faculty

To be able to accurately assess what this would be, we need much better measures of student outcomes than we currently have. Think about Berkeley, or the old Wisconsin model, with enormous cohort sizes. Successful students are very successful, but there are plenty of not only less successful, but "unsuccessful" in the eyes of academia today, students. When we talk about our graduates, regardless of where we might be ranked, departments tend to use the "model to be copied" version of exemplary student rather than the "typical" version. They highlight their superstars. This is as true at the top as it is in the middle. I appreciate your reframing to not look at the top, but at the bottom, but students who end up in the very bottom of their class anywhere - even Chicago or Princeton or <insert sought-after program here> - are in the same boat. If anything, it could be even more difficult psychologically or financially for those people in the higher ranked programs because of reference groups, expectations, and the fact that they're more likely to be in an expensive city and the department is less likely to have institutional structures to help them find a job outside of academia.

36 people - and not just department chairs or people at top universities - filled out the last USNWR survey and those responses were averaged with the previous respondents. It is a flawed measure of quality (and see ). A better measure of reputation, perhaps, and I realize that reputations are important, but still flawed. It is also important to realize that these things change. As xdarthveganx has noted time and again, Irvine is an example of movement up. Many of the schools at the top (most notably, perhaps, Princeton and NYU) have not always had the reputation they have now. And others (e.g., Washington, Arizona) have declined in the last few years. Ranking (along with reputation and quality) is not stagnant, in part because of the students schools are able - or unable - to attract to their programs.

You have three (I would not rule out Indiana) great choices. It is hard to go wrong. That said, DO NOT choose a program based on one professor.

GRE scores are only one piece of an application, although they are often used for quick weeding. If it has been so long since high school (and perhaps undergrad), you want to signal to schools that you're willing to put in the time to learn new (or relearn old) tricks. If you don't get in this application cycle, it would be a good idea to study to improve those scores for the next time around.

This post above also relates to the chatter on the forum about contacting departments to check on the status of applications. This is completely understandable when it comes time to make a decision and you still haven't heard from a school that you think would be your top choice or a real contender. But right now it is way too early in the process to be doing this. It is certainly better to contact an administrative assistant if you decide to do this, but recognize that this is a busy time for people involved in admissions - whether they are a DGS, office staff, or other faculty - so please don't read too much into response times, etc. I know it's hard, but I recommend you wait a while before you start hunting down all the programs you applied to in order to get updates.

Wisconsin is not a school on the rise - it is a top program and has been for a long time. Palito, who was active on the forums last year, answer anyone prospective students' questions via PM.

Notre Dame is definitely a school on the rise (full disclosure, I have a friend who is an assistant professor there, but I think that they are deserving of the reputation as a school that is moving up). I know that faculty are well-supported - financially and otherwise - and I'm sure that students are, too. They are particularly strong in certain areas - social movements (that's where the journal Mobilization is edited), education, culture, and religion. I knew about some of their recent placements (Yale and Bowling Green), but looking at their website they seem to just be the most recent in a solid history of placements including liberal arts schools like Calvin and Wheaton. The list also suggests that they put people in both faculty and policy/research positions. That's likely the influence of the education program, but good news for people who aren't sure if academia is what they ultimately want. Maybe someone with student experience or who visited the program has more to say.

You bring up so many issues in your post, phiwheat, that it is difficult to know where to begin. I will start by saying, though, that I sympathize. It is stressful to be uncertain about the decisions that you've made and your future. To address some of your more specific questions: Rest assured that many students change programs after the MA (or even before). To have a compelling reason like you do - that your specific interests are better served elsewhere - is a very good rationale for doing so. Your current department will understand and so will the places that you are applying to if you articulate clearly that this is your motivation for leaving. I would also acknowledge, to both your current department and to the programs that you're applying to, that you appreciate the solid foundation that you acquired in your current department but that you have realized that working with faculty members who are specialists in your area will significantly enhance your work and potential to contribute to the discipline. That said, you can certainly stay put and enhance your training with networking. Don't underestimate the benefits of being at a top-ranked school when it comes time to be on the job market, in part because of wide networks and reputation. However, don't sell a lower-ranked department short when it comes to specialty areas that they are strong in. The key players in those departments know the people who will be doing the hiring in those areas. I recommend having a conversation with your advisor or DGS about their thoughts on the matter. They know more specifics to your situation. They will certainly know more about the networking possibilities, and the past history of students like you whose interests might have not been closely aligned with department strengths, and can guide you in making a decision. Trust me when I say what I did at the outset, you have a good reason for considering leaving and the people in your department should understand that. If they don't, they don't have your best interests in mind and perhaps that will just make it easier for you to justify leaving to yourself. They might surprise you, though, and have a creative way to connect you to a specialist. As an aside, you will probably be limited in the number of credits you can transfer, etc., so moving will likely tack on addition time to degree. That's something to consider as well. Good luck to you.

Things tend to start really moving late January: http://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/index.php?q=sociology&t=a&o=&p=43

Your two observations are not unrelated. Bowling Green is not a highly ranked department and most students on the forum focus on schools in the top 25 or so, with a couple fall backs or exceptions if the schools are well-known in a specialty area. If there is one thing that Bowling Green is strong in, it's family demography. So it's mentioned rarely because so few students have interests similar to your own so they simply see it as a lower-ranked department. In choosing which school to attend, I would ask about recent placements. Like with the education track, there are a number of potential directions to take post-graduation. It is easier to get an R1 job from a more highly ranked department. There might be other departments that have a track record of policy-oriented jobs or research centers or liberal arts jobs. Deciding what you want to do after school, and whether or not people from the departments you're considering have done that, is a good way to make a decision on where to attend.

While I wasn't the audience for the initial post, I would think that some obvious choices would be Penn State, Maryland, and Texas-Austin. There's also UC-Irvine, Bowling Green, and Nebraska-Lincoln. With Michael Hout's move to NYU, that might be a place to consider as well. Those are just a few, of course, but they're hopefully helpful.

You should certainly be a competitive candidate for any sociology program, especially one with a specialization in education. Worry less about the lack of a thesis or publication (most applicants do not have a publication and many did not write a thesis) and more about discerning what you'd ultimately like to do with the degree. As Canis notes above, there are career options in continuing K-12 teaching, administration, policy, and working in academia. It would be helpful for you to have at least some sense of where you'd ultimately like to end up.

I hesitate to put this here because this will probably be buried soon and I'm not sure if anyone will read it as they prepare for next year, but I want to offer a few specific tips about emailing professors. As people who have been around the forum for a while might know, I'm generally against the idea, but it seems like something that students are going to do regardless so it's best to lay out some guidelines. First, explore the website - thoroughly - before you do anything. I'm not only talking about the faculty page where it lists people's interests. I mean the requirements for the program, information on the graduate students, what the course listings are and what the graduate assistantships entail. Don't ask a question that is easily located with a relatively quick read of the website. Seekingsun is right; this is a busy time of year for faculty. However, faculty are always busy - always! Many of us are happy to help, but we put information on websites to save us time. Take advantage of it and show us that you realize that our time is valuable. The number one question that my colleagues and I answer is "Are you taking students?" even though that is not the way that any of the sociology departments that I know of work. You wouldn't ask this question if you actually read the website. Second, related to the above, if you want a reply, email with a formulated question. Students will write to tell me their research interests and then ask, "Is there anything I should know about the program?" or "Can you tell me more about the application process?" These are questions that are nearly impossible to answer. I have no idea what you already know. I have no idea what interests you. Sometimes students will even say, "I've looked over the website and I'm wondering what additional information you might have." It is much easier (and interesting) for me to respond to an email that asks something like, "Are you starting a new project in the next couple years? If so, what do you think it will be?" Don't just email to email. Third, be honest in your communications. Students are always trying to figure out how to get themselves into the program. Getting into a program under false pretenses - feigning interest in something you're not interested in, for example - is not doing anyone any favors. The department can't accurately assess whether you'll be a good fit or not. That's not just about an acceptance. It can also affect whether or not you'll succeed in the program. SUCCESS, and not acceptance, should be your number one priority. To this end, an honest email (and application) is better and more effective than an ingratiating one. Fourth, and this has been said here before, be brief. Prospective students will send long emails with their CV and personal statement attached or embedded, going on and on about their accomplishments. This is what applications are for, not emails. Begin with a short email of interest with a specific question. If a faculty member engages you, you can write more details in a response. If they don't engage you, don't take it personally. See #1 above. Besides, most faculty aren't on the committee and therefore have very little control over the process. Finally, if the question can be answered by a student or an administrative assistant, ask them first. It is a much better idea to call the main office and ask a question - they are used to these things - and have them refer you to a faculty member for something they can't answer than the other way around. Our DGS - and sometimes other faculty - get emails and calls from students who are trying to find out the deadline, update their application, check on whether their letters arrived, and so forth. These are not questions for him. Some are a waste of his time and others he can't even answer. Other queries ask about life as a graduate student, whether someone can reasonably live in our city on the stipend, etc. These are not questions for faculty. They did not go to school in the program and are not living like graduate students. These are questions for current students. Students are accustomed to getting emails from prospectives. Like faculty, some respond and some don't, but following the guidelines listed above will help (be brief, specific, honest, realize they are busy too, etc.). If I've overlooked or forgotten something, hopefully others will add more below. Good luck to everyone who is applying!

Schools differ on this. I recommend looking for special sections for international students on graduate school and department webpages to find out what the policies are at the places that you're interested in. If there is a cut-off listed, I think that schools are likely to be quite strict about it. These policies are often set by the graduate school and the departments can't bypass them.

The University of Oregon. They have Hollander, Pascoe, and others who would be of interest for their qualitative approaches and interests in gender, deviance, and social psych/microsociology.

Arizona's social psychology program is now non-existent and is a perfect example of why reputational rankings are problematic. Of the others that Revo listed, Indiana is the best bet. Stanford is a nice combination of social psychology and gender. But, like most of the top social psychology programs, is heavily quantitative and experimental. I would consider applying to places that might seem less intuitive given the social psych ranking but have a constellation of the things you're looking for (Oregon, Georgia, UC Santa Barbara are a few that come to mind).

Sam Friedman, a sociologist in London, is another person who comes to mind: http://www.city.ac.uk/arts-social-sciences/academic-staff-profiles/dr-sam-friedman

To say that one is interested in astrosociology is a rookie move. Luckily, most faculty were (and realize it) rookies once too. We had interests in substantive topics that others might balk at and had to figure out how to situate them in sociology. I almost wrote an undergraduate thesis on paranormal beliefs because the data was in the GSS. There's no way that I knew how to make it sociological at that time, but others--with more training and creativity--effectively did so. As previous posters in the thread note, there are many ways that one could study astrosociological topics without studying "astrosociology," per se. It would be easier for all of us to be more helpful to the OP if they stated what, exactly, they were interested in about astrosociology. They note in their profile that they're also thinking about organizational behavior. There are many organizations devoted to topics of space, astronomy, etc. and there is interesting work that has been done on them (When Prophecy Fails and The Challenger Launch Decision being two often referred to in Sociology). Above all, I think it's important (especially as sociologists) to remember that we're all at different stages in this process and that it can be helpful to ask OPs for clarification and also to couple advice based on experience (that few, if any, think of astrosociology as legitimate) with helpful suggestions that lead others to engage in dialogue (much like jmu did above) rather than abandon their ambitions.

There are a handful of MA programs that offer funding (on a competitive basis). I think a list has been discussed here before, but I can't easily find the thread. Two schools that do and have a history of strong placements into PhD programs are UW-Milwaukee and UNC-Charlotte. I would really recommend that you talk to one or two of your professors about this, though. They know you better than any of us. I certainly wouldn't rule out applying to PhD programs. It doesn't hurt to try. There is also often an opportunity for you to address "weaknesses" in your application with a summary statement. I would provide a similar account to what you did here - being a student of color in small, predominantly white school. Given your interests, it's a situation that committees at the schools that you're applying to might be sympathetic to, especially if the other components of your application are strong - and if the liberal arts school you'll graduate from is particularly selective.

GR: This is the main job market board in sociology: http://socjobs.proboards.com/#general. It seems to be a more general gathering place, with students both earlier and later in their programs and a number of faculty, but it's certainly not a productive place to bounce around research ideas.

Women's & Gender Studies departments may be more likely to hire someone with a WGS degree - I don't know, but there are still far fewer such departments than there are sociology departments. Furthermore, many of the "WGS departments" that do exist are interdisciplinary departments cobbled together with people in those other departments you mention (sociology, history, psychology, english, etc.) who can teach classes rather than the tenure-home for those faculty. In other words, those faculty got hired in their fields (and will, or already, got tenure there). It is ultimately up to you, but if I were you, I would at least look into departments in schools where you can minor in WGS while earning a PhD in Sociology. that gives you the WGS credentials without limiting yourself to the few hiring departments.

You hit on one of the main things that I missed as a junior faculty member - relatively unfettered access to colleagues (faculty and other students) who I felt that I could safely (and easily) ask for help with things, without worrying if it somehow came off as weakness. There comes a time when you have to break off, at least in large part, from your advisor and establish yourself. My social networks were rich in other ways in grad school. Moving to a new place where I basically knew no one was hard (although it helps you focus on work). But the nearly singular focus on work is a luxury of graduate school. There is way more to do as a faculty member. I taught as a graduate student, but I taught one class a semester and/or summer. Teaching loads vary, but very few students will end up in a job where they teach that little. I was involved in service as a grad student, but not the amount I was as a faculty member. At a liberal arts college, this is mentoring undergrads in addition to serving on department and university committees and attending frequent social functions for the school. At a research school, you're mentoring grad students, serving on exam/theses/dissertation committees, and on the department and university committees. You're more likely asked to do external service as well, reviewing manuscripts and joining section committees. Of course your pay goes up, but the expectation that you start living like a grown-up makes expenses increase dramatically as well - housing, retirement, insurance, clothing budgets, taxes, etc. For me, student loans kicked in, too. I am further from home than I was as a grad student, so spend more money traveling in the summer or for holidays to see my parents and siblings (even with much less frequent visits). Some things you might have had in graduate school don't magically disappear: feelings of insecurity/impostorism, time management issues, work-life balance, coming up with (and funding/executing) research projects, etc. The pre-tenure years are tough, as you feel constantly evaluated and unsure of what the future holds. That might be a bit like grad school, but it's different. Those are just what come to mind. I feel a tinge of PTSD typing it all out as it's long behind me now. I would not change my job for the world. I absolutely love what I do, but transitioning into faculty life (and I hope you're all so lucky) makes most of us (albeit not all) long for the grad school days. Edited to add: As far as what students can do to better prepared... I do think that I was better off than most having taught, worked, been active service-wise, etc. in grad school. People who are singularly focused ("This semester I'll teach a class. Next semester I'll work on that paper. I don't have time to serve on a stupid committee.") fared much worse than I did. I also had a couple of papers and projects in the works and under review when I finished. Many of my peers had even more. That helps lessen the pre-tenure crunch. Be mindful of the loans that you take out as a student, as they'll have to be paid back at some point. Ask a lot of people (fellow students, faculty members, alumni) about their strategies for work-life balance, time management, and productivity. There's no one-size-fits-all approach, so it's helpful to get ideas from a lot of people and determine what works best for you. Make connections with scholars outside of your department, people who you can draw on and socialize with that help expand your professional network and are there to read drafts, bounce ideas off of, etc. - and maybe even working in the department that you'll one day work in. Those are just a few ideas...

For the last one, I would have read more. Everyone's life circumstances are different and most folks need to find a place where they can cut corners in graduate school to help retain their sanity. My way of doing that was reading very little outside of what was necessary for research or teaching. I wish I had been more sociologically curious in that sense, but - for a number of reasons - it just wasn't possible (it's also much easier now than it was in the olden days because the internet puts so much at your fingertips). I also wish I would have appreciated just how good I had it as a graduate student. Becoming a tenure-track faculty member, with so many more obligations to juggle, was an incredibly difficult transition. Enjoy yourselves!

I'm not FertMigMort, but I would suggest that you apply early to waive the fees and then email the graduate coordinator in the programs with an updated CV at the application deadline. You can list the papers in an "under review" section and even include the journal titles if you'd like (although anyone can submit to top journals and these might change if you get decisions back and decide to send elsewhere).

I understand how difficult it can be to live off a stipend, and this probably depends on department culture, but in the departments I have been affiliated with, this is highly frowned upon. Your job in graduate school is to be a graduate student. That goes well beyond classes and your duties as an RA or TA. You should be reading and writing in your non-allocated time. There may be time for part-time work in the summers, but not during the year. Unlike an MA, where the goal really is a final product, pursuing a PhD is not about that finite degree but about becoming an active expert in a field. The more commitments you have outside of graduate school, the harder that is. Graduate school is unique in that you actually have the time to do all of this unencumbered by other work (e.g., more teaching, service, committee work, etc.). Take advantage of that, even if it means living like a pauper.