Schaumschläger hin oder her. Das Grundproblem weiter Teile der Wirtschaftswissenschaften ist ein anderes: Sie sind auserzählt. Keine neuen Ideen, stattdessen billige Datenschubserei. Ich hab früher Finance gemacht, da gab es mal intellektuell fordernde Konzepte. Jetzt mach ich Methoden im Machine Learning. Da hat man Fortschritt und gute Leute.
So true.
Schaumschläger hin oder her. Das Grundproblem weiter Teile der Wirtschaftswissenschaften ist ein anderes: Sie sind auserzählt. Keine neuen Ideen, stattdessen billige Datenschubserei. Ich hab früher Finance gemacht, da gab es mal intellektuell fordernde Konzepte. Jetzt mach ich Methoden im Machine Learning. Da hat man Fortschritt und gute Leute.Hier muss man leider zustimmen. Mit diesen Aussagen wirst Du aber logischerweise in einem Jobforum für Ökonomen nicht auf viel Gegenliebe stoßen, weil diese Nutzlosigkeit, Redundanz, Ineffizienz und politische Rente suggerieren. Da wird man tendenziell eingeschnappt sein, obwohl man innerlich möglicherweise auch zustimmt.
100%
genau
yes, there is a larger number of this type of Schaumschlaeger around with high importance. Nobody will care about them in 20 years.
That's not true for the main reason that they will still be on W3s in 20 years.
Why care? If you gained tenure (even as a postdoc on A13 or A14-level) you can have a decent living as a deadwood. These Schaumschläger*innen ultimately have no power over you any longer and you can enjoy your live. So what is the problem? Do not care about those Schaumschläger*innen
Because Schaumschlaeger*innen distort many things: competition for a low number of (tenure) positions, teaching standards, the publication process and scientific progress.
What are your tricks to become tenured in our competitive Field? A friend of mine told me this; focus on top publications: that means not caring about students except for your teaching evaluation, Cheap teaching, always the same exam, little to no office hours, minimum time on reading students papers, feedback only if requested unsolid but fancy results with a great story & marketing, hiding data, hiding bad results, stop doing regressions one you find effects, be overconfident while describing results, acting skills are crucial, selective citing of papers and evidence, get a Twitter account, choose research question supporting important think tanks and the zeitgeist, become connected with influential researchers and institutions
Do you partially agree with this?
Nailed it a 100%. Teaching doesn’t matter
yes: priority list
1)how many top 5
2)how many top 10
3)how many top field
....
4)bean counting of other refereed papers
....
5)teaching? Yes? How much and teaching evaluations
others: your pedigree*, competitors within the department, can you teach something nobody else wants to teach, etc.
*pedigree: your advisor is important in the field, he sits in editorial boards of important journals to give a favour back. Your advisor is important in your university to hire somebody from the university you have been hired.
THINGS WHICH DO NOT MATTER: you really contribute to the field and your research will be quoted because of impact in 20 years (don't mistake this with citations you get for your top5 publication with your two established co-authors who are important Schaumschlaeger, see argument before)
What are your tricks to become tenured in our competitive Field? A friend of mine told me this; focus on top publications: that means not caring about students except for your teaching evaluation, Cheap teaching, always the same exam, little to no office hours, minimum time on reading students papers, feedback only if requested unsolid but fancy results with a great story & marketing, hiding data, hiding bad results, stop doing regressions one you find effects, be overconfident while describing results, acting skills are crucial, selective citing of papers and evidence, get a Twitter account, choose research question supporting important think tanks and the zeitgeist, become connected with influential researchers and institutions
Do you partially agree with this?Nailed it a 100%. Teaching doesn’t matter
And these people will still argue they are the only one who do relevant research.
I think the selective result part is also so common
What are your tricks to become tenured in our competitive Field? A friend of mine told me this; focus on top publications: that means not caring about students except for your teaching evaluation, Cheap teaching, always the same exam, little to no office hours, minimum time on reading students papers, feedback only if requested unsolid but fancy results with a great story & marketing, hiding data, hiding bad results, stop doing regressions one you find effects, be overconfident while describing results, acting skills are crucial, selective citing of papers and evidence, get a Twitter account, choose research question supporting important think tanks and the zeitgeist, become connected with influential researchers and institutions
Do you partially agree with this?
What are your tricks to become tenured in our competitive Field? A friend of mine told me this; focus on top publications: that means not caring about students except for your teaching evaluation, Cheap teaching, always the same exam, little to no office hours, minimum time on reading students papers, feedback only if requested unsolid but fancy results with a great story & marketing, hiding data, hiding bad results, stop doing regressions one you find effects, be overconfident while describing results, acting skills are crucial, selective citing of papers and evidence, get a Twitter account, choose research question supporting important think tanks and the zeitgeist, become connected with influential researchers and institutions
Do you partially agree with this?
I do agree, and would be seriously concerned if we were talking about serious disciplines like philosophy or physics. In a clown discipline like economics, it does not matter.
What are your tricks to become tenured in our competitive Field? A friend of mine told me this; focus on top publications: that means not caring about students except for your teaching evaluation, Cheap teaching, always the same exam, little to no office hours, minimum time on reading students papers, feedback only if requested unsolid but fancy results with a great story & marketing, hiding data, hiding bad results, stop doing regressions one you find effects, be overconfident while describing results, acting skills are crucial, selective citing of papers and evidence, get a Twitter account, choose research question supporting important think tanks and the zeitgeist, become connected with influential researchers and institutions
Do you partially agree with this?
Full agreement from my side.
My advise is to just do a good job. Write relevant and well executed papers. These will be publishable in good journals without excessivley thinking about strategic aspects which editor might like this topic, who could be the referee and so on. Teaching is also part of the job. If you have to do it, then why not put some effort in it? Apart from the very best departemts in Germany, teaching is a very important aspect. No small department can afford to hire someone who fails in this regard. If you have no interest in your students, you probably also do not care about your colleagues, which is a bad sign. In a small department people have to work together intensively in all kind of committees.
Don't be too strategic, just do a good job and you will get a nice W3 position. People will recognice if you just focussed on publications and achieved few high ranked publications (maybe even only with senior coauthors) at the cost of neglecting other duties like teaching and admin. This might work at the best places, but not at the vast majority of universities in Germany.
Overly worried about career and earnings and great pubs, position,etc: maybe a schaumschläger and maybe a good researcher, too
Not quite so worried and less successful: maybe a good researcher, certainly not a schaumschläger
This, a 100% with one addition. Even if you do not get a W3, you will have fun along the way. You will not be out on the streets either. Even a 40 year old failed PostDoc in Economics can out-earn a W3 Professor in the medium run.
My advise is to just do a good job. Write relevant and well executed papers. These will be publishable in good journals without excessivley thinking about strategic aspects which editor might like this topic, who could be the referee and so on. Teaching is also part of the job. If you have to do it, then why not put some effort in it? Apart from the very best departemts in Germany, teaching is a very important aspect. No small department can afford to hire someone who fails in this regard. If you have no interest in your students, you probably also do not care about your colleagues, which is a bad sign. In a small department people have to work together intensively in all kind of committees.
Don't be too strategic, just do a good job and you will get a nice W3 position. People will recognice if you just focussed on publications and achieved few high ranked publications (maybe even only with senior coauthors) at the cost of neglecting other duties like teaching and admin. This might work at the best places, but not at the vast majority of universities in Germany.Overly worried about career and earnings and great pubs, position,etc: maybe a schaumschläger and maybe a good researcher, too
Not quite so worried and less successful: maybe a good researcher, certainly not a schaumschläger
Thank you for these encouraging and comforting words.
This, a 100% with one addition. Even if you do not get a W3, you will have fun along the way. You will not be out on the streets either. Even a 40 year old failed PostDoc in Economics can out-earn a W3 Professor in the medium run.
My advise is to just do a good job. Write relevant and well executed papers. These will be publishable in good journals without excessivley thinking about strategic aspects which editor might like this topic, who could be the referee and so on. Teaching is also part of the job. If you have to do it, then why not put some effort in it? Apart from the very best departemts in Germany, teaching is a very important aspect. No small department can afford to hire someone who fails in this regard. If you have no interest in your students, you probably also do not care about your colleagues, which is a bad sign. In a small department people have to work together intensively in all kind of committees.
Don't be too strategic, just do a good job and you will get a nice W3 position. People will recognice if you just focussed on publications and achieved few high ranked publications (maybe even only with senior coauthors) at the cost of neglecting other duties like teaching and admin. This might work at the best places, but not at the vast majority of universities in Germany.Overly worried about career and earnings and great pubs, position,etc: maybe a schaumschläger and maybe a good researcher, too
Not quite so worried and less successful: maybe a good researcher, certainly not a schaumschläger
100%
This, a 100% with one addition. Even if you do not get a W3, you will have fun along the way. You will not be out on the streets either. Even a 40 year old failed PostDoc in Economics can out-earn a W3 Professor in the medium run.
My advise is to just do a good job. Write relevant and well executed papers. These will be publishable in good journals without excessivley thinking about strategic aspects which editor might like this topic, who could be the referee and so on. Teaching is also part of the job. If you have to do it, then why not put some effort in it? Apart from the very best departemts in Germany, teaching is a very important aspect. No small department can afford to hire someone who fails in this regard. If you have no interest in your students, you probably also do not care about your colleagues, which is a bad sign. In a small department people have to work together intensively in all kind of committees.
Don't be too strategic, just do a good job and you will get a nice W3 position. People will recognice if you just focussed on publications and achieved few high ranked publications (maybe even only with senior coauthors) at the cost of neglecting other duties like teaching and admin. This might work at the best places, but not at the vast majority of universities in Germany.Overly worried about career and earnings and great pubs, position,etc: maybe a schaumschläger and maybe a good researcher, too
Not quite so worried and less successful: maybe a good researcher, certainly not a schaumschläger
This is how you should think about it. Great and interesting time and there always should be a decent job.
This, a 100% with one addition. Even if you do not get a W3, you will have fun along the way. You will not be out on the streets either. Even a 40 year old failed PostDoc in Economics can out-earn a W3 Professor in the medium run.
My advise is to just do a good job. Write relevant and well executed papers. These will be publishable in good journals without excessivley thinking about strategic aspects which editor might like this topic, who could be the referee and so on. Teaching is also part of the job. If you have to do it, then why not put some effort in it? Apart from the very best departemts in Germany, teaching is a very important aspect. No small department can afford to hire someone who fails in this regard. If you have no interest in your students, you probably also do not care about your colleagues, which is a bad sign. In a small department people have to work together intensively in all kind of committees.
Don't be too strategic, just do a good job and you will get a nice W3 position. People will recognice if you just focussed on publications and achieved few high ranked publications (maybe even only with senior coauthors) at the cost of neglecting other duties like teaching and admin. This might work at the best places, but not at the vast majority of universities in Germany.Overly worried about career and earnings and great pubs, position,etc: maybe a schaumschläger and maybe a good researcher, too
Not quite so worried and less successful: maybe a good researcher, certainly not a schaumschläger
THINGS WHICH DO NOT MATTER: you really contribute to the field and your research will be quoted because of impact in 20 years (don't mistake this with citations you get for your top5 publication with your two established co-authors who are important Schaumschlaeger, see argument before)
I mentioned something like that to a colleague longer ago. His resposnse: "You will be dead by then!"