6

Is doing research with a student considered to be good for a dossier? Is it okay to have few research publications but a lot of student projects? I am finishing up a grad program and am looking at tenure track jobs at both big and small schools.

Tom P
  • 61
  • 7
    "OK" for what purpose? You might really want to be more specific about what sort of schools you're interested in. – Ben Webster Sep 22 '10 at 02:51
  • 5
    What will get you tenure varies at different institutions. A CV with mostly supervised undergrad work won't get you tenure at an R1, but it will be highly valued at a liberal arts school. Your goal should be to find a school whose mission aligns well with your values/talents. One way to get an idea of what is necessary for tenure at a specific institution is to go to the univ webpage and look at the CV's of mathematicians who have gotten tenure recently (or not so recently -- just cut off papers written after promotion, though many places have increased their requirements as time goes by). – Andy Putman Sep 22 '10 at 03:57
  • @Andy: I want to temper your answer about liberal arts schools. Everyone likes the idea of undergraduate research, but I cannot promise that administrators will value it equally (my original answer was written with the perspective of looking for a job rather than applying for tenure, since it seems this is what the OP is currently doing). Also, people who are thinking about directing UG research in a new job should be aware that opportunities to do so will vary from school to school. Students' other extra-curriculars have a knack of getting in your way. – Thierry Zell Sep 22 '10 at 04:59
  • @Thierry : Of course, you have a lot more experience with liberal arts schools than me! In reality, the last sentence of my answer is the whole reason I wrote it, and is advice I give anyone contemplating a job. In general, I think it is a good idea for someone envisioning themselves in a career path to choose some people further along in the same career and make sure that your cv is aligned with theirs (adjusted for time). – Andy Putman Sep 22 '10 at 05:13
  • @Andy- Of course, if someone is looking tenure-track jobs just finishing a grad program, either they don't expect those jobs to be at R1 (or R2) or they have a big surprise coming, especially in a year like this, when lots of good people will be finishing postdocs, or trying to get out of second ones. – Ben Webster Sep 22 '10 at 06:58
  • 1
    Wouldn't it depend most of all on the quality of the work, in an objective sense? I wouldn't imagine that having an undergraduate co-author could be any worse than having a colleague as a co-author (and would be distinctly better than having a superior as co-author), if the results were as interesting or important in either case.

    It seems natural to distinguish between mentoring/working with an undergraduate in a problem you (and other mathematicians) are genuinely interested in, versus a problem that's somehow off to the side, or not your main focus.

     – David Jordan Sep 22 '10 at 12:58
  • @Andy: I don't know that I have a lot of experience with liberal art schools (less than 4 years). The key point I would make to our OP is to look ahead, but not too hard. I find myself spending a large amount of time doing things that I couldn't possibly have imagined when I was hired. In a small school, one should be able to figure out what will be valued, and that may be different for those who came in before you (small sample effect, plus you tend to want people who complement each other). I might need to revisit this opinion when I come up for tenure, though... ;-) – Thierry Zell Sep 22 '10 at 13:01
  • 2
    @David: in most places, undergraduate research is first and foremost a form of education for the student, not about research. I've had only one serious foray in UG research so far, and it did lead to a paper, but the result was minor and my understanding is that even having a paper is far from typical. (It appears to be true even for REU's where students are carefully selected.) – Thierry Zell Sep 22 '10 at 13:08
  • @Andy Putman, @Ben webster, what does R1 and R2 refer to and mean specifically? Is there an authority that compiles the list, or is it a "generally accepted" categorization? Wikipedia informs me that Thierry's REU refers to Research Experience for Undergraduates, but can shed no light on R1 & R2, beyond a lot of sports references... rankings? – sleepless in beantown Sep 22 '10 at 14:57
  • Also as an aside, when a referee is reviewing a paper under consideration for publication, isn't it the content of the paper which is being reviewed rather than the academic education level thus-far attained by the authors? I would like to think that the merits of publication with undergraduates or with doctoral-level colleagues would be judged based upon the quality, impact factor, rigorousness of acceptance criteria, and "reputation" of the journal publishing the article. Shouldn't all authors contribute to the content and value of the paper? – sleepless in beantown Sep 22 '10 at 15:04
  • R1 and R2 refer to the old Carnegie classification of universities. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_I_university – Nikita Sep 22 '10 at 15:09
  • @Thierry: I appreciate your point, thank you. I only mean to say that the OP does not explicitly make the assumption that the research is unpublishable, while it seems to be implicit in many answers. This mismatch of assumptions could be misleading; for instance if one has an interesting research project, which is actually relevant to one's program, and one can bring an undergrad in, I don't see any harm, and only benefit. Naturally, spending too much time on toy projects instead of more relevant research is not advisable... – David Jordan Sep 22 '10 at 18:19
  • @sleepless et al. It's not that undergraduate research is not publishable. Rather, it is rare for undergrads to work on problems that are of interest to the broad mathematical community, so most undergrad research is published in not particularly good journals. Indeed, for most people the first serious theorem they prove is their PhD thesis. This is different from the other sciences in which undergrads can work in a lab and get their name on a serious paper (with many other people). – Andy Putman Sep 22 '10 at 20:48
  • Continued. Of course, if an undergraduate proves a theorem good enough for a top journal, then their age won't stop them from publishing it there. I do know of a couple of examples of this (one undergrad with an Annals paper, and another with a JAMS paper and a Duke paper). However, these students are extremely rare. You are lucky if you teach one of them in your entire career (nb : I didn't teach either of the above people). – Andy Putman Sep 22 '10 at 20:50
  • Andy is correct: there are a few undergraduates that get to publish mainstream research in mainstream journals (some of my favorite papers from the Monthly are UG research), but they're rare. To this, I'd like to add a very pragmatic consideration, which is that ethics dictate that you do not try to place the paper in the most prestigious journal possible, like you would with your own research. Your students' careers are at stake, they usually don't have a lot of time between submission and graduation, so you would aim for journals that can give you a quick answer. – Thierry Zell Sep 27 '10 at 22:19
  • @Sleepless- I think I was actually conflating the Carnegie classification with the AMS groups (used only for statistical purposes http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/groups_des) Groups I and II are roughly the 100 "best" (based on the '95 NRC ranking) doctoral granting programs in mathematics. It's probably an exaggeration to say none of these universities will hire someone without postdoctoral experience, but the vast majority of them aren't going to this year, given the number of people with postdoctoral experience looking for jobs. – Ben Webster Oct 01 '10 at 19:09
  • @Ben Webster, thanks for the follow up comment. Mathematics is not usually in the "US News" rankings of universities either; I was just wondering what "authority" had generated the rankings. Post-doctoral studies seem to be a requisite for many fields, particularly the physical sciences and in medicine (where it's called residency for clinical training and fellowship for research training), but not engineering. I published a few papers as an undergrad (where I actually contributed a significant amount) which ended up in decent but not top tier journals. – sleepless in beantown Oct 01 '10 at 20:56
  • @Sleepless- The "postdoc-ification" of mathematics is a fascinating subject, and obviously one very important to many members of this board. It's something that still quite a bit in flux, but I don't think there's much doubt that it's necessary to get ahead as a research mathematician these days, as more and more people do it. – Ben Webster Oct 02 '10 at 06:23

3 Answers3

11

Doing research with undergraduate is currently very valued: at small schools, as JSE points out, because it helps improve the educational experience of your students. At larger schools, bringing in outside undergraduate students in the summer is a great way to advertise [recruit for] a graduate program. Including a solid undergraduate project always improves a grant application.

At the same time, undergraduate research cannot take the place of your actual research. I think that most people who are serious about UG research would agree that UG research in math should be primarily about the student's experience and growth, which means that more often than not the actual science will have to take a back seat to making the student a better mathematician.

It sounds like you're afraid your CV has too much of that. You can rightfully boast about this, but (in an interview) I would make it clear that you don't intend it to be your whole research program.

Addendum: This is only marginally connected to the original question, but I thought I would mention a few useful resources for those who want to look into the what and how of undergraduate research.

  • Pretty much every year including 2011, Aparna Higgins and Joe Gallian offer a minicourse, Getting students involved in undergraduate research at the joint meetings. A lot of what they do is to explain what to expect and how to get started. A lot of people seem to have unrealistic expectations (I imagine our OP does not since he has a track record).
  • The UG poster session at the joint meetings is a good place to get an idea on what people are doing. Plus, they always need more judges! ;-)
  • Remember though that the joint meetings poster session represents the cream of the crop, so check out your regional meetings, they usually have a poster session too.
  • Check out the NSF REU site
  • Here is an example of a non-REU program I'm familiar with. I'm sure there are more.URSI (Vassar)

This is in no way meant to be exhaustive of course!

Kevin O'Bryant
  • 9,666
  • 6
  • 54
  • 83
Thierry Zell
  • 4,536
  • 2
    It's also worth mentioning that the NSF likes it. It's a "broader impact." – Ben Webster Sep 22 '10 at 02:52
  • 2
    In my last grant application, two reviewers specifically mentioned (in a positive sense!) the fact that I included potential undergraduate research projects. – Dan Ramras Sep 22 '10 at 07:10
  • 2
    I had the same experience as Dan with my last grant proposal. But for a standard research grant (as opposed to an REU grant), undergraduate projects definitely won't get you a grant by themselves. Instead, they may help move an already strong proposal from the large "good enough to be funded if only we had more money" pile to the smaller pile of actually funded proposals. – Mark Meckes Sep 22 '10 at 15:30
  • Another non-REU program: http://math.mit.edu/academics/undergrad/general/spur.html – Qiaochu Yuan Sep 22 '10 at 16:12
7

A former student of mine in a tenure-track job at a liberal-arts college tells me that publishing research papers with undergraduates is highly valued there.

JSE
  • 19,081
  • I agree. I have a close friend who has long been on the liberal arts college circuit. Over the years, I have watched his publications shift from mostly singly authored on the topic of his thesis to mostly coauthored with undergraduates, on rather more accessible topics. A few years ago, after many temporary positions he landed a very nice tenure track job. This leads me to think that some (rather good) liberal arts colleges distinctly prefer research in which undergraduates can be involved. – Pete L. Clark Sep 22 '10 at 06:11
  • Liberal arts colleges focus mainly on teaching,so this emphasis on publishing relatively low level papers with undergraduates makes sense.It'd be interesting to check to see if Darthmouth-a top-notch school which in unusual among the power schools in that it has long emphasized teaching focus-has a similar slant among it's faculty. – The Mathemagician Oct 01 '10 at 19:07
4

One should also be aware (or beware!) that what a college's webpage or promotional materials advertise may be different than what a promotion and tenure committee values which may in turn be different from what an individual department values. Within a department faculty members may also have widely differing views on the value of undergraduate research (as UG research -- most people want good papers no matter who the authors are.) At some schools, like my own LA college, the research of a tenure candidate is evaluated mainly through letters written by people in related research areas. These people are likely to evaluate you solely on the basis of the (perceived) quality of your publications. Thus, if one has to make the decision between fewer or weaker publications with undergrads and more or stronger publications without undergrads, you really need to take institutional structure and personalities into account. It may be impossible to do this without reading the faculty handbook and without knowing the individuals in the department. I suspect most people find themselves constrained and guided by circumstances and don't actually choose one or the other.

Scott Taylor
  • 41