RefurbedScientist

And as a counterpoint to the argument that adcomms only care about numbers and research fit, I would contend that oftentimes unique life experiences can be influential. If you served in the military, worked as a paralegal for a public defender's office, community organized, raised children, or have some other non-traditional (for a grad school applicant) life experience, this may really resonate. At every accepted students' day I've attended, there have been a few students who fell into this category. Often they were a little older than the rest of the group. I don't think that any of these qualities would supplant academic potential as the primary metric, but if you can relate your unique life experience to your research, then I think this could help an application stand out. Of course, these aren't "extra curricular activities," so they hardly apply to the OP's question. I just wanted to complicate the over-simplification that adcomms only care about a narrow set of metrics.

I agree with the claim that extra-curricular activities won't get you in, but they also won't hurt. If you're still an undergrad, and you're set on making your free time count toward grad school, then look out for opportunities that relate to academic work. Such activities might include editing a journal, doing research, tutoring in your department, or organizing a conference. Even advocacy or activism around an issue related to your research might count for something. Often these activities are not part of formal student clubs. You may want to inquire at academic departments or research centers. These places often love undergraduate volunteers. That being said, there is something to be said for doing extra-curricular activities just because you want to... but that doesn't really answer your original question. Remember also that the CV you submit to admissions committees can be a bit longer than the standard one-page resume common in the job market. An academic CV front loads publications and presentations (if any) and research experience, might include some relevant skills (e.g. STATA, programming, GIS, foreign language, etc.), and then can close out with non-related work experience and other activities. I would say that a 2 page CV is appropriate for your grad school application, so you'll probably have room to squeeze on the relevant activities.

This is somewhat off-topic, but I had this bizzarre half-waking stress dream about grad school decisions last night (normal occurrence these days). I came up with this hypothetical where two applicants, let's call them Jack and Jill, have been accepted to School A and School B respectively and wait listed at the other. That is, Jack got into School A and was waitlisted at B. Jill got into School B and got waitlisted at A. But Jack really wants to go to school B and Jill really wants to go to school A. So both of them sit on their respective offers, waiting to get off the waitlist at their dream school. But because neither is taking action and declining their offer, no spots are opening up for them to get off the waitlist. Jack would have to take some wild chance and decline his offer at School A, thus opening up a spot off the waitlist at A for Jill, who would subsequently turn down her offer from School B, thus opening up a spot off the waitlist at B for Jack. Or vice versa. But, assuming Jack and Jill aren't in communication and can't collude, no rational prospective grad student is going to turn down a bird in the hand! When you start dreaming in game theory about grad school decisions, you know April 15 is just 10 days away... (also, insofar as grad cafe if a medium for prospectives to collude, then it may actually help people make informed decisions, rather than pressure them into rushing, as we can potentially consult others about their decisions first)

Speaking personally, the knowledge that people were on the wait list at programs to which I had been accepted actually motivated me to "tear off the band-aid", so to speak, and decline offers. Because writing to faculty at these programs, faculty with whom I had developed a rapport over several months, to tell them that I won't be working with them next year is very emotionally trying, I would have liked to put off the unpleasant task. However, because people I knew (mostly on these boards) were really enthusiastic about getting off the wait list at these programs, I sucked it up, got over my cold feet, and sent the hard email. I didn't necessarily need all the much time to make informed decisions about each and every one of the programs I wasn't going to attend. I understand that, for some programs, you do need all the time you can get. That's where I'm at now with my top two choices. But for the couple of programs that weren't on the top of my list, it was really important to me to decline the offer just to open up spots for my future colleagues. This might be a function of the fact that I am also personally familiar with being on the wait list, too. I just hope that, in all things, we can use our imaginations to empathize with those who we may not know in person. Two cents.

You might try to contact your program and ask if there are any grad students to stay with.

I did my UG at Brandeis and never had a car. That being said, I was doing the typical "on-campus" life, so much of my entertainment did not involve leaving campus. That being said, Waltham itself is a very livable city. The movie theater is not second run, per se, but actually features lots of indy films and documentaries not found in big cinemas. Big blockbusters, however, will do a second run there (Embassy Theater). Also, Moody St. is replete with restaurants of all varieties, especially Indian, Thai, and various kinds of Latin food. One of the best Mexican restaurants in the Boston area is in Waltham (Taqueria Mexico). There are also three grocery stores (the nearest to campus is Hannaford, which is 1.5 miles. Then about 2-3 miles away there is Russo's, which has great produce. Somewhere else in driving distance is a Shaws). There's also a great cafe 2 miles from campus (Cafe on the Commons) and the best ice cream place around Boston (Lizzy's). As for bars, there is a veritable cornucopia on Main and Moody Streets. These will be primarily scenes for undergrads on weekends (stay away from Joe Sent Me on Thursday through Saturday if you want to avoid undergrads), but there are some nice places to get a drink with cohort mates, such as the Watch City Brewery. I think Waltham alone would be a very adequate college town, with even more diverse offerings than a place like Chapel Hill. Add to that the fact that Brandeis and Waltham center have their own respective stops on the commuter rail, and you have Cambridge and Boston just 20 minutes away by public trans. Now, that being said, if you're really looking to get away from Brandeis and be in "a big city", then I would echo the recommendation to live in Cambridge within a close shot of Porter Sq. and taking the commuter rail into Waltham. It's indisputable that Cambridge will have more to offer than Waltham (except I still maintain that Waltham has a higher and denser concentration of awesome restaurants than almost any other city I've seen). @j3doucet-- Waltham is fairly bikeable only insofar as there are no really crazy thoroughfares that you might be riding on. Main St. is the busiest street, and you can avoid it on side streets with ease. There's generally not a lot of traffic in Waltham, but then again I don't think there are bike lanes either. *Edit: I should add that, in addition to the supermarkets I mentioned above, there are several ethnic grocery stores in Waltham, mostly on Moody St. These include Indian and Latin groceries. There might also be an Asian market, but I'm not aware of it. But the Indian and Latin stores are where I would go to buy more unique produce or spices. I would also add that there are two very good book stores on Moody St., one of which is now also a cafe and arts space.

@jacib-- Wow, that's an amazing tool and I've never thought to search for dissertations by advisor. This will be hugely helpful to me, as I'm trying to make a decision between two programs, and it's coming down to this sort of really in depth research. The two biggest factors are (a) where do grads get jobs and (b ) what kinds of dissertations to my POIs usually advise (e.g. methodologically, paradigmatically, publication journals, etc.) Anyway, thanks for sharing this advise.

I am in the same position as you two. The two programs I'm choosing between could not be more disimilar. One is urban, the other is rural. One is heavy quant, the other is heavy qual. One is super strong in my subfield, the other appeals to more of a diversity of my interests. One is a "sure thing" top 5 program, the other is a top 15 (OK, I recognize that I can't really go wrong here with "ranking"). What to do! Would anyone be interested in either starting a thread or exchanging some PMs about weighing programs against each other? We could all post the two or three top choices in question and debate their merits. This has the risk of making posters' identities known, but we can try to be as discreet as possible.

Congrats avee! I went to 'deis undergrad and I loved it. The faculty is super cool and open.

True that.

So would you suggest that rank (and I mean rank as a proxy for reputation alone but nothing else, such as networks or resources) is moot in this job market? Or is it just that it's less influential, such that scarcity of jobs has an equalizing effect? I would speculate that, on the contrary, when jobs are scarce, reputation might become even more important a factor because, when positions open up, the competition is greater and departments have their choice. It's a buyer's market.

I think it's a good suggestion. Rank, per se, also has little intrinsic value to me (i.e. rank for prestige's sake). However, I am concerned with job placement, particularly because I have a rather specific geographical outcome in mind for my career, and it's extremely difficult to simply choose where you want to live and work in academic. I would rather not have to follow a job, so I worry that program rank may be decisive in landing me job talks at schools in my cities of choice.

Not to stir up a hornets' nest, but what about rank? I'm choosing between a program in the ~25 area and a program in the ~5-10 range. The ~25 ranked program has world class, big name faculty in my subfield and decent resources. The top ~5/10 program is probably the best in the top tier for my subfield, but the faculty are just younger and less accomplished by comparison (still very accomplished in absolute terms, though). They're both public schools, so let's assume funding is equal. Research fit is a tiny bit better represented at the lower ranked program than at the higher ranked program. Also the lower ranked program has famous faculty who are enthused about being advisors. The top ranked program also has great and enthusiastic advisors, but my research fit isn't quite as snug. So feel free to respond either directly to my personal dilemma or share how you're weighing ranking in your own decisions.

These words should be printed on the shrink wrap of every new copy of STATA... (as if we didn't all use pirated copies).

To respond to this question directly: Yes sociology PhD programs are intended for academic/research-oriented careers. The top programs (let's call it top 50 for argument's sake) are training you for an academic career. Not everyone ends up there. Increasingly people are heading to private, public, and non-profit jobs. HOWEVER, you can technically do whatever the hell you want with your degree. BUT, urban ethnography will probably not be a very attractive skill to most of the research-y kinds of jobs out there (they want stats, GIS, survey methods). I would look into public sociology terminal masters programs if you're jazzed about ethnography but don't want a career in academic. This applied social science program at Hunter would be open place to start: http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/sociology/graduate But yes, you do have to pay for terminal masters programs, but without the promise of the salary you might get from a professional degree (MPP, MPH, etc.)

First of all, I think that it's totally fine for you to be considering these questions, even in light of your doubts. Like sociology27 said, we all have doubts even as we're on the precipice of entering grad school. You're doing the right thing by asking around about your options and figuring out what sounds exciting to you. I would wait, however, until you have more certainty before actually applying. A serious application season can cost hundreds (some people even spend thousands) of dollars, and the process should not be undertaken lightly. It's perfectly normal to take some time off before applying to grad school (especially a doctoral program). I think most people on this board are not going straight from undergrad to grad school. OK, now on to Urban Ethnography. First of all, check out the programs for these upcoming conferences. The panels will be chock full of urban ethnographers, and you can follow those back to their respective institutions. https://sites.google.com/site/ajs2012conference/ http://www.uic.edu/depts/soci/cec2012/#top Programs that I know that are known for urban ethnography include UChicago, Princeton, CUNY, Yale... Also, don't ignore anthropology and geography programs. And I would echo the above suggestion to consider urban planning. UCLA's school for Urban Planning has always seemed cool to me, and I'm sure there would be opportunity to do stuff with the sociology department. I like Edward Soja at UCLA Urban Planning program, for example. I'll think about this more, because I think you have some good questions.

I'm making the claim that, for a grad student or junior professor, book chapters are less valuable than peer reviewed journal articles for the job market or tenure review. It would be quite unusual for an applicant to have a book chapter, but probably awesome.

Definitely put it on your CV. You can even mention it in your SoP as an academic product that you produced independently (or collaboratively with fellow students as they case may be), but don't give it more than a sentence. That might demonstrate work ethic or follow-through or something desirable like that, especially if you contextualize it along with math and analytical skills. I think it would be very unusual for a adcomm to request to see a paper on your CV. I put a paper on there that is written entirely in Spanish, so it wouldn't have been very much use to them. It's worth putting on everything that relates and reflects well on you.

Edited volumes are typically considered as a resource for teaching or as introduction/update in a topic. Usually a publisher and editor will approach profs and invite them to contribute chapters. The editor will review the chapters, but they're not subject to the rigorous double-blind peer review process that characterize academic journals. Edited volumes aren't exactly for a "popular audience", but they typically don't go deep into methodology or results, so you won't see data. All the nuts and bolts of research are backstage. You're right that oftentimes chapters are revised articles, which means they are somewhat behind the current state of research. Also chapters are frequently reviews of a particular branch of the literature with some argumentation added on. They're not usually the first product of an original research product.

It's also worth noting that, while having original research experience going into grad school is good but not necessary, things change in grad school. Original research is key. Something I have found in my various visits and with conversations with professors and grad students: Do not let the less-original research distract from your original research. There is a strict hierarchy in the value of academic products when it comes to hiring time. Being an RA for professor is not valuable except for gaining you research skills (excluding of course a co-authorship). A literature review is only useful as a prep for your qualifying exams or dissertation. Book chapters can get your name out there but do not generally count as original research. Even second author on articles is of subordinate value. The real currency in academia is single author publications in peer reviewed journals. This is just something to keep in mind, as many of us will have the opportunity to take on more projects than we can handle. While it's an honor to be invited to write a book chapter or be second-author with a professor, these activities can take away precious time and energy from one's own original research. Granted, this concern is most relevant for those pursuing a research position. This is by no means universally applicable advice (nor does it come from personal experience). Edit: Just to reiterate, this shouldn't concern someone applying to grad school. You'll have plenty of time to worry about publications once you're in.

Good point. I think if one is asked, then it makes sense to reply earnestly. I think that, if for example you are sitting in on a panel of faculty talking about their research, then it would be in bad form to say, "When I visited Cooler-than-U., faculty co-authored frequently with students. Do you do that here?" Maybe it goes without saying. I was always made uncomfortable when people asked me where else I was looking. So maybe just out of courtesy for the super-nebbish out there like me, one might not jump right into that line of conversation.

I would say that neither research experience nor original research is that which occurs in the process of writing a normal term paper for an undergraduate class. "Research experience" probably refers to a broader category, which can include original research but also includes being an RA for a professor, doing analysis for a job, doing a literature review for a senior thesis, or other "derivative" work. "Original research" would be a subcategory that involves collection and/or analysis of data that results in original findings. That means collecting new data through interviews, ethnography, surveys, etc., or analyzing some existing data set and producing new results. Put simply, original research requires the production of new knowledge, however small. Research experience might include simply reviewing other people's original research. For example, my current job is as a research assistant at a research center. I do pretty much one kind of research day in and day out, and that's reading literature. This "library" research is not original. Occasionally I get to help with focus group interviews and analysis of interview data. That is original research because it's not deriving from some previously published work. This wasn't part of your question, but it's worthwhile to consider which is more valuable in the admissions process. I don't think there's a straight answer. The "original research" most students do for a senior thesis, for example, may not be particularly rigorous because it's their first research experience. My rote, mundane research experience as an RA, however, might be highly instrumental to me when I become an RA for a prof. in my program. I think adcomms would probably like to see either or both original or derivative research. Good original research is always better than good derivative research, but poor original research is often not all that valuable (except maybe as a learning experience of what not to do).

I hope this prof wasn't at a school I'm visting My problem is that once I entered the working world and needed business casual clothing, my entire wardrobe has pretty much shifted to khakis and button down shirts. I don't have presentable casual clothing (e.g. I don't even own a pair of jeans). I pretty much have old retired chinos that are all paint stained, a pair of ripped up dirty sneakers, and grimy white-Ts. That's my weekend uniform. When I'm at work (which is honestly more than I'd like to admit) or out at night, I just wear nicer stuff because it's all I have. Then again, I'm far from fashion-forward. I've never been able to pull off the "jeans and a blazer" look. I wish I could, but I'm just too nerdy. This is why I'm going into this line of work: I can barely survive on the outside! But yeah, I would echo that grad students are always on the lookout for pretension. Obviously you're not visiting a school to impress your future friends, but you do want to come off as an approachable and friendly person. I think when we're surrounded by such smart people, there is a bit of collective social control to keep the snobbiness at a minimum. Wearing a blazer emblazoned with your university seal or a tie from J. Press will probably come off as pretentious, even if your intentions are good. In the same vein, humility is always a good attribute at these things. You're in, so there's no need to impress anyone. That being said, I am, by nature, the kind of person who likes to participate, ask a lot of questions, raise my hand, etc. If you are like me and tend to be an over-eager student, be conscious of this and keep your comments brief. Don't wax theoretical about Husserl at the departmental colloquium. At the same time, don't be afraid to ask relevant questions. It's just better to ask some things in private. You will have ample opportunity to speak to profs and students in private or small groups, either at meals or receptions or over email. Never never compare the program you're visiting to other programs you've seen in public conversation. If you come to trust an individual and the rapport is there, then it's fine to compare notes about schools in private. That goes for grad students and other prospectives.

Yes, that's fair. I really don't know much about Marxist scholarship in the US. I do have the impression that the most self-avowed Marxists (paradigmatically speaking) like David Harvey are few and far between. I think it's a product more of the heritage of American social science than anything else. I agree with this statement and believe that this shift correlates with the cultural turn (some call it post-structuralist) that happened a couple decades back in sociology. I think American sociologists were willing to move away from grand theoretical debates and accept the middle-of-the-road theories of Bourdieu or Giddens (i.e. some structural and some agentic factors to social action), especially as this allowed for us to get on with our damned empiricism already and ignore those silly Europeans and their theories. ( ) Point being, I would hesitate to drop Marxist theory into an SoP unless I was certain there would be a warm welcome for it on the adcomm side. That being said, if you really like Marx (or continental social theory in general), then you probably don't want to bother applying to a strictly positivist department anyway, because you might not fit in. I'm facing this issue now with my top choice. I happen to like me some Marxism, crit. theory, and feminism, but it's tough to work that into network analysis... I may end up doing a network map of all the italian communists who wanted to kick Gramsci's scrawny ass. Best of both worlds.

Ha, yeah I guess that was an ambiguous set-up to my story... hmmmm maybe the awkwardness is my fault.