Looking for other professor mamas - Page 20

[Geofizz]

Thanks ladies, you're great. Can I list all of you as potential reviewers?

Originally Posted by dctexan

In general what I do is look at my letter from the editor and see if he/she is encouraging a rewrite & resubmit or if I should move along. Also how much does the editor refer to the problems/issues brought up by the "bad" reviewer? If you think the editor agrees with your bad reviewer, you should move on (even if you are having a hard time coming up with another journal for submission) because you will probably NOT be able to get around that reviewer. However, if most of the editors comments sound like your other reviewer, you probably don't have to worry too much. Good luck!

The editor's letter doesn't say anything about the good review. The text about resubmission says:

The review (see below) found promise in your manuscript, however, and indicates that a substantially revised manuscript might meet GRL criteria. If you remain interested in publishing in GRL and believe that a revised manuscript will meet these criteria, please submit it as a new manuscript since XXXX is now closed.

The new manuscript will be assigned a new number and received date, and the paper would be subject to re-review. Please be sure to return a detailed response to the reviews below should you decide to resubmit, as it is helpful and may expedite the review of your article.

?? I'm not sure if that's encouraging or not. A detailed response is going to be hard. I mean, I'm tempted to just say "Reviewer A seems to think that everything the mantle wants to fart out is diamond. News flash: it's not."

Ug. How do you bounce back from stuff like this? All I can think about is quitting to get a real job.

[Geofizz]

Originally Posted by kerc

Geo: I think it is reasonable to request that this paper NOT be given to a reviewer.

Also the submission process is a little crazy, but in your letter that goes along with can you expressly comment on the previous reviews? Can you call the editor?

How do I request that it not go to that reviewer, though? It's anonymous. I can't really say, "please don't send it to the jerk who wrote that last review. It wasn't good. Please send it to someone who will give me a better one?"

The AE gave no contact information. Not even an email address. I do assume that I can find him in the AGU directory, but if they don't give a phone number, doesn't that mean they don't want to be called?

Part of the problem here is that I'm doing theoretical calculations on this topic. It's natural to send the paper to a theorist (to evaluate if my calculations are right) and something who does experiments to evaluate if I interpreted the calculations right. I'm assured to get another experimentalist. The problem is they don't understand that I can address a part of the problem very well, but I can't address a 50 component system. Geez, I'm not made of silicon!

Thanks for changing your sig, kerc. It was starting to drive me nuts.

[rock_dr]

Originally Posted by Geofizz

"Reviewer A seems to think that everything the mantle wants to fart out is diamond.

it makes oil too, right?

re: how to avoid that reviewer... we had a similar problem with someone who had very strong opinions about one of our interpretations, and we kept running into him on every MS and every grant, b/c of the small world of sub disciplines. I started just inserting a paragraph into a note separate from the cover letter (which sometimes goes to reviewers) saying something to the effect of there is another research group working on a similar problem from a different perspective, and we have long differed on the issue of X (brief explanation inserted)... We request that if the ms is sent to one of this group that you also consider additional reviewers from other groups in order to get multiple opinions...

maybe you could approach the issue of theoretical vs experimental reviewers in a similar way?

maybe email the AE saying you would like to discuss this in a brief phone call, and when/ehat # should you use?

gl!

[namaste_mom]

Geofizz: I think you can ask it not to go to "Reviewer A" or whichever one it was by writing something like comments A, B, C, from Reviewer A are unsubstainiated because of ..... and asking for another reviewer. This manuscript is appropriate for GRL because of this, this, and this.
I think CJ had a good idea in asking for a third review. I had to resubmit one to GSAB a couple of years ago but if you build a good case, I think editors are willing to reconsider.

[rock_dr]

question about promotion and raises...
how does it work?

We get yearly merit raises (or not) depending on the whims of our state legislature and a merit review committee.. but when it comes to a promotion, say, from assistant to associate level, do you kind of wait and see what is 'assigned'? Is it something you are supposed to negotiate? before, after??

PS - D. 'around thanksgiving' is soon! good luck!

[namaste_mom]

CJ - I can't help on the promotion question; I'm not there yet. but yes, T-giving is soon. The "due date" is the 18th I think but I figure I'll go a few days later. I would like to teach Monday classes just to wrap up some lose ends and then feel relaxed for the holiday. But, we will see; my kids just come when they are ready.

[KalamazooMom]

Originally Posted by rock_dr

question about promotion and raises...
how does it work?

We get yearly merit raises (or not) depending on the whims of our state legislature and a merit review committee.. but when it comes to a promotion, say, from assistant to associate level, do you kind of wait and see what is 'assigned'? Is it something you are supposed to negotiate? before, after??

Don't know if our situation is typical, but annual raises are set in the contract. (We are AAUP). In the last few years we've gotten in the neighborhood of 2-3%. So everyone gets that regardless. Some years there is merit money, which is up to the Dean to assign. Again that gets negotiated in the contract and each College gets a certain amt of money to distribute. As far as promotions, when you get promoted you get bumped up to the minimum for that rank. Base salary here is $38K for Ass't, $47K for assoc., and $62k for full (That's academic year salary). All this stuff is negotiated by the Union and individuals don't have much room for side deals-- though there are some. You can't get away with a whole lot though in a state institution where salaries are public.

[Geofizz]

Ours is 10% on promotion or tenure.

[kerc]

Originally Posted by Geofizz

Thanks for changing your sig, kerc. It was starting to drive me nuts.

LOL I was complaining to my next door neighbor Stephanie (a wonderful phd in russian studies turned SAHM) the other day about not enough time in the day to get everything done. And she said, "Kristin you are such a multi-tasker. The tough part about finishing a phd is that you aren't supposed to multi-task. Let go of everything you can until it is done. And JUST do the dissertation"


So there, that's what I was doing. I did think shortly after Leah was 2 I should change it but I kept getting distracted.

[emilysmama]

Originally Posted by KalamazooMom

Don't know if our situation is typical, but annual raises are set in the contract. (We are AAUP). In the last few years we've gotten in the neighborhood of 2-3%. So everyone gets that regardless. Some years there is merit money, which is up to the Dean to assign. Again that gets negotiated in the contract and each College gets a certain amt of money to distribute. As far as promotions, when you get promoted you get bumped up to the minimum for that rank. Base salary here is $38K for Ass't, $47K for assoc., and $62k for full (That's academic year salary). All this stuff is negotiated by the Union and individuals don't have much room for side deals-- though there are some. You can't get away with a whole lot though in a state institution where salaries are public.

My institution is very similar. Also a public state university, but NEA, instead of AAUP.

[sarahsmiles]

Just subbing to this thread. Always more to find on MDC, huh?

I'm a tenured (thank GOD!) associate professor / librarian. I have a 13 month old. DH works part time afternoons and evenings. No child care yet.

I'm having a tough time making things work for us. I'll be interested to catch up with this thread.

Just got my first book contract! Hurrah!

[Ana_Isabel]

Originally Posted by Geofizz

Ok ladies, I need advice:

I submitted a paper to Nature-Geoscience, and it got turned away because I cited a paper in the sentence where I stated my primary conclusion. I learned my lesson, and turned the paper around to GRL (non-geology moms: that's the major "letters" journal for our field).

I got the reviews back today. One review is great -- it pretty much says that the paper is great with a few things to make clearer, with a few technical comments.

I evidently pissed off the other reviewer. The written review is two pages long, and comes with 15 citations. : There are three major points, and a bazillion nit-picky points. The reviewer is outright wrong on one point (says it's already well-known, but what's out there is incomplete and wrong), but the other two points are kinda a matter of how you view the Earth and internal processes. I think I could respond to these comments, but the paper is rejected, and it will have to go back in under a new submission number (and submission date) and go back through re-review.

(1) There's not an obvious next-journal-down to go to for this paper. I could really expand it to send it to EPSL, but that's a lot of work, and honestly, this paper doesn't need expanding.

(2) Is there a way in the resubmission process to say that reviewer 1 is not an appropriate reviewer for the next time around? It's an anonymous review, so I don't know who it is (though I can make an educated guess based on the lengthy citation list). I'm assured to have the same AE, since he seems to handle all of the papers in my field.

What would you do with this? I've actually gotten a ton done this year, but I'm feeling frantic that I don't so much as have an accepted paper for 2007.

Am I the only one that routinely pisses off reviewers? I seem to get this every second thing I submit for review.

Geofizz;
I'm in the social siences: Experimentalpsychology. Here's what I do/my take on this.

My papers typically have 3 reviwers, and often one sucky/stupid reviewer who had a bad day or is just a bad person.
My approach: I address all the major points. 1/2 of the game is demonstrating that you considered everyone's remarks and addressed them to the point possible. Some points you will disagree with, you can state in your next submission letter your counterarguments.

Now adays journals have to say "reject" unless it's a real close accept. So I no longer believe in the word "reject"; i believe in the phrase "not this round".

There is an advantage to having it as a new submission: more likely jerky face reviewer won't be reviewing it again.

If this journal has high impact and your not in a desperate time crunch to get a paper out, take the long haul, and resubmit. They willl officially call it a new submission, but the process is likely to be faster and the next round of reviewers will see how you have addressed limitations on the last round.

I had a jerky face reviewer recently, who only wrote one paragraph and basically said the paper sucked. Without any back up arguments!

GL!

[athansor]

Wow..sorry to hear you are going through that with the reviewer. I got one back last year and was in a similar position..got a revise and resubmit along with some very jerky reviews. One serious one, and two that were terrible...and an odd thing..for three seperate reviewers, two of them were nearly identical (including the exact same incorrect grammar in a few places). I ended up basically doing what others recommended...and revised the paper, adressing the comments that made sense, leaving out a flat out insult or two, and ended up with a good paper. Then...it got declined for a completely different reason! Aarg...so now I have a good paper that needs a home.

Anyway...some amazing developments here...and I could use some quick advice.

Some background...the school where I currently teach as a TT assistant prof, does not have an engineering department. When I was hired, they hinted at plans for developing one, and my classes are basically engineering taught under the umbrella of a new technology program. This is my third semester, and at the beginning of the semester, word came that the state had approved the creation of a collgee of engineering. However, there was a debate about which branches of engineering to include. My branch (petroleum) was one of the options, but there was at least one person in the adminstration who was not very supportive. So, they hired a couple of consultants to help them determine which branches of engineering to include. I knew that if the consultants came back with a recommendation that didn't include petroleum engineering, I wouldn't have much of a future at the school. Knowing how long the academic job search takes (and considering that there really is nothing for DH at my current school), we started a search.
So, fast forward a few weeks. The consultants ended up recommending petroleum engineering, and I was tasked with designing the preliminary degree. Plus, I found out I was expecting again. So, it seemed like the best plan was to stay here and see this program off the ground. I worked on program design and planned on staying, but then I got some feedback from some of the applicaitons. (I already posted about a phone interview with a school in the UAE...that went well, and I have an invite for an in-person interview...but we're not sure if we're ready for that kind of move with a newborn)

So now, one of the top programs in my field has invited me for an interview (and they are interested in DH as well). I got a call last Friday and have an interview on Monday! It's not too far from where we are, so moving wouldn't be too big a hassle (the new one is planning to make an arrival mid-May), and the faculty page reads like a whos who list!. I'm pretty nervous about this interview, but I think I have a good presentation to give. I think that if I do get an offer, I've got to take it, but I sure dread telling my current school I'll be leaving (right now, outside of a few close friends...no one at the school knows I've been doing any searching).

Also...I'm about 4 months along, and in my suits, I don't think it's too obvious that I'm pregnant. Should I bring this up at some point? I'm not sure how I should (although two people there already know...so it might be a moot point) because my schedule for Mon. is to talk to all sorts of people individually for 20 minutes or so, and give a 45 minute seminar (mainly on my major research...with the end devoted to other research interests and teaching)

Anyway, that's my big news and my long rambling post! Back to putting the finishing touches on the presentation and then it's time to pack!

[Quate]

Just poking my head in to ask a question ... I've read my way through most of this thread to see what my life might be like if I go this route. Just wondering if any of you have had a child while adjuncting--or know someone who has. I've read plenty about how tenure track jobs deal with maternity leave and so forth, but is leave even a possibility with an adjunct position? What happens? Thanks.

[Sleepymama]

I've adjuncted a bit--I think it really depends on the department and how they feel about you and how many reservists they have around. If they have a lot of people to draw from or they want to keep relationships with only a few people, they might not be receptive. But where I adjuncted there were several people who would take a couple quarters off here and there, no problem. They were always in need of people to teach this particular course so adjuncts were always welcome back. I found it much easier to adjunct a class or two with kids than to teach full time as an adjunct, and now as a full time non-TT.

[kerc]

not sure if callie is here or not. thought I would post a link so ya'll would respond to her.

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=798323

[rock_dr]

athansor: how exciting! Is the interview today or next monday? I wouldn't mention the pregnancy (congrats btw!), you have so little time with each person, better to talk about all the exciting work you are doing. I don't think anyone at your current institution could possibly blame you for moving to a top-notch program with better options for your dh. But if it doesn't work out, building your own PE program sounds pretty exciting too. Good news all around!

no personal experience with adjuncting but I agree that a good adjunct is worth keeping happy by being flexible about maternity leave. Just make sure you aren't being abused by the dept, decide what's fair and reasonable for yourself and suggest it.

[emikey]

when to tell the department?

Hi everyone -
first of all, I am so glad this thread exists, because where else can I get this question answered?

I just found out I am expecting #2 (bkgd: I have a 2 year old, I am TT but untenured in a department where lots of my colleagues are women with young kids, and there's lots of support, but I'm the only untenured woman right now). My nature is to be very wary of telling anyone, even parents, until 12 weeks. But last time around, I was a grad student and it didn't matter. This time, it means unscheduling my classes for the fall (I'm due in July and will get an automatic 1-semester teaching release), and also scheduling a teaching visit/report for this spring, because I won't be teaching next fall when I'm up for a formal review. I'll be 12 weeks in mid-January, assuming all goes well - do you think that's too late to go public? Should I tell my chair beforehand?

Thanks!

[huggingmama]

I didn't tell my dept. chair (or any colleagues) until February; DS was born in August, and I got tenure that September. It worked well because there was still time to find people to replace me for the fall semester.

When does your department start scheduling classes for the fall? January sounds fine if they'll have time to cover your classes... and time to schedule the early review for the spring.

Originally Posted by emikey

Hi everyone -
first of all, I am so glad this thread exists, because where else can I get this question answered?

I just found out I am expecting #2 (bkgd: I have a 2 year old, I am TT but untenured in a department where lots of my colleagues are women with young kids, and there's lots of support, but I'm the only untenured woman right now). My nature is to be very wary of telling anyone, even parents, until 12 weeks. But last time around, I was a grad student and it didn't matter. This time, it means unscheduling my classes for the fall (I'm due in July and will get an automatic 1-semester teaching release), and also scheduling a teaching visit/report for this spring, because I won't be teaching next fall when I'm up for a formal review. I'll be 12 weeks in mid-January, assuming all goes well - do you think that's too late to go public? Should I tell my chair beforehand?

Thanks!

[emikey]

We've already scheduled for next fall, including some moving around in order to accommodate me! But I think if I can hold out through 1st trimester I'll be ok. I did meet with the incoming chair, whom I'm friendly with, and hint that this would probably be an issue between now and my tenure year.... And wow! - good for you for giving birth and getting tenure in the same year!