CV Conundrum

So, I've been wondering about something lately and wanted to get input from all of you about it:

It seems commonplace for academics (especially junior scholars, I think) to have a section of their CVs reserved for manuscripts that are in progress or under review. This section quite often lists the titles of each manuscript and, for those in review, the journal to which they were submitted. So, here's my question: how does this practice square with the blind review process? I know, I know -- the peer review process is rarely truly "blind" anyway, but this seems like a potentially problematic custom. Wouldn't a simple Google search of a manuscript title provide a snoopy curious reviewer with the CV of the author, assuming that person has listed the manuscript as being "under review" on his or her CV?

And what about the unpleasant circumstance in which a manuscript is rejected? (Not that I would expect any of my blog-mates to have any experience with rejections, of course.) Let's say I have a manuscript listed on my CV as being under review at Journal A. Then it gets rejected, so I send it to Journal B and make the change on my CV. It could just be my own paranoia, but wouldn't subsequent postings of my revised CV let the entire planet know just how many times this particular manuscript has been rejected, and by which journals?

I understand why it is important to demonstrate that one has manuscripts in progress/under review, but I'm wondering whether it is necessary to include specifics on one's CV. I'm curious to hear whether you all have thought about this, or whether I've concocted an issue in my mind that nobody else worries about!

Great Chronicle Article

My friend Sarah (about whom I've written before) sent me an interesting Chronicle article today about the invisibility of academic work (or, more specifically, of the idea formation and preparation that precede the actual writing stage of a research project):

People far removed from academe can spit out the tired, if still pithy, phrase "publish or perish." But explaining the process that leads to publication to the average Joe, or to a supportive and understanding partner named Mo, isn't easy....

What does it look like to do intellectual work? What does it look like to have an insight? To formulate a theory? To solve a philosophical problem? What does it take to get to the point at which you're ready to sit down and write something, ready to present something to the world?

The invisibility of this type of work likely has been the subject of countless academic blog posts, so it is hardly revolutionary to discuss it here. I did, however, particularly appreciate the author's use of metaphor to illustrate how efforts to measure academic "output" by metrics recognizable to those outside academia (i.e., articles published) can underestimate the amount of time and effort invested in a particular research project:

When I first started running competitively, each time I told my brother that I had run a race, he would ask me the same question, "Did you win?" It diminished any achievement I may have felt -- a personal best, feeling good the whole time, having a great day...[because it] meant that the months of hard work I did training for the race were made invisible by the way he had framed the question....

You don't need me to tell you that when you're working it can sometimes look to the rest of the world like you're curled up in front of the fire petting the cat. This column is for your husbands, wives, partners, parents, siblings, friends, and strangers who ask questions like "When are you going to graduate? It's been five years already." Or "Why hasn't that book come out yet? You've been working on it forever!"

Personally, I think the solution to this problem is right there in the article: perhaps we should all "pose like Rodin's sculpture" in our offices to convince others that we're actually working!

What They Didn't Teach You in Graduate School

The newest edition of the Chronicle has a great article discussing things new grads should know, but probably aren't taught in school.

Of course, we try very hard to make sure our students understand some of these, such as "don't take a job without having completed your Ph.D.", but the rest really aren't discussed in much detail. I may have to post this on my door--most of the points made are very useful to doctoral students and new assistant professors.

There is one I must disagree with, however. The advice to "change your career or move every 7 years" may apply to some fields, but I don't see how it benefits people in our fields. In fact, if I knew someone who changed jobs every 7 years, I'd wonder why they don't just say put. Perhaps this is because there are a limited number of top-tier research jobs available in CJ.... thoughts on that one?

Journals To Use Anti-Plagiarism Software

Those of you who are avid readers of our humble blog will recall a discussion of academic dishonesty among professors--specifically, plagiarizing from journal articles they had previously written (once you sign off your copyright, folks, it doesn't belong to you anymore!).

It seems academic journals may finally be getting serious about this, and a program called CrossCheck may be used by some journals to check for plagiarism. Woo hoo!

Let's hope the Journal of Ice Cream and Ben & Jerry's Quarterly are the first to sign up for such a service...

Commentary on the State of Our Discipline?

Okay, I'll be the first to admit I'm cranky...it is who I am, learn to love me anyway.

I received my Nov 2007 issue of Criminology today. While thumbing through the articles, I noted an interesting piece on "Understanding the Influence of Victim Gender in Death Penalty Cases." My comment here is in no way meant to take away from the authors or their research.

Here's my issue...The study is based on data used by Baldus, Woodworth & Pulaski (1990). This is a prominent study used extensively by the Supreme Court in McClesky vs Kemp (which basically said establishing general bias in capital cases is not grounds for appellate action...appellants have to establish bias in the handling of their particular case).

Now you may think "okay, 17 year old data, not ideal but not unheard of in our discipline." True, until you note that the Baldus data are based on 1066 cases from Georgia from 1973-1977. The latter is what really gets me.

Again, I'm not slamming the authors. I just wonder what it says about our discipline when one of our flagship outlets publishes a study that is based on 28-34 year old data (from one state)? Given the finite volume of material that can appear in this outlet, should we focus on more contemporary concerns.

I do see value in the analysis and the insights it might provide...I just question how timely it is in 2007. At what point are data too old to merit consideration in a top-tier outlet when the objective is not a time-series analysis?

Am I missing something here? Am I just personifying my blog moniker? Is this just a thinly-veiled manifestation of my own feelings of envy given my track record in top-tier outlets?

I think I need a candy cane or something...

More Letter 'S'

Another year older - wow. As we all reflect on the past year and start to make resolutions for next year, I would suggest reading this post on scatterplot. I know this post is from a female perspective, but it provides insight for all of us who are faced with choices. This short discussion is also important for understanding and contextualizing rational choice. A choice made for today may seem rational but have long-term, negative implications. We often view criminal behavior from the worldview of privilege. Continuing to integrate context, particularly the social location and psychological essence of an individual, into choice-based conceptualizations of crime is likely to yield important results.

Here is a short snapshot -

You become what you do. Every day in every way we make choices that have consequences for ourselves and other people. Every time we say yes to some things we say no to countless other things. We make dozens of choices every day that are consequential for ourselves and others. We live embedded in opportunities and constraints created by other people’s choices, and we in our turn create constraints and opportunities for ourselves and others. This is a law of nature, this is how our finite and interdependent universe works.

Vita or Vitae?

I have never fully understood the difference between vita and vitae (or curriculum vita versus curriculum vitae). I found this relatively clear definition on Virginia Tech's career services web site:

A curriculum vitae (singular), meaning "course of one's life, is a document that gives much more detail than does a resume about your academic and professional accomplishments. Curricula vitae (plural) are most often used for academic or research positions, whereas resumes are the preferred documents in business an industry.

Note about plural / singular forms: "Curricula vitae" (vee-tie) is the plural form; "curriculum vitae" is singular. The informal shortened form, "vita" standing alone, meaning a brief autobiographical sketch (Webster's), is singular, while "vitae," is plural. The abbreviation is often used: CV or CVs.

I think this clarifies things a bit for me, anyone else have any thoughts?

CV Pet Peves

I often help with the department CV lecture. Something I think is important. Dan highlights one of my pet peeves - don't do it people.

Use this format -
McVeigh, Rory, Daniel J. Myers, and David Sikkink. 2004. "Corn, Klansmen, and Coolidge: Structure and Framing in Social Movements." Social Forces 83(2): 653-690.

This is very bad -
2004. "Corn, Klansmen, and Coolidge: Structure and Framing in Social Movements." Social Forces 83(2): 653-690. (with Rory McVeigh and David Sikkink).

See the whole discussion here - what are your CV pet peeves?

Chronicle Article

http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2007/09/2007090601c/careers.html

This is a fantastic article which I'm going to give to people who think my professional life is cake because I don't teach five days a week. Secondly, I just like its tone...Joe and I were talking recently about needing long hours of solitude to write/publish.

Sincerely,
Pap