DontHate

I'm not really being an elitist. I'm just trying to stir up a conversation about what people plan to do with their PhD's, especially in the event that they may not have a realistic shot at an academic career. I base my opinions on the facts I've heard from people who supposedly know these things (including articles people have shared on this thread). I got a bunch of responses that range from "you're mean for saying that," to "I just want to be a high school teacher anyway," to "well your field isn't even that competitive," to "even though I have very small chance of getting a tenure track job, I will persist in trying to get one." The argument that you're "not aiming to be an academic superstar" makes me feel sad. It's not as though any of us pursue our dreams with the hope of achieving a mediocre approximation of them. But, in any case, it's a complicated topic. I'm not bulldozing the nuance of anyone's situation as much as everyone is demonizing me. Shouldn't we all be able to look straight into the fearful truth of possible failure, without getting angry?

Becoming a professor at a SLAC is incredibly competitive. They don't just hand those jobs out.

I'm obviously not concerned. I'm sure you'll do fine. ALL I was saying is that a PhD is not intended as training for high school English teaching. That doesn't mean you can't use it that way. It's just not the traditional route.

Graduate admissions is not a purely statistical game of chance. It's not like playing the lotto. If it were, then none of us would bother worrying about the quality of our essays and writing samples. If there are fewer applicants to comp lit programs, but each applicant is more qualified, then the likelihood of getting into a program could very well be just as low as it is applying to an English program where the only prerequisite is a love of reading. It's much harder to discourage unqualified applicants to English programs in an English-speaking country. Everyone on this forum is cultishly devoted to this mystical notion of "fit." I have a few problems with this. The first is that it implies that an applicant already knows exactly what he or she wants to write a dissertation on, before even setting foot in grad school. If this is the case, you're doing it wrong. If you've already boxed yourself into such a narrow sliver of the discipline that only Podunk State Conservatory of Science has a scholar that could advise you, then you're committing career suicide, as well as approaching the most critical years of your intellectual formation with an extremely narrow mind. Fit is never easy to determine before visiting the department and meeting all the faculty, and you only get that opportunity after you are invited to admit week. So the whole "fit" argument sounds a bit like a rationalization for avoiding rejection, more than a legitimate argument for not trying to get into the best programs available. Don't hate me for having a different opinion from you. Ha. As if saying that will make a difference. Whatever. Just pile the hate on, if you must. Pretend that I am the admissions committee that rejected you. It seems to be helping y'all get some rage out at the unjust world, with it's sadly competitive nature and bleak career realities.

Foreign language is generally a requirement, so no matter how many undergrads try to avoid, universities still have to hire people to teach it.

There are specific foreign language fields that are growing, even while many are being cut. And yes, a degree in Comp Lit would train someone for an English-language literature position as well.

And I'm not saying it's bad to get an English PhD in order to teach high school. I'm just saying it's unusual, and you will be overqualified for that position. People who want to teach high school generally just get a Master's and a teaching credential, and are out on the job market much faster, with less debt.

In response, may I say the following things: 1. Thanks! That makes me feel wonderful right now. I know, rationally, that Comp Lit is smaller, but hearing that I have a better chance at the schools I'm applying to than an English PhD applicant is very soothing. I tend to forget how much foreign language scares people. I was an English major in undergrad, and that is just a completely glutted field. Of course, you have to remember that I'm probably competing with a lot more international applicants than you English guys. 2. There are indeed fewer jobs in Comp Lit departments, but I think there's actually a lot more jobs in Language departments. Possibly, in sum, more jobs than in English departments. This is what many Comp Lit programs train people for (particularly Columbia, where Comp Lit is only accesible as an interdisciplinary program through a national literature department). Comp Lit grad students teach language classes just as often as they TA literature courses. So the job market might not actually be tougher for me. 3. I still don't think that it's easier to get into top Comp Lit programs than it is for English. There may be fewer applicants, but they are expected to have a lot more skills coming in than an English applicant would be expected to have, particularly reading fluency in at least 3 foreign languages. And as I mentioned before, they are competing with foreign scholars who are native speakers of these languages. Also there are fewer spots. So on a purely numbers basis, it's probably just about the same. But I would like to think it's easier, just for my own peace of mind. So I'll just keep thinking that. All empirical evidence keeps pointing to the fact that it's extremely hard to get a tenure track job coming out of an unknown school. So I think everything I've been saying is true. It's not meant to insult anyone. I don't know why people keep interpreting it that way. It's simply the truth. It's a lot more realistic to get a job coming from one of the 10 best programs in a given field than it is coming from elsewhere. If you can't get into one of those programs, it doesn't bode well for getting one of the even more competitive academic positions that you (along with all the top-10 grads) will need to apply for 5-7 years down the road.

yes

This is an internet forum. Not a peer-reviewed journal. I credit myself with the ability to distinguish between the two

Why do I have to be diplomatic? I'm literally just asking simple questions. No one needs to get offended by them. If you can't explain why you're doing what you're doing, then you probably don't have a very good reason for doing it. The answer isn't to get offended, it's to get more self-aware about your own rationalizations.

I agree, I feel like gradcafe is almost biased against elite programs. A lot of people on here aren't applying to any.

I know a buttload of people who went to Princeton. Some of them are dicks. I think the eating clubs are way stupid, but as a grad student I don't know if that matters.

But you already did! And turkeys never forget. Especially not turkeys wearing hats. dum dum dummmmmmmmm Seriously though, forums are such fun!

The fees are always too damn high! I just think that the PhD is supposed to be a pre-professional degree, and the profession it is preparing us for is professing. Ha! Anyway, if one cannot get said job with said degree, then said degree becomes something quite different. And what I was asking about earlier was what this degree means to those people who aren't looking to become professors (or who are putting themselves into a position that will make becoming a professor quite difficult, making me assume that they have other plans in mind).

Fit is one thing, but when your advisor tells you that you shouldn't apply to a school because the fees are too high to justify your slim-to-nil chances of acceptance, that's something else.

So you were discouraged from applying partly because your advisors didn't think you would get in? And that once you got in, the exams would be too hard for you? That seems like a pretty nice way of saying that perhaps you aren't the best candidate for grad school.

Ok, this is just a general (and probably extremely ignorant) question for everyone out there: why are you applying to schools that aren't ranked in the top 20 or 30 programs? Why bother applying to schools that are relatively unknown, and might not even fund you? Is this really something that would lead to an academic career down the road? Or are you applying for a PhD without plans to go into academia? In which case, why are you applying? From what I've been led to understand, by my advisors and professors in general, and by articles about the academic job market, if you want a chance at an academic position after graduating a doctoral program you MUST go to a top-ranking school in your discipline. And on top of that, you have to do extremely well in the program, and publish a lot, and write a great dissertation. So why would you cripple yourself from the start by beginning your academic life in an obscure department? Just wondering...

Netflix is very helpful for the stress... I particularly like watching movies about marriages falling apart. Take This Waltz is amazing.

Do GRE scores even matter? I already did apply. Now I'm just waiting...

Why do you say that? I've read you posts on here, you seem to have your shit together.

What are any of us looking for? Acceptance? Validation? Love? Why are we here? I think when it comes to admissions, we're all underdogs. This time last year I was severely depressed, living at home, completely uncertain about what to do with my life. I thought I would apply to grad school, started an application to SFState, and then went to talk with an old prof at Columbia -- who told me to throw the SFState app in the garbage and apply to Stanford. So I completed exactly one application last year, expecting nothing. I literally forgot I had applied until I got the acceptance email, on exactly Februar 15th. Life is nuts sometimes. So now I'm here, learning new languages, having too much wine with my professors in our philosophical reading group, discussing heidegger with French rocket scientists... I love it. I'm trying my absolute best to stay here. I really want to be a part of academia, a forever part. I've never been happier, or felt more at home, than doing what I'm doing right now. That's why I'm going crazy over these applications. Doing this job, studying these things, being a part of these conversations...well it just makes me really damn happy.

somebody please...

I realize that it's impossible to predict. I'm not really asking for anyone to predict the future for me. I just want to know how other people perceive my chances... that's all... I'll go back into this corner to be neurotic by myself now kthanks

I applied (removed at poster's request) this cycle. These are my stats: Currently enrolled in an M.A. _______ (no grades yet, too early, the program is 1 year) Undergrad at _______ with a 3.6 GPA (3.77 in my major, English Lit and Fiction Writing) Studied 4 foreign languages (only 3 of which are going to be a part of my project) No publications in my field, but I did work for two years between undergrad and grad, writing for an SF bay newspaper and working as an editorial assistant at a magazine and a book publisher (I don't think this experience is at all relevant, but it is on my CV) My letters are from 3 full professors, one of whom is pretty famous, (the others are solidly respected in their field, but they work on premodern literature and I plan to do mostly 20th C with a dash of 16th C). 2 from _______ and 1 from _______. They all know me pretty well, particularly the Columbia prof. I think they will be very good letters. My statement of purpose is pretty strong, I think. It's about a creative topic that is growing in popularity, at the intersection of (removed at poster's request). I applied to 7 extremely competitive programs (no safeties): 4 Ivies and _______, _______, and _______. I've corresponded with professors at _______, _______ (where one of the profs in the department I'm applying to is recommending me), _______, _______ and _______ (of course, I'm here, they all know me at least in passing). My profs at _______ are extremely encouraging, but they say they can't guarantee anything, since every year is a crapshoot. I have 3 of 7 on the _______ adcom who are very enthusiastic about having me stay. The other 4 don't know me as well, so I have no idea what they will vote. I'm just worried that my writing sample is weak. I had to produce it in a hurry, it probably could have been better, I think there was a typo. And it's basically the most important part of the whole app :/