Sappho
-
Posts
9 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sappho
-
-
I am sorry for being away and not replying. I would suggest all of you read the following, including the comments. It is sobering:
http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2014/03/10/essay-about-inability-find-tenure-track-job-academe
Same article, but different comments.
Also, read this in order to see just how little power you will have when negotiating for that tenure-track job (which of course you have very little chance of getting in the first place!):
http://philosophysmoker.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-new-kind-of-pfo-mid-negotiating-post.html
Not Classics, but applicable. Think about this, all of you, please!
-- Sappho
Possibly a stupid question, but is there somewhere reliable that gives the statistical breakdown of retention rates and job placement for top programs? Or is it on you to ask the department? I'm assuming you should only do this once they give you an offer, considering how reticent (reasonably so, given the bleak picture) departments are in handing out information like this.
No, there is nowhere. You must rely on individual departments, who have every incentive to gloss over uncomfortable facts about their program.
It's been a while since I was around the Classics scene, but UT used to do pretty well with placement. Has that changed? (And yeah, for Bronze Age there and Cincinnati are where you would want to be.)
I really think you need to get in touch with some recent UT and UC archaeology PhDs and have them give you a straight account of their experiences, and the experiences of the many who didn't. This is one of the most difficult areas to get a job in, period. You aren't considered a Classicist by Classicists, and you aren't considered an Archaeologist by non-Classical Archaeologists.
-
Sappho, what's your background? Are you a PhD student, ex-PhD student?
I am a current student, just now ABD.
Well, don't play coy.
OSU, NYU, Cornell. Ask them what their true attrition and placement rates are. I have friends who went to, are or currently at, each. It isn't pretty.
I don't really care: I'm not in a 'mainstream' field (Aegean Bronze Age), so didn't really apply to 'top 10' programs. I reckon I have a shot at employment if I perform well within my field, publish and network. It's one of those odd areas where otherwise not leading Programs like that at the University of Cincinnati or UT Austin are rather good.
Plus I rather like the field - I don't necessarily view the PhD as a means to get a job. That would be an added bonus at the end - I would be equally happy to teach in a school or do something unrelated by the end.
If you are being honest with yourself then this is a fine attitude. But most people, after getting a taste of the apple, will not be so happy to do something unrelated to it.
In the end the onus to succeed is one's own alone; a strong program can only give you a few advantages which you may or may not be able to use to the full. Personally I've made the choice after much reflection to accept this risk and to take my chances in the profession. Fortunately I'll have the help and support of a top program in doing that, and believe me, I wouldn't be making this gamble if I hadn't managed to get into a top program. But now that I've given myself the strongest possible start, I'll take my chances, and enjoy the next 5-6 years doing what I'm passionate about.I think this is the the healthiest attitude, FWIW. I am just surprised more applicants and current students don't understand what the real risks are. They don't know how much the odds are stacked against them finding a full-time job.
a funded phd in classics at any decent department means five stable years on a guaranteed, liveable salary; health insurance and partially-subsidized insurance for dependants; subsidized accommodation; free access to a library, gym, shuttle service, etc; plus several free trips to major US metros and free holidays in europe thrown in for good measure. that, to me, is a great job. you don't even need to bring in the usual bromides about the life of the mind to justify it. i can't think of anybody i know who is walking out of their BA program into a job this good.
Yes, but. We tend to discount the opportunity costs far too much. This is a paying job with benefits, true. Keep in mind how much it pays varies school to school. I am lucky to have a stipend that comes close to 30K/year. Most classics programs do not offer that kind of support. Even with this stipend I am not able to save much, and many of my friends at other schools must take out student loans because their stipend is too small. Also, none of your trips are free, they are part of your job. You are working for them, even though it might not feel like it.
Compare notes with those of your intellectual peers from undergrad at age 30. They will be in much better condition financially, and are on course for a well-paying, secure career (though not at all, the economy being what it is). We classicists tend to be among the best of our class wherever we went to college, so therefore the opportunity costs of not taking advantage of our academic excellence are, in fact, quite large.
I like being a graduate student, and I hope I can find a tenure track job. But seeing friends in my own program who were superstars in undergrad and superstars in grad school come up with zilch on the market is sobering. Some of them are piecing together adjunct work. One has left for law school, which seems equally risky now. Others are exploring non-academic possibilities. Not a single one of them would have thought these results possible five or six years ago since our program has always been considered in the top five, and even number one by many people in the field.
That is why it is so important that all of you try to get accurate information from the programs you are looking at. Unless they can show you a break-down of every result for every student who enrolled, beginning in 2000, then they are being dishonest. How many drop out at year one, two, three, four, etc. How many go on the market? How many find a tenure track job within three years of graduating? If you don't know the answers to these questions then you have failed your first research assignment. I failed mine. I'm trying to help you avoid that failure.
I beg to differ. I don't view university, at any level, as being about a job. I'm only after a PhD out of interest. However those PhDs I have known, who have got jobs, including some out of very middling departments, have been exceptional.
Well, that lines up nicely with the interests of any institution. If you are after a PhD only out of interest then you will have no problem acknowledging that your PhD is the "waste product" of graduate education.
How about this idea? We all read the following and then come back here and say whether these articles have made a difference in our thinking about our own graduate education, and what we think departments and professors owe us when they accept us. Perhaps I will not seem quite so crazy to some of you after you've engaged with the ideas below.
http://www.theminnesotareview.org/journal/ns58/bousquet.htm
http://socialtext.dukejournals.org/content/20/1_70/81.full.pdf+html
http://www.theminnesotareview.org/journal/ns7172/interview_bousquet.shtml
I still want to get my PhD and try my hand at the market. But I am glad that the scales have been lifted from my eyes now, rather than two or three years from now.
-
I only applied to places where most of the graduates get tenure track jobs after graduating. I don't care if it's an R1 university or a shitty one in rural Tennessee, I'll be happy either way. I would also like to point out that a place like famae volent is going to skew pretty significantly to the negative. Most of the people on there on the people that don't get jobs - there's not really any reason to keep on at a place like that if you get hired. Not to say that finding an academic job isn't difficult, but my instincts (and very basic knowledge of formal statistics) say that a place like that will make things seem even bleaker than they actually are.
I wonder, which programs can claim that most of their graduates get tenure track jobs? Do you take them at their word when they tell you this? How do you find out the truth in these matters?
Seeing the selection of institutions to which you applied, that information right there tells me you are likely mistaken in your ability to discover data relevant to your own decision making. You have applied to three programs whose placement rates are abysmal. Criminally bad, really. Following your own logic you ought not to have applied to them.
FV skews negative because the experiences of most people on the job market in Classics skew negative.
With respect, I think you are woefully out of touch with your own likely future. But, onward and upward, as they say!
-
I'm curious to know how many of you have thought seriously about what graduate school in Classics will mean for you after the fun of admissions, after the stress of comps, and after the trauma of the job market.
Have you talked with your advisors, or your friends, about how bleak the market for Classicists is?
Do you care?
Have you checked out Famae Volent, or the Classics jobs wiki, to get some sense of what is in store for you?
http://famaevolent.blogspot.com/
http://classics.wikidot.com/1-2013-2014-classics-ancient-history-archaeology-job-market
If so, what did you think?
If not, why not?
-
A friend from the Centro just told me about a Classics blog for graduate students trying to find professor jobs:
http://famaevolent.blogspot.com/
I was so happy to get into grad school in classics, and now I'm already terrified about finding a job as a professor
Has anybody else seen this blog????
-
To pass the time... Which program have you applied for (or what is your area of specialization), and if you haven't applied this year, what are you considering?
Feminist approaches to ancient history in particular!
-
At Penn, the post-bac program is not just "doing undergrad courses for non-degree credit". They have dedicated Post-Bac reading courses taught by real faculty; these course are the equivalent (in terms of reading experience) of 2 advanced level undergrad courses. Additionally, they will let you audit non-language courses for free (through permission of the instructor). If you audit and do some work for the course anyway, you can potentially rack up some rec cred. I would highly recommend Penn if you opt for the post-bac route--I looked at the other programs and I don't think they can compete.
However, it does cost about 10,000 for the year. If you can get into a funded MA program that would be better.
I second the Penn recommendation. This is the oldest, most established, and best post-bac program in classics. People try to talk up other programs (UCLA, UNC, Columbia) but there is no comparison. Penn really is the best one.
-
Hi everyone,
I just received an offer for Princeton's PhD program, and am SO excited -- but nervous about the COL and finding housing for my husband and I. It's really early in the game, but we're trying to figure out when we should move -- and therefore, when we should quit our jobs/when he should find a new one. We'd like to be able to move to NJ slightly before school starts, and he might have to move sometime between May-July, depending on when he finds a position (which would most likely be in NYC, incidentally).
It seems that graduate housing move-in is not until September 1. If we prefer to move earlier, is it feasible to find non-Princeton housing at reasonable rates, convenient to the train, with leases starting in the late spring/summer?
I am looking at Princeton as well, and have a friend there now who lives in campus housing. She was able to move into the Butler Apartments (which is family housing) in the middle of June, so you should contact Grad Housing first. It is *much* cheaper to live in University Housing, and much, much more convenient, than anywhere else. Good luck!
Life After Admission
in Classics
Posted
Yes, absolutely, UT and UC are indeed top programs in BAA! I was simply pointing out that choosing that particular sub-field means facing an extraordinarily difficult job-hunt, far harder than almost any other sub-field in Classics.
If you don't understand my point about Archaeologists not considering Classical Archaeologists (that is archaeologists trained in Classics departments, so Bronze Age, Classical, Roman, etc.) "real" Archaeologists then you need to give this whole thing a re-think. Archaeologists trained in Classics departments have a very hard time getting hired in Physical Anthropology/Anthropology/Archaeology departments because many if not most of those faculty don't think the Classicist's training is appropriate to their discipline.
This means that Bronze Age Archaeologists suffer from a doubly hard problem: they are considered suspect by Classicists because they aren't primarily text-based, and they are considered suspect by Archaeologists because they don't have the cutting-edge archaeology training (so the prejudice goes) that a "real" Archaeology program would provide. They slip through the cracks and suffer unemployment as a result.
*That* is why anybody considering any type of Classical Archaeology really needs to talk to recent graduates or those currently ABD, who have had to deal with the job market first hand. Things have changed dramatically in the last few years, so much so that many faculty do not understand the brave new world their own students have to live in.