3 ms·

You imply that strong reference letters, strong publications and talks at top conferences are obtained unfairly. Why do you think so? If you look at the batch

You imply that strong reference letters, strong publications and talks at top conferences are obtained unfairly. Why do you think so? If you look at the batch of assistant professors that start every year at good schools, did they pick the wrong people?

foldr 8y ago
>You imply that strong reference letters, strong publications and talks at top conferences are obtained unfairly. Why do you think so? There's no implication that the letters are obtained unfairly, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the resulting outcomes are fair. The point is that if you find yourself in a situation where you can't get hold of these things and yet you are, in fact, really good, there's nothing much you can do about it short of waiting a few more years and hoping to build up a better professional reputation. In contrast, you can just show up at a coding interview, demonstrate that you can in fact code (at whatever level is required), and land a job. Case in point: I moved from academia to coding by doing this (without any relevant qualifications or having worked professionally as a software engineer). There is no equivalent progression for someone who wants to move to academia from coding.
- robotresearcher 8y ago
  The equivalent to acing a code interview for an academic is submitting a terrific paper. Papers are typically submitted to open calls without any referrals. If the paper has an impact, the rest of it follows. Prestigious invited talks don't come out of the blue, but usually as a result of consistent work that people care about. If a researcher can't get their papers published, in an activity where that is a key metric of success and the key communication medium, what's the basis of the 'really good' assessment? Look at the list of keynote speakers at any major conference you understand. Are those the wrong speakers? Did they get this privilege unfairly?
  - foldr 8y ago
    It's quite absurd to suggest either that (i) the review process is entirely fair or (ii) that it is possible to land an academic position merely by publishing papers. (If so, where are all the professors without PhDs these days?) I don't claim that the process by which hiring decisions are made in academia is notably unfair by the standards of life in general or in comparison to many other career paths. But when talking to another (ex) academic, you must know that you can't get away with those kinds of simplifications. I don't understand your rhetorical questions. Clearly, yes, conferences choose bad speakers sometimes.
    - robotresearcher 8y ago
      I didn't suggest either of those two points, which I agree are absurd. I readily agree these selection processes are not perfect, and institutional nepotism in particular is an issue in academia.
      - foldr 8y ago
        >The equivalent to acing a code interview for an academic is submitting a terrific paper. You can get a coding job just by acing a coding interview (and having basic social/professional skills). So this part of your comment did appear to suggest that merely publishing papers can be sufficient to obtain an academic position.
        robotresearcher 8y ago
        You have to be invited to interview before you can ace it. So you probably have either a relevant degree or experience before you get in the room.
        foldr 8y ago
        It's very much possible to get a coding interview without either of these things.
        8y ago
  - kaitai 8y ago
    I finally got one of the papers I'm proud of published! It was in review at a major journal for over a year, and then was soft-rejected for being too specialized (nice comments from referees though). Then it went to another journal, and was most of the way through the review process when the entire board quit to start an open-access journal. So we withdrew the paper and submitted to the open-access journal. They finally accepted with revisions last fall, and so I think it'll get published soon. Only three years from start to finish, where "start" refers to posting the finished paper to the arXiv! Every job application process has its own kinds of luck and failure modes. The time scales of academia lead to very different distortions than those in software engineering.
    - robotresearcher 8y ago
      Congratulations! A three-year ride is a outlier. I hope your arXiv version got some citations to keep you going emotionally and professionally in the meantime :)

foldr 8y ago

>You imply that strong reference letters, strong publications and talks at top conferences are obtained unfairly. Why do you think so? There's no implication that the letters are obtained unfairly, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the resulting outcomes are fair. The point is that if you find yourself in a situation where you can't get hold of these things and yet you are, in fact, really good, there's nothing much you can do about it short of waiting a few more years and hoping to build up a better professional reputation. In contrast, you can just show up at a coding interview, demonstrate that you can in fact code (at whatever level is required), and land a job. Case in point: I moved from academia to coding by doing this (without any relevant qualifications or having worked professionally as a software engineer). There is no equivalent progression for someone who wants to move to academia from coding.

robotresearcher 8y ago
The equivalent to acing a code interview for an academic is submitting a terrific paper. Papers are typically submitted to open calls without any referrals. If the paper has an impact, the rest of it follows. Prestigious invited talks don't come out of the blue, but usually as a result of consistent work that people care about. If a researcher can't get their papers published, in an activity where that is a key metric of success and the key communication medium, what's the basis of the 'really good' assessment? Look at the list of keynote speakers at any major conference you understand. Are those the wrong speakers? Did they get this privilege unfairly?
- foldr 8y ago
  It's quite absurd to suggest either that (i) the review process is entirely fair or (ii) that it is possible to land an academic position merely by publishing papers. (If so, where are all the professors without PhDs these days?) I don't claim that the process by which hiring decisions are made in academia is notably unfair by the standards of life in general or in comparison to many other career paths. But when talking to another (ex) academic, you must know that you can't get away with those kinds of simplifications. I don't understand your rhetorical questions. Clearly, yes, conferences choose bad speakers sometimes.
  - robotresearcher 8y ago
    I didn't suggest either of those two points, which I agree are absurd. I readily agree these selection processes are not perfect, and institutional nepotism in particular is an issue in academia.
    - foldr 8y ago
      >The equivalent to acing a code interview for an academic is submitting a terrific paper. You can get a coding job just by acing a coding interview (and having basic social/professional skills). So this part of your comment did appear to suggest that merely publishing papers can be sufficient to obtain an academic position.
      - robotresearcher 8y ago
        You have to be invited to interview before you can ace it. So you probably have either a relevant degree or experience before you get in the room.
        foldr 8y ago
        It's very much possible to get a coding interview without either of these things.
        8y ago
- kaitai 8y ago
  I finally got one of the papers I'm proud of published! It was in review at a major journal for over a year, and then was soft-rejected for being too specialized (nice comments from referees though). Then it went to another journal, and was most of the way through the review process when the entire board quit to start an open-access journal. So we withdrew the paper and submitted to the open-access journal. They finally accepted with revisions last fall, and so I think it'll get published soon. Only three years from start to finish, where "start" refers to posting the finished paper to the arXiv! Every job application process has its own kinds of luck and failure modes. The time scales of academia lead to very different distortions than those in software engineering.
  - robotresearcher 8y ago
    Congratulations! A three-year ride is a outlier. I hope your arXiv version got some citations to keep you going emotionally and professionally in the meantime :)