Jump to content

maxhgns

Members
  • Content count

    370
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

maxhgns last won the day on May 14

maxhgns had the most liked content!

About maxhgns

  • Rank
    Mocha

Profile Information

  • Location
    Canada
  • Application Season
    Not Applicable

Recent Profile Visitors

3,074 profile views
  1. maxhgns

    Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics programs?

    Unfortunately, I wouldn't count DePaul. It's a fantastic continental department, but one of those pretend ghosts when it comes to aesthetics/philosophy of art.
  2. maxhgns

    Philosophy of Art/Aesthetics programs?

    Nope. This is the subforum for it. Sacralicious is asking about a subfield of philosophy. This is a move you need to make with your eyes wide open--way more wide open than for getting a PhD in philosophy in the first place. You absolutely need to know that the job prospects in aesthetics are just about the worst of any subfield of philosophy. Most years, there's one job in the AOS; often, there are none. Occasionally you get bumper crops of 3+, but that's rare. You have to expect one job a year, max. And you have to realize that it's a subfield that's widely (and unjustly) looked down upon. Things are better among continentalists, but still not good. So you have to plan your trajectory accordingly. The result is that anybody working in aesthetics has to specialize in something else, too. And that's not a bad thing, since aesthetics gives you the opportunity to bring philosophical work from elsewhere into conversation with human culture, and that makes for really interesting stuff. But from the practical and research standpoints, you absolutely have to master some other aspect of the philosophical literature. Even then, that's not enough for the job market (you'll still get discounted as not the real deal). On the plus side, there's much less legitimate competition for that one job a year. And the main aesthetics associations--the ASA and the BSA--are great, very friendly, and do a lot of work to promote aesthetics, and to help students (e.g. student travel to the conferences is funded, they fund lots of grants, they have editorial opportunities for students, and the ASA is going to start sponsoring a postdoc). These are relatively large organizations (especially the ASA), and so there are lots of conferences every year--4 for the ASA, 1 BSA, 1 CSA, and 1 ESA, plus a few other regular events. That all means that networking and getting conference experience is a lot easier in this subfield than in others. With those warnings out of the way, I suppose it needs to be said that the state of graduate education in aesthetics in North America (if that's where you're looking) is not great. A lot of programs have people who claim aesthetics as an AOS, but most of those aren't affiliated with the ASA/BSA/CSA/ESA, and don't publish in the relevant journals (if they publish in aesthetics at all). So you have to be careful. You absolutely need a supervisor who is active in the subfield, because you can't afford not to have a vocal advocate. To my mind, the best ranked departments in North America for the study of aesthetics are (in alphabetical order) CUNY, McGill, NYU, and UBC. Among the unranked departments, I'd say it's Illinois-Chicago, Oklahoma, and Vanderbilt (since they hired Taylor). I may have forgotten a department, but at any rate I'd say that these are currently the best places to do that kind of work. You'll have noticed, though, that some of these departments aren't necessarily the best places for a continental specialization. For that, I'd give much closer consideration to Columbia, Oklahoma, UIC, and Vanderbilt. (McGill is continental-friendly, but their main aesthetician is wholly analytic.)
  3. That's weird. It's entirely appropriate to email and ask. In my field, a conference paper is usually about 3000 words long, and one aims to present it for about 20 minutes. Things are definitely different for different fields, but you can get a decent sense of what's expected by perusing the instructions on other conference CFPs.
  4. maxhgns

    Moving out of the US?

    The first thing to know is that the direction of the brain drain is from these other countries to the US, not the other way around. That means it's going to be an uphill struggle for you--especially, I suspect, coming from a program that isn't much of an international name-brand (unless it is in comms?). The other thing to know is the number of jobs in your field in those countries every year. For English Canada and Australasia, it's going to be a couple. Maybe one or two more if we count French Canada, but you'll obviously need French for those. For western Europe, it'll probably be a handful or two in the UK, and a trickle in France, Germany, Spain, etc. (almost all of which will require knowledge of the local language). It's also worth noting that many of these places have preferential hiring for their own citizens, graduates, or holders of work permits, just as the US does. Having said these things, the thing to do is to start looking at job ads in these countries to figure out what they're generally looking for, and to start looking at the CVs of new American hires in these countries, to see what their profiles are like. You'll need the PhD, of course, but also as many pubs as you can get, a solid portfolio of courses under your belt, perhaps even a large set of conference presentations, the best letters of rec you can find, etc.. These things will vary a little by discipline, and I'm not in comms, so I may be a little off. But those are the general pre-reqs for academic jobs.
  5. maxhgns

    Is it good or bad if professors are hands off

    No, it's not a test. It's just that you're relatively low on his or her list of priorities. It's also not about you. It's just the way they think of their duties to their students. Most think of you as being somewhat higher in the list of priorities, but their actions show that your real rank is somewhat lower than their conception of it. Ideally, a supervisor should be hands-off in the sense that they let you pursue your own project and make and solve your own mistakes, but be hands-on in terms of giving you regular feedback, introducing you to their network, etc. It's a relatively hard balance to strike. Most err on the side of too little contact/feedback.
  6. Ask your supervisor for some guidance. That's what they're there for.
  7. maxhgns

    Journal Submission Process - my first time

    Like Hope.for.the.best said, whenever you think you're ready to start. Actually, IMO you should start before you feel confident that you're ready, because the writing process can help to shape the direction of your research, and keep you appropriately focused. Also, too many people fall into the trap of postponing writing until they've read all the things or done all the tests, and that's a recipe for never actually writing anything at all. Note, however, that this does not mean that you'll be ready to submit soon after you start writing. It could take years to bring your paper up to snuff. But the sooner you start trying, the better. There are different ways to do this, and the best strategies of course depend on where you are in your career. When you're aiming for 2+ a year because you're on the tenure-track at an R1, you'll want to adopt a shotgun-style approach--that is, you'll want to have 5-10 papers under review at all times, at a mix of journals (some top subfield, some second-tier subfield, some top generalist, some second-tier generalist, etc.). And exactly which journals you select will depend on fit and--especially--their average time to reach a verdict, and how soon you need that pub. Right now, I think that you should identify the three best journals for which your paper is an excellent fit, and start by sending to the first (I'm assuming, of course, that time-to-verdict doesn't matter so much for an MA student. I might be wrong about that!), and work your way down from there. I'm guessing those'll be subfield journals, but maybe one is a generalist journal. Shrug. (I'm not in a field where impact factor counts for anything, so I'm not sure how to advise you on that point. My intuition is that the best journals in your subfield will have decent impact factors.) The best remedy is to write, and have people (friends, colleagues) read your work and help you. You can always return the favour for them--in French, yes, but also in English (even if you don't catch their mistakes or can't help them with the actual writing, you can help them at the levels of content and clarity of exposition). You could, for example, start a weekly workshop group, with five or so participants, where each week you read and discuss and comment on one person's paper or chapter. Regularly reading in English (especially at the level you want to emulate: so, academic writing) will also help a lot. You can certainly hire a copy editor, but I wouldn't bother. It's going to be extremely expensive. (I should know, I've been one!) Some journals do offer a free help service for people whose native language isn't English, however. Check the journal's author guidelines.
  8. maxhgns

    Failing to meet language requirements? What happens?

    Nobody can answer this except for people in your department. Specifically, ask whoever the graduate chair/coordinator/director of graduate studies (or equivalent) is. You may also have a program handbook that spells out the policy's details. At my program, students could complete the language requirement at any time during their enrollment in the PhD program, and could take the test(s) any number of times. The logic requirement, however, had to be passed by the end of our second year, and we only got two tries. (With appropriate exceptions for medical problems, leave, etc.)
  9. maxhgns

    Total Number of PhD Applicants per year?

    There's no official count that I'm aware of. When I was applying (in '08 and '09), even pretty low-ranked programs were getting 300-400+ applicants. Things have definitely slowed down a lot since then, so I'd guess that the total number of applicants (if you count applicants overseas, those who only apply to one or two programs, and applications to non-PGR-ranked programs [including VERY unranked programs]) is <1000 for Anglophone programs. I'd put it at somewhere in the vicinity of 500-600. But that's a total guesstimate based on little more than intuition.
  10. maxhgns

    Applying to phd programs with an interdisciplinary MA?

    Queen's (Kingston, Canada) is very strong in social and political, and has a tops public policy department. Also very strong in bioethics. But they're a bit of a boutique program in that respect.
  11. Being ABD counts for nothing, especially if it's never followed up with a PhD. Students put it on their CVs when they're applying for jobs to indicate that they're job market-ready, and will have the PhD in hand by the start date. But it isn't a credential, and shouldn't go on your CV if that's where your studies left off. At best, academic employers will think you're unprofessional; at worst, they'll feel duped and hold it against you. Non-academic employers, on the other hand, won't give it any credit or credence. So, if the options are MS or ABD, then an MS is the way to go. An MS is a real credential, and one you'll have earned--the only hitch being that it's redundant if you've already got one in the same subject. If that's the case, then a second one won't make you any more competitive. Community college jobs are increasingly going to people with PhDs. I don't know how widespread this is in math yet, but it may be worth factoring into your decision. What you should probably do is spend some time going through recent community college job ads and talking to/emailing people currently working at community colleges to get their take on their hiring practices.
  12. maxhgns

    Job Placement Concerns in Academia

    I'm in a different (but related) humanities(ish) field, but... Pedigree is (depressingly) important on the job market. It makes you a contender for a lot more jobs, and helps you stand out from the crowd. It'll even do this for people who didn't have superstar advisors. On the other hand, your letters will mean a lot on the market, too. And having strong letters from superstars intimately familiar with you and your work will help a lot, and will help you stand out from the crowd. They can also do more to help you build a network. And it actually shows when an applicant attended a program that's very strong in their area of specialization, and had stellar advisors (as opposed to students who went to higher-ranking programs weaker in their areas of specialization). So my advice would be to try as hard as you can to get into a high-ranking program. But it's defeasible advice, especially if your alternate program is tops in your area of specialization. (I, for example, opted to attend a relatively low-ranking program so that I could work with one of the top living scholars in my area of specialization. It's worked out well for me so far (especially for jobs in my AOS), although I've definitely noticed the absence of a prestige bump when I apply to jobs listing open specializations. Note, however, that a program is tops in an area because it has well-established first-rate scholars working in that area. Up-and-coming doesn't quite cut the mustard yet.
  13. maxhgns

    Typos/errors in published pieces?

    Turns out my first publication has a typo in the title that's not replicated elsewhere in the text. I don't know if it's my fault or the copy editor's, and it can't be changed. But it's no big deal. Most people won't notice it (it's a 'c' for an 's', and everyone will assume it's a British vs. American English thing. But I know it's not, and that the word in the title designates something slightly different.) I only noticed it because I was recently refereeing a reply, and so re-read my paper. So there you have it. At least your typos weren't in the title!
  14. maxhgns

    B+ in PhilMind

    Forget about it. It doesn't matter.
  15. A master's degree, like a PhD, should be funded by your department, otherwise it's not really worth it. Many MAs in philosophy are funded, although not all are (especially in Europe and the UK). If you're Canadian, then you can apply to SSHRC for funding to do your degree anywhere; if you're from Québec, you can do the same with the FRQSC (but I think it's limited to universities in Québec); if you're from Ontario, apply to OGS (for a degree at an institution in Ontario). One thing you'll have to decide is whether you're aiming for an MSC in logic, or an MA in philosophy with a focus on logic and mathematics. The range of options for the MSC is a lot narrower, but will obviously afford you much greater competence in the subject. On the other hand, the MA will probably give you broader competence in philosophy itself, and there are lots of departments with very strong logicians and philosophers of mathematics. For the MSC in logic, I know that Amsterdam and CMU both offer it. I think these are probably your strongest options. IIRC the LSE and Paris 7 also offer a master's-level degree in logic. Manchester does, too, but it's through the maths department. For the MA, you're right to think of Western. I'd add Calgary as a possibility. On the PhD front, it's worth noting that Berkeley has a straight-up PhD in logic run by the philosophy department.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.