coffeekid

You know, that's a fair point, and I appreciate you challenging me on this. Perhaps I'll have to think about this more seriously in the coming years. A lot of this has to do with my personal history. I'm deeply and personally religious, but don't come from a religious family; I have constantly been the incognito Christian in philosophy departments; I have been the heretic in conservative theological circles; I've been more traditional in a largely progressive divinity school. In short, I'm passionate about an honest and critical approach to sophisticated topics in religion, philosophy, and psychology. My experience has been that the setting (seminary vs divinity school vs religious studies department) has not had a particularly strong effect on the ability to do this well. I should definitely respect the fact that, especially in seminaries, particular theological and creedal commitments are taken very seriously. Personally, I do too. In an academic context, however, I mostly care that people are willing to think and communicate honestly. This is why I have a pretty flexible approach to an eventual teaching setting. Now I'm curious to hear more about this! Perhaps I should start another thread, though.

Ha! Yes, I knew I couldn't avoid that. Of course I'm doing it for the passion, but I would like to eat, have insurance, and maybe even retire someday. So there's that. That said, it doesn't make a huge difference to me about working in a seminary or a religious studies department, which is why I ask. Does anyone have any more specific points of reference?

So, here comes a question about salary. I'll brace myself for the capitalist critique the best I can. Does anyone here have a general sense about how salaries for professors in seminaries/divinity schools compare to straight up religious studies departments in liberal arts colleges or universities? I ask because I might accept an offer for a program that's really geared toward preparing people for work in seminaries, and not RS departments. It would be nice to have a rough idea if this is a downgrade in pay or not, but it's hard to find anything clear. I understand that there will be extremes in both settings. I'm mostly wondering about the average for both.

Like everywhere, the Vandy MDiv/MTS has its strengths and weaknesses. I graduated with an MTS last year, with hopes of applying to PhDs, and had a relatively successful response. My focus was on theology, contemporary philosophy of religion, and pastoral care/pastoral psychotherapy. Vandy is definitely pretty strong in biblical studies, theology, ethics, pastoral care, and homiletics. As with anywhere, Vanderbilt has a particular flavor in each of these fields. Maybe one of the most overlooked aspect of the Vandy masters programs is that the faculty is grouped in eight different subfields, which is more than a lot of places. The effect on Mdiv students is a very diverse and comprehensive training. This is frustrating for some people certainly (i.e. - those knowing what they want to specialize in), but for most of those people the MTS is a better idea, because it is essentially 75% electives. The broad characterization of Vanderbilt is that it is informed my a progressive, older liberal model of theological education and scholarship. As an insider I can say that this is partially an appropriate description, but has limitations. Especially in theology, there are serious traces of the Peter Hodgson (prominent Hegel scholar) and Sallie McFague (feminist and metaphorical theologian) tradition. That is, Vanderbilt is still investing in progressive theological education, and has recently received a lot of money to invest in training people in "Practical Theology," but there is definitely room for growth and development still--especially in thinking more critically about the progressive theological project itself. My experience is many of the cutting edge religion programs face similar challenges. And, this is surely an unending task: redefining and reforming theological education. And, no joke, Nashville is truly amazing. Small city feel, but very culturally rich (think innovative coffee house, brewery, ethnic cuisine, biker friendly scene). A very weird blend of hipster and southern sensibilities, which is pretty palatable for most people (I'm originally from the North).

Ha! Anyone else who applied to the Clinical Psych PhD get accepted to the masters in general psychology? There's no funding information, but I'm doubting it's very good.

Hey IBSharp! Welcome to the Grad Cafe! I was one of the Theology and Practice acceptances on the results page, but I wasn't ethics. If you haven't heard from Vanderbilt, that puts you in an odd place. They definitely extended their first round of offers, including the T&P fellowships, but they have also handed out quite a few rejections. I know because I have a few friends who've received them. So if you haven't heard, chances are you are on some form of unofficial waiting list. I know a few people who have received late acceptances from Vanderbilt, as late as April. My suggestion would be to send a polite email to your person of interest in ethics, likely Victor Anderson, Stacey Floyd-Thomas, or Melissa Snarr. Just say you are still very interested in Vanderbilt, and you were wondering when you might expect to hear something about your application. They will understand your desire to know more about where you stand, and in fact it might help you to let them know that you haven't accepted an offer anywhere else yet. Best of luck in waiting to hear back! And, truly, being on a few waitlists is a sign you're on the cusp of something good, so hang in there if possible. Same advice as with Vanderbilt, if you haven't been in contact with those other waitlists in a while, it never hurts for you to let them know that you still haven't accepted an offer elsewhere. It might not get you in, but it might draw more attention to your name among the pool of waitlisted people.

Wow! Thanks for this feedback, everyone! I'm definitely sensing some disagreement, which affirms for me the fact that this might not be a cut and dry situation. Jdharrison's right that religion departments (especially higher level research ones) will normally want people trained in, well, religion. But I've seen what Lux Lex Pax is talking about too. It's odd how sometimes cachet comes from being an academic foreigner. To bridge these opinions, however, I think it's true that if I did the psych route, I would probably have to "pay my dues" teaching psychology for a while, building a reputation as someone with something interesting to say about religion, before bridging the gap to a religion position. Regardless, I do feel that this will be an increasingly common circumstance for people as teaching jobs become more competitive, so I'm still interested to see what others' experiences have been.

Wow! So thrilled that people are actually talking about Duquesne Clinical Psych! Psychology weirdos unite! I received my acceptance letter yesterday, and a phonecall from the clinical director today. It was all pretty standard, but no health insurance. I posted on the results page. Psykir: I've only known one person who was waitlisted a few years back, and they did not get in. But, they applied the following year and were accepted, after strengthening their clinical experience. Yes, my experience is that if you happen to get accepted to Duquesne Clinical Psychology, it is likely your dream program, and you're very unlikely to decline the offer. However, I will say that at the moment I am very conflicted about whether I'll be accepting the offer. I have a very generous offer from Vanderbilt for a Psychology and Religion program, and I'm honestly 50/50 at the moment. My wife and I have made like a dozen pro/con lists, I've emailed about ten important people in my life (including faculty) for additional insight, and I'm still pretty confused. I think my next step is to meditate on a mountain somewhere. All that to say that there is a possibility that at least one or more people will get in off the waitlist. I can assure you that this decision is literally all I am thinking about at the moment, and I'm trying to make it as soon as possible. I understand how awful it is to be on a waitlist, so I wouldn't want to subject anyone to that for longer than necessary. If I can offer some additional encouragement, this was my second time applying to the program. I interviewed three years ago and was rejected. So persistence is definitely helpful.

So I have a serious dilemma, which I could use some help on. Background: I've heard back from all of my programs, and I've been accepted, with almost identical funding offers, to two programs. The first is a religion PhD, and the second is an APA accredited Clinical Psychology program. I should say that the religion program is very philosophical/psychological in focus, and the clinical psychology program is very philosophical/spiritual in focus; hence my fit in them both. Like many people, I currently hold a bachelors in religion/philosophy, as well as a masters in theology (MTS). Both are from reputable schools. I'm also completing a CPE residency now, so I'll have enough CPE units to be a licensed chaplain in just about every state. My ultimate hope would be to teach in a divinity school, graduate school, or liberal arts college (pretty much anything but a large state school), teaching in the intersections of philosophy, religion, and psychology. Also, it would be nice to do a small bit of pastoral or clinical type work on the side to enrich my largely personalistic and relational research. Question: Considering my ultimate teaching goals, and the serious competition of good academic jobs in religion now, I'm strongly considering doing the clinical psychology program, with hopes of eventually using that training to come back and teach in a religion setting. More specifically, my question is whether I would be seriously considered in a religion setting at that point. I would have a PhD in Clinical Psychology, but an MTS and a BA in religion. I know your last degree is most important usually, but I'm wondering if having a PhD (at all) in a related field would be enough to merit a position in religion. Needless to say, my research in clinical psychology would have to be somewhat religious in focus. Has anyone heard of anybody doing this? Or something similar in neighboring fields? If I do the religion PhD and miss the goal of teaching, I'm kind of SOL, like so many others. But if I miss the mark with the psychology PhD, I'd still be able to land a decent paying job as a psychotherapist just about anywhere. I understand that this is a very good sort of problem to have, but nonetheless it's posing a serious conundrum for me now.

I was explained by and admissions person once that while an acceptance is relatively transferrable for M* programs, money is not so much. As is so commonly noted on the forums, scholarships/fellowships vary drastically from year to year in many programs, based on economic conditions and grant renewals. I was told when I was thinking of deferring a year that I was guaranteed acceptance for the next year, but I would be thrown back in the mix for competition with the new applicants for funding. I ended up just taking the sure thing. I have the looming suspicion, however, that if a school knows you're committed to going there in deferring, that they might not offer you the big bucks, since they know they can get you at a better price. Again, you'd have to feel out the department. My advice would be that if you're going to defer, defer at multiple programs if possible, to reduce your risk of getting the shaft next year. That is, unless they can guarantee your funding. I'd be sure to keep that it writing, though.

I'll add to the above: chaplaincy. I know this seems obvious, but you can do a CPE program very reasonably out of an MTS program, get certified, and make a pretty decent living. I know quite a few people who have done this.

As someone with very similar interests to you, I can say that uChicago seems like a natural fit. Even if you have a trust fund to draw from, you're looking at $40,000 in tuition plus chicago living for an academic risk (as are all religion masters for those looking to do a PhD eventually). What I can say is that in recent years, philosophy programs have become increasingly difficult. Even continental programs, which have historically been less competitive than top 25 analytic programs, have become nearly impossible to penetrate without a philosophy masters. I say this as someone very attracted to the continental ones. That sad, I had the same offer you had from uChicago three years ago, and would have killed to study with Marion (on whom I've written two theses now), but went where more money was offered. I can say that after the fact, I am very happy I made the decision I did. All your options are good. If money is not an object, do Chicago. If it is, wait to see what Duke says. Their philosophy and religion programs are solid, but their comp lit department is probably most suited to address your philosophical interests.

That's helpful, jdharrison. I do get that same sense that disciplinary specialties are less defined than some strands of philosophy (esp. analytic). I like the fact that this demystifies certain areas of specialization in religion, making those areas more permeable and open to interdisciplinary work. But I also get frustrated because I feel religion faculty end up claiming "expertise" in areas they have no business claiming expertise. Putting down your AOS and AOC is as much about recognizing what you don't do as owning up to what you, in fact, do. As a result, I've rarely been in a philosophy course where I felt a faculty member was out of her academic comfort zone, while I've relt this way rather often about religion faculty. Might there, then, be a reasonable alternative for religion people? Something a bit broader in scope? Maybe it doesn't matter. I'm just really concerned about academic honesty at the moment, and this seems to be pretty relevant.

Screw Boston College. If they can't recognize someone who is as passionate as you to study with them, then that's there problem. You're going to rock out at Seton Hall or Fordham, so don't sweat it. (I say this also after being rejected from BC philosophy this weekend. So yeah. And nothing personal against anyone in attendence there.)

Hey religion friends, I've been looking at faculty CVs in religion, philosophy, and neighboring disciplines for some time now. And for the life of me, I still can't understand why religion scholars do not typically follow the format of placing, front and center on the first page of a CV, "Areas of Specialization (AOS)" and "Areas of Competence (AOC)." I'd say 7 or 8 out of 10 philosophy CVs follow this format, whereas maybe 1 or 2 of 10 in religion follow it. This is a bit baffling to me, considering that, like with philosophy, these details are very helpful to clarify just what it is that you're doing in your scholarship, which is important to hiring committees, fellow scholars, etc. So my two part question is: (1) Can someone flesh out in better detail what it is I'm missing here, as to why religion folks don't use AOS and AOC? Do they simply lack precision in identifying their research interests? And: (2) Any thoughts on changing this? That is, is there something admirable about this format that religion folk should adopt?

Dude, if you get accepted to BC, I'm pretty sure that post of yours will set the record for most up votes.

I'd only echo the advice here. There is a weird principle for which I don't exactly have a name when it comes to things like this. When one thing works out financially (you get a big tax return), you suddenly think to yourself that it isn't worth it to do something that would otherwise be reasonable in helping your predicament (working a weekend job). True, the tax return makes life easier, but unless you can retire on it, nothing says you should coast on the other, sensible options. All that to say: you're in a position that many people work many years to get to. So for all of our sakes, don't blow it when reasonable options are on the table. I know it might sound drastic, but even working an extra year and reapplying to see if you get better aid might be worth it.

This has been a recurrent question on the GradCafe over the past few years. Some people have made definitive claims that they know adcoms that do check in here. My take is that any admissions committee member who spends their time roaming the forums is probably not a faculty you'd want to be a part of (i.e. - shouldn't you be writing a book or something?!) Then again, if I ever land a faculty position, I'd probably continue on here to see how my program's street cred is shaping up.

Just thought I'd throw this out there, for the few wierdos like me who interviewed with Duquesne's Clinical Psychology program over the last two weeks. I called the psychology office today and was told the admissions committee plans on making decisions March 13th, and hopes to notify people by that Friday, the 15th. They are on spring break this week, apparently.

Thanks folks! Not sure if I could persuade my family into moving to the UK anyway, but it's starting to look like Oxford's out of the picture too.

I see a few Oxford acceptances. Naturally, it's a BPhil and DPhil program, and grad cafe doesn't have those as options. Some people specified BPhil, but no one has specified DPhil. Does anyone know if DPhil decisions have been made? It looks from past years that they were on slightly different time tables, but it's hard to say.

I hate to be making a case for Vanderbilt again, but because you mentioned her, Neem217: Laurel Schneider will be joing the Vanderbilt faculty in Fall 2013. Emilie Townes will also be joining as the Dean. Both of these scholars would be huge assets to the project in conversation here. http://as.vanderbilt.edu/religiousstudies/people/schneider.php http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2012/12/emilie-townes-named-dean-of-vanderbilt-divinity-school/

Wow, yes, very interesting stuff you're looking at here. As an insider at Vanderbilt, I'd say the Religion, Psychology, and Culture program would be of particular interest to you. The chair, Bonnie Miller-McLemore, is pretty well established in the field, and your project would surely interest her. But I would definitely say that having and MSW would only be an asset to you in your eventual doctoral studies. Not only does that give you a clinical lens from which to draw in your theoretical writings, but in a competitive academic job market, having the means for licensed practice in therapy and case management would be a very valuable safety net. I know of at least one person who was a licensed counselor, did a PhD in psychology of religion, couldn't find a job right away, and then spent the next few years in private practice, building his CV before landing a full time TT job. It's very good that you're thinking so conscientiously about this all. It should definitely pay off long term.

Very possible. I took a year off to do CPE, and during that time did more substantial extracurricular academic stuff than I had during my masters. Especially if you have some underdeveloped term papers from your previous program, time outside of school is a great opportunity to beef them up and send them off to CFPs and journals. Just be sure to be disciplined with that time and start early. A year can slip by you pretty quickly while you're "catching up on the books you've been meaning to read."

Yikes. Just got rejections from Yale and uChicago 20 minutes apart. The academy seems to be wishing me a good weekend!