The Early Bird Catches the Fuckin' Worm

Check out this post from last year by Gualtiero Piccinini, a philosophy prof whose department had just done a job search when he wrote the post. Here's his take on what makes a good application package:

1. Your awards and teaching experience won't help your application. But it'll count against you if you don't have all that stuff.

2. Your writing sample won't help your application, since no one will read it (unless you're a finalist).

3. Your APA interview--if you're lucky enough to make it onto that short-list--won't help your application. Apparently, even before the interview, everybody's already got you pigeon-holed.

4. Letters of recommendation from people outside your department won't help your application much.

5. Having more than the required number of letters won't help your application much.

6. Having done conference presentations won't help your application much.

Wow. So apparently almost nothing can actually help your application. Almost nothing. So what does help?

7. Publications in the best journals in the business might help your application.

Okay, well, I guess that makes sense. Surely getting something published in J.Phil would be good, right? Except, no, not even that is as important as something else.

8. "The rank of your institution and department counts more than you might think. . . . If your program is not highly ranked, that counts against you regardless of whether you’ve published in J. Phil."

And just to keep things focused on what's important:

9. "The fame of your advisor and letter writers count for more than you might think. The bigger the name, the more meaningful the letter is assumed to be."

Awesome! So really, the only thing that can actually help your application is going to grad school in a really prestigious department with really famous people in it. Nothing you do in the course of your graduate training is as important as something that's determined before you even start grad school.