Are academic conferences worth attending?

[fj20]

I know that the general consensus is that academic conferences are a great way to gain experience of academia (and to strengthen your resume), but my question is: if the conference is abroad, and thus an expense of a couple thousand dollars, how can you be sure it's a worthwhile investment? To be more specific, I recently submitted an abstract to an interdisciplinary (that is, not exclusively literary) conference called "Making Sense of Suffering," run by "Inter-Disciplinary.Net"); I was invited to attend, but I'm hesitant to do so because it's in the Czech Republic. Will presenting there, and later publishing my paper in the book the conference releases, really make me a more attractive applicant to doctoral programs? Anyway, if anyone knows about this Inter-Disciplinary.Net group, I'd be grateful to get any further info on them--I've researched, but found little.

[socialpsych]

I know that the general consensus is that academic conferences are a great way to gain experience of academia (and to strengthen your resume), but my question is: if the conference is abroad, and thus an expense of a couple thousand dollars, how can you be sure it's a worthwhile investment? To be more specific, I recently submitted an abstract to an interdisciplinary (that is, not exclusively literary) conference called "Making Sense of Suffering," run by "Inter-Disciplinary.Net"); I was invited to attend, but I'm hesitant to do so because it's in the Czech Republic. Will presenting there, and later publishing my paper in the book the conference releases, really make me a more attractive applicant to doctoral programs? Anyway, if anyone knows about this Inter-Disciplinary.Net group, I'd be grateful to get any further info on them--I've researched, but found little.

First, assuming it turns out that this Inter-Disciplinary.Net thing is not a well respected society in your field (which to me sounds more than likely -- in fact it almost seems like it might be a scam), I don't think a conference run by a group that has no status in your field is worth paying any money to attend. Honestly, I think it will not help your CV even one bit, because your eagerness to present your research (+) will be balanced out by the fact that you chose to attend a crummy conference (-). This could be totally different in the humanities, but in my field I can think of only a handful of conferences I would encourage prospective students to attend.

Second, even if the conference turns out to be a really legit one, I don't think it is worth spending a couple thousand dollars to go. It's not that important to your CV, and having attended a couple conferences now myself, I can tell you that the experience, though extremely stimulating, is also exhausting. So I don't think it is worth spending that money either for the fun of attending a conference or for the usefulness of having it on your resume.

Edited July 3, 2010 by socialpsych

[foppery]

It seems to be a truism on this forum that applicants should attend as many conferences as possible, to network and present papers and whatever else. Honestly, I don't see the need, and I believe that a strong application alone can win you acceptance. And there is NO reason to spend thousands of dollars on a conference in the Czech Republic (which, I agree, sounds like a scam. "Interdisciplinary.Net"? Really?). Attending overseas conferences is something you do as a PhD student, not as a potential applicant. Look, if there's a well-respected conference in your area, and it's IN YOUR FIELD, and you can actually find out information about its hosts, go ahead. But neither I nor any successful applicant I know attended a single conference before grad school.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[fj20]

This is more or less how I feel about it too, but I'm always hesitant to pass up an opportunity. (Conferences don't seem to me so easy to come by: this was the only one I found for which I had an appropriate paper.) I should also add that, though I don't know much about the group running the conference, it's not a scam: it's run by two fairly well-respected academics, and the small publishing press that the group runs does publish actual books.

I guess what I find tempting about the conference is that, if you present a paper, it will also be published in a book released by this publishing press. Sufficed to say, it's not going to be a best-seller, but I've seen professors' resumes that include essays published in similar books published by this same group, which leads me to believe that for me to do so would be an accomplishment, and would be a small first step towards participating in academic discourse. The advantages of attending conferences might be dubious, but isn't getting published usually a worthwhile goal?

[foppery]

<br style="text-shadow: none;">This is more or less how I feel about it too, but I'm always hesitant to pass up an opportunity. (Conferences don't seem to me so easy to come by: this was the only one I found for which I had an appropriate paper.) I should also add that, though I don't know much about the group running the conference, it's not a scam: it's run by two fairly well-respected academics, and the small publishing press that the group runs does publish actual books. <br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">I guess what I find tempting about the conference is that, if you present a paper, it will also be published in a book released by this publishing press. Sufficed to say, it's not going to be a best-seller, but I've seen professors' resumes that include essays published in similar books published by this same group, which leads me to believe that for me to do so would be an accomplishment, and would be a small first step towards participating in academic discourse. The advantages of attending conferences might be dubious, but isn't getting published usually a worthwhile goal?<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">My impression is that many conferences publish collections of papers, and that getting your paper in one of these collections is less prestigious than getting it in an actual volume of essays or a well-respected journal. I don't know anything about the rest of your application, so I'm not sure how much this conference would help you. I WILL say, though, that thousands of dollars is quite a sum to spend on something that may not even help you. And the Czech Republic is pretty far away. But if you can afford it, financially and logistically, I guess it couldn't hurt.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[ScreamingHairyArmadillo]

At this stage, I highly doubt anyone would fault you for not spending thousands to go to the Czech Republic for a small conference. It's not like any other academics pay out of pocket to attend conferences; their departments reimburse them.

Edited July 5, 2010 by ScreamingHairyArmadillo

[Medievalmaniac]

At this stage, I highly doubt anyone would fault you for not spending thousands to go to the Czech Republic for a small conference. It's not like any other academics pay out of pocket to attend conferences; their departments reimburse them.

Departments don't always fund conference participation, and don't always fund the entire cost of attendance. It all depends on the department's resources, how many professors are making use of conference funding, and so forth. Generally at a small public U. you can count on 80% or so funding for two conferences involving travel, 100% funding for conferences not involving travel tickets (local/regional) or 100% funding for one distance conference, per annum. In departments with bigger budgets, you can sometimes get more. Nearly always, a department will also fund graduate student conference participation to greater or lesser degree; my old department gave us a $500.00 stipend (which covered the plane ticket...! lol)

In terms of conferences and their usefulness on applications - well, they do demonstrate commitment to academic behavior, but not much else. You can pretty much always get an abstract accepted at any conference, so just presenting a paper is good practice and good for showing you are committed, but isn't all that impressive in the end on a CV, unless the paper is subsequently published.

What conferences ARE good for - invaluable for, really - is a.) stimulating your thinking and keeping you current with work in the field; b.) giving you the chance to meet and get to know scholars from all over, which results often in networking leading to other presentation and publication opportunities and also that all-important outside reader for your dissertation; c.) keeping you interested and engaged in the subject matter. Grad school and early teaching years are strenuous and they are grunt work - you can get really worn down and lose your "spark". I have found that attending a few conferences a year keeps me fresh and lively as a scholar, and prevents burnout.

I would NOT, however, travel on my own dime to the tune of a thousand dollars to a foreign country simply for a little-known/unknown conference. I would TOTALLY go to the Leeds International Medieval Congress, but if there were a local "Alterity and the Other, a 2-day conference" in the Czech Republic - unless I wanted to visit there just to go, maybe as a vacation, that coincided to some degree with the dates of the conference, I would not do it. There are other and better ways to spend that money.

[fj20]

"unless the paper is subsequently published."

See, that is the one thing tempting me to do this conference: the paper IS subsequently published, and to me that does seem important. I mean, there are full professors at respectable universities who list just such papers, published by the "Inter-disciplinary Press," in their resumes -- should I really turn up my nose just because the press is not well known, when these professors have deemed such publication one of their accomplishments? Money aside, I'm a little surprised that the people who've responded would so readily pass up the opportunity to publish their work.

[ScreamingHairyArmadillo]

Here's a recent advice column from the Chronicle with a TT assistant professor asking this question: http://chronicle.com/article/Where-Shall-I-Go/66132/?sid=wb&utm_source=wb&utm_medium=en

[Baudrillardist]

relatedly, it was suggested to me to attend a conference, that it would be a good chance to meet people and network in my field (i'm not presenting a paper, would just be visiting). My thought is, why does it cost so much (hotel room, food, plane tix) to simply apply to grad school? Are the advantages really that serious, that I should pay 700ish dollars to go network??

[socialpsych]

should I really turn up my nose just because the press is not well known

It is not turning up your nose; it is a cost-benefit analysis. Attending the conference results in a respectable publication, which is useful to you; the question, given how much it would cost, is how useful. It might be worth your time, but not worth your time + thousands of dollars.

Since you are surprised by our reactions, isn't there an academic in your field that you could ask for advice? Maybe one of your letter-writers? Take their word over ours.

[grad_wannabe]

fj20 - I also had a paper accepted by this group for this same conference weekend, but for a different topic. They are apparently hosting a group of conferences at the same time. Mine is "Visual Aspects of Performative Practice." I too wonder whether I should attend.

To my mind, this is why it's worth going:

This is a new online journal, working to push the boundaries of discipline and establish cross-platform networking. It's understandable that they are not well-respected or reputed yet, because they are so new. Of course established journals are better respected, but I like what this group (provided it is not a scam, which I doubt it is - their website is a deep depository of work) is trying to do - establish new ways of working, using a new media platform. The world of academia is changing rapidly. Old models are falling by the wayside, and soon the education bubble itself may burst. I think this group is trying to think ahead, and I want to support that.

I'm also applying for grants outside of school's travel fund that may help relieve the financial burden. I've been told that the graduate travel fund is only to be accessed for one conference per year, and I don't want to use it up on this.

[Pamphilia]

"unless the paper is subsequently published."

See, that is the one thing tempting me to do this conference: the paper IS subsequently published, and to me that does seem important. I mean, there are full professors at respectable universities who list just such papers, published by the "Inter-disciplinary Press," in their resumes -- should I really turn up my nose just because the press is not well known, when these professors have deemed such publication one of their accomplishments? Money aside, I'm a little surprised that the people who've responded would so readily pass up the opportunity to publish their work.

I'm really surprised that no one has brought this point up yet, because I hear it ALL the time: one should not try to get published just for the sake of being published. It won't do all that much for your application, and it can come back to bite you in the ass later on in your career. Publications stick around with you forever. The wisdom that I have always heard is that you should not publish until you can publish well.

I'll admit that I know nothing about this group or press. Who knows? Maybe they are well-respected in your subfield, or are on their way to being well-respected--and in that case, this advice might not apply. But it's important to keep in mind that you shouldn't pursue any publishing opportunity you come across just because it's there. It can really screw you over later on, and it won't necessarily do much good for you even now.

Edited July 6, 2010 by Pamphilia

[Minalaury]

I know that the general consensus is that academic conferences are a great way to gain experience of academia (and to strengthen your resume), but my question is: if the conference is abroad, and thus an expense of a couple thousand dollars, how can you be sure it's a worthwhile investment? To be more specific, I recently submitted an abstract to an interdisciplinary (that is, not exclusively literary) conference called "Making Sense of Suffering," run by "Inter-Disciplinary.Net"); I was invited to attend, but I'm hesitant to do so because it's in the Czech Republic. Will presenting there, and later publishing my paper in the book the conference releases, really make me a more attractive applicant to doctoral programs? Anyway, if anyone knows about this Inter-Disciplinary.Net group, I'd be grateful to get any further info on them--I've researched, but found little.

[Minalaury]

I know that the general consensus is that academic conferences are a great way to gain experience of academia (and to strengthen your resume), but my question is: if the conference is abroad, and thus an expense of a couple thousand dollars, how can you be sure it's a worthwhile investment? To be more specific, I recently submitted an abstract to an interdisciplinary (that is, not exclusively literary) conference called "Making Sense of Suffering," run by "Inter-Disciplinary.Net"); I was invited to attend, but I'm hesitant to do so because it's in the Czech Republic. Will presenting there, and later publishing my paper in the book the conference releases, really make me a more attractive applicant to doctoral programs? Anyway, if anyone knows about this Inter-Disciplinary.Net group, I'd be grateful to get any further info on them--I've researched, but found little.

I was glad to see this post because I too had a paper accepted for this same conference and am also feeling some qualms due to the relative obscurity of the research community and the expense, although I would only have to fly from Ireland. I spoke to my soon-to-be supervisor about it and he said it would probably be worth it because of the experience of presenting as well as the motivational value of meeting others with shared interests. In my discipline, I haven't come across anyone who takes seriously the topic of suffering so that would be valuable for me. He also reassured me that it's not a scam! Have you made up your mind yet?

[strokeofmidnight]

It seems to be a truism on this forum that applicants should attend as many conferences as possible, to network and present papers and whatever else. Honestly, I don't see the need, and I believe that a strong application alone can win you acceptance.

Amen to this. I realize that I sound like a broke record, but what really, really, REALLY counts is how strong your writing/thoughts/research actually IS (and how well suited it is for the particular program/professors), NOT necessarily the length of your CV. You'll have plenty of opportunities to network once you're in a program, guided by an adviser, and have a better sense of what you're doing. The vast majority of my peers (and I'm in a top 5 program) did not have publications upon entering the program. Hell, the majority of my peers don't have publications as they start writing their dissertations, 3 years into the program. Many top programs (my own included) actually tell us (their own grad students) to NOT publish until we have work that's worth publishing and can make it into the top journals/presses. (Granted, this advice will shift a bit if we're nearing the job market and still unpublished, but that's a different story). A less-than-stellar article/journal publication might pique an ad-comm's attention momentarily, but if it lacks the "substance" (for the lack of a better work) that they're looking for, you won't get in anyway. And if it does indeed possess the "substance"...then you'll get in (most likely) regardless of whether or not it's published/has been presented at a conference before. And Pamphilia is absolutely right on this one: an weaker article will follow you around for the rest of your career, and can actually hurt your chances on the job market, for fellowships, etc...later on. Quality over quantity, folks. (For what it's worth, I actually did have a chance to publish in "conference proceedings" and my adviser--and every other professor I spoke with--firmly told me to withdraw my paper and hold out for a better venue).

An antidote to back this up: I applied 3 times (not unsuccessfully each time, but that's another story). I only bothered with conferences the first round. Once I figured out what grad programs are actually interested in, I realizes that conferences weren't really worth my time/money...and I'm not at that stage in my career when I can begin to make useful connections, learn from the detailed presentations, etc. I'm currently a third year, and will (finally!) start attending/submitting to conferences this year. While this isn't true for all students, there's absolutely no way that conferences would have been a worthwhile endeavor for me when I was applying. I simply didn't know enough (academically, socially, etc) to be able to take advantage of the opportunity--and it's an expensive opportunity.

[Medievalmaniac]

One other thing to consider is that because it is a new and unknown publication, and also an online one, many departments will not consider this publication as "valid" as a publication in an established print journal. It sucks, but it's true. Although it does look like academia is shifting to a much more dynamic and online format in terms of journals, at present the overall attitude is "let's just wait and see" in terms of the quality of such.

Also - as others have said - just getting something published isn't enough; almost anyone can get something published. What matters most is publishing something of quality, something that is a contribution to the field and will stand the test of time.

If you decide to go to the conference, it needs to be because you want to go, not necessarily for what you think it will bring you in terms of dividends towards graduate school. For me, as I've already said, going to conferences is a great thing, but I would not go to a conference that required I pay a hefty price tag to attend unless it were an established conference and I had a very compelling reason to go. The International Medieval Congress at Kalamazoo to preside over a session and/or give a paper? Absolutely. The "Popular Culture and The Middle Ages" symposium in San Antonio, Texas? Love to - but not happening. Ultimately, it's about your own personal priorities and individual comfort levels, of course.

[sundv004]

I know that the general consensus is that academic conferences are a great way to gain experience of academia (and to strengthen your resume), but my question is: if the conference is abroad, and thus an expense of a couple thousand dollars, how can you be sure it's a worthwhile investment? To be more specific, I recently submitted an abstract to an interdisciplinary (that is, not exclusively literary) conference called "Making Sense of Suffering," run by "Inter-Disciplinary.Net"); I was invited to attend, but I'm hesitant to do so because it's in the Czech Republic. Will presenting there, and later publishing my paper in the book the conference releases, really make me a more attractive applicant to doctoral programs? Anyway, if anyone knows about this Inter-Disciplinary.Net group, I'd be grateful to get any further info on them--I've researched, but found little.

I attended one of Interdisciplinary.Net's conferences (5th Global Conference on Cybercultures) and it was, by far, the most productive conference I have attended. To be sure, I was also skeptical at first: the conference fee and the number of conferences they host annually rendered the program initially suspect in my eyes. But such was not the case. First of all, this is Europe, not the States: attendees are not expected to stay in an over-priced Radisson with cold coffee and stale donuts as their "food"--you eat three course, gourmet meals with the individuals attending the conference. And on that note--the cats from Europe astounded me. If anyone needs any kind of verification on whether or not the Humanities system is broken in the American academy, take a stroll over to Europe and converse with some of the cats over there. In addition, while they do publish an e-book with the conference papers, they sometimes publish a hardcover anthology of papers selected by committee (they have a press, Inter-Disciplinary Press), and these books are edited by tried and true academics who attended the conference and volunteer to edit. In short, any cynicism directed towards this organization is merely a further reflection of the backwards thinking of American academia: how will it look on my CV? will it improve my chances for Phd admission? is it a "scam?" I am not aware of any other standing academic organization that is doing inter-disciplinary work like this one. The opportunity to converse with some of the top-notch scholars within the global community on topics that are often ignored by conferences is, in and of itself, commendable. Extremely professional, and my hats are off to the top heads who keep this ship afloat. If you're still skeptical, just check out the credentials of those who run, and have attended, the conferences (their webpage is thoroughly comprehensive).