Zeugma

Always a pleasure to read your responses, fuzzylogician.  

Just to expand the context of my post: This is also a problem in graduate seminars. A friend once told me that graduate seminars are fertile breeding grounds for professors who are trying to incorporate material (or think of material to incorporate) into their own projects. From what I have heard, many professors assign in their course syllabi books that are formative components to their articles (or book projects), hoping that graduate students' ideas (from either in-class participation or final papers) aid them with writing. I acknowledge, of course, a limit to the level of appropriateness associated with this approach. Yet, this is technically gleaning of intellectual property! 

Does being a student (and thus contractually bound to participate in class in order to succeed) presuppose an abdication of one's intellectual property to the professor? (I very rarely see article and book acknowledgments that thank graduate seminars participants). Thoughts? 


Wishing you all a wonderful evening,
Z

If you put an idea out there, you should be aware that it's now in the public domain and anyone can pick up on it and essentially write your paper before you manage to. For that reason it may be wise to strategize about when you start presenting a new idea. If it happens to be the case that there is someone in the audience who works on the same problem as you and is familiar with the literature, you might be supplying them with precisely what they're missing to make their own theory work. In that case, they may beat you to the punch. So, someone could take your idea and run with it, but if their new paper is based on a presentation you gave and on any written materials that originated from your work, then that contribution should be cited and you be credited with coming up with the approach or proposing the idea (even if you didn't have a full theory of it at the time) or whatever else is relevant. If that is not done, you're looking at what you can call "idea stealing." If your original work was cited but then essentially someone beat you to writing the paper that would result from the idea, then that person is perfectly within their rights. It's all about how the credit to the original ideas was given.
 
Of course it still sucks if instead of collaborating, this hypothetical audience member doesn't approach you to discuss your contribution to their work, but I suppose that's not anything out of bounds. Just kind of sneaky and someone who I would mark as a person I want to have nothing to do with.
 
I know this is a real problem in some fields, but in mine people are happy to cite several people for coming up with basically the same idea at roughly the same time (independently). It's terrible if someone beats you to writing your own paper, so it's important to worry about this, but you also need to balance that with being out there and spreading your ideas. So it's a tough problem, but one that everyone deals with. I tend to opt to be out there and be known for saying certain things even if the papers come much later, because I believe it gives me the right image and authority so that people know to associate my ideas with my name. But yes, it is a risk that someone else will beat me to the final punch line.

Hi, Nicko   

Congratulations on your interview with Northwestern. I hope all goes well on that front!

I do want to specify that landing an interview does mean the university is interested in you and in your scholarship (thus using the interview as a way to match paper to face). However, an interview does not automatically indicate a definite acceptance. Remember additionally that an interview is two-way: You will also get a sense or "feel" of the school, and you will be evaluating the professors who interview you (i.e., their professionalism, cordiality, etc.).    I was interviewed by two schools -- one of which was an Ivy. I was immediately turned off by the, may I say, lack of professionalism of the Director of Graduate Studies of one of the institutions. I was actually quite thankful for that interview. The other interview went extremely well, but much to my chagrin I did not get accepted. 

The tone of the interview is casual, of course; and half of it will be conducted in English, the rest in French. (Or some ratio very similar -- it's just an opportunity to have them evaluate your French speaking proficiency). You will be asked about your research interests, why you applied to that institution, what motivates you to pursue your field of inquiry, and -- as was the case for both schools that interviewed me -- there is always a "zinger" question at the end. The Ivy that interviewed me asked me "What do you read that's not academic?" Had a great time with that one!  

Wishing you the best of luck, Nicko, and keep us posted on your results!
Z  

Congratulations on your publication!    Though a word of caution: Many conferences do publish their panel papers; nevertheless, the publisher's reputation is crucial here. I have seen a growing trend in which conference papers have been published by Peter Lang, Cambridge Scholars Press, and the like. The fact that the conference you mention publishes all papers (both bad or good ones) is a red flag to me -- this assumes that there is no rigorous peer-review monitoring. These kinds of publications do not usually count toward tenure considerations. Of course, it certainly wouldn't hurt to have it listed on your CV. Remember, nailing a publication in a rigorous, peer-reviewed book or journal is the ideal!

Good luck and all best,
Z 

Congratulations on your publication!    Though a word of caution: Many conferences do publish their panel papers; nevertheless, the publisher's reputation is crucial here. I have seen a growing trend in which conference papers have been published by Peter Lang, Cambridge Scholars Press, and the like. The fact that the conference you mention publishes all papers (both bad or good ones) is a red flag to me -- this assumes that there is no rigorous peer-review monitoring. These kinds of publications do not usually count toward tenure considerations. Of course, it certainly wouldn't hurt to have it listed on your CV. Remember, nailing a publication in a rigorous, peer-reviewed book or journal is the ideal!

Good luck and all best,
Z 

I recently took a look at the newest (2010) NRC Rankings and was baffled by some of the rankings. Just by the "R" rankings, there's a four-way tie for 1st place: Duke, Princeton, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale.

Then the order is: University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Indiana Univ. Bloomington, UChicago, Stanford, Harvard.

Surprisingly, NYU and Berkeley don't even make the top ten!

So many of these rankings are subjective and incorporate external variables such as "Percent of Faculty with Grants" or "Average GRE scores" that do not directly correlate to the rigor and quality of the department's pedagogy. Another thing to consider is that each French Literature graduate program has a unique, different "flavor": some departments are more "traditional" whereas others are more welcoming to theoretical ideas (psychoanalysis and literature, etc.). Cornell (12th place on the NRC's R Ranking) is a great example of this inter-departmental flexibility. Additionally, some departments are "stronger" in some fields (for example, Medievalists would strongly consider Princeton or Yale over Duke).

The best gauge is to assess the department in regards to your interests (i.e., Do they offer a strong Francophone program? Do they provide research funding? How many Renaissance specialists are there?, etc.). Then, look and see the Post-Grad job placement rates of that particular school.

I recently took a look at the newest (2010) NRC Rankings and was baffled by some of the rankings. Just by the "R" rankings, there's a four-way tie for 1st place: Duke, Princeton, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale.

Then the order is: University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Indiana Univ. Bloomington, UChicago, Stanford, Harvard.

Surprisingly, NYU and Berkeley don't even make the top ten!

So many of these rankings are subjective and incorporate external variables such as "Percent of Faculty with Grants" or "Average GRE scores" that do not directly correlate to the rigor and quality of the department's pedagogy. Another thing to consider is that each French Literature graduate program has a unique, different "flavor": some departments are more "traditional" whereas others are more welcoming to theoretical ideas (psychoanalysis and literature, etc.). Cornell (12th place on the NRC's R Ranking) is a great example of this inter-departmental flexibility. Additionally, some departments are "stronger" in some fields (for example, Medievalists would strongly consider Princeton or Yale over Duke).

The best gauge is to assess the department in regards to your interests (i.e., Do they offer a strong Francophone program? Do they provide research funding? How many Renaissance specialists are there?, etc.). Then, look and see the Post-Grad job placement rates of that particular school.