In applications for grants, jobs, tenure, and promotion one is asked to list a range of accomplishments: research, collaborations, teaching, community service, ...
There is real danger here that you produce a long list of activities and this can really dilute the impact of your actual significant accomplishments on the reader/reviewer. Hence, I think it is best to not list everything but highlight a few accomplishments and give some specific details of why they are significant.
On a related matter I think that universities are putting increasing pressure on faculty to be involved in a diverse range of activities so they can produce such lists. I noticed this particularly in a couple of tenure/promotion cases I recently reviewed. I was really impressed by how much the applicants had done but I wondered if they had focussed more on just a few of the activities whether everyone would have been better off.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
From Leo Szilard to the Tasmanian wilderness
Richard Flanagan is an esteemed Australian writer. My son recently gave our family a copy of Flanagan's recent book, Question 7 . It is...
-
Is it something to do with breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation? In molecular spectroscopy you occasionally hear this term thro... -
If you look on the arXiv and in Nature journals there is a continuing stream of people claiming to observe superconductivity in some new mat...
-
I welcome discussion on this point. I don't think it is as sensitive or as important a topic as the author order on papers. With rega...
No comments:
Post a Comment