Dissertations: The Balance between Passion and Career-Smart

[tingdeh]

Wanted to generate some thoughts on this, since it's been a thing that's floating around at my home base. There's the dissertation that makes you bubble with excitement, and then there's one that takes the job market and the cutting-edge hot topics in mind. Where/how do you strike the balance?

[mvlchicago]

I've always thought about the "cutting-edge hot topics" as a framework or conversation, rather than a set of dissertations that will land a job. I guess this largely depends on perspective; but for example the recent bubble of postcolonialism is a methodological conversation. As long as you can frame the "bubbling with excitement" topic in a way that mentions postcolonialism–which could including framing things like "postcolonialism is awful and we should abandon it 5ever"–you can have your cake and eat it too!

[rising_star]

What's trending or hot in the market when you're ABD may not be what's cutting edge when you actually finish your dissertation and go on the job market... In my own field, topic X was cutting edge in 2010-2012 but is decidedly not anymore. If you started a dissertation on it in 2012 and finished in 2014 or 2015, you would find that not many jobs are that interested in that now... There are some topics that have lasted over several years. This is one of those times where it pays to keep track of old job ads so you can look at what the trends were and how those have changed over time.

[TakeruK]

What rising_star said is important to keep in mind! Things can stay the same for a long time then suddenly move very quickly! From the mid 1990s to 2010, when I started my Masters work, there was one really popular class of model for forming planets (others existed but most people interested in planet formation was working on this class of model). Then, during my Masters degree, a new class of model was proposed and now this is the hot topic right now for computer simulations of planet formation. Even the people who pioneered the method in the 1990s are incorporating aspects of the new class of model into their work.

 

I think it's really important to keep reading (not necessarily full papers, maybe just abstracts or news releases) to keep track of how things are going. We have a weekly discussion group to talk about what's newly published this week (or if it's after a major conference, what new things were said etc.). 

 

Also, although I have interest and passion in both certain topics in my field, I try to develop passion and interest in methodology instead of topics. Sometimes it just takes learning a little bit more about a certain thing before you can really develop an interest in it--you never know if you really like it or not until you try it. I find that knowing what methodologies I'm interested in makes me more flexible because now I can pursue whatever the hot topic is using the methodology that I am excited and passionate about.

[knp]

Interesting! I have two topics I've been thinking about pitching for my SOPs, and I've actually been leaning away from the one I find more exciting because it's very trendy at the moment (among other reasons). That's a hugely different calculus than making such a decision when you're coming up on your dissertation, since there's no way this topic of mine will still be trendy seven or eight years from now (whereas many trends are still going three years later) but I am also interested in this question.

[TakeruK]

Interesting! I have two topics I've been thinking about pitching for my SOPs, and I've actually been leaning away from the one I find more exciting because it's very trendy at the moment (among other reasons). That's a hugely different calculus than making such a decision when you're coming up on your dissertation, since there's no way this topic of mine will still be trendy seven or eight years from now (whereas many trends are still going three years later) but I am also interested in this question.

 

Maybe this is not valid because our fields are different, but my advice is to capitalize on the trend now. Go for the trendy topic in your SOP (but do take care to describe your interests clearly to avoid sounding like you're just trying to hop onto the bandwagon). My reason is that trends that start at the beginning of your grad school are perfect for grad applications. The department (and professors in the department) might notice the trend and want to capitalize on it but most of the current students probably already have research projects. Bringing in new people who want to do what they do would be great. By examining trends you can have a good guess of what the department's research interests might be and advertise yourself as an excellent fit.

 

Of course, the trend might die by the time you graduate and look for jobs. In my field, few people do the same topic for graduate school during their postdocs and beyond. So you don't really need that trend to be around anymore. When the trend was alive, you got into school, and published a bunch when everyone else was paying attention to that topic (i.e. people will actually read your work!). Now, when you move on to other topics in your field, people will remember you for your past work and that could open up new opportunities in different topics.

 

(** Note: Here, I refer to a "trend" as a specific subtopic or methodology in a subfield so that even though a trend might die, the subfield is still around. I guess it's not a good idea to do this if there's nothing you can get out of working on this trend that you can use in other subfields).

[knp]

I'm not sure what I'm going to do; I'm taking the fact that I have at least five months to sort this out to my advantage, and trying not to write any drafts or make big decisions until I've done a serious amount of further reading, say in a month or two.* I have very little coursework in my field—only two classes, as well as my thesis, due to a late-breaking and dramatic regional switch—so I'm applying to both MAs and PhDs. I do think I'll apply to some schools where Topic 1 is more strongly represented, and so pitch my SOP for those schools on Topic 1. One reason I think the trend is going to start to die by the time I finish my PhD, though—and certainly by the time I finish an MA and PhD, if I go that route—is that a good number of the faculty I want to work with at those schools wrote dissertations on Topic 1 and have all recently received tenure. That means it's been "in" for a while, and I'm not sure how current it's still going to be in another seven years.

Independently of Topic 1, though, I think I would prefer to go to a school where I could work on Topic 2, even if I am 8% less bubbly about it right now. When I'm giving my 45-second pitches about the two topics I'm considering, it's true, I lead with Topic 1 and bounce a little more about it. But that's because I think the trend is cool. I don't think I actually have an interesting spin on anything related to that trend, and I deflate a bit whenever I try to actually explain what my take could even be. Nor am I that excited to find such a spin. (Although if something comes up in further reading, that changes the calculus again.) Whereas I think I could reach a lot deeper in Topic 2, and that's reflected in my observation that I get more and more animated the more I talk about it, even if my thirty-second pitch is less bubbly. Plus, it much better takes advantage of some of my skills. I am fluent in a difficult language that very few scholars in my region know, and Topic 2 would utilize that familiarity to the hilt, while Topic 1 might not use it at all. Plus it's not un-trendy. People are interested in it and talking about it. It just doesn't have the overwhelming interest of Topic 1 at this particular moment.

 

Thanks for the advice, though! I'll continue to do a lot more reading, and if some facet of Topic 1 does grab me, you've made a case for applying to study that. My ideal is to go to one of the like two universities on my list where there's faculty representation of both topics, so that I can investigate both at greater depth before I choose. Here's hoping!

 

*The number of articles, chapters, and books that are on academia.edu is a lifesaver, and a nice surprise. Thank you, more established scholars!

[TMP]

Follow your passion because you WILL be married to your dissertation topic.  Methodological and theoretical frameworks can evolve over time.  Your adviser/committee will want to see intellectual growth in these areas and you do that by continuing to read relevant books/articles to the topic/methodologies you're interested in and going to conferences to hear papers and speak with other scholars.

 

You can capitalize on the "trend" but demonstrate your understanding of what's going on and what areas you'd like to explore (methodology?  theories?).  The most important thing in the SOP is demonstration of your familiarity with historiographical debates and how they fit within the field of your study, and what you hope to explore more in graduate school.

[knp]

I assume most of that post is directed at the original question, not at me, but I do think I like Topic 2 better. I'm doing more investigating, but right now, I think I enjoy 2 in a deeper and more substantial, although less bubbly, way than my trendier option.

 

Tingdeh, is there a way to make your two topics compatible at all? Can the exciting topic, in fact, take on some of the helpful trendy characteristics? I'm just curious.

[Riotbeard]

Follow your passion because you WILL be married to your dissertation topic.  Methodological and theoretical frameworks can evolve over time.  Your adviser/committee will want to see intellectual growth in these areas and you do that by continuing to read relevant books/articles to the topic/methodologies you're interested in and going to conferences to hear papers and speak with other scholars.

 

You can capitalize on the "trend" but demonstrate your understanding of what's going on and what areas you'd like to explore (methodology?  theories?).  The most important thing in the SOP is demonstration of your familiarity with historiographical debates and how they fit within the field of your study, and what you hope to explore more in graduate school.

 

 

This.  Also if it's successful (or even just good enough to become a book), you're going to be branded with this for years!  Try to find a way to make the topic appealing of course, but from proposal to dissertation to most likely book if you want to get tenure, you are talking about 10 or so years working on this stuff.  Don't do something you won't like.  I was picking between two topics that I liked equally and went for the one with more professional legs, but I also opted against another project that probably had to most legs, that didn't interest me.

[GradSchoolTruther]

Interesting! I have two topics I've been thinking about pitching for my SOPs, and I've actually been leaning away from the one I find more exciting because it's very trendy at the moment (among other reasons). That's a hugely different calculus than making such a decision when you're coming up on your dissertation, since there's no way this topic of mine will still be trendy seven or eight years from now (whereas many trends are still going three years later) but I am also interested in this question.

 

Keep in mind your topic will probably change down the line, which faculty expect.

[kotov]

I don't think anyone cares about my topic regardless of the methodology.

 

The experts in my subfield like it since it's filling a hole in the historiography and there's tons of primary documentation, but it's probably not interesting to anyone outside my subfield.

[dr. t]

The experts in my subfield like it since it's filling a hole in the historiography and there's tons of primary documentation, but it's probably not interesting to anyone outside my subfield.

 

 

AKA "A Dissertation".

 

Broader audience appeal is what the book's for.

[TMP]

I don't think anyone cares about my topic regardless of the methodology.

 

The experts in my subfield like it since it's filling a hole in the historiography and there's tons of primary documentation, but it's probably not interesting to anyone outside my subfield.

 

Book editors and reviewers will push you to think beyond your "bubble."  So will your dissertation defense.

[tingdeh]

AKA "A Dissertation".

 

Broader audience appeal is what the book's for.

Really good point! My advisor calls the dissertation "the rough draft of a rough draft of a book." 

 

I assume most of that post is directed at the original question, not at me, but I do think I like Topic 2 better. I'm doing more investigating, but right now, I think I enjoy 2 in a deeper and more substantial, although less bubbly, way than my trendier option.

 

Tingdeh, is there a way to make your two topics compatible at all? Can the exciting topic, in fact, take on some of the helpful trendy characteristics? I'm just curious.

That's what I'm trying to figure out right now. But alas, I also must remind myself to let the archives fertilize my topic more (my field is history). I'm headed out again in a couple of months, so we'll see what it turns into by then, but I'm also wary of just getting washed up in the flurry of material I'll find. It's a pretty focused archive, and the only one of its kind outside of the United States, so...