In the academic career, many scientific papers or articles are written, but time goes by and the speed of knowledge often makes great works to be considered obsolete. What do you do? Do you continue to publish your scientific articles regardless of the time elapsed?
Dear Gustavo Eduardo Toledo Lara Yes, in my curriculum vitae, all of my published papers appear. They are still relevant, and likely to be. New knowledge has just strengthened our previous findings. Fortunately, most our works belong to classical genetics and plant breeding. New advances made in molecular biology have speeded up the attainment of ultimate achievement, and fortunately did not contradict the previous ones. Therefore, my papers published a decade ago are still relevant.
Thanks!
No, because I started researching in 2014 and I finished my doctorate in 2017. Therefore, 10 years have not yet passed.
Thanks,
There may be very old works that have not lost their relevance. However, if not a revision of the content, then at least an update of literary sources and a corresponding analysis is necessary. Otherwise, the work will seem insufficiently relevant, which can be regarded as disrespect for the readers.
Yes. All of mine are there starting from the very first one in 1984. It is useful to have older ones because someone may be inspired by the methodology or conclusions from a four decades old work.
I have one full CV, where I included all articles which I published since I started to write academic articles and others where I have part of my articles. I usually take out the conference proceedings as they are not so important.
Yes, There are several articles on the morphological and molecular description of varieties.
Yes...definitely yes....
It is a scientific article even today.....................though published 10 years before!
And that's why the name Curriculum Vitae
Everything I manage to write, I put on my resume. It is the way I have to show a certain path I have walked for some years. However, some university quality evaluation agencies consider that scientific articles published more than 5-6 years ago may have lost their validity. This does not seem fair to me because, as other colleagues have said here, scientific articles published years ago may be useful for other academics to write their papers. In any case, everything I have been able to write is part of my work and I am happy to show it in my curriculum vitae.
There are several reasons in presenting a complete list of published articles. First off, articles are in the essence new ideas and/or new data at the frontiers of a particular profession - as time is passing by, they show the impact of those older results on the current state of this research field. Second, such articles allow to make an initial judgement on an individual's professional determination and one's scientific level. Third, people during their life span may occupied different positions, worked in various fields, and reached a quite wide spectrum of achievements - such people, having a multi-dicsiplinary background, are priceless in certain fields of research and teaching, provided the achievements are impressive indeed.
Of course my dear. These is releated to scientific quality of paper. Also, research interest can increasing visibility of studies.
Yes. I think it is important to remember some of our old publications. There is no shame in that, quite the contrary.
I agree that to assess our research, the university agencies evaluating the quality of the research only look at the results of recent years. But for me the trajectory of a researcher throughout his professional life is also important, in which fields he has worked, or he may have dedicated times to theoretical research or applications, to dissemination, to teaching, ... All this I think enriches the professional life of a researcher.
Those can be added as citations are more in earlier articles. But generally papers published within the last 5 years have greater value in case of academic evaluations (recent publications)
Yes of course, all published articles should be uploaded to your CV, starting for the newest up-front to the oldest at the back. Everything counts, it is your complete research career there. It is after those individuals interested in your CV the value they give to older publications.
I think it will be better if two show the recent five years, however, it depends on the submission of your CV in the organization.
Forgive me if I seem harsh, but a researcher is not a business applicant. a C.V. is not what defines a Scientist. You are not akin to a factory where the items you produce are stamped with a date of manufacture and expiration date. Research is something like the Arts where your lifetime of work fills a portfolio. Sure, if you want something brief on one or two pages fine. Choose what you think is the top ten or five publications that you are the proudest of. If it is just for your future collaborators can understand how you could fit in a proposed project again choose the best articles that define you or your specific capacities related to said project. Enough said
CGY
Juana Maria Arcelus-Ulibarrena I so agree with you, can you imagine " So Prof Einstien, Albert old chap, the C.V. looks real good, just one thing, can you lose those old papers on electromagnetic radiation (light), and Brownian motion, they're so 1905. No one wants to read about the Brownian thingy! Stick to your new thingummajig ... that unified theory stuff, that is your future kid.
nuff said
CGY
You got two different questions. The first is "In your curriculum vitae, do the scientific articles you published more than 10 years ago still appear?," indicating a scholarly work was published a long time ago. In this case, I would answer, yes. Your second question is "Do you continue to publish your scientific articles regardless of the time elapsed?," denoting the work has not been published. Here, I would not consider a long-time-ago written piece for publication.
Here is a good read on academic CV.
Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Tsigaris, P. (2018). Academics must list all publications on their CV. KOME, 6(1), 94-99. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2018.16.
Good luck,
I would restrict a CV to the latest 5-10 years and add those publications that I think are still relevant (whatever the number of citations they received).
Dear prof Gustavo Eduardo Toledo Lara After 10 years, your publications in which you spent your time and effort might be less cited. however, They are still valuable and never expired. Of course, you have to include them in the CV.
Good morning
Yes, of course.
In my personal case for an evaluation, I present all my job.
Best regards
Ph.D. Ingrid del Valle García Carreño
Yes, of course.
It is important to inform your entire trajectory.
http://buscatextual.cnpq.br/buscatextual/visualizacv.do?id=K4734915P4&tokenCaptchar=03AGdBq25K7QBSX4x2qD64Hd8bX5di4c8XKLzRQa5TkbnOVIPwOp3fpT6HO94zsITM7olTrNCYTRB31kGt3dayCwqxDzcwUi59xlgpwfBntjrbzhnVC5xUukqR_eS22gDuPAF_aIKt1QgPmVDOAlfB4_irfsxv1m3RjNrJ6I1wuGI6Tj_FCXjxVyQLj5sZrwqHBXZj_2PBcIJG-UlXuYSGNeW5xXUHYKKObTvtsrWnU5KItqKzW7R4cAbs_N3JKtUCpUjJZp3UMgS2cmJij6Gd4Ar_QNAJ3G3c8vGKw7o4VQBBeIDYFSeMpoJstyO0xnlYAO7r6fdzZHnHdkQQhNazKEjFnZk8iXYdD5yQ-OqlMeVp8qsTRy9JuAl5-24J0ZqG42vkU1EKcY2bUgTfZGlcj6gVA3ib7jtrGVzuN41Pik8WRthiOT245AKqzFkfGZK17Ihn8ffb7IpPMPcnRAGr8v48oH8O73bRt5Hu8xIyYsVoklaDbFUCt-6J69k6lAoaQAoMg3UCpxdNFtX5ZEGhXhL_HtGr7bOoNQ
Yes, but I might ignore those publications that are really old and not relevant to my current research work and interest.
Sharing a knowledge is a dynamic process ,never could be completeted.
Sharing a knowledge is a dynamic process ,never could be completeted.
A CV should include selected publications.
However, a personal website or an extended version of your CV can have ALL of the publications.
Gustavo E.T. Lara@ Why not? A CV is meant to provide information on the person and his/her contributions, that is, life time contributions. It is absurd to think that advances in science make earlier contributions irrelevant. I think that if your earlier contributions are read and cited by researchers, then they are relevant and useful.
By the way, I normally do not add publications to my CV because of their large number, and attach a separate list of them when necessary. But the proposal of M. Irfan@ is quite good, that if the CV is bulky, one may add only a dozen selected publications. I am going to follow this good suggestion.
Although I don't write a CV for more than one decade - when I change to another institution I asked the previous one to transfer the CV and diplomas to the new... -, I would certainly keep my previous scientific titles in books and papers. The contrary would mean that they should be "outdated", which is not a serious or, at least, comfortable scientific background. In my case, I am still developing scientific areas that I have started decades ago, so keeping a publication record means stressing a personal scientific memory. I am aware that nowadays there is a huge, incomprehensible attachment to fashions, but this should not be the case of science: theories, authors, and book-papers do have an intrinsic value regardless of time, uses, abuses, or any other sort of manipulation. I still read Plato, Aristotle, Sun Tzu, or the Astashastra, texts with thousands of years; I still use in my researches Weber, Durkheim, Braudel, and several other key theorists from the last two centuries. So, why should I erase my papers with more than 10 years? The question is not if they are less or more cited, but rather if they contribute to scientific knowledge development.
Yes of course, a CV is a record of achievements and developments. It’s not an application for a grant or a research assessment assignment (REF in the U.K.) which are usually restricted to more recent areas of research, usually ten years. A potential employer usually wants to see development and performance over a longer period of time.
Dear Gustavo, this is an important technical question which is certainly of broad general interest to many RG members. I think there is no general answer to this question as it depemds on the individual situation. In the past ca. 45 years we published ca. 400+ publications in chemical journals. I have a complete list of all my scientific publications beginning with the first paper published in the year 1976. My CV is 2 pages long. In this CV I only mention the number of my publications. Only if required I provide my list of publications separately. There are, however, other situations where this needs to be changed. For example, when we apply for research grants at our National Science Foundation DFG, they want a list of my 5 most important publications directly included in the CV. I hope this helps. With best wishes, Frank Edelmann
Dear @Gustavo Eduardo Toledo Lara
Yes, I include even my first paper (which I published in 1994) in the curriculum vitae. However, depending upon the requirement (as stated by @Frank T. Edelmann), the number and nature of publications may vary.
Best wishes, AKC
I can't speak to jobs in academia, but for industrial jobs, I only put the most relevant recent papers and patents. If I am applying for a Cloud Computing research gig, I am not going to put my web performance paper from 25 years ago on the CV/resume that I submit. I would definitely include the Cloud Computing paper from earlier this year.
I feel that an academic CV represents more than just current publications. It stands as a legacy of ideas and published accounts of those ideas. It provides the history and transitions of the academic's career. Personally, I have multiple publications from the early 1990s that remain frequently cited today (> 20 citations per year). Of course, one could easily create several versions of a CV, especially if a request is for one that is annotated or scaled-down.
Yes.
Even if the papers are outdated now (often the case in methodological papers), they may have been an important contribution at the time they were written, and stand as testimony to your skills of innovation and your contributions to the field.
Since the C.V. of an individual reflect totality of his career, including his pre-doctoral exposure with the supervisor concern, including any gap if any in his research career, I prefer myself total inclusion of the publications, (if possible year wise) for having overall view of his research journey. This is my personal opinion.
As I have already mentioned earlier, so here, only last 10 years publications in a Researcher's CV mean that it is incomplete CV . I feel that an academic CV should represent more than just current publications.
What I have done is listed only few of my selected articles (irrespective of dates) in my curriculum vitae without making it look lengthy.
As I have already mentioned earlier, so here, only last 10 years publications in a Researcher's CV mean that it is incomplete CV. Some important information may be missing in the CV (e.g. gap, if any, in the academic activities, research publications focusing in the career, shift of research interest, etc.) Therefore, I strongly recommended that an academic CV should contain totality of publications of a researcher, including research training and other activities.