In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I'm an incoming PhD student with a couple of questions about publishing in grad school. Throughout my MA, I have been working on a clearly historical topic 'X' in Early Modern philosophy (one that is fairly interesting but also quite specific). However, this topic is also relevant for contemporary discussions in the form of a slightly modified topic 'Xi'. In my graduate studies, I want to focus strictly on the latter topic and leave the former behind. The thing is, I have already put a lot of work into researching 'X' and potentially would like to publish an article on it. So, my questions are: (1) Is it wise to put more time and effort into polishing up the draft about 'X' and preparing it for publication, or should I rather leave this topic behind and start working exclusively on 'Xi'? (2) Would hiring committees be suspicious about a diverse publication section in my CV and even hold it against me? I am aware that for many, HoP is a subfield with a very high entry barrier, and my attempts to make a contribution may seem naive/unserious.

I would recommend trying to publish the paper on X while also transitioning to Xi. Changing one's focus in a PhD program is common, and I don't think anyone will hold it against you. If anything, I think having more diverse interests is likely to help you on the market, at least for some jobs. Finally, I think one is simply likely to do one's best work if one works on what one is most interested in. 

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?

Posted in ,

4 responses to “Changing topics between the MA and PhD?”

  1. Current PhD Student

    I’m in a history subfield, and I (along with almost all my fellow history grad students) dabble in a contemporary area that is relevant to our particular historical interests. We are advised to do so as a way of developing complementary AOS/AOCs. So yeah, I think it could only help you on the job market (unless it is hugely distracting or something). But you want to have a bit of range when you go on the market (at least that’s my understanding), even if you’re aiming for R1 jobs that are generally more specialist than R2s and so on.

  2. my two cents

    Publications take time. So unless you are pretty sure (probably by asking you supervisor) that it is worth the time, it might be better to first focus on your current area. It is possible that you will come back and decide that your previous work is publishable. At that time, presumably you will be significantly more skilled in writing, and also have new ideas worth including in the original paper.
    I don’t think it will hurt you though, unless you publish in some predatory journal.

  3. Rosa

    Lots of philosophy departments have history of philosophy courses on the books, but aren’t big enough to hire a historian to teach it. I think many of these departments would love to hire you qua ethicist or philosopher of science or whatever and get someone qualified to teach their history course into the bargain. I agree with my two cents, though, that I would not put off a focus on my new area to focus on this paper – work on it alongside your new main area.

  4. hmm

    I do not think it is a big deal to change topics between the MA and the PhD, at least not in North America where PhDs are rather long programs. There is an obvious advantage to NOT changing – one has to do catch-up if one changes topics, and it is surprising how much time this can take. But for a PHD one really needs to pick something that keeps one’s interest for a long time. Assuming one is lucky enough to have a career in academia afterwards, one could be working on their PhD topic for at least a decade, and most likely longer. I still contribute to my PhD topic, two decades later.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading