greenmt

I tend to overwrite and then go back and cut, cut, cut. Sometimes the raw material is useful (as others have said above) in other contexts. Carving away at things that sounded good in the moment but pull you away from your main thesis (which, I've found, often appears on a second or third draft) can be hard but ultimately satisfying. As an undergraduate, I had a writing teacher who would advise me to take the final line of a poem I brought to him, and start writing from there. I found that nearly impossible to do at the time, but in my professional writing, now, I often find that the real subject appears toward the end, and I do just that, make the end the beginning and start from there. Also, that feeling of defeat is often the precursor to learning something new and important. I struggled a lot with writing academic papers in my MA program. The feedback I was getting was, essentially, that I was being too associative. I fought and fought and fought with that, and the fighting made me a better writer, not only in academic writing but in the writing I've done since to make my living.... Failing with good guidance is one of the reasons for school.

I like that article a lot. On the topic of "the two sides have much to gain from each other," here's a story about an art education method used to improve the observation skills of Harvard Med School students. Disclosure: I worked with the folks behind Visual Thinking Strategies for a few years, before this project got underway: http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/articles/2008/07/20/monet_gauguin_using_art_to_make_better_doctors/?page=full and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2517949/

That's awful. Whether or not you have a union, I'd suggest contacting the NLRB. Your friend might have a case.

I agree with all of this. I'll just say that from what I have found there is already a fair amount of data available, in the form of the MLA's annual reports on the Job Information List; in periodic reports from the Association of Departments of English on the state of the profession, polling and reporting on who is working and on which track (it's time for another one, as the most recent was in 2007); and in various other places I've cited elsewhere, such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I found the ADE site particularly interesting, because it's the place that the faculty-managers of departments talk with each other. Among the facts cited in their 2007 report (which tracked faculty numbers between 1995 and 2005) was that the *number* of tenured faculty increased during that time, but the *percentage* declined. This is because much of the growth in both faculty hires and the student population was at 2 year colleges. If that's true - and from what I read in the papers it might be even more the case since 2008 - it kind of makes sense that tenure-track hiring is declining. Community colleges tend to be underfunded, to have fluctuating enrollments (because students drop out at a higher rate), and to focus primarily on survey courses in the Humanities. In any case, maybe the place to organize would be in that subsector of the overall field. I think the main thing for me is to get away from the alarmist tone that predominates in popular articles on the subject. In order to solve the problem, I agree, it's necessary to look at it directly, and that might be difficult for people whose future professional lives rely on their reputation within fairly small, fairly personal networks (compared with the workforce at large), or whose professional lives are more or less settled. In other words, there may be disincentives to speaking plainly, related to the structure of the tenure system. I'm speaking as someone currently outside that system, so I'd be interested to hear what others think, who are closer to it. There are lots of other pressures. At the small, private college where I work, things are desperate: competition for students, lots of unfounded notions about online education, flat or diminishing student aid, increasing expenses, and outright hostility from some quarters for any kind of education that doesn't lead directly to the help-wanted ads. I have some sympathy for the administrators, having seen what *they're* up against.

It might be kind of a wise idea for these programs - or their association, the ADE, or an association of graduate organizations, if there is such a thing - to poll the various programs, to glean best practices in professionalization. I've been very impressed (at least prospectively) with the kind of support that is provided by the program I'm entering in the fall. Other programs are probably doing interesting things, too, to support their students' preparation for work after the PhD. Why not gather and share this info? Might make for a very compelling MLA presentation. My little ax to grind is, if there are no tenure-track jobs to be had for everyone entering PhD programs now, why not broaden the notion of professionalization to include experience doing other things PhD students do when they leave school? It's possible to serve the university by improving its archives or its web presence or landing an NEH grant, as much as by teaching composition to undergraduates. A lot of the agony people seem to feel - on this board and in magazine articles and blog posts - when they can't get a tenure track job, seems to stem from a justifiable sense of betrayal: they studied and prepared and served the university for five or eight or ten years, and then they were out on their own.

Some programs require the subject test. Plenty of reputable programs don't. I wouldn't let this stop me if I wanted to apply next year or later. I have the sense that it's not the kind of test for which one can easily study. There exists at least one test prep book, but it was last updated in 2010, and their main piece of advice - basically to read through the entire Western and multicultural English language canon - is something you can do without buying the book. If I knew I were going to take the subject test two or three years down the road, I'd use the time to read in areas I know I haven't read much. The book also had one specific piece of advice that was useful. If I remember correctly, it's advisable to guess on the general GRE, but not on the Subject GRE. That's confirmed in this practice book on the ETS web site. The general GRE is definitely worth taking again if you had a hard time the first time through. It's like any multiple choice test. Learning how the test designers think is a big part of succeeding on the text. I would certainly buy a test prep book for that one and use all of the resources on the ETS web site. I don't love ETS, but they provide useful prep materials.

I'd like to "like" this but I'm out of upvotes, so please accept this verbal version. I think I did find a program that is a bit more flexible and outward looking. We'll see. I'm starting this fall.... My advisor does a lot of public-humanities stuff, and knows what my intentions are, so that helps. From what I've seen the job market is cyclical, so folks who entered in 2006 or 2007 (rightly) had a different job market in mind than the one into which they are graduating. I can't say, nor can anyone, what the market will look like five or eight years from now, but if it follows patterns from the last 20-30 years, chances are good that there'll be both a lot more jobs being listed, a higher proportion of them tenure-track jobs. So in fact it might not be a terrible time to *enter* a PhD program, though it seems like a rotten time to be *leaving* one.

I second everything!

Out of upvotes! Congrats, all. Admissions to some pretty kick-ass programs today!

I appreciate that you commented. I remember noting that, after a posted this, a bunch of people looked at it, but no one commented. I suspect that says something about the kinds of conversations that are (not) happening in Humanities PhD programs, or maybe even the things people are expected not to say there. It's possible it's only an issue for me, because of my particular background. But I see a contradiction in the unwillingness of "a university/the government [to] invest all that money in you if you don't intend to serve the Academia forever and ever" when everyone seems to agree that there aren't enough spaces available for everyone to do that by researching / teaching in 4 year colleges. (I've done a bunch of research on this in the year since I first posted, and I think the anxiety is overstated, but that's another topic.) Also, I would assert that there are many ways to serve the field - whether the humanities generally or a given particular field - outside the academy. In the last 20 years, museums and performing arts orgs, among others, have realized they need to reach out and engage the general public, first in order to survive, and second because they have something to offer that's of value to people outside the usual audiences. I don't like *why* that's happened - it has a lot to do with the replacement of government funding with private and corporate funding - but as someone who grew up feeling excluded from that world, I like that it has happened. I say the humanities are essential, because they offer ways of thinking and knowing that can only come about through the kinds of engagement that historians, literary folks, and the like engage in. But why should anyone who hasn't had those experiences believe me? That work - moving humanities scholarship into the public realm - is also a valuable way to serve the field, and might make the difference in the survival of the field as we know it. Because you know that computer scientists are making the case that government funding should go to their scholarly endeavors. The notion of STEM didn't arise out of thin air. All that said, the kinds of jobs that I envision as a possible outcome of my PhD study are roughly equivalent to museum curator. They include: private and public funders, historic houses and museums, archives, humanities centers, nonprofit associations, and the like. Some explicitly require a PhD, others just always go to the person with the PhD. I wouldn't be doing it if I didn't care about the work I'm proposing to do, because it does seem like a lot of effort just to get a job. But there are job-related skills that a PhD course, and writing a dissertation, are helpful in developing, which translate well into the skills needed in nonprofit-land, at least: research, writing, working with byzantine bureaucracies and still getting the thing done, envisioning, planning, and carrying out a long-term, large-scale project. I still don't get why humanities departments - which, after all, are often connected with humanities centers, museums, and the like - don't offer alternate professionalization tracks, if the job market is so bad. But the last year has shown me, at least, a way to keep both tracks going simultaneously.

Is there one? I think there should be. If many of the problems we face result from the indifference or hostility of those who hold the purse strings in Washington and state capitals, and pressure on individual programs to tighten their budgets as resources diminish, doesn't it make sense for a coalition of programs that represent the full cohort of humanities graduate programs - faculty, adjuncts, and students - to speak with one voice, to articulate why the f this work matters and is worth supporting? It may be self-evident to us, but where I come from, it's not. Virtually every profession in the US has a representative in DC or NY making a public case for support. Why not this one? What do you think?

In a minute, I'm going to take myself off the waitlist (not quite the same as turning down, but it might mean something to someone, all the same) Tufts for 19th C. American.

I've accepted at UMD. 19th C. American is my racket, for anyone still waiting. I'll be taking myself off the waitlist at Tufts. (Has anyone but me been waiting on Tufts? Seemed like a lovely campus, with good people.) It's a relief to no longer be waiting, but this app season has left me feeling (metaphorically) beaten about the head and shoulders. My best wishes to all still waiting.

I just officially accepted at UMD. Quite the grueling application season, and the last week, since I was accepted off the waitlist, I have been seriously distracted. I feel more like sleeping than celebrating. But, that said, a tiny hooray! is in order, no?

Somewhere on one of these threads a while back, a similar discussion came up right around the time I saw a story online about Harvard's acceptance rate. It turned out that, stated as a percentage, the rate of acceptance for most of the PhD programs I (and probably you, if you're reading this) applied to was *lower* than Harvard's famously absurd undergraduate acceptance rate: so low that it made the news. That gave me some perspective. I feel damned lucky to have gotten into a good program (barely, the second time around). I've never been particularly competitive, so this might be a rationalization, but it feels like chance plays a big role in these outcomes. Take heart. If you got in, it's because they saw something in your prospective work. If you didn't, ask for feedback and try again. My application the second time around was objectively better b/c of what I learned the first time around. PS, I half-expected that things would get more contentious on this board as April 15 drew near. That it hasn't confirms something good, and pretty rare, about you folks. I hope to get to know some of you at conferences and such.

Since there's not a separate thread for this, I'll say here that I became a complete fanboy when speaking with my prospective advisor at UMD just now. She's all kinds of awesome, and I'm very excited to work with her, but it's a bit embarrassing in retrospect.

Have you tried contacting the POI and describing your situation? I don't mean to imply that you should pressure anyone, but simply stating (to her / him) your situation, reiterating your desire to work with her / him, and in the program, for the reasons you mention, might prompt the POI to see whether the dept. can free up the funds. I wouldn't even necessarily *ask* for that, but it seems to me perfectly reasonable to restate your interest and describe your situation.

Ow, ishmael. I know how it is to be on the waitlist. I sympathize. I'm gonna send you a brief PM.

Congratulations! And if you're talking about Burlington, Vermont, I can affirm that a Viking-themed brewery would fit right in. The whole damned state is hop-crazy. I will say that hard cider seems to be the coming thing....

ProfLorax and Wyatt's Torch, thank you! I'm out of upvotes and it's been too long a day to gather my thoughts, but I will be taking you both up on your offers; and I'm looking forward to meeting you both.

Congratulations to wetheplants and ToldAgain!

Thank you, everyone! ProfLorax, yes, I'm married, and we have a 9 year old daughter, so among other concerns is school. We're also moving from a place where the natural world is right outside our doors, and community is central to everything - a small town, basically, where everything happens face to face and on a small scale, including relationships with teachers and school administrators and so on. So, changes in work, school, and landscape, with no very clear idea of how to find a community of reasonably like-minded people = a big move. We lived in New York City for many years, but by the time our kid came along, I knew how to find what I was looking for, and it was not hard to adapt. I'm less familiar with the DC area, and know virtually nothing about the schools or where and how to find the natural world, etc. I've been thinking about the benefits / drawbacks of DC vs. MD. Is it ok if I PM you with some questions?

Congratulations! I <3 Mississippi. I've only ever driven by Oxford, but the landscape around there is gorgeous.

Congratulations, CarolineKS!

I agree with InHacSpeVivo: if I were in your shoes, I'd be inclined to go directly for the PhD. Brandeis is not only well-regarded, it's well-situated, partway out of town. Boston is easily accessible by car or public transport; it's smaller, obviously, but a great city; and getting to NY will be much easier because you'll already be partway out on the Mass Turnpike. (Amtrak, and I think Greyhound, stop at a station near the intersection of Rts. 128 and 95, so you don't have to go into Boston to catch public transport.) Also, I think you said earlier that your spouse is certified in New York but not in Mass, but - depending on what the field is - I'd look into reciprocal certification rules. It's possible that it's simply a matter of taking a test and paying a fee. The area in / around Brandeis is pricy, but there are more affordable options a short commute away. Having said all that, if the issue is not wanting to leave New York yet, or wanting to work with specific faculty members at your undergraduate institution, or have other particular experiences that are not available through Brandeis, I think it's always best to go with your gut.