next »

[amewa_silk]

Another individual submission of mine has come back accepted, this time from a big-time conference in my field.  Maybe it is my mild impostor syndrome, or residual PPD, but I thought the abstract was poorly written and that it would come back rejected. 

The paper is a write-up of a research conducted alongside my former prof.  My former prof says the abstract is "strong," but he has not yet seen my writing on this body of work.  He says the topic is "deep" and that it may be too much work for me to write three papers at once.  Also, he says to wait until I hear back from the graduate programs before I decide to attend the conference.  For what it's worth, I already pre-registered.  Is it paranoia, or is he discouraging me from attending?

I am concerned about being viewed as a snowflake for cancellation, but my former prof might be trying to guide me with proper positioning of my career.  Could he perhaps be attempting to prevent a premature debut on a global stage?

[lottie]

You're waiting to hear from graduate programs: does that mean you're an undergraduate?

[amewa_silk]

Nope, I am neither.  I am in limbo.

[lottie]

I would say wait. I think grad students shouldn't present until they're further along, post-exams being ideal. It seems unlikely to me that someone who hasn't taken comps can adequately handle a conference Q&A. Your advisor has basically said as much. I would take his advice.

[amewa_silk]

Thank you, Lottie, for that good point.  This is Conference #3 for me.  Conference #3 is on a grander scale, so I can entertain that the Q&A may pose a greater challenge than I have experienced thus far.

My former professor has never recommended against my conference attendance, and has encouraged other undergraduates to present at national conferences.  In fact, as an undergraduate, I was encouraged by the former professor and Senior Colleague to present my work at Conference #1, and it was helpful in shaping that paper for subsequent publication.

This Spring, I am presenting at Conference #2, which former professor will attend.  To attest that young scholars are encouraged in my field, conference organizer of Conference #2 has asked if I would be willing to moderate my panel in the event that Senior Colleague could not attend.  I can only guess that my name came up because Senior Colleague (as behind the scenes organizer) suggested me as his understudy.

If, after weighing the advice, I decide not to attend Conference #3, how might I decline without appearing snowflakey?

[tee_bee]

I would say wait. I think grad students shouldn't present until they're further along, post-exams being ideal. It seems unlikely to me that someone who hasn't taken comps can adequately handle a conference Q&A. Your advisor has basically said as much. I would take his advice.

Post-exams may not be ideal. But like everything else in the fora, this varies by discipline. My experience is that most conference Q&A is rather gentler than a PhD exam. But it depends on the conference and the discipline, I guess.

[hegemony]

My guess is that your professor means that if you're not accepted in graduate programs, it's a waste of money going to the conference, because you won't be going further in academia. This is why he said to wait for the graduate programs to respond. Because otherwise what bearing would their responses have on the quality of your conference paper?

The secret about conferences is that they are generally fairly elementary. They are to air your ideas, give you feedback (sometimes useful, sometimes wacky), give you experience presenting them, and help you meet people doing similar things. You don't have to be polished and expert to go; going is how you become polished and expert. Of course, you'll want to write a solid paper, but don't fall victim to the belief that it has to be a sterling and unassailable piece of deathless prose. It just has to be solid. And practice it beforehand, make sure it fits the time limit, etc.

I see absolutely no reason why you shouldn't go, bar the expense. I doubt your professor is thinking very much about whether you're academically qualified to go; I imagine he assumes that you are. It sounds to me as if it'll be a useful experience and a nice line on the CV. And it's not a total disaster if you bow out, but it does add one suggestion that you're flaky. Someone will probably remember, and it could come back to bite you. All in all, I think indications point to "Go: prepare, and don't be intimidated."

[amewa_silk]

Thank you for your advice.  The reason why I submitted a proposal was because I like to research and to write.  Besides, I want to meet new people in the field.

My mentor clarified that he does not want me to go because he wants me to be conscious of my "brand.'  It is the topic of my paper with which he has issue.  I do not know how I can relate this to the organizing committee.  I guess I should not have submitted anything in the first place.

[hegemony]

Conscious of your "brand"?!  This sounds like a lot of hooey to me. Who the heck things of academics in terms of brands?  Who the heck keeps track of what people give conference papers on?  Does your advisor resent your presenting on something he's worked on -- are you using too many of his ideas?  That's the only reason I can think of that an advisor would object to someone's topic, unless it's something crackpot like "Why Hitler Was Right: My Views." Anyway, didn't your advisor previously okay the submission, with the proviso that you should wait until you heard from grad school.

You don't have to give any reason for withdrawing to the conference organizers.  You just shoot them a note and saying, "I'm sorry that circumstances have made it impossible for me to attend the conference, so I must withdraw my paper, 'X'." 

But I don't see that there's any reason to do that. Your advisor's advice doesn't make sense to me, frankly; there's a disconnect here somewhere.

[amewa_silk]

Hegemony, you bring up good points.  I had sensed the disconnect and read into it personally, thinking he must not think I am adequately prepared to present.  (Although, he did say the abstract was strong.)  I sought alternative answers in starting this thread. 

Maybe there is truth in that he resents my presenting something we worked on together.  But I do not see him as competitive; he is nearing retirement.  Could it be that he gently discourages my writing about it because he believes another student would be more suited this topic?

I found out today I was not admitted to any doctoral programs.  I await reply from the master's programs.  If going to a conference will help me to continue my research and to publish, then I want to attend.  If it will burn bridges, or embarrass me publicly, then I will cancel.

[totoro]

Hegemony, you bring up good points.  I had sensed the disconnect and read into it personally, thinking he must not think I am adequately prepared to present.  (Although, he did say the abstract was strong.)  I sought alternative answers in starting this thread. 

Maybe there is truth in that he resents my presenting something we worked on together.  But I do not see him as competitive; he is nearing retirement.  Could it be that he gently discourages my writing about it because he believes another student would be more suited this topic?

I found out today I was not admitted to any doctoral programs.  I await reply from the master's programs.  If going to a conference will help me to continue my research and to publish, then I want to attend.  If it will burn bridges, or embarrass me publicly, then I will cancel.

Something doesn't compute to me here. You are going to conferences and presenting research papers but you couldn't get into a PhD program. Or you didn't get funding? Or did you only apply to the top programs?

[amewa_silk]

Totoro, you are right; it does not add up.  That is why I seek advice from these forums.  Hegemony must be correct in that conferences are a piece of cake.  That explains why my proposals are accepted.

I applied to doctoral programs based on my location and field.  Maybe they are top programs.  Funding is a plus, but it is by no means requisite.  My advisor and I had expected that my chances were good for acceptance to at least one of the programs.

[totoro]

Totoro, you are right; it does not add up.  That is why I seek advice from these forums.  Hegemony must be correct in that conferences are a piece of cake.  That explains why my proposals are accepted.

I applied to doctoral programs based on my location and field.  Maybe they are top programs.  Funding is a plus, but it is by no means requisite.  My advisor and I had expected that my chances were good for acceptance to at least one of the programs.

Some conferences are very easy - everything is accepted - e.g. Association of American Geographers in my field. Others are very hard to get on the program - e.g. American Economic Association in my field. You should apply to top programs as well as some a bit lower. Given you are showing such an interest in doing research unless there is really something wrong with other parts of your application or qualifications I'm surprised you didn't get admitted. Funding is obviously harder, but unless you are rich you want to get funding. I usually suggest that even if you are rich you should get funding unless you really don't care about making a career afterwards in the field.

[hegemony]

The idea that your advisor might believe another student is better suited to this topic, and therefore wants to discourage you, doesn't hold water.  Generally professors do not try to micromanage these things.  If you're concerned, why don't you just ask him if indeed he thinks you shouldn't present the paper (which you have already had accepted) at this conference, and if so, how come? Ask by e-mail so that you have his reply written out.

But you sound quite unsure of yourself. Some people would say, "I've been accepted, yahoo!" and start getting busy writing up the paper. My attitude was always, "Sure, I'm unqualified, but I'll bluff so well no one will notice."  It's still working. If you want to present the paper, go ahead and do it, unless it would break the bank. It's not a PhD defense, it's just an opportunity to get some feedback.

[merce]

Well I've been hunting for the thread where there was quite a bit of nasty talk about a person who sent in an abstract for a conference and then wrote to tell the conference or panel organizers that they were not going to go.

This really should not be done.

Do not continue to send out abstracts willy nilly like that.

Send an abstract if you are going to the conference. At least in my field, to send an abstract is to commit to give the paper (some communications have begun to say this explicitly).

keep that in mind for the future.