Skip to main content
deleted 5 characters in body
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12
  • Simply put, most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and even embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes and fill in for the professor's lectures when the professor decide to be some place else.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for these academics not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been -- for many decades -- a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtaining an assistant professorship at a selective university or college.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother with considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, in economics. However, they are the exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only things that matter are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (WellWell, if the position entails some teaching responsibilities, the applicant's proficiency in English might also matter a bit as well, if the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidatestheir peers with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have just one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

  • Simply put, most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and even embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes and fill in for the professor's lectures when the professor decide to be some place else.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for these academics not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been -- for many decades -- a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtaining an assistant professorship at a selective university or college.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, in economics. However, they are the exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only things that matter are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (Well, the applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, if the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

  • Simply put, most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and even embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes and fill in for the professor's lectures when the professor decide to be some place else.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for these academics not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been -- for many decades -- a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtaining an assistant professorship at a selective university or college.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother with considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb in economics. However, they are the exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only things that matter are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. Well, if the position entails some teaching responsibilities, the applicant's proficiency in English might also matter a bit... If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to their peers with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have just one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

shortened the answer
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12

I've decided to shorten my answer drastically to make it focus on (a) what I believe are commonly held views among academics based in North America and (b) an explanation of why they are comfortable with (and likely also justified in) holding these views.

I guesssuppose any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study. My answer is informed by what I know is the state of affairs in my field, economics. However, I believe thesethe views I state below are not limited to academics employed by North American economics departments.

  • MostSimply put, most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and mildlyeven embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes and fill in for the professor's lectures when the professor decide to be some place else.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance of academics in econ departments at North American universities willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for themthese academics not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been -- for many decades -- a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtainobtaining an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, in economics. However, they are clearlythe exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only thingthings that mattersmatter are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (Well, the applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, in caseif the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

I've decided to shorten my answer drastically to make it focus on (a) what I believe are commonly held views among academics based in North America and (b) why they are comfortable with (and likely also justified in) holding these views.

I guess any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study. My answer is informed by what I know is the state of affairs in my field, economics. However, I believe these views are not limited to academics employed by North American economics departments.

  • Most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and mildly embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance of academics in econ departments at North American universities willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for them not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been for many decades a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtain an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb. However, they are clearly exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only thing that matters are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (Well, the applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, in case the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

I've decided to shorten my answer drastically to make it focus on (a) what I believe are commonly held views among academics based in North America and (b) an explanation of why they are likely justified in holding these views.

I suppose any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study. My answer is informed by what I know is the state of affairs in my field, economics. However, I believe the views I state below are not limited to academics employed by North American economics departments.

  • Simply put, most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and even embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes and fill in for the professor's lectures when the professor decide to be some place else.

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for these academics not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been -- for many decades -- a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtaining an assistant professorship at a selective university or college.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb, in economics. However, they are the exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only things that matter are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (Well, the applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, if the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

shortened the answer
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12

An up-front comment: This answer has managed to attract a fair number of downvotes, as well as several very helpful follow-up comments (which have since been moved to chat). One hypothesis offered by a commenter for why so many have chosen to cast downvotes is that my answer may bemaybe too focused on just one field (economics, which happens to be my field) while failing to explain what a habilitation is. Well, the question was not about what a habilitation is, was it? Instead, it was about how it's viewed in the US (and, presumably, Canada as well).

My answer to the OP's question can be stated as follows: To the extent that academic economists based in North America are even aware of the existence of this thing called "habilitation", they view it as having absolutely no relevance to them. For sure, their hiring decisions are goingI've decided to be completely independent of whether or not job candidates have "habilitated" themselves.

The bulk ofshorten my answer, then, is about providing some all-important context for drastically to make it focus on why habilitations(a) what I believe are viewed as such a non-factorcommonly held views among academics based in economics at North America. The context boils down to a recognition of the dramatic difference in the perceived value of doctoral degrees in economics earned from North American and (traditionally-orientedb) continental European universities. In economics, and possibly other fields as well, earning a Ph.D. degree from a high quality North American university is seen as infinitely more valuable for one's academic job market prospects than obtaining a doctorate from a "standard" European university is. My answer attempts to explain why this is the casethey are comfortable with (and likely also justified in) holding these views.

I guess any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study.

In my field -- economics -- there has traditionally been a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: My answer is informed by what mattersI know is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationalitystate of the degree holder.) For sure, pursuing a Ph.D.affairs in my field, economics in the U.S. takes four or more yearsHowever, I believe these views are not limited to achieve; obtaining a doctorate inacademics employed by North American economics from a continental European university could be done in as little as 18 monthsdepartments.

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtain an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S. In contrast, most (all?) US universities would never bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification was that they had just received a doctorate in economics from a European university.

  • This view appears to be widely held in Europe as well: economics departments at universities in the German-speaking European countries (including Austria and Switzerland; sorry, I'm not familiar with the situation in Poland) will pretty much automatically waive the requirement of an habilitation for job applicants who come with a North American Ph.D. degree in hand. (Aside: If the European econ departments didn't waive this traditional requirement, they would simply eliminate themselves from the most important segment of the academic job market for economists.)

  • Most American academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they do know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and mildly embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" should developis supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- all the while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes. 

  • To the extent that a European habilitation degree has any value at all at USin North American economics departments, it'sthe only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree which matter, certainly not the. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • If you're about to graduate from, say, a German university with a doctorateIs this state of ignorance of academics in economicsecon departments at North American universities willful and wish to pursue an academic careerdetrimental, you may be contemplating whetheror is it maybe entirely rational for them not to (a) staybother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been for many decades a huge difference in Germanythe perceived quality and "habilitate yourself" (pun intended) atstatus of a German university or (b) move to the U.S. or Canada for two years and work in a post-doc program at a leading academic place in North AmericaCanadian Ph. Judging by the choices made by people in similar positionsD. degree in economics on the past, I think it's fair to say that optionone hand and a (bcontinental) isEuropean doctoral degree in economics on the first choice for many a serious budding researcher, even ifother. (and especially if!) their long-term goalAside: what matters, of course, is to be employed at a German universitythe thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • I mentioned earlier that the quality ofEarning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (continentaland largely still is) European doctoral degree in economics simply doesn't measure up toseen as the vehicle that ofopens doors toward obtain an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree.

  • In contrast, most (To make the comparison fair and relevant, let's focus on just the few dozen top degree-granting programs in both continents.all?) This difference in ranking has begun to erode over the last couple of decadesUS econ department hiring committees know -- but only for those European universitiesusually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have switched their approach to graduate education to mimic the U.S./Canadian model. Thejust received a doctorate in economics departments at these innoviative universities havefrom a European university. (Well, incidentallythere have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb. However, also by and large abolished granting "habilitations"they are clearly exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule. After all) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the doctoral degrees they awardonly thing that matters are really meant to be the equivalentquality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (orWell, hopefullythe applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, considerably better thanin case the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the traditionalEuropean doctorate/habilitation combocandidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

An up-front comment: This answer has managed to attract a fair number of downvotes, as well as several very helpful follow-up comments (which have since been moved to chat). One hypothesis offered by a commenter for why so many have chosen to cast downvotes is that my answer may be too focused on just one field (economics, which happens to be my field) while failing to explain what a habilitation is. Well, the question was not about what a habilitation is, was it? Instead, it was about how it's viewed in the US (and, presumably, Canada as well).

My answer to the OP's question can be stated as follows: To the extent that academic economists based in North America are even aware of the existence of this thing called "habilitation", they view it as having absolutely no relevance to them. For sure, their hiring decisions are going to be completely independent of whether or not job candidates have "habilitated" themselves.

The bulk of my answer, then, is about providing some all-important context for why habilitations are viewed as such a non-factor in economics at North America. The context boils down to a recognition of the dramatic difference in the perceived value of doctoral degrees in economics earned from North American and (traditionally-oriented) continental European universities. In economics, and possibly other fields as well, earning a Ph.D. degree from a high quality North American university is seen as infinitely more valuable for one's academic job market prospects than obtaining a doctorate from a "standard" European university is. My answer attempts to explain why this is the case.

I guess any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study.

In my field -- economics -- there has traditionally been a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.) For sure, pursuing a Ph.D. in economics in the U.S. takes four or more years to achieve; obtaining a doctorate in economics from a continental European university could be done in as little as 18 months.

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtain an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S. In contrast, most (all?) US universities would never bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification was that they had just received a doctorate in economics from a European university.

  • This view appears to be widely held in Europe as well: economics departments at universities in the German-speaking European countries (including Austria and Switzerland; sorry, I'm not familiar with the situation in Poland) will pretty much automatically waive the requirement of an habilitation for job applicants who come with a North American Ph.D. degree in hand. (Aside: If the European econ departments didn't waive this traditional requirement, they would simply eliminate themselves from the most important segment of the academic job market for economists.)

  • Most American academic economists have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they do know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and mildly embarrassing device by which a person enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" should develop and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- all the while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes. To the extent that a European habilitation degree has any value at all at US economics departments, it's the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree which matter, certainly not the degree itself.

  • If you're about to graduate from, say, a German university with a doctorate in economics and wish to pursue an academic career, you may be contemplating whether to (a) stay in Germany and "habilitate yourself" (pun intended) at a German university or (b) move to the U.S. or Canada for two years and work in a post-doc program at a leading academic place in North America. Judging by the choices made by people in similar positions in the past, I think it's fair to say that option (b) is the first choice for many a serious budding researcher, even if (and especially if!) their long-term goal is to be employed at a German university.

  • I mentioned earlier that the quality of a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics simply doesn't measure up to that of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree. (To make the comparison fair and relevant, let's focus on just the few dozen top degree-granting programs in both continents.) This difference in ranking has begun to erode over the last couple of decades -- but only for those European universities that have switched their approach to graduate education to mimic the U.S./Canadian model. The economics departments at these innoviative universities have, incidentally, also by and large abolished granting "habilitations". After all, the doctoral degrees they award are really meant to be the equivalent of (or, hopefully, considerably better than) the traditional doctorate/habilitation combo.

An up-front comment: This answer has managed to attract a fair number of downvotes, as well as several very helpful follow-up comments (which have since been moved to chat). One hypothesis offered by a commenter for why so many have chosen to cast downvotes is that my answer maybe too focused on just one field (economics, which happens to be my field) while failing to explain what a habilitation is. Well, the question was not about what a habilitation is, was it? Instead, it was about how it's viewed in the US (and, presumably, Canada as well).

I've decided to shorten my answer drastically to make it focus on (a) what I believe are commonly held views among academics based in North America and (b) why they are comfortable with (and likely also justified in) holding these views.

I guess any answer to your question will depend importantly on your field of study. My answer is informed by what I know is the state of affairs in my field, economics. However, I believe these views are not limited to academics employed by North American economics departments.

  • Most academic economists based at North American universities have never heard of -- or are, at most, barely familiar with -- the concept of a "habilitation". To the extent that they think they know what it is, it's widely regarded as an awkward and mildly embarrassing device by which a person, after having earned a doctorate, enters an extended period of indentured servitude to some "big name professor", during which time the "habilitand" is supposed to acquire and demonstrate serious research skills and, ideally, manage to publish a couple of well-regarded papers in top-notch journals -- while also having to engage in such career-irrelevant activities as sprucing up the big-name-professor's lecture notes. 

  • To the extent that a European habilitation has any value at all in North American economics departments, the only thing that matters are the publications that (should) go along with the additional academic degree. The degree itself is pretty much irrelevant.

  • Is this state of ignorance of academics in econ departments at North American universities willful and detrimental, or is it maybe entirely rational for them not to bother finding out a lot about what this habilitation thingy might be all about? I'd say it's the latter. In economics, there has been for many decades a huge difference in the perceived quality and status of a U.S. or Canadian Ph.D. degree in economics on the one hand and a (continental) European doctoral degree in economics on the other. (Aside: what matters, of course, is the thoroughness and breadth of learning and the research skills that come with the pursuit of the degree, not the nationality of the degree holder.)

  • Earning a Ph.D. degree from a high-quality North American graduate program was (and largely still is) seen as the vehicle that opens doors toward obtain an assistant professorship at a selective university or college in the U.S.

  • In contrast, most (all?) US econ department hiring committees know -- usually from painful first-hand experience -- that they needn't bother considering applications from persons whose main qualification is that they have just received a doctorate in economics from a European university. (Well, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule of thumb. However, they are clearly exceptions that prove rather than refute the rule.) If the European job applicant possesses both a doctorate and a habilitation, the only thing that matters are the quality and quantity of the applicants' publications. (Well, the applicant's proficiency in English might matter a bit as well, in case the position entails some teaching responsibilities...) If anything, the European doctorate/habilitation candidates might be at a disadvantage relative to the job candidates with "just" a Ph.D. from a North American institution, who often have one or two promising job market papers but no publications (yet) in top-notch journals.

posted a preface
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12
Loading
posted a preface
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12
Loading
Mod Moved Comments To Chat
typo fixes
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12
Loading
Source Link
Mico
  • 666
  • 4
  • 12
Loading