MissingVandyCandy

Not only am I waitlisted, but I was told I am at the top of my subfield's waitlist. They took 5 of 127. I e-mailed the graduate chair and he said they usually yield 75 percent and take 1 from the WL but no guarantee. In response to my question regarding whether they take the best overall applicant on the WL or go by subfield the answers became a bit more hazy... And the wait begins. Anyone know what happens if you accept program A and sign on say April 14th and then get off a waitlist elsewhere on April 16th? Quite frankly I'd be happy at either program... but just curious.

Has anyone been rejected (I saw one rejection posting)? I know one other applicant who called and was told s/he was on a very small waitlist that could very well move. I have not yet called, but still have not heard anything and wanted to ask around the cafe before sucking it up and e-mailing the director of grad studies myself.... Thanks! VandyCandy

I have a question that has been percolating in my head as we collectively approach recruitment weekends at the various doctoral program(s) to which we were admitted. Namely, how are you each approaching the relationship aspect of your visit with potential advisors? I'm speaking here to folks who don't have relationships outside of maybe a brief e-mail exchange with faculty at the schools you will visit. Is it safe or naive to assume that faculty with whom you share an interest will: a) be honest with you regarding their genuine feelings about your research interests and how well the department is structured to support those interests be willing to discuss placement opportunities and by extension your career goals down the line (e.g. Liberal Arts College, or Research institutions) c) demonstrate (either with a direct statement or with nascent signals) that they see themselves as a future advocate for you (assuming you don't screw up) I know many of you are using visits to investigate the area, culture and life of grad students in the department (all valuable aims), but I'm particularly curious about how I should attempt to interact with faculty. 1) As a deferential no nothing who makes it clear that I haven't the right or audacity to expect anything in the way of your encouragement or support or 2) as a confident soon to be PhD student, respectful, yet more colleague-ial (pun intended), and outgoing to the extent that I want to probe whether you as professor can see me as your student? Thoughts anyone? Maybe I'm making more out of this than I should. I just recall that at a program I was accepted to last year, when I visited the professor kept going on and on about how he loved my application and insisted on me calling him by his first name that "professor x" was in no way the way grad students addressed faculty at his school. I know the answer to these questions will vary and are textured by the nature of departments (conservative or more progressive, younger vs. older, crusty, non crusty) but can anyone shed some insight on the general theme here. Thanks VandyCandy

Tis true... however as someone who works directly with governors and commissioners of higher education on public postsecondary, state higher education systems are pushing an emphasis on more rote English Language and Composition skills in state universities which must in some way impact Literature/English departments on the public side of the equation in terms of hiring patterns, course offerings, and departmental needs aligning with undergrad course requirements.

Admittedly not my field... I'm political science, but I am interested in academe most broadly so I came accross it while reading The Chronicle's aggregator, Arts&Letters Daily. My take isn't entirely negative, and it's not as if this stuff is all that new of a revelation. If anything, I think it suggests that those who want to continue to do Lit Crit select a private university if possible over public postsecondary which state policymakers have more control over and where they are attempting to infuse more rote training for obvious and in some ways fair purposes - to graduate literate students who can write...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080324/deresiewicz

via e-mail friday around 5 pm est

Thanks everyone!

got the good news

you seem to have some insider knowledge. are you able to say anymore about the process at ND and why it seems (at the moment) they are operating in the opposite fashion of most programs out there (giving out rejections), waiting til last on acceptances, WL and final cuts?...

Has anyone heard anything? Has anyone been accepted or waitlisted, or even just called by the dept. and told they were a finalist etc.? I'm so confused as a few have claimed to have received reject e-mails. If you're rejecting via e-mail why would it be in stages?

Very weird. I checked online but I don't think the standardized web site that ND uses (along with other graduate schools) is an interactive one that updates your status. I think we have several people posting here that have received e-mail rejections. Thankfully at this point I have not received one, but I'm confused as to why people report e-mail rejections over the course of two days. How long could it really take to send out 250 rejections via e-mail? I mean WL and Acceptances are a bit trickier and personalized, but rejections? It's not like the faculty member you wanted to work with is going to write you a personalized rejections. These developments are odd indeed.

Excellent answer ABC. Obviously I want the best crack at jobs so I figured getting the broader background in History was more appropriate, but my background is in Political Science and so when I analogized the situation in my own head I had trouble seeing how someone with an interest in the History of American Higher Education--basically someone who would like to write biographies of colleges and universities and the notable academics who work in them-- would navigate a traditional history or education dept. I don't really have an interest in the role of higer education in expanding U.S. workforce productivity or access or the GI bill, just straight up academe for academe's sake. On the same token I don't think i would have interest in the education school types who singularly focus on studying what factors lead to increased student achievement or access to college. I could envision instead a doctoral dissertation that examined the history of selective liberal arts colleges in post War America and their influence on the undergraduate education provided by the traditional reserach university. I don't see how I fit into either category!

Thanks everyone, but can anyone name actual programs (either in History Departments or Schools of Education) that are strong? And would one be better off doing a straight up History PhD in terms of finding a job or an Education PhD... given the narrowness of this topic I still see it as valuable and viable given that as a Professor your research subjects be they historical documents or every day interactions on campus would be right in front of you... there for the taking.

In

All good point. Your willingness to actually read through the entire piece and say something substantive was very thoughtful and helpful. I may yet try my hand again next year in this crazy process!

Very helpful, thanks for all the suggestions. I must say I still am undecided (it's hard to say if my impending 0-8 is related to the SOP) whether or not personal narrative, creative hooks and pointing out that the PhD means more to me than a chance at a teaching job but the centrality of academe to a worthwhile career in my view is entirely a waste of space. Perhaps. Though using nearly this same SOP last cycle landed me 1 attractive offer. I think I took the gamble because in some ways (no major bad grades or bad GREs but simply adequate), I thought that I needed to differentiate somewhat. Again tough to say but in some ways a more focused albeit boring approach might have been better.

Not a word from ND :| .

Wow Lenin Got some good replies. Lenin I owe you my reply to (you e-mailed me yours)... If anyone else is willing to do the same thing for me that you did for Lenin below is my effort (names of workplaces and professors changed to conceal identity)...

I wouldn't worry about it.

Thanks for the encouragement

But here again is a good point. People's impressions of what a quality tenure track job are, vary tremendously. I don't think any of us would call Northeast Podunk Technical College a great or even good job, but there is a lot in between the Univ. of Phoenix Online and Harvard. Just as there is a lot in between Swarthmore and Sweet Briar College. There are a ton of good LAC's that aren't Williams and Amherst. I mean I'm sure many of us would be happy going for tenure at Bucknell, Lehigh, Bates, College of Charleston, Furman, Wheaton (MA not IL), and again I doubt a BC or WashU PhD would be fighting against the world trying to get a job at Furman.

By the way to the OP, if I misinterpreted your comments and your assertion that T25 was necessary to gain TT jobs was confined to T1-Research University Jobs, than I apologize. My interpretation was that you were more broadly stating a PhD outside of a T25 department was more or less useless regardless of one's advisor. I hope I did not misinterpret you and am sorry if I did so.

I just spent all of 5 minutes debunking the myth that a top 25 Political Science PhD is needed to earn tenure as a professor of Politics at a prestigious or quality 4 year college or university. The OP was correct, however, in saying that it is highly correlated to earning such a job. That said, there are many outliers. For example, go to Bowdoin College's (liberal arts yes, but not a slouch school or government department by any means) Government home page. Sure many UW-Madison and Ohio State professors, but the Fletcher School and the New School (both not top Poli Sci programs) are the PhD alma mater of 3 full tenured profs. I'm sure one could find examples elsewhere. While I agree with the OP sentiments that folks shouldn't walk into this process blindly (all PhDs are not and never will be created equal), who you "work with" even if you aren't buddy buddy with them or writing articles with them matters. A strong letter in your dossier from a top Law and Courts scholar like Rogers Smith, Howard Gillman, Ken Kersch,or Shep Melnick will help you land a job even though Penn, USC and Boston College aren't "top departments." And again, defining "top 25" departments as Chingos has shown is dicey. Chingos' placement list does not overlap perfectly with USNews or other surveys. Other than that I'd say 95 percent of what the OP said is on the ball, it's just that like anything worth doing in life there are exceptions. Will you get a tenure track position at Harvard or Berkeley with a PhD from UVa., USC, Boston College or Brown? Probably not. However, your C.V. isn't going in the trash when you apply for jobs at schools like Bates, Bowdoin and Colby. You may not have an edge over the Big 10 school applicants who slaved away on SASS for 5 years, but Bowdoin isn't going to laugh at a thesis committee supervised by Kersch and Melnick at least not if you are applying to teach Judicial Politics at Haverford.

In all seriousness, I will probably just try and find whatever job requires as little thinking as possible. If I can't do what I love in academe, I might as well just shut down the brain and do whatever job pays the rent. Learning to compartmentalize learning and knowledge from my career will be tough, but there is no point in teasing myself by trying to bridge the gap when it can't be bridged. Two cheers for living for the respite of Monday Night Football like 99 percent of all unhappy Americans who hate their jobs.