Let’s get this straight, publishing is important if you want a job in academia. The supply and demand balance for professorship positions is skewed in the sense that there are too many PhDs vying for not so many spots. And since we live in a meritocracy, there needs to be a fair way to assess performance, and one’s publication record is the most objective proxy for a candidate’s intellectual rigor as determined by his or her peers.
But I think where there is an issue is the publication arms race for trainees, and this applies to both graduate school and medical school where students are judged on their publication record (typically the number of) to secure coveted spots at the next stage. In my experience, this is not necessarily a fair situation. At the student level, during a time when you have very little power, knowledge, and experience, publishing can be a matter of luck in the sense that it depends on either connections that you may have, being at the right place at the right time, and/or chance encounters with mentors who are willing to and capable of helping you publish. Thus, perhaps we should rethink the emphasis on publishing for students, as I think this can lead to a lot of resentment toward the educational system that one is in.
In my opinion, the purpose of graduate school and medical school is to become familiar with the publication process, not necessarily the act of publishing itself. I think it’s much more important that the student has the experience of drafting a manuscript, physically submitting it to a peer-reviewed journal, and responding to the comments. Whether or not the actual publication goes through is not necessarily a reflection of the student but perhaps says more about the mentor in charge and the training environment that he or she is in. Thus, to address this, it is more important that we take the time to evaluate the manuscripts, projects, and quality of writing that trainees are authoring, especially in the early stages.
The Ivory Tower 
Leave a comment