In our new “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:
I would appreciate some advice about how to structure one’s dissertation committee. As it happens, I’m deliberating between some plausible but non-obvious options for the “chair” person for my committee: one is more senior, widely known in the profession, but is farther removed from the (sub-)area of my dissertation research. The other is more junior, a few years out of PhD, but is more closely aligned with my work. There’s no procedural barrier either way, but let’s say they’d both say yes if asked.
Would it ever make sense — from a job-market perspective — to have the more senior person as chair, even if you might get more substantive feedback and perhaps interact more with the junior person, given the specialized expertise? I believe I’ve seen in the past candidates who had an assistant professor as chair had great success on the job market. But I’ve also heard advice to the contrary. (I’m aware that, due to all sorts of conscious and unconscious biases that people have, recommendation letters from big-names might be particularly beneficial. But I’m not sure if letters of similar content would be weighted more simply because they come from the “chair,” if you’d have it anyways by bringing them on your committee.)
I think it could be fine in principle to have a more senior person as chair, while perhaps interacting with and getting more feedback from a junior person. The key, I think, would be to do so in a way that ensures that everyone would be fine with this. I’m not sure how one would do that, but one definitely doesn’t want to alienate the senior person (one’s dissertation committee chair!) or other members of the committee by looking like one doesn’t really want to work with them. It’s been a long time since I was in grad school, but if I recall one of the most critical things is to have a dissertation committee and student who all work well together.
What do readers think? Any helpful tips, experiences, or other insights to share?
Leave a Reply