Colleagues want to publish with me

[the-tenure-track-prof]

I am a third-year AP at a teaching university. Two colleagues expressed strong interest in researching either publication or conference papers. The reason being is that this is a requirement for tenure review, and the other faculty members do not have active research agenda. For those who know my story, I have explained in earlier posts that this school has NO RESEARCH ACTIVITY. On the other hand, because I plan to move to a research university as soon as possible, I have been very active in publishing and developing research agendas and collaborators outside of the university. In the past two years alone, I published 15 manuscripts, and since the beginning of this academic year, I had 10 conference papers accepted.

The two faculty members pressured me to publish or do some work together, but I know that they never posted, nor do they have the writing skills, let alone research experience or publishing. I did agree to meet next week to "toss ideas and see if we can do something together," but I did not make any specific promises. One sent an email saying, "I will be a fly on the wall in the discussions," the other one said, "I am so behind with my publications and conference papers." Then jumped right away on the idea of "consider to do something together."

A journal manuscript can be a lengthy process that requires knowledge and skills. Considering the lack of research/publishing knowledge and experience they exhibit, and the fact that I had observed some backstabbing in the past, it is not good, nor will it be enjoyable. I wonder what suggestions you have for doing something together with a desperate colleague because I am going for a tenure review next fall. I am thinking about a brief quick conference proposal submission. This will be a short and quick proposal with no long-term commitment or "work" together (which will mean I will work, and they will perplexedly observe).

[research_prof]

No expectations at all and that's why I do not work with people like that (and you should not work either). I had worked with a person like that, who stole ideas, stole unpublished work and published it on his own, and also got several publications without doing much. I even introduced his first (and only) PhD student to him. Anyway, I have cut him loose ever since.

I only work with the students I supervise at this point and collaborators that we have joint federal grants. You should try to do the same. 

[traductio]

What are the norms of co-authorship in your discipline? In my subfield of communication, co-authorship is relatively rare, but I'm guessing you're in a different field because fifteen articles in two years and ten conferences in a year would explode my head. At any rate, I imagine people's answers might depend on that -- the answer will likely differ by field.

Also, what value is there for you in a collaboration (or "collaboration," since it sounds like you'd be doing the heavy lifting)? Is it that you need to demonstrate collegiality for your 3rd-year review, or that your colleagues will be on the review committee? If that's the case, I'd consider expressing enthusiasm for collaboration, but insisting that your colleagues take the lead. The enthusiasm demonstrates your collegiality, and asking your colleagues to take the lead is not an unreasonable request if collaboration is their idea.

I write this as someone who collaborates a fair amount, despite that being outside the norms of my field. A collaborator who carries their weight is valuable beyond words. A "collaborator" who does nothing but gum up the works is a source of endless resentment.

[Parasaurolophus]

Counterpoint: these two colleagues will owe you a favour. That might be worth something to you. Or not. But it's worth considering, especially since you don't need the pubs. If you go in on a satellite project that won't trouble you if it tanks, it could be worth the trouble for the goodwill it generates.

[mleok]

I guess the question for you is whether you expect to be able to move to a research university before the results of the tenure evaluation is released. If you do collaborate, I would suggest working on something which is ostensibly in their area of expertise, because it would not be central to your research efforts, and you could legitimately wait for them to do their share and pitch your level of effort according to their level of engagement.

[the-tenure-track-prof]

Co-authorship in my field is common, and I have other authors I work with.
I do not "need" to work with these two, especially since they do not know research and pursuing federal funding is a total waste of time. No one will look at their bio sketches (after learning how to prepare a biosketch).

I think that I will have a general conversation with them about their ideas for research, and express enthusiasm and collegiality. I will then turn it to ask for a specific research idea or data and to think about it, and we can talk again.

What are the norms of co-authorship in your discipline? In my subfield of communication, co-authorship is relatively rare, but I'm guessing you're in a different field because fifteen articles in two years and ten conferences in a year would explode my head. At any rate, I imagine people's answers might depend on that -- the answer will likely differ by field.

Also, what value is there for you in a collaboration (or "collaboration," since it sounds like you'd be doing the heavy lifting)? Is it that you need to demonstrate collegiality for your 3rd-year review, or that your colleagues will be on the review committee? If that's the case, I'd consider expressing enthusiasm for collaboration, but insisting that your colleagues take the lead. The enthusiasm demonstrates your collegiality, and asking your colleagues to take the lead is not an unreasonable request if collaboration is their idea.

I write this as someone who collaborates a fair amount, despite that being outside the norms of my field. A collaborator who carries their weight is valuable beyond words. A "collaborator" who does nothing but gum up the works is a source of endless resentment.

[research_prof]

Co-authorship in my field is common, and I have other authors I work with.
I do not "need" to work with these two, especially since they do not know research and pursuing federal funding is a total waste of time. No one will look at their bio sketches (after learning how to prepare a biosketch).

I think that I will have a general conversation with them about their ideas for research, and express enthusiasm and collegiality. I will then turn it to ask for a specific research idea or data and to think about it, and we can talk again.

What are the norms of co-authorship in your discipline? In my subfield of communication, co-authorship is relatively rare, but I'm guessing you're in a different field because fifteen articles in two years and ten conferences in a year would explode my head. At any rate, I imagine people's answers might depend on that -- the answer will likely differ by field.

Also, what value is there for you in a collaboration (or "collaboration," since it sounds like you'd be doing the heavy lifting)? Is it that you need to demonstrate collegiality for your 3rd-year review, or that your colleagues will be on the review committee? If that's the case, I'd consider expressing enthusiasm for collaboration, but insisting that your colleagues take the lead. The enthusiasm demonstrates your collegiality, and asking your colleagues to take the lead is not an unreasonable request if collaboration is their idea.

I write this as someone who collaborates a fair amount, despite that being outside the norms of my field. A collaborator who carries their weight is valuable beyond words. A "collaborator" who does nothing but gum up the works is a source of endless resentment.

Another idea is to essentially "use" them as your grad students. Let them do the low-level work and see if they can produce something publishable.

[the-tenure-track-prof]

The question about landing a position before the tenure review next year has been a consideration as well, but with the backlog in the number of applications schools receive, it seems that I may have to go through the tenure review next year; however, I am waiting on two schools who did not even start the applications review process.
If I end up moving, I am afraid that this will open the door for gossips that will hurt my reputation in the institution after I leave. I had seen them doing that to a faculty who left a year before I arrived. I know that this faculty poured his/her heart into work, saved the program, and saved the program from being closed. They gossiped about this faculty and trashed this person's reputation after s/he left. It was heartbreaking to watch how low they were willing to go. I have managed a good relationship by keeping a low profile and focusing on my research work.

I guess the question for you is whether you expect to be able to move to a research university before the results of the tenure evaluation is released. If you do collaborate, I would suggest working on something which is ostensibly in their area of expertise, because it would not be central to your research efforts, and you could legitimately wait for them to do their share and pitch your level of effort according to their level of engagement.

[the-tenure-track-prof]

If the conversation comes to this point, using them to do the low-level work sounds like a good idea...Thanks..

Co-authorship in my field is common, and I have other authors I work with.
I do not "need" to work with these two, especially since they do not know research and pursuing federal funding is a total waste of time. No one will look at their bio sketches (after learning how to prepare a biosketch).

I think that I will have a general conversation with them about their ideas for research, and express enthusiasm and collegiality. I will then turn it to ask for a specific research idea or data and to think about it, and we can talk again.

What are the norms of co-authorship in your discipline? In my subfield of communication, co-authorship is relatively rare, but I'm guessing you're in a different field because fifteen articles in two years and ten conferences in a year would explode my head. At any rate, I imagine people's answers might depend on that -- the answer will likely differ by field.

Also, what value is there for you in a collaboration (or "collaboration," since it sounds like you'd be doing the heavy lifting)? Is it that you need to demonstrate collegiality for your 3rd-year review, or that your colleagues will be on the review committee? If that's the case, I'd consider expressing enthusiasm for collaboration, but insisting that your colleagues take the lead. The enthusiasm demonstrates your collegiality, and asking your colleagues to take the lead is not an unreasonable request if collaboration is their idea.

I write this as someone who collaborates a fair amount, despite that being outside the norms of my field. A collaborator who carries their weight is valuable beyond words. A "collaborator" who does nothing but gum up the works is a source of endless resentment.

Another idea is to essentially "use" them as your grad students. Let them do the low-level work and see if they can produce something publishable.

[Parasaurolophus]

The question about landing a position before the tenure review next year has been a consideration as well, but with the backlog in the number of applications schools receive, it seems that I may have to go through the tenure review next year; however, I am waiting on two schools who did not even start the applications review process.
If I end up moving, I am afraid that this will open the door for gossips that will hurt my reputation in the institution after I leave. I had seen them doing that to a faculty who left a year before I arrived. I know that this faculty poured his/her heart into work, saved the program, and saved the program from being closed. They gossiped about this faculty and trashed this person's reputation after s/he left. It was heartbreaking to watch how low they were willing to go. I have managed a good relationship by keeping a low profile and focusing on my research work.

If that's a big worry, wouldn't helping two faculty members work to counter the negative gossip?

[traductio]

The question about landing a position before the tenure review next year has been a consideration as well, but with the backlog in the number of applications schools receive, it seems that I may have to go through the tenure review next year; however, I am waiting on two schools who did not even start the applications review process.
If I end up moving, I am afraid that this will open the door for gossips that will hurt my reputation in the institution after I leave. I had seen them doing that to a faculty who left a year before I arrived. I know that this faculty poured his/her heart into work, saved the program, and saved the program from being closed. They gossiped about this faculty and trashed this person's reputation after s/he left. It was heartbreaking to watch how low they were willing to go. I have managed a good relationship by keeping a low profile and focusing on my research work.

I guess the question for you is whether you expect to be able to move to a research university before the results of the tenure evaluation is released. If you do collaborate, I would suggest working on something which is ostensibly in their area of expertise, because it would not be central to your research efforts, and you could legitimately wait for them to do their share and pitch your level of effort according to their level of engagement.

Here's another low-investment possibility. Are you familiar with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (Wikipedia entry here)? Since you're at a teaching-oriented school, and since your potential "collaborators" are unlikely to get funding (per your description of them), you could write about the process of teaching your subject. This was a common approach at my former university, which required a fair number of publications for tenure, even if many faculty members were not inclined toward original, discipline-specific research. A project could be as simple as dividing your intro sections into two groups (say, six sections of Chemistry 101, to make up a hypothetical example) and teaching one group Conventional Approach A to balancing equations and one group Innovative Approach B, and then comparing results. Granted, you can't control for all the variables you'd like to, but you can still say something about effective teaching strategies. It's low-investment on your part -- you just teach your classes as you normally would, but substitute Innovative Approach B where applicable. It's also something you could leave if you get a job elsewhere without any financial costs.

Whether your potential collaborators gossip behind your back is something that, unfortunately, is beyond your control. If you do leave, though, what possible influence could two non-research-productive professors at a teaching-oriented school have among the research-productive professors you hope to join at a new university?

[the-tenure-track-prof]

That sounds like a good idea. I wonder if you mean that it involves data collection?. If so, this will require IRB and they don't understand that and they do not have the CITI training required for IRB. I will need to explain these things to them and I do not want to be the lead author.
I think that writing a review article about online teaching which became very common in our program due to the COVID-19 can be a good topic that they will relate to (in my field there are review articles that do not require research but are considered a lower-level work).

The question about landing a position before the tenure review next year has been a consideration as well, but with the backlog in the number of applications schools receive, it seems that I may have to go through the tenure review next year; however, I am waiting on two schools who did not even start the applications review process.
If I end up moving, I am afraid that this will open the door for gossips that will hurt my reputation in the institution after I leave. I had seen them doing that to a faculty who left a year before I arrived. I know that this faculty poured his/her heart into work, saved the program, and saved the program from being closed. They gossiped about this faculty and trashed this person's reputation after s/he left. It was heartbreaking to watch how low they were willing to go. I have managed a good relationship by keeping a low profile and focusing on my research work.

I guess the question for you is whether you expect to be able to move to a research university before the results of the tenure evaluation is released. If you do collaborate, I would suggest working on something which is ostensibly in their area of expertise, because it would not be central to your research efforts, and you could legitimately wait for them to do their share and pitch your level of effort according to their level of engagement.

Here's another low-investment possibility. Are you familiar with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (Wikipedia entry here)? Since you're at a teaching-oriented school, and since your potential "collaborators" are unlikely to get funding (per your description of them), you could write about the process of teaching your subject. This was a common approach at my former university, which required a fair number of publications for tenure, even if many faculty members were not inclined toward original, discipline-specific research. A project could be as simple as dividing your intro sections into two groups (say, six sections of Chemistry 101, to make up a hypothetical example) and teaching one group Conventional Approach A to balancing equations and one group Innovative Approach B, and then comparing results. Granted, you can't control for all the variables you'd like to, but you can still say something about effective teaching strategies. It's low-investment on your part -- you just teach your classes as you normally would, but substitute Innovative Approach B where applicable. It's also something you could leave if you get a job elsewhere without any financial costs.

Whether your potential collaborators gossip behind your back is something that, unfortunately, is beyond your control. If you do leave, though, what possible influence could two non-research-productive professors at a teaching-oriented school have among the research-productive professors you hope to join at a new university?

[traductio]

That sounds like a good idea. I wonder if you mean that it involves data collection?. If so, this will require IRB and they don't understand that and they do not have the CITI training required for IRB. I will need to explain these things to them and I do not want to be the lead author.
I think that writing a review article about online teaching which became very common in our program due to the COVID-19 can be a good topic that they will relate to (in my field there are review articles that do not require research but are considered a lower-level work).

The question about landing a position before the tenure review next year has been a consideration as well, but with the backlog in the number of applications schools receive, it seems that I may have to go through the tenure review next year; however, I am waiting on two schools who did not even start the applications review process.
If I end up moving, I am afraid that this will open the door for gossips that will hurt my reputation in the institution after I leave. I had seen them doing that to a faculty who left a year before I arrived. I know that this faculty poured his/her heart into work, saved the program, and saved the program from being closed. They gossiped about this faculty and trashed this person's reputation after s/he left. It was heartbreaking to watch how low they were willing to go. I have managed a good relationship by keeping a low profile and focusing on my research work.

I guess the question for you is whether you expect to be able to move to a research university before the results of the tenure evaluation is released. If you do collaborate, I would suggest working on something which is ostensibly in their area of expertise, because it would not be central to your research efforts, and you could legitimately wait for them to do their share and pitch your level of effort according to their level of engagement.

Here's another low-investment possibility. Are you familiar with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (Wikipedia entry here)? Since you're at a teaching-oriented school, and since your potential "collaborators" are unlikely to get funding (per your description of them), you could write about the process of teaching your subject. This was a common approach at my former university, which required a fair number of publications for tenure, even if many faculty members were not inclined toward original, discipline-specific research. A project could be as simple as dividing your intro sections into two groups (say, six sections of Chemistry 101, to make up a hypothetical example) and teaching one group Conventional Approach A to balancing equations and one group Innovative Approach B, and then comparing results. Granted, you can't control for all the variables you'd like to, but you can still say something about effective teaching strategies. It's low-investment on your part -- you just teach your classes as you normally would, but substitute Innovative Approach B where applicable. It's also something you could leave if you get a job elsewhere without any financial costs.

Whether your potential collaborators gossip behind your back is something that, unfortunately, is beyond your control. If you do leave, though, what possible influence could two non-research-productive professors at a teaching-oriented school have among the research-productive professors you hope to join at a new university?

You should check with your IRB to see whether you'd need approval or not. In my experience, for SoTL research, it depends on the design and whether the teaching deviates from "normal" duties (a lot rides on that word "normal"!), and whether you need informed consent.

The review article is not bad, either -- similarly low investment.

[Morden]

As someone who does a lot of SoTL, I would hesitate to try a multi-section SoTL project with people who didn't have experience doing research; if I wasn't familiar with SoTL myself, I definitely wouldn't try leading novices through it and expecting to get something publishable at the end of it.
A review article is a much better idea.

[Ruralguy]

I would ask them what they want to do, have them take the lead, and tentatively agree to "help" on X, assuming that X is some sort of overlap with their interests.
I would avoid agreeing to tack them on to existing work, something people at my school do a bit, unless they are good friends and very trusted colleagues---you know their limits and know what you will get.

As far as SoTL, it can be a bit more complex than what some have suggested here, especially if you are trying to do some sort of real statistically meaningful analysis of groups. But it could be something that they are interested in. But I wouldn't suggested first unless *you* are interested in that.

You have no control over your reputation after you leave, and in any case, I can tell you that a decade later, you will be "lucky" if anybody mentions you at all or even remembers you existed. People gossip at my school, but rarely do I hear anyone chattering about somebody who has already left, and very rarely 5 or 10 years later. And never if its more than a decade (the one exception might be very high level administrators, but run of the mill faculty--nope).