Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Fool's avatar
  2. Santa Monica's avatar
  3. Charles Bakker's avatar
  4. Matty Silverstein's avatar
  5. Jason's avatar
  6. Nathan Meyvis's avatar
  7. Stefan Sciaraffa's avatar

    The McMaster Department of Philosophy has now put together the following notice commemorating Barry: Barry Allen: A Philosophical Life Barry…

Writing Samples in Job Applications: How Long?

Brian Leiter

A reader writes:

As a graduate student going on the market this year I find myself obsessively worrying about every aspect of my dossier.  One thing that has been a particular worry is the length of my writing sample.   I think, and have gotten comments from readers to the effect that, it’s a fine paper, in need of few changes.  But I’ve also gotten comments to the effect that, at 35 pages/twelve thousand five hundred words, it’s too long.  I thought I might turn to Leiter Reports for advice.  Is there a length for dossier papers which turns you off of a candidate when you are reviewing their file?  Does it depend merely on content?  Does it depend on the strength of the candidate’s file in general, and the sort of job she is applying for?  Ideally, philosophers across the spectrum of universities would apply.

I generally recommend not more than 25 pages, but what do readers think?  Signed comments strongly preferred, as usual.  Post only once; comments may take awhile to appear.

Leave a Reply to Keith DeRose Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

17 responses to “Writing Samples in Job Applications: How Long?”

  1. Mark Eli Kalderon

    The thing to bear in mind is that hundreds of applications are being reviewed and at a good clip, at least initially. There is inevitably a natural human tendency to look for reasons to exclude an application (as opposed to reasons to promote, which typically yields a different result). If in reviewing your application they have hit, say, page 30 and the punch line has yet to emerge, a nervous glance at the pile of hundreds of other applications may encourage them to simply stop reading.

    I think that the writing sample should be 20-25 pages long. Moreover, this is easier to do than it might seem. What makes a paper good are not any of the brilliant asides, scholarly footnotes, bon mots, etc. it is the narrative/argumentative structure of the paper. If you can get clear on what that structure is, and get rid of what is strictly speaking irrelevant, then hitting that target is usually doable. This can seem hard only if you are overly precious about your prose. But if you can get over that (close your eyes, think of Dashiel Hammet, and murder your darlings), it really isn't hard, and the result will be a stronger and better defined paper.

    Reply
  2. Mike DePaul

    I always tell job candidates to think about the conditions under which their dossiers will be reviewed. They may have noticed that faculty members are ordinarily fairly busy people. They may also have noticed that the work load kicks up towards the end of the semester — which is the time when they are reading dossiers. Another thing to think about is that most of the jobs are not at elite institutions such as the applicant's PhD granting department but at institutions with a heavier teaching load. Last think to think about is the number of dossiers faculty members are supposed to read — I've had as many as 80.

    So I like to imagine someone at the end of a normally long day, having finished the required teaching, grading, meetings, etc. Maybe squeezed in some time for research. Also finished up the usual household and family matters, a share of cooking, cleaning, activities with children, etc. And of course it is probably sometime around Thanksgiving, so we better throw holiday activities into the mix: hosting visiting family, packing up to go visit family, etc. But now the kids are finally asleep, the house is quiet, and there sits that stack of 50 dossiers to screen.

    Now, what was the question? Should I send a 35 page paper?!

    Obviously screeners do not do more than glance at the majority of writing samples. These come into play after a candidate has made an initial cut, when committees are trying to decide who to interview at the convention from a winnowed list or especially when preparing for the convention interview. But even at that stage of the game there is a great deal of paper to sift.

    So obviously, the shorter the better and also much better if the work is front loaded. Imagine a typical seminar paper that spends 20 pages surveying the literature in order to set up the problem to be addressed. What are the chances of a reader giving up on it before the punch line?

    The question concerned writing samples, but supposing my story is not too far off the mark, there are implications for other elements of the dossier: Make it easy to scan. Be sure the significant stuff stands out visually or by placement. And put the whole thing together so that it is easy for readers to decide whether they want to dig deeper or not, and then to access the additional information if you have succeeded in convincing them they want it.

    Reply
  3. Gualtiero Piccinini

    I wouldn't disqualify a candidate for a 35 pp. writing sample, but excessive length is a turn-off. I would ask myself, why couldn't s/he select the important point and express it in 20/25 pp.? Also, the longer the paper, the fewer chances it will get read (or read in its entirely).

    Reply
  4. Fritz Allhoff

    I agree with Brian that 25 pages is a good length. 35 pages is definitely too long! I've been on three search committees in the past two years, and I can guarantee you that many of us aren't going to read papers that long. Remember also that places use writing samples differently: first cuts (e.g., 300 people -> 50 people) probably aren't going to use writing samples at all, but maybe just CVs (and/or skims of letters). I think more places are moving toward "don't send us a writing sample, but we'll let you know if we want one" for just this reason; it's silly to have 250 people send in something that isn't going to be read. Being short, though, doesn't offer enough philosophical depth should you make it far enough that someone does want to have a serious go at your paper. Remember also that journal submission guidelines often tout 6000-9000 word ranges; 12500 words is almost too long to even be publishable, even if there are obvious exceptions of very long papers. Two suggestions. First, write an abstract to your paper, and a fairly detailed one (i.e., think 200 words, not 50). Second, give the paper some sort of "structure" with detailed headings. A lot of papers use I, II, III (without further detail), whereas 1. [heading], 2. [heading], etc. is more user-friendly. These two suggestions will help people who are in a hurry and have a lot of papers to read and will probably get you greater notice overall. Good luck to everyone on the market this year!

    Reply
  5. Mohan Matthen

    7000 words is a good benchmark. But Mark, Mike and Fritz make an important point: papers are read differently at different stages of the process. In the early stages, they are read quickly (if at all, but let's be optimistic) by people who want to shorten the list; in the late stages, they are read more carefully for positive virtues. To get past the first stage, a paper has to make an impact in the first few pages. This means getting your point out early. Don't spend a lot of time outlining views you disagree with: get to the point. What do you want to establish, and how will you go about it?

    Reply
  6. Mark

    Could it be feasible to include more than one sample, perhaps a shorter and a longer paper. I have a shorter conference paper (4000 words), and a longer published paper (12,000 words) that I have both been considering for inclusion in my dossiers. While it would look nice to sent the offprint of the publication, it is rather long. But perhaps I could also include the short paper, with the thought that if the committee likes what they see in the short paper, perhaps they will take a look at the longer paper (which is probably my best philosophical work). As a general rule, is it a good idea to include multiple writing samples? Or, could I take the published paper and shorten it for inclusion in my dossiers?

    Reply
  7. Benj

    Skimmability is the key to getting your paper processed. Exceedingly lucid structure is the key to skimmability — by which I mean the paper and its sections and subsections have helpful titles; the order and hierarchy of sections and subsections corresponds to the conceptual order and hierarchy of the discussion; key theses are blocked and labelled; key arguments are blocked and numbered; roadmapping and signposting are used rigorously (including stating the paper's central aim and strategy in the introduction).

    These features allow the reader to follow their own course through the paper, deciding whether the aim is significant and whether it is successfully carried out (to within a degree of precision compatible with the reader's time) in the reader's idiosyncratic way, skipping what they don't care about and focusing on what they do. That's the case whether the paper is five pages or 60 pages.

    Conversely, any paper over about ten pages that doesn't have these features will bog the reader down.

    Accordingly length is way less important a consideration than structure. (That said, don't blather on needlessly.)

    Reply
  8. Brad Cokelet

    In reference to the question about sending two samples: I did this last year and I was told by many that it was a good idea. If you do send a short one and a longer one, be sure to indicate which one you consider the primary sample (in the cover letter AND in the header of the paper itself).

    I got no complaints about this and was surprised by the number of interviews that focused on the shorter sample rather than the dissertation or larger research project (be prepared for that). The only worry I have is that the committee might only read the short one and it might be less interesting or impressive philosophically than your longer one.

    Perhaps this two-sample solution is something the initial poster should consider.

    Good Luck!

    Reply
  9. Ralph Wedgwood

    Some readers of this blog may be wondering whether the above comments apply equally to UK jobs as well as to jobs in North America.

    The answer is that they do — even though there are some significant differences between appointment processes in the UK and in the USA and Canada. In particular, some UK appointment committees still follow the practice of drawing up a "long list" purely on the basis of the applicants' CVs and letters of reference, and only read written work from the "long-listed" applicants. However, in these cases, it is quite common for the committee to request two or even three samples of written work from each of the long-listed candidates. So it is equally true in the UK that the committee will be overwhelmed with samples of written work to read.

    For this reason, it is just as important for UK jobs to make sure that the structure of each piece of written work is as lucid as possible, and the main point of the work sample comes across as clearly and concisely as possible!

    Reply
  10. Tom Hurka

    Let me second Mohan's comment: an effective dossier paper should make an impact in its first couple of pages. You never have a second chance to make a first impression, etc. In journalistic writing the most important paragraph by far is the opening paragraph, because that's what convinces people to keep reading. Like it or not, hiring committee members also need a reason to keep reading, and you should give it to them right at the start, with something clear, punchy, and interesting.

    Reply
  11. doris

    Seconding (fourthing?) the observations of Mark, Mike, Mohan, and Tom: frontload. On the first pass, many readers will look seriously at only the first bit of a paper. Accordingly, it is advisable to craft an introduction such that the *whole* story arc of the paper is accessible in the first few pages. And make this story arc *compact*: readers should be able to recall and recount your "brand" in no more than a few sentences. This helps with visibility in early meetings where a lot of candidates are being discussed, often only briefly. Needless to say, while the prose needs to be tight for the whole piece, take extra care over the first few pages.

    If things are properly frontloaded, I do not think the overall length of the piece (so long as it is not too long to be plausibly thought of as a journal submission) is terribly important.

    Reply
  12. Kevin Klipfel

    I've never been on a committee but I thought it might be worth noting that much of what has been said here, esp. by Benj, Tom Hurka, and John Doris, might also be very good advice for prospective grad school applicants when considering the best way to present their writing samples.

    Reply
  13. Keith DeRose

    I, for one, have always appreciated directions like this at the very start of long writing samples: "Those who want to read about 15 pages should read the intro and sections ____; those who want to read about 20 pages should also add section _____; those who want to read about 25 pages should also add section ____." Alternatively, one can send only the short version, with instructions for how to get more, if one is interested: "This writing sample is taken from my longer paper, '_____,' which is available at http://____. The longer paper contains two sections, sections __ and __, that are not included in this writing sample."

    Reply
  14. Shields

    Are we talking double-spaced pages when we give the 20-25 page range? Perhaps a word-count target would help . . .

    Reply
  15. Brian Leiter

    I'm quite sure everyone here is talking about double-spaced (US-size) pages. I am grateful to Ralph for weighing in about this issue with regard to the UK market. If any Australasian readers want to weigh in, that would also be most welcome.

    Reply
  16. J.C. Berendzen

    This thread has been very interesting to me coming from the opposite side, insofar as I am about to serve on a search committee for the first time. It is my great hope that everyone who applies for the job will read this thread and take the general advice given above.

    Applicants might think about things from my perspective, which I figure is not all that unique. I am going to be reviewing dossiers in an AOS that is different from my own, and am going to be doing so at a time of year when teaching (and particularly grading) responsibilities will also be weighing on me. On the other hand, I am not that far removed from being on the market myself, and I have a good sense of how hellish it can be. Because of that, I want to do right by the applicants, and give everyone fair and ideally thorough consideration. It would be tremendous if applicants can do what is in their power to help me give them such consideration despite my shortcomings. Front-loading your writing sample, having a clear structure, keeping the length to around 20 pages, and maybe even providing the kind of explicit guidance that Keith DeRose suggests will help me help you, to put the point in hokey but I think reasonable terms.

    Of course, the same points probably won't apply to applications sent to top PhD departments, because those applications are much more likely to be read by people who are really well versed in your area, and who perhaps have a bit more time on their hands (or who at least have less undergraduate grading to wade through). But for for most applicants out there, the bulk of their applications are likely to go to places where the situation of the search committee members makes the advice above really valuable.

    Reply
  17. Paula Casal

    Be maximally concise and clear. Padded papers suggest padded CVs, complacency, disrespect for people's time… and there are already too many books and papers out there wasting our time and obstructing our search for good stuff. Success should be measured with the formula "CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIELD, DIVIDED BY THE NUMBER OF WORDS (AND TREES!) EMPLOYED".

    Reply

Designed with WordPress