises the fact that you might have itchy feet.  But with such expertise ready to hand in the Chronicle forums, who needs flesh and blood, eh? ;-) 

[humanista]

I just wanted to agree with the advice that has been given here. The articles that I culled from my dissertation are published in solid, peer-reviewed journals, but by a long shot my most prominent publication so far is a forthcoming article in a prestigious journal that everyone in my field reads. The topic is completely unrelated to my supposed area of expertise. No qualms about listing that article on my CV! One of my grad school profs always talked about the need for "Beethoven in your briefcase," by which he meant that it's fine to publish about obscure topics, but one should have a secondary area (or two) of research in an area of general interest for virtually everyone in one's field. It shows your intellectual breadth and willingness to engage in larger debates within your discipline.