The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting
Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)
Job-Market Discussion Thread (2026-27)

recent posts

about

Advice on structuring a dissertation committee?

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?

Posted in ,

11 responses to “Advice on structuring a dissertation committee?”

  1. Dissertator

    Here’s (hopefully) a relevant anecdote: I had intended to ask Professor A to chair my committee, but they left the department during my last semester of coursework. I then gravitated toward Professor B, whom I later learned some unsavory things about and decided not to associate with them. I landed with Professor C, who was not as aligned with any of the specific sub-areas that my dissertation covers as the previous two were, but who works in my general area (ethics). What I’ve found of most value is Prof. C’s experience supervising a dissertation — giving incisive but constructive feedback on drafts, advising me on job market strategy, and general guidance on the profession. These are things that Prof. C was very forthcoming about and which, based on my experience with other dissertators from my program, Professor C has not dedicated as much time to sharing with students on whose committees Prof. C sits, but is not the chair.

    The gist of all this is that your chair/advisor is (perhaps) first and foremost your primary point of contact regarding matters related to the dissertation. But they may also have additional value to add qua chair that they would not similarly add, or feel inclined/obligated to contribute, were they merely a committee member. Maybe Junior Prof. in OP’s case is, despite their juniorness, equally or exceedingly better than Senior Prof at some of these ancillary advising duties. In which case, my comment is rendered moot. However, I just wanted to echo Marcus’ concern that Senior Prof might feel negatively about OP asking them to be chair de jure but working with Junior Prof as their chair de facto.

    Reply
  2. Mike Titelbaum

    Having senior person as chair while you work more extensively with junior non-chair is a time-honored arrangement I’ve seen (and participated in) many times. It can be sensible and helpful for everyone involved. Two things to look out for: (1) As you note, it’s important for everyone involved to be comfortable with the arrangements. (2) In some academic systems, chairs of dissertation committees get more official credit than mere members, which can make a difference to such things as teaching assignments, service credits for tenure, etc. In such systems, the time-honored arrangement can become exploitative of the junior member’s work. (I seem to recall a past online discussion of this, perhaps on this very blog.) It’s unfair for you as a graduate student to have to worry about this kind of thing, but it can be a real issue. So maybe discuss that aspect with the senior person or your department chair—whomever you trust and feel will be candid—to be sure you’re not contributing to an exploitative arrangement.

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

    Having well-known letter writers is of course useful, and one wants to be mindful of the politics of committee selection as suggested, but I would advise students not to lose sight of the mentoring relationship as a key consideration. Is this person reliable, honest, caring, conscientious, and so forth? Do you have a good working relationship with this person? Are they willing and able to guide and mentor you in a way that works for you– not only through the dissertation-writing process, but in navigating the job market and then, hopefully, establishing your career? Ideally, this is someone who will help you develop into the best philosopher you can be and who will be in your corner for a long time.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    I wouldn’t worry much thinking about gaming letters but focus on figuring out who would likely give you the better kind of support and regular, constructive feedback on your writing since what matters a great deal more is getting good research and publishing that research on time. Also, those working specifically in your sub-field may not always give better feedback because they might be so deep in the weeds that they fail to raise questions that those outside would, especially when motivating the value of research questions in the sub-field; on the job market, being able to speak and write clearly to people outside your sub-field is very important.

    Reply
  5. Anonymous

    As a junior faculty member myself, I highly recommend OP to seek whoever is known to be a really helpful advisor. There is *a lot more* that matters to advising quality than that they are especially knowledgeable in your niche area (though this is also an important consideration). Also, do not focus on whose letter is more helpful–this, I think, is pretty minor consideration, especially since they are all on your committee; and letters in general do not play too much of a role in hiring. Focus on all the support they can give. This way, the exploitation concern is also addressed automatically, since you are choosing the one who gives you the most support and deserves the role.

    Reply
  6. Anonymous

    Im junior faculty and have a different take on this, but it might because im not in North America. We get paid more or less if we chair dissertation committees or merely serve on one. We can chair up to 4, and serve on up to 6.

    I would not be taking on the work as chair if I were not actually chair, in part because I’d be working more for less money. I did enough of that in grad school, postdocing and now reviewing papers etc. I won’t do any extra work for my department that I’m not paid for. However, I’m in the EU so labour laws and attitudes to the job are different.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      I’d like to echo this comment. In a department in which being a chair is more recognized, acknowledged, and “compensated” (not in terms of money but in terms of service), I definitely do not appreciate being treated as the chair if I am not, in fact, the chair. Others may differ, so just be sure everyone’s on board with your plan!

      Reply
  7. dazesensationallye39c0dc2cd

    I wish I could echo those advising you to get the most helpful and useful mentor, junior or senior. But the truth as I’ve seen it (though others may know better) is that it matters a great deal that you get highly recommended by folks whose positive appraisal of you would itself be noted as a major achievement. Usually that happens more easily if your chair is a big shot. The other thing to keep in mind is that your best and most useful feedback doesn’t have to come from the chair; you should regularly exchange papers with reliable peers and colleagues, and workshop your ideas at conferences and informal reading groups. If you do all that, you’ll get the feedback and mentoring you need. Don’t waste the all-important Chair’s spot on that. My two cents, anyway.

    Reply
  8. Anonymous

    Dissertation chairs/supervisors are complex things, and they usually have many properties, some good, some bad. I ended up working with a senior person who was doing little research at that point in his career. He had a lot of experience supervising, and he was a very supportive and a critical reader. He read far more than I should have expected, and he genuinely improved my dissertation with his perceptive criticisms (which I was forced to address). Those were the plusses. On the down side, he was not much support when I went on the market. Because he was less engaged in research, he was not so well known (friends of his from graduate school decades ago, though, had a ton of respect for him … and told me so). But I ended up on the market with less support than others, who worked with more active researchers.
    The one very active researcher I was thinking of having as a supervisor was very self-centered, her students had a very hard time finishing (and always took 7+ years), and she was herself on the market looking for a better job. Oddly, as an examiner for my thesis, she was super supportive of my project, and appreciative of what I accomplished.

    Reply
  9. Anonymous

    I think its good to know something about the personalities involved. I had two senior scholars that in my head were co-chairs. I ultimately listed one as formal chair because I knew that as a matter of personality he wouldn’t do the work if he wasn’t getting the credit. And I knew the other would do the work regardless. That’s exploitative in a way that felt uncomfortable—but in my case they were both prominent folks with full professorships so it didn’t feel too bad to do it that way. I know that not-actually-my-chair-on-paper definitely still thought of himself as my chair because, among other things, he invited me a decade later to events that were held for people who had been his grad students. (And honestly I think of him as my chair also, years later).

    I’m actually not sure it matters who is actually the chair unless you think it will change their behavior.

    Reply
  10. Anonymous

    While not a direct answer, I want to say that I think the choice of who will be chair is probably less weighty than it seems now. You can (and will) get letters from people who aren’t your chair, or even not on your committee. And you can and should get letters from people at your university, either. While your chair should probably be *one* of your three to four reference letters of choice for at least a few years after your defence, that’s one spot filled among several. You can get good letters from whomever you don’t choose, too, if you put in the work to build a relationship with them, rather than treating the dissertating process as the be-all-end-all of research relationships.
    All that said, all else equal, my advice would be to choose as chair the person whose letter you most would want to have advertising you to committees. That might be the better-known person, but only if you take them to be genuinely enthusiastic about your work. An unenthusiastic letter from a superstar is probably going to be less helpful to you than a rave from someone who’s still at a PhD-granting department, but is just a bit less well-known.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Philosophers' Cocoon

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

Continue reading