What makes a good academic CV?
In theory, it should be the quality and novelty of your research, but I hear that often it is also simply the number of papers. I would imagine this is because it may be quite difficult for a given hiring committee to evaluate the impact of your work, and so they use number of publications as a proxy for quality or novelty.
To what should we, as aspiring academics who want to push our research further, aspire? How can we convince a committee that our research line is promising enough to warrant a position?
I will be graduating with my PhD in Engineering soon, but only have 6 conference papers and one journal paper. I am graduating because some external circumstances dictate that I should.
The method I have published is novel, broadly applicable, and very effective at certain things. I have some solid analytic performance guarantees and solid experimental results.It may not be a panacea, but it can solve an important practical problem with great precision. It is just not in a hot field like ML or something like that.
The world is large, and there is lots of ways to apply the results, extend them, and contribute positively to humanity. I am afraid however that my lack of publications will bar me from academic positions, despite the fact that I have an original line of research that is ripe to explore and currently published results indicate that is it effective at a certain class of problems.
I just want to push my research further and dont have much interest in becoming a post-doc to work on other people's problems...
Edit: Also, this is my throwaway account, so I've asked some dumb questions haha