rhetoricus aesalon

Yes, this.
And also, more generally, it's comforting to tell ourselves narratives about why unsuccessful candidates are obviously so unsuccessful ("he's got a bad personality"; "she must have botched her teaching presentation"). Resist that impulse. In this job market, it's quite possible to do everything "right" and still be shut out not for multiple jobs but for multiple years on the job market. Regardless of what Karen Kelsky may try to tell you (i.e. sell you), there aren't tons of candidates out there who make it to the final round and then get up to give their job talk and do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAanrkLn6bI&t=0m24s  Most of us are pretty practiced at interviewing and job-talking by the time we get to the final stage. I don't know anyone who makes the ridiculous mistakes that get passed around as cautionary tales on social media (and I've also seen people give less-impressive job talks that resulted in a job anyway).
It's possible to do everything "right" and walk away from the table without a job.
 

this is easy: nope, don’t retake. your grades in your MA show you’re ready for graduate level work. what will higher scores tell them that your writing sample, sop, lors, and grades don’t already?  

If your goal is to enjoy grad school, feel supported and valued in your department, and get the best education possible: go to the lower-ranked school. If your goal is to be as competitive as you can on the imploding academic job market: go to the elite private school.
I’m not saying both aren’t possible at the same institution. But without knowing more about your specific situation, this is the (problematic) assumption that still predominates in academia. Especially from the perspective of the academic job market.

Thank you so much for saying this. I completely agree. But going back to OP's question, going to a higher-ranked school will still offer the best change of getting this job than not. What I meant by my post is that top-ranked program graduates are the most likely to be in a position to make this choice.

What if I told you this is exactly what happens, again and again and again, on the market? 
I’m not here to fight or agree or disagree, because I genuinely value the mission of Gradcafe in grad students supporting grad students. But I have to say I see very little of my and my cohort’s market experience represented in what you’ve written here.

If your goal is to enjoy grad school, feel supported and valued in your department, and get the best education possible: go to the lower-ranked school. If your goal is to be as competitive as you can on the imploding academic job market: go to the elite private school.
I’m not saying both aren’t possible at the same institution. But without knowing more about your specific situation, this is the (problematic) assumption that still predominates in academia. Especially from the perspective of the academic job market.

I agree that stats about where students end up only tell part of the story. However, I would argue that students from "top programs" aren't the only ones getting multiple offers. It's very likely that a good candidate is likely to get multiple offers of differing types. Part of that might be based on their school. But it's also likely that certain candidates will get looked over by the hiring school if the hiring university has had a high turnover from that school. I think it's also important to note that not everyone's end goal is to be placed at a school which focuses heavily on research. And I think it's equally as important to remember that we often have very little choice of where we end up if we decide to go on the job market. Considering most schools are not research-focused, being open to non-R1 schools will broaden our chances of being placed.
As a side note, there are some fairly well-known colleges that do have a permanent teaching-track. This remains to be a viable option for a fair amount of people and I wouldn't consider people holding these positions to be less deserving of tenure than those on a research-track. Different departments have different needs at a time and it's possible that a person's specific subfield may never open up at the R-1 school they were hoping for.
Some students might also have no desire to leave their city. I can't remember how many people I spoke with doing their Ph.D. in NYC and Austin that said they had no desire to leave their city. They said they would rather adjunct than be placed elsewhere. Likewise, there are a number of candidates in my program who have made a decision to stay because they're ready to settle down and start a family. Many have started the process of buying a house. They don't plan on entering the job market but demand from local colleges for permanent positions have always been high here. Likewise, some have expressed interest in alt-ac jobs and have no interest in the job market.Those who put in the extra effort here tend to be well rewarded on the job market. This is not a top 10 program but there are a lot of resources offered to those who do seek it.
I agree with this so much. Funding is critical. You won't be rich at anytime during your program. But not having to worry about funding is important. Even if a program guarantees five years of funding, it might be worthwhile to ask what the average time-to-degree is. If there's a difference, it might also be wise to ask them how funding is determined for the additional years and whether you're responible for any additional fees.

@Warelin
I was raised on philosophy, so I selected the username acutely aware of its implications.  
It's almost criminal that so few responses produced rankings that students need to consult.  Yes, there is a lot of uncertainty in placement.  I guess the only certainty we can have is that working at a top 20 school is only likely if you study at a top 20 school.  They'll trickle down to other schools even if they have no need for a "top 20 product."  However, some top 20 graduates just don't fit at schools with more focus on teaching.  I've heard of some job talks where they just outright make demands from the institution during the interview.  It's not really their fault, but it shows they could be out-of-touch with life at a teaching campus.  Overall, I think that the rankings might be right about the top 20 because their such givens.  I'm less confident of how they rank "middle-tier" and "lower-tier" schools.  The nature of schools having success in certain subfields has a big impact here too. 
I'm more attuned to literature than creative writing and rhet/comp.  I do know that University of Houston is one such example of a great school for creative writing (somehow they've placed students at Rice), but their literature students don't have nearly the same opportunities.  
On University of Denver, I do love the "school," but the support they offer graduate students is really disappointing (three years).  I'm a firm believer that the package has to be right.  I think schools can vary on assistantship money versus fellowship money, but cutting support before students are expected to complete the degree is definitely a big negative for me.  
You've already pointed out to us how placement stats are very misleading.  For example, Rutgers publishes stats from a favorable market, but they delete the last three years, which has been a much more challenging market.  I think more so than stats, a prospective student should look at graduate profiles and see options.  Do you have students in TT jobs, lecturer positions,  teaching colleges, and alt-ac placements?  Ideally, for programs outside the top 20, I would argue their ought to be a mix. 

I think there's some truth to this. However, one thing I would definitely do in the OPs position is obtain a list of former advisees of the professors you'd be interesting in working with and see where they are now (this is perhaps less helpful for advisees pre-2008, but still a good exercise). It's possible that at the lower ranked institution there are handful of professors that do a very good job of placing their students. If so and if those professors are the one's the OP would like to work with, that might mitigate some of the concerns regarding rank. (Although I do think that @ExileFromAFutureTime makes a very valid point that's worth considering).

That IS rude. I’m so sorry that you are both experiencing this. 
But I think in the end you just can’t know why they aren’t responding. Maybe they don’t know the answer and they are waiting until they do. Maybe they do have an answer but it’s their policy to notify applicants in groups. Maybe they thought they did respond, but the email didn’t send correctly. Maybe it is just a crappy department. 
In any case, it’s not okay that you haven’t heard back. I hope that you do soon!

I think this is really important to note. Equally important is that the college you graduate from determines your initial placement. Afterwards, it depends more on the reputation that you've built as a scholar and/or professor. It's often difficult to transition from a teaching-to-research school because the schools have different objectives they consider to be important. 

Unpopular opinion but: rank isn't the most important thing in the world.

@renea Thanks so much for the detailed response. I learned a lot from your post, and I appreciate the time you put into compiling the information for me.
@Chadillac I have done some work in writing centers and have presented at writing center and WPA conferences as an undergrad. I enjoy my work, and I do not see myself losing interest in teaching writing or teaching English anytime soon. However, I also want to do some work outside of literacy research. I am interested in bettering myself as a teacher and an instructor, but I am content to follow the field and take the best training and advice on teaching that I can find. However, I want my own research to focus mostly on issues outside of classroom writing. As I stated, I am interested in analyzing and writing about propaganda and political rhetoric. What I am struggling with is finding English departments with rhetoric/composition scholars working in this area. Mostly what I find is those working in literacy and writing program research. I am somewhat constrained geographically right now. Is it possible to do the work I want to do in a graduate program where the faculty mostly works with literacy and classroom writing?

+1 to all the wonderful work renea has done writing their response. Answering big questions like this about an entire field -- especially one that has pretty much been in flux and trying to define itself since its start 60-130 years ago (for modern composition) and 2500+ years ago (for rhetoric) is hard. So I totally want to echo renea -- it isn't your ignorance but the how-do-you-hold-a-moonbeam-in-your-hand way in which rhet/comp is always anything and yet not everything.
I think the best way to really get a sense of the field is to either (1) take a class in it if you can, or (2) take a look at Views from the Center, which is a collection of chairs' addresses from the Conference on College Composition and Communication, which is the largest conference in the field, from 1977 to 2005. You should be able to Google more recent addresses, but my recommendation is to try and look at a good range because in general a chair's address will try to account for where the field currently is and where it needs to go.
That isn't to say that's going to be a whole picture of the field -- just an idea of its core in a certain place in time. To add to renea's long list, there's work being done in rhetorics of labor, feminism, historiography, ecocomposition, posthumanism, ambient rhetoric, sonic rhetoric, object oriented ontology, feminist new materialism, feminist technoscience, writing centers, crip theory, etc., etc. 
One other way you might want to think about your questions is to think about what classes you want to teach. You could certainly study propaganda, advertising, and political rhetoric in many, many rhet/comp programs (though they would probably stylize it as "visual rhetoric"). But in just about every rhet/comp program, and in every rhet/comp job, you will teach composition. Usually first-year composition. A lot. You will probably have to direct or oversee a writing program or writing center at some point in your career, even if you aren't hired as a writing program administrator or writing center director. You will be a go-to person for anyone who has questions about the teaching of writing, and you will be expected to be an expert in the theory and practice of writing instruction, no matter your sub-area of study. If that doesn't sound appealing to you, then I would say rhet/comp is probably not the right fit. Even tenured professors in rhet/comp at R1 institutions who teach graduate seminars in courses that align perfectly with their subfield will at times be expected to teach intro-level composition courses. And just about all of them love it.

What do Rhet/Comp folks do? Is a Rhet/Comp PhD always focused only on college writing and literacy issues like WPA and writing center work? If I am interested in studying propaganda, advertising, and political rhetoric, is a Rhet/Comp PhD right for me? Do I really have a better chance of finding tenure-line work with a Rhet/Comp degree than with a Lit degree? Am I more likely to find a standard classroom teaching gig as a Rhet/Comp, or am I more likely to work in administrative roles like WPA or writing center director? Why do some universities (looking at you Vanderbilt) not offer Rhet/Comp as a potential focus? If I am interested in literacy research, what are some reputable institutions with decent funding packages that I might look into? If I am interested in rhetoric research (history, propaganda, online and tech writing [like Reddit or Facebook], etc.), what are some institutions I should look into? 
What are some specializations or subfields in Rhet/Comp that are especially popular right now? What are some subfields that I might not know about (given that I clearly know very little to begin with)? What kind of non-academic work does a Rhet/Comp degree open me up to that a Lit degree might not?
And, what other aspects of Rhet/Comp am I clearly trampling over in my ignorance in this post?

Rhet/Comp person here. There are lots of questions here so I'm going to answer a few I know answers to and direct you to some ways to find out if rhet/comp is right for you.
 
What do Rhet/Comp folks do? Well it depends on what type of program you're in. Some rhet/comp folks focus more on traditional aspects of rhetoric (think the classics, aristotle, theory, writing, and communication), other programs are more interdisciplinary and their departments may overlap with other programs at their university (Womens studies departments, English lit, digital humanities, ect), some simply have their own specializations (MSU for example has strong Cultural Rhetorics and Digital Humanities tracks). Mostly though some common themes you'll find in rhet/comp lit is writing (surprise!), community, stories, literacy, persuasion (through rhetorical devices), and communication.
Is a Rhet/Comp PhD always focused only on college writing and literacy issues like WPA and writing center work? If I am interested in studying propaganda, advertising, and political rhetoric, is a Rhet/Comp PhD right for me? See above- of course not! If you are interested in WPA or FYW then you will find it much easier to find programs (and faculty) that fit your interests. Most rhet/comp people who end up as adjuncts or in early faculty positions do serve as college writing instructors. However, many serve as WPA, program directors, or in positions in other fields (digital humanities, Arts & Sciences programs, or within smaller sister departments within their research interests- think a rhet/comp degree holder whose thesis was on indigenous methods of storytelling may serve in an Indigenous Studies programs). For your second response: there are many programs that would have faculty studying propogand and political rhetoric (especially in light of the recent election! search CFPs for special election issues and you'll be pleasantly surprised), but your interests would also fit within a communication program or a media studies programs (it just depends on where you think you fit best based on region, finances, and faculty).
Do I really have a better chance of finding tenure-line work with a Rhet/Comp degree than with a Lit degree? This is tricky, so I will leave this to lit people to discuss the job market in their field, but I will say Rhet/Comp (just like many humanities programs) can provide training in areas that will help you get a degree (such as professional writing, website design, coding, technical writing, ect). I have seen many of the people from my program leave with jobs in hand and our department has only grown. I realize though that this is not the case everywhere. Jobs are hard to find in any field right now, so if tenure-track is your goal, ask programs about their graduate's record in receiving these positions.
Am I more likely to find a standard classroom teaching gig as a Rhet/Comp, or am I more likely to work in administrative roles like WPA or writing center director? This will depend on your research, focus, and GA position. If you don't want to be a WPA no one will make you. I will say though just in terms of job availability there will always be less WPA positions than teaching positions. Most universities have 1-3 admins in a writing center whereas they may have 20-30 teach positions for "standard classroom teaching" (note: I'm talking about FYW, rhetoric/comp, and potentially English class positions since let's face it most Rhet/Comp people end up in an English department not in a stand alone Rhet/Comp department).
What are some specializations or subfields in Rhet/Comp that are especially popular right now? What are some subfields that I might not know about (given that I clearly know very little to begin with)? Just to name a few that I know of from my department's subfields: pedagogy, literacy, teaching, visual rhetoric, digital rhetorics, cultural rhetorics, disability studies, indigenous studies, chicano/a studies, trauma studies, queer theory, environmental studies, African American studies, multi-modal composition, accessibility, professional writing, rhetorical theory/historiography, and technical writing (these are literally just some of what people in my department study- find a department that is flexible and enthusiastic and they will help you find spaces for your work)
 
And, what other aspects of Rhet/Comp am I clearly trampling over in my ignorance in this post? This is not your ignorance, but a lot of people think rhet/comp is just writing, or just like the field of English because we are so often housed in English programs. However, Rhet/Comp is a very growing and changing field. There is also a great divide in the field between more traditional programs and more "progressive" programs. Where you do your MA/PhD will greatly influence what you will read, how you will be trained, and the programs you will be able to more easily network with. Rhet/Comp is a lot more diverse and nuanced that just writing, but writing is at the heart of what we do. If you want to focus more on literature, history, or a particular time period literature may be a better fit for you, if you want to focus more on theories of communication then communication may be better for you. It just depends on your resources, desires, and focus. I highly recommend searching through a department's website and looking at what their graduate students are focusing on. Their research interests will show you what is more popular/available in their department and you will often see common themes. Taking a brief look through their list of courses is also a good start. I chose Rhet/Comp because I always enjoyed theory and persuasion over literary analysis, as an undergraduate I had the opportunity to take rhetoric classes that really made me think about my position, power, and motives (in fact we talked quite a lot about propoganda and power). Overall I found a place in the field that was open to me really exploring my identity, power, and position and overall challenges me to write (and discuss other's writing) from a place that questions those priveleges. However, rhet/comp isn't the only place you can do that work and our field is smaller than lit. Our field is growing because we are able to secure some funding through digital humanities programs, Writing Centers, and First Year Writing pedagogy/labs (something some more traditional programs/english programs may not be able to). 
 
PS: Online writing is a very hot topic right now so there is space for that interest as well.

My department accepts ASL to meet the requirement, but I know some folks in other departments here who've had to fight to get their department to accept it for their requirement.

Apologies for bumping a rather old thread, but I just have to say how happy and impressed I was with the events of OSU's visit day. It's truly a congenial environment here, and I felt extremely welcome. Major hat-tip to @acciodoctorate for answering a ton of questions and showing me around campus (and a delightful dive bar!). Were it not for an early morning drive back to Maryland, I'd probably still be enjoying the subtle pleasures of Columbus' nightlife...

I'll likely announce my final decision by the end of the week.

I just wanted to second what @Old Bill said. Really, a lovely visit.
For those unable to make it to the visit or who are on the waiting list, feel free to PM me. I don't mind gushing about the experience, and especially if you're a 19th century person, hit me up.

Seconded!  We had a fantastic time talking about the program and meeting all the prospective students.  Feel free to message me as well if you have any questions!

Very glad to hear that you all enjoyed the visit. We certainly enjoyed having you here 

For those of you accepted to OSU: who is planning on attending their visit day next month? I was going to set up a group PM, but I've lost track of all the various acceptances, since it's a fairly large cohort...

I'll be driving in on the Sunday, and should be in Columbus around 2:00. I may do a bit of general driving around the city (looking at possible living areas etc.), but I'd be happy to pick up anyone who happens to be flying in that afternoon / evening and take you to your hotel. I've heard that there may be an unofficial get-together with the DGS and others at a pub near campus on the Sunday night, but haven't heard anything specific yet...so if that's not happening, then perhaps we can have a little pre-visit pub trip of our own?

Anyhow, feel free to chime in if you're going to make it to the day for admitted students, and we can potentially work out specific details via PM!

It is not a fun thing to share, but it is important to share that higher education is in a labor crisis, and it stands to only get worse now that our government has become ultra-conservative. Getting a graduate degree in the humanities is difficult enough, and even if you do finish there are a mountain of obstacles awaiting your future as a professional.
With that said, law school graduates don't have it all that much better -- perhaps even worse since, statistically speaking, you are about as likely to land a job as a law school grad now as you are an English graduate school grad but are more likely to have amassed much more debt in law school.  
I don't share this to dissuade your choice. I love grad school. I love what I do; I am personally fulfilled and feel I do important work. But you (and any partner you might have) should be knowledgeable about exactly what you're getting yourself into no matter the choice you make. 

Just adding to the chorus here, but...I started my Bachelor's when I was 32, started my Master's when I was 36, and I will have turned 38 by the time I start my Ph.D. There have been moments of awkwardness and embarrassment over being older, and I do have some regrets for not going down this path earlier, but ultimately I think that life experience and a lengthy non-academic background can give you a lot of perspective, and can ground you quite a bit...and I've heard from several people that adcoms know this. In other words, being an undergraduate at 25 (and a grad student at 26, 27, 28 etc.) is probably not going to hurt you, and may even help you.

All of the job market posts above are (obviously) completely accurate and on point, and there's really no way to argue with the bleakness of the numbers. I'll just add two side points, however (I nearly called them "alternate facts"): the first is that, while the downward trajectory has been somewhat consistent, it's nonetheless difficult to predict the lay of the land in six or seven years. These are scary times for arts, science, education (and many, many others), but my other point is that if you can afford to live on a fairly slim stipend, there's a lot of appeal to being paid to get an education. I'm not even meaning the pie-in-the-sky "life of the mind" notion. Just on a basic level, getting paid to study literature, teach college students, attend conferences etc. and come out of the process with an advanced degree isn't a bad way to spend two to seven years. There are many who will disagree with this stance, which is completely fair and valid, but I've now spent most of my thirties in academia after spending most of my late-teens and twenties in a series of mediocre jobs and false starts...and I couldn't be happier. I don't make a lot of money as a grad student, but I love the environment, love the constant challenges, love the research, and love the teaching. And yes, I love the feeling (false or no) of increasing prestige. If these things sound to you like a reasonable trade-off for a lot more money and stability (and if you have the kind of long-term persistence and depth of focus that academic work requires), then grad school is definitely a great option for you.

It is not a fun thing to share, but it is important to share that higher education is in a labor crisis, and it stands to only get worse now that our government has become ultra-conservative. Getting a graduate degree in the humanities is difficult enough, and even if you do finish there are a mountain of obstacles awaiting your future as a professional.
With that said, law school graduates don't have it all that much better -- perhaps even worse since, statistically speaking, you are about as likely to land a job as a law school grad now as you are an English graduate school grad but are more likely to have amassed much more debt in law school.  
I don't share this to dissuade your choice. I love grad school. I love what I do; I am personally fulfilled and feel I do important work. But you (and any partner you might have) should be knowledgeable about exactly what you're getting yourself into no matter the choice you make.