Political Science Educator: volume 27, issue 2
Reflections
By Robert Tanner Bivens (Z1844745@students.niu.edu)
I recently attended a smaller, regional political science conference. In addition to workshopping the article version of my dissertation, this was my first year on the job market as a late-stage ABD and I thought that it would be a wise decision to attend. My initial thought was that I could try to network with individuals from local colleges who might be looking for a lecturer or even a tenure-track position. Hopefully, I could make myself known in local circles where I am more likely to obtain a position in an increasingly difficult academic job market. I and two others from my department decided to apply to present our research and were all accepted. However, I was confused when I looked at the conference program to find that everyone from my department was on the same panel. Even more surprising, the three of us were the only members of the panel, with one individual who was serving as discussant and chair. This was, in my mind, disappointing. I was hoping to present my work to others outside of my department to obtain feedback from new perspectives and to meet prospective local collaborators. While disappointing, I still decided to attend if for no other reason than to let this be a low-stakes practice session for the more important conferences that were on the horizon. However, once I attended the conference, my disappointment shifted to frustration when I learned that the individual who was our chair/discussant was also the person who arranged the program. They informed us that they deliberately put us together in a panel to provide feedback on our prospective papers, to offer some advice on our careers, and to show their undergraduate students in attendance what graduate level work looks like. While they did provide each of us some feedback on our papers, the majority of the conversation was relating our work back to their undergraduate students and to offer us unsolicited advice to not strive for an academic job and how we could use our skills to gain employment elsewhere.
I do want to stress that this individual was kind and genuinely wanted to be a supportive mentor. However, there seems to be a mistake here that ties to a larger issue of undervaluing the conference panel experience as if it were a less vital aspect of networking and mentoring graduate students. Considering the importance of the conference panel for graduate students attempting to network, this deserves some discussion. As such, this is meant to be a reflection on the conferences panel experience, its importance to the networking for graduate students, and how we can use our field’s conferences to be better mentors.
Conferences are a vital aspect for the graduate student at any level of their career. It helps them broaden their horizons, be exposed to opposing viewpoints, and find individuals to collaborate with on future projects (Turner, Boyes, Bennion, & Newman 2022). The importance of networking cannot be understated for a young scholar to become integrated into an academic community that can offer them opportunities outside of their own little academic bubble (Kim, Lebovits, and Shugars 2021). However, I think that more senior scholars often see presentations as a less important part of the overall conference and place more emphasis on the networking occurring outside of the conference panel itself. What can often be the case is treating the presentation as primarily a feedback opportunity that is a significantly minor part of a much larger networking framework (Fakunle, Dollinger, Alla-Mensah, & Izard 2019). It is true that, more often than not, what is meant to be a forum of workshopping ideas turns into a mostly vacant hotel ballroom with five individuals trying to politely troubleshoot computer issues, with the only substantive payoff potentially being a business card, elevated blood pressure, and some decent suggestions written in a small field notebook. This is most likely the reason why advice for graduate school conference networking involves a wider collection of talking points like recommendations of approaching people at tables, having mentors introduce the enterprising grad student to fellow colleagues, and attending other non-panel events that put a lot of emphasis on footwork and communication (e.g., Gupta & Waismel-Manor 2006; Kim, Lebovits, & Shugars 2021).
However, it does need to be stressed that the conference panel is the only guaranteed opportunity a prospective graduate has to reach out to other people outside of their bubble at these conferences. While it may not be a definitive career-making opportunity, to have that lessened does take away a vital opportunity to network. This is especially the case for those who are neurodivergent or introverted, who often struggle to engage in group settings where approaching random individuals in a hotel ballroom can be a near-Herculean task (Zack 2019). Beyond that, there is the face-value benefit that the presentation itself leads to academics hearing about your work who would not have otherwise engaged in the paper that can lead to more opportunities to publish and make connections with fellow scholars (Leon and McQuillin 2020). But more broadly, the conference presentation experience also helps connect graduate students to a broader academic community. It can help them feel less like a mere student and more like the burgeoning scholar that belongs in the room with the others that they have read in their classes (Campbell et al. 2021). Even if the conference panel is a small piece of a much wider conference networking puzzle, it is a much more substantive piece then what is often considered.
Considering the importance of the conference panel for graduate students, I recommend three strategies we can utilize to maximize the potential for graduate students to network and engage specifically in the conference panel experience. First, everyone should keep in mind both horizontal and vertical networking opportunities. As noted, it is important for scholars to not just strengthen their network with other junior scholars but to build relationships with senior scholars as well (Kim, Lebovits, & Shugars 2021). Those that assemble panels should be especially cognizant of this. The optimal panel for a graduate student is a mix of senior and junior scholars from diverse schools and locations. Second, discussants and chairs should remember there is a time and a place for certain discussions. Keep the panel discussion to conversations about the junior scholar’s research and provide feedback on their projects. After the panel is concluded, most junior scholars would welcome a continued conversation that provides feedback on career opportunities, potential work outside of academia, and collaboration on future projects. Third, senior scholars attending conferences and program organizers should not undervalue the panel or the conference if it is not one of the major conferences in the field. It is certainly the case that a panel at a local conference are less likely to drastically change the trajectory of a junior scholar’s career. But the smaller local conferences can build those local networks which are more geographically convenient both for employment and cooperation among cohorts (Fisher & Trautner 2022).
This reflection is meant to be an opportunity to educate others to be aware of the role that they play in mentoring graduate students. We should be cognizant of the importance something that is perceived as potentially low-stakes to more senior academics—like a conference panel at a small regional conference—can significantly benefit a junior scholar’s career. They may seem small. However, a conference panel is a guaranteed opportunity for the graduate student to put themselves out into the world and to present their thoughts and ideas to those outside of their academic social circles. Even well-intentioned actions meant to mentor can have unintended consequences for those that we are attempting to help.
References
Campbell, Anne, David Wick, Amy Marcus, JoAnn Doll, and Aleena Yunuba Hammack. 2021. ““I Felt Like I was Not Just a Student:” Examining Graduate Student Learning at Academic and Professional Conferences.” Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education. 8(1): 1-17.
Fakunle, Omolabake, Mollie Dollinger, Joyceline Alla-Mensah, and Blair Izard. 2019. “Academic Conferences as Learning Sites: A Multinational Comparison of Doctoral Students’ Perspectives and Institutional Policy.” International Journal of Doctoral Studies. 14. 479-497.
Fisher, Joslyn W. and Barbara W. Trautner. 2022. “Maximizing the Academic Conference Experience: Tips for Your Career Toolkit.” Journal of Graduate Medical Education. 14(2): 144-148.
Gupta, Devashree and Israel Waismel-Manor. 2006. “Network in Progress: A Conference Primer for Graduate Students.” PS: Political Science & Politics. 39(3): 485-490.
Kim, Seo-Young Silvia, Hannah Lebovits, and Sarah Shugars. 2021. “Building the Bigger Table: Networking 101 for Graduate Students.” PS: Political Science & Politics. 55(2): 307-312.
Leon, Fernanda L.L. and Ben McQuillin. 2020. “The Rolse of Conferences on the Pathway to Academic Impact: Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” Journal of Human Resources. 55(1): 164-193.
Turner, Kimberly, Christina Boyes, Elizabeth Bennion, and James Newman. 2022. “How to Conference.” In KG Lorentz & DJ Mallinson’s Strategies for Navigating Graudate School and Beyond. American Political Science Association. 135-142.
Zack, Devora. 2019. Networking for People Who Hate Networking: A Field Guide for Introverts, the Overwhelmed, and the Underconnected. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Oakland, CA.
Robert Tanner Bivens is a PhD Candidate from Northern Illinois University. His main research interests include global LGBTQIA+ human rights, comparative regionalism, international organizations, norm diffusion, and Lusophone identity. He has had publications accepted in journals such as Africa Today and is currently working on projects involving shared identity between Lusophone countries and global LGBTQIA+ norm diffusion.
Published since 2005, The Political Science Educator is the newsletter of the Political Science Education Section of the American Political Science Association. All issues of the The Political Science Educator can be viewed on APSA Connects Civic Education page.
Editors: Colin Brown (Northeastern University), Matt Evans (Northwest Arkansas Community College)
Submissions: editor.PSE.newsletter@gmail.com
APSA Educate has republished The Political Science Educator since 2021. Any questions or corrections to how the newsletter appears on Educate should be addressed to educate@apsanet.org
Educate’s Political Science Educator digital collection
