next »

[tijuanafina]

Which looks better on a CV - Paper Presenter at a conference, or having a panel you devised (but did not read at) accepted and run?

Or are they two different beasts?

I am in Literature.  I have, in the past, organized a panel of respected people around one topic that I am interested in, and was the discussant as well, but it seems some people put this elsewhere on their CV?  Is it less prestigious to be the chair/organizer than a presenter?  I was pretty excited that my panel had the great people it did, and that I led the discussion as well, but maybe it looks like I was just made "chair" (some conferences do this for people who want a letter of acceptance)? 

I'm thinking of organizing another one, but don't want to if it doesn't matter as much as a paper presented. 

Thanks.

[wanna_writemore]

Why would you organize a panel you're not presenting a paper on?  In the grand scheme of things, for the purpose of applying for a TT job or moving towards tenure, organizing counts for very little, and presenting a paper counts (albeit in a minor way) as research.  At my institution, tenure and promotion letters (written by my chair, e.g.) wouldn't even mention organizing, while they might mention presenting a paper as evidence of continuing progress towards the completion of a book. (At upper levels, only published peer-reviewed articles and books count)

[tijuanafina]

I see, thanks, I didn't know.  I actually didn't present on my panel because so many distinguished people applied to it, so I was excited to get to gather them all and hear and speak to them on our subject.  So if I organize a panel I should also present a paper on that panel?

[snowbound]

YES!  If you're n the company of these great scholars, so much the better.

[watermarkup]

Eh, I don't know. I've never been on an SC, but I think organizing a panel and presenting a paper are two different things. So do both. Five conference papers plus organizing a panel probably looks as least as interesting, and I would guess more interesting (for my MLA field), than six conference papers. On your CV, no one knows who else was on the panel when you gave your paper. Just keep in mind that both of them are orders of magnitude less important than publications.

[hegemony]

I'm surprised at what people are saying here -- in my field, organizing a panel and then putting yourself on it just looks as if you were trying to pull a fast one, like self-publishing.

That said, presenting a paper counts for a lot more than just organizing a session, in my (humanities) field and at my university.  Pretty much anyone can organize a session.  Presenting a paper requires (optimally) actually doing some scholarship.

[corny]

I'm surprised at what people are saying here -- in my field, organizing a panel and then putting yourself on it just looks as if you were trying to pull a fast one, like self-publishing.

Hegemony, in my MLA field, this seems to be pretty common.

Why would you organize a panel you're not presenting a paper on?

I'm actually contemplating doing this for next year's MLA. A colleague is putting together a panel on a topic related to my research and has asked me if I'd like to be part of it; but I'd also already been considering organizing a panel on a pedagogical topic of interest to me, for various reasons. The MLA limits the number of times/ways you can participate at the conference, so if I am giving a paper on one panel and presiding at another, I can't also present at my own panel (as I understand it). (Plus, that's a lot of papers to write between Christmas and early January. Ahem.) I'm also at a stage on my CV/in my research where I've got plenty of conference presentations and don't really "need" another at the moment.

I don't think that's quite the OP's situation, but I just thought I'd put it out there as one example of why one might do this.

I've also gotten the impression that chairing / organizing a panel sometimes counts as service (whatever that aspect of service is - not departmental or university, but service to the profession). That being said, it seems like it's one of those things you only do *after* you've got your presentations and publications squared away.

Then again, I'm pretty new at this, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

[tijuanafina]

I think on a CV people who organize panels and include themselves only list that they presented a paper, not the organizing part, at least that's how the two people I know who did this, did this.

[larryc]

Organizing a panel is far different than chairing a panel. Typically the organizer of any panel is also one of the presenters (hint: look for the untenured presenter). The organizer recruits the presenters and chair and commenter, puts together everyone's abstracts into a panel proposal, and serves as the contact person between the organization and the panel members.

Organizing a panel is not a line on your vita, the presentation is the line. If you chair is a decent person she will congratulate you for having organized the panel in her opening remarks, but that is it. However, organizing a panel is a great way to make contacts with scholars whose work you admire, to get accepted at a big conference, and to build your professional network.

At least that is how it typically works in history.

[larryc]

I'm surprised at what people are saying here -- in my field, organizing a panel and then putting yourself on it just looks as if you were trying to pull a fast one, like self-publishing.

And I am surprised at what you are saying as well. Either you are too modest or I am too self-promoting.  I have a bad feeling about this.

[cc_and_grad]

I'm with larryc on this one. I am also in history and have just organized a panel. Someone else (more senior) is commenting/chairing and I am presenting. The organizer does the grunt work of lining everyone up and begging someone to chair. Although it probably has a nice sense of professional activity/service to the discipline associated with it, I don't think it warrants CV inclusion (unless you are trying to eke out your CV because you're new and it's kind of thin).

[systeme_d_]

I'm surprised at what people are saying here -- in my field, organizing a panel and then putting yourself on it just looks as if you were trying to pull a fast one, like self-publishing.

And I am surprised at what you are saying as well. Either you are too modest or I am too self-promoting.  I have a bad feeling about this.

No "caught feelings"* necessary, folks.  This is just a disciplinary difference.  

My discipline is like Hegemony's.  Our main scholarly association doesn't even do the "entrepreneurial panel" model very well at all.  We have set areas, with set steering committees, and they compose CFPs, read and judge the received proposals, and create the panels.  If a steering committee member wants to submit a proposal, they have to recuse themselves from the judging.

Of course, if you organize and hold a more specialized conference at your own institution, you can make up your own rules.


*Very slick interthreaduality there.

[hegemony]

I suspect system_d's discipline is like mine because I suspect it is mine.  Anyway, I think the moral is to investigate the norms of one's particular discipline before forging ahead.

[larryc]

Again and again this forum teaches me that what I thought were academic norms are actually (my) disciplinary rules, or quirks of the institution where I work, or some mistaken understanding I picked up in grad school and never bothered to examine.

[systeme_d_]

Again and again this forum teaches me that what I thought were academic norms are actually (my) disciplinary rules, or quirks of the institution where I work, or some mistaken understanding I picked up in grad school and never bothered to examine.

Many years ago, when I first subscribed to a couple of H-Net discussion groups/listservs, I remember being shocked upon seeing all kinds of "entrepreneurial panel creation" going on.  Some grad student with a topic in mind was trolling for other scholars to compose a panel, and this callow youth was going to pick and choose from the ones that (potentially) far more established scholars submitted to him!  Ye gods, the world was upside down! What brash and reckless innovation in these other disciplines!