Faculty Advisor Titles

[jusrain]

Hi all! I’m working diligently on my SOPs, but I’ve noticed there’s a bit too much guesswork involved in choosing which faculty advisors to list for many programs. Does anyone have any advice as to phrases/words to look for that determine whether or not a professor is potentially still advising/actively researching? 

For programs that have a lot of “John Smith III Professor of English” appointees (essentially a lengthy alumnus’ name followed by “distinguished professor of anthropology and English, etc.), does this title hint anything about that scholar’s future in the department? Are these almost always temporary postings? If so, should I only list folks who have “assistant/associate professor” in their titles, as they’re definitely tenured or tenure-track faculty? What about full professor? Is it silly to avoid listing potential advisors who have been teaching for a long time, or is that a good way to avoid faculty who may be leaving shortly? 

Many current students whom I’ve already reached out to don’t know who may be leaving, and faculty may not want to clue prospective applicants in on departmental politics. Other than directly asking people if they are taking advisees, do any current students have thoughts on how to navigate this? Is it a crap shoot? 

Thanks for any and all advice! 

[Warelin]

19 minutes ago, swarthmawr said:

Other than directly asking people if they are taking advisees, do any current students have thoughts on how to navigate this? 

I think it's important to realize that the Humanities and Sciences work differently. In the humanities, professors generally don't take on students as their advisees until after students have gone through coursework. This is becuse Faculty are aware that students may have a change in what they're interested in after taking a variety of coursework within the field. In the sciences, funding is often tied to a professor and you'll often be working on that professor's projects.

 

22 minutes ago, swarthmawr said:

Are these almost always temporary postings?

Unless it says they're a visiting professor or postdoc, it's generally safer to assume that it's a permanent position. Sometimes, it comes with some additional conference funding for their research. Sometimes (not always), it's a way for a university or department to note that this person has contributed something important to the field or to the university or department.

 

26 minutes ago, swarthmawr said:

What about full professor?

A full professor is a tenured professor who has passed their evaluation to be promoted from Associate Professor. Moving from Associate Professor to Professor isn't guaranteed and it's possible to spend your career at one university without being promoted to Professor.

 

28 minutes ago, swarthmawr said:

Is it silly to avoid listing potential advisors who have been teaching for a long time, or is that a good way to avoid faculty who may be leaving shortly? 

I think that depends. Academia is a career in which people tend to retire later, rather than earlier from. People who have been a professor for a longer time often have more connections and understand publications better. On the opposite end, they're less likely to have an understanding of the current job market and less likely to want to collaborate on a publication. 

I think as long as you're targetting Professors,  rather than instructors (which does not imply temporary work either -- just a teaching track, rather than a research track), you'll be fine. 

Good luck!

[Deleted Because Useless]

I had similar worries! I think a safe bet is to go with associate or full Professors. And if you are planning to write down a professor that is extremely old and may not be taking any more graduate students, look for another associate professor, since they are most likely younger. It is always good to have at least two professors you want to work with in the department. Cheers!

Edited December 15, 2018 by Hopeful and Not

[jrockford27]

On 12/15/2018 at 10:50 AM, Hopeful and Not said:

I had similar worries! I think a safe bet is to go with associate or full Professors. And if you are planning to write down a professor that is extremely old and may not be taking any more graduate students, look for another associate professor, since they are most likely younger. It is always good to have at least two professors you want to work with in the department. Cheers!

I wouldn't rule out assistant professors. In my department, new faculty are often on the adcoms so that they can select students who might work with them (in our dept. students choose their advisors after their first year).  Another thing to consider is that full profs are not always older, or even more senior in the program. People are elevated or not elevated to full professor for all kinds of reasons. 

I would also not discount older professors as potential advisors. Just because they are older doesn't mean they aren't still prodigious. My wife and I both have advisors who are in their 70s and who are very involved and attentive. I wouldn't discriminate against potential advisors based on age. I've known of young faculty who are guilty of all of the bad advising stuff that people sometimes attribute to older faculty.  Indeed, young faculty have a host of challenges (a higher service load, pressure to publish and accumulate tenure points) that might make them less accessible or attentive that more senior faculty do not face.

To reiterate what warelin said too, the positions you're referring to are called "named chairs" and they are for full time permanent faculty, so you should absolutely pursue them as advisors.