Argthtjtr

I'll keep this question short to make it easy to read, but happy to supply details later if relevant.

I recently finished my Ph.D. - computer science, in the US. I have a choice between accepting a post-doc position and a tenure-track Assistant Professor (AP) position.

However:

1. The AP position is at a satellite campus of a state university. This is a masters-granting campus (i.e. no PhD students). The teaching load is 3+3, though there is expectation of decent research output, especially (but not exclusively) during the summers.




2. The post-doc is at an R1 research university (though not highly ranked or especially prestigious). It appears (to me) to be less-than-ideal for the following reason: the PI applies techniques from my field (CS, AI) to another field (let's call it F2). He publishes (and presumably, I would publish) exclusively in conferences and journals of F2. After 2-years of this, I fear being stuck between two fields, departments of neither seriously considering me for tenure-track positions.

So, both positions appear sub-optimal, which is the source of my dilemma. Eventually, I hope for a tenure-track position at a R1 university. Which of these will best help me meet this goal?

ADDITION:

Thanks for the responses. It's helpful that the responses clearly categorize the AP institution as a teaching-focussed university. When I went to interview, they harped on their focus on research, show-casing the research activities and publications of professors and MS students. Since it is a masters-granting university and not an undergraduate teaching college, I was uncertain of what to make of all this. I suppose, in the end, the 3+3 load is telling.

One reason I'm swayed toward the AP is that, as a foreign national, a tenure-track position is a firm step toward US permanent residency, which a post-doc position is not.

It is uncommon for people to move up from a teaching school to an R1 school. It happens, but rarely, and your chances are slim. So this seems like a dead end regarding your goal, though of course teaching can be quite satisfying for a lot of us.

The offer of a postdoc elsewhere at least allows you to continue dreaming about a permanent position at an R1 university. Of course, there is never a guarantee that you will get such a position, whereas the AP offer you have at least offers this certainty.

This seems clearly to favor the postdoc position. Teaching 6 courses per year, likely not just 6 sections of one or two courses, will leave you no time for research in any field. Moreover, if everyone else is doing this then there won't be a lot of research synergy that will help you build up your CV.

On the other hand, working in an R1 institution doing research in any field helps you get papers out the door. And you won't get stuck between fields, though you may need to be flexible when it comes to choosing a field for your first R1 faculty position. But no one is required to stick to any particular specialty once they hold a faculty position. You can move to the field you want, and it may be neither of F1 or F2 when the time comes.

Think long term. The teaching position will likely have you teaching for the long term. The research position will more likely have you doing research for the long term. Both of those can be attractive, but maybe not to the same person. Your call.

Just a guess that it is easier to move "over" from one field to another than it is to move "up" to an R1 from a teaching position.

The additional information added by the OP adds some considerations. One that should be considered is the expected size of each section you need to teach. If it is <=10 then it is quite different than if it is 30+.

Otherwise you need to weigh the scales. Citizenship possibilities might weigh heavily depending on your background.