guest56436
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by guest56436
-
-
Yeah, that's obviously harassment and certainly against numerous policies at your university.
Report him to your department head + the appropriate university-wide administration that handles these issues. Cease all contact.
-
I definitely think more clarification on the context is needed here to really jump to giving advice.
How did this exactly occur, where, and how did it even come up in conversation?
It makes a big deal because for example if professor in a different department propositioned you in a private and social setting and there was some kind of dual dialogue that led up to it, it may not be sexual harassment (could easily be construed as inappropriate or whatever). If this person propositioned you without being led on in say his office, then yes obviously it is.
-
I delete them; unless they are particularly important. I'm a purger.
-
Too much variation both across and within departments to say either way.
Most departments in the top 20-30 have students every 3 or 4 years that publish multiple articles as grad students or ABDs. Some departments it's more common, some it's more rare. Probably mostly sheer luck. These people are usually just really good and succeed because of mostly their own merit. That being said, some programs ranked a little lower play the 'one star' model where they identify a talented student in each cohort and shift a disproportionate amount of resources to him/her.
But there are a few things to look for:
CHYMPS departments are actually quite variable; lots of grad students are unpublished when on the market - that being said, these are the only candidates these days that get placed in TT positions without pubs so there could be less pressure.
Private school departments for the most part have students that publish more or larger percentages of students who publish. The main reasons are stipends are better, there are more funds to support research, and they TA less.
Higher ranked departments have higher numbers of students who get published, most of this is probably selection effects (better students usually get accepted to better programs) but also may have to do with gaining access to tighter networks that result in book chapters or coauthoring opportunities.
There is also the variable of coauthoring with your advisor or faculty. Some faculty do a lot of research with their students and some do not (some don't care or some rather push their students to publish on their own. But keep in mind that this doesn't go nearly as far as a solo author pub on the job market.
All that's to say there aren't really any departments that stand out in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure you could crunch the numbers and come up with a ranking of some sort, but I imagine it would be pretty closely correlated to the typical program rankings you see today.
-
I don't take notes anymore. I was never a big note taker, but as my classes got more and more discussion/seminar based, I stopped taking them entirely. For me, I don't see the point of sitting there jotting down notes rather than just listening. The only exception is I still take notes for readings (I first read the entire reading the take some notes on the main theoretical argument and empirical evidence), which I just do on the computer in a word file that is organized by week in a class folder.
-
16 hours ago, deutsch1997bw said:
Thanks. Out of curiosity, did you accept the offer? Did you get into any other programs? I'm interested in working with Zoltan Barany and Robert Moser.
FYI, Moser is in administration now and is not leaving his post as head of department any time soon. He is not teaching grad seminars anymore and I don't think he currently advises many either.
-
None or minimal. A lot of first year students make the mistake of reading ahead. But the problem is that it is very hard to remember much more than the basics of what you read even as little as a couple of weeks later.
If I were you, I would try to see if you can study some Old English before the program, that way you can hit the ground running and potentially spend less time on developing those skills during your program (or conversely, become more proficient than your could have otherwise).
- hats and RurikNjalsson
-
2
-
To be honest, if you can't get above 150 on the quant section I would question your ability to survive a first year quant sequence.
-
I refuse to work/read/be on my phone because I think it is unprofessional. I'm being paid to proctor an exam, not do what I want.
I sit or stand at the front, walk through the aisles or stand in the aisles or back. All this while looking at individuals to make sure no one is cheating.
-
Not great. Academic doctorates in the social sciences aren't particularly designed to funnel people to the private sector. Although some people land decent jobs if they focus on attaining good quantitative skills.
-
Are these pubs in actual legitimate outlets? Because if they are then you have a stronger profile than 99% of applicants. I suspect they aren't because that would be strong output for even an ABD.
-
These types of blurbs are usually very vague. And they can be changed or updated.
-
I don't know if it's mandatory or not. But I'm still confused at why this is an issue for you.
-
Sad but not uncommon occurrence. There was another recently that got imprisoned in one of the Central Asian countries. Always a risk doing research in countries with authoritarian regimes.
-
Why wouldn't you want one?
-
3 minutes ago, davedove said:
Hey everybody !! I will finally be in grad school next year. I noticed that in the official website of my department, grad students have an academic profile in which they highlight their research interests, topics of thesis, and faculty supervisor(s). Is it mandatory to have this kind of "academic profile" as I don't want to have one? Thank you all in advance
Why wouldn't you want one?
-
My general rule of thumb is to avoid interdisciplinary programs at the doctoral level. They rarely have as good as job prospects as traditional discipline programs do.
-
2 hours ago, nhhistorynut said:
Wow that would have been a lot easier lol that's about how long my MA program expected seminar papers to be (well, 20-30)...
It's not really any easier. In fact, it can be harder because everything has to be very succinct.
-
30 pages (~10k words). Kept it short on purpose. I wanted a polished manuscript out of it that I could submit to a journal. Didn't see much point in producing a bloated project that had no significant value afterwards.
-
I think there are really only two proper places to put languages on your application: 1) usually the online form will ask you about languages or 2) your CV. The only real exception to this could be if you knew a very rare language and it was logically tied to your research interests, then maybe in your SOP. I wouldn't personally put it anywhere if I was in your shoes. BUT you may be inclined to put 'beginner' for Russian on the form and/or CV but you have to decide if that's ethical or not because it will be unlikely to be at that level by the time you apply.
I personally put a third language as 'beginner' but I can have a basic conversation and read it well so it was not mischaracterizing it.
-
Let's take a step back here.
The OP originally asked is there was any departments strong in scholars who study Marx. You seem to be shifting towards something completely different and arguing that there are plenty of scholars that periodically engage with Marx.
Richard Tuck is not a Marxist. All his publications, from what is searchable, are predominantly written on natural laws and predominantly Hobbes. Benhabib has dabbled with critical theory but predominantly writes on ethics and gender. Not a Marxist. Markell writes on political economy topics, but his publications are centered on Arendt. Brown engages in critical theory, but does so from a pretty long list of thinkers.
Once again, lots of people engage with Marx (he is a major social science scholar) but that doesn't make them Marxist writers, nor does having a person like that make a department strong in Marxism or a place where people wanting to study Marx go to be grad students.
For example, just because Theda Skocpol engaged with Marxism and used class analysis in States and Social Revolutions does that make her a Marxist scholar? No. Does that make Harvard a place you apply to with a project centered on Marxist political thought? No.
I'm not in the business of giving prospectives bad advice. And I think acting like there are a plethora of options all over the place for someone proposing a Marxist project in their SOP is not good business.
Bottom line...getting a job as a political theorist these days is almost impossible. It's also exponentially more difficult getting a job as a political theorist if you go to a mid-ranked department. It's even more difficult getting a job as a political theorist as a Marxist scholar from a mid-ranked department.
If you are hell bent on doing a Ph.D. in political theory, then you should find ways to connect your proposed project with other thinkers and more mainstream topics in political theory. That way you can be more attractive to the top programs. Because I strongly advice anyone that is competitive to apply to top programs. Even if you don't get in, you still need to apply there. Otherwise, I would take a strong look at other disciplines because your options and chances of getting into top programs studying Marxist thought could be significantly higher.
- TY09, The0ry and reasonablepie
-
2
-
1
-
How are Tuck, Brown, and Benhabib Marx scholars?
- reasonablepie and The0ry
-
1
-
1
-
The fact that the biggest names you can think of are at CUNY, JHU, and Brown kind of proves the point. Is there a single Marxist that is at a top 10 department? I'll assume the answer to that is no. The closest I can think of is Peter Evans at Berkeley but he is pretty much done and many of these types of scholars in political science are no longer part of the discipline.
No one said it isn't seriously studied or engaged with (of course it is), just that you are not going to get 'trained' in Marxist theory unless you want to go to a more obscure department - and you probably won't get a job if you do.
We have had these same discussions with postcolonial studies, feminist studies, ect. We just need to accept that they are not mainstream in the field, for better or worse. If you want this type of training you should really look at other disciplines.
- reasonablepie and The0ry
-
1
-
1
-
Simple steps:
- Start cultivating your LORs now. Ideally, all three should be from profs you have worked one on one with (independent studies, honours thesis, RA work, TA, ect.). You need to start (if you're not already) regularly attending office hours (but use them effectively).
- Ask the profs you know the best if you can get involved in their research, ideally as a RA.
- Do an honour thesis.
- Do independent research courses with profs.
- Do quantitative classes. At least differential + integral calculus, plus intro to statistics. Ideally, also other math classes.
- Take as many upper level, and if you can, graduate classes as possible in your junior and senior years.
- Find some broad/narrow research interests that you want to pursue for your own projects.
- Present your thesis or something else at one conference (can be a grad student conference or something).
- If you want to apply to American programs, start prepping for the GRE (take it a year+ before you need to get to know it).
sexual harassment?
in Coursework, Advising, and Exams
Posted
If you must see him again, you should record it.