Select a program, not a professor

[faculty]

I used to frequent this place, but haven't been in a long while. A discussion in another forum made me think about all of you over here preparing to make a big decision. I'm not sure if this is buried in other threads and I'm sure you've heard this advice before, but to reiterate, it is very important that you go to a school because of the program more generally and not for a professor.

Sure, you want to go to Duke in hopes of working with Steve Vaisey or Wisconsin to study under Eric Grodsky, but ask yourself if you would still generally get the education that you want if they left or if they were uninvolved with students? In both those cases, you'd likely be fine, even if you wanted to study culture or education, but it's important that you think through these things as you're making decisions. Faculties shift. Junior faculty don't get tenure, or move someplace as they're getting it. Commuting couples get tired of commuting and someone moves. More senior people are recruited by other programs. As morbid as it is, people also die or suffer profound health crises that render them incapacitated. Even if they stay, some faculty are very involved in departments while others only show up for visit day or on the faculty web page. Even for people who are generally involved, a need to care for an older parent or child who needs attention (whether a baby or a troubled teen) can also change the involvement of faculty.

You can ask about potential movement or involvement, but it's difficult to predict the future. The best thing you can do is to attend a place that you believe has a lot to offer you with or without the star that you might dream of working with.

[pinoysoc]

Thank you for this insight! I do agree with everything you said. If I may add, I think what we all get caught up in is also prestige of the program. I watched a TedTalk that explored how "star" students struggle in top programs while similar students who chose a less prestigious program thrived. 

Sorry for chiming in, but this is something I feel that we as potential grad students and future faculty forget. As much as I am sad that I didn't get accepted to my top-choice program, I found a silver lining in my only acceptance where I have to opportunity to earn another master's in a related field en route to the PhD. Also, it doesn't hurt that the program itself is part of the only R1 campus in the state and where all its health-related research/programs are located at. 

[geedowg]

Hey @pinoysoc, mind sharing that ted talk with us? Sounds like t might be worth a listen

[Eigen]

I think the caveat I'd add to this is to select professors (plural), not a program. 

Who you work with is the biggest determining factor of your PhD, including trajectory post-PhD. 

But there's a reasonable chance that you find out your first choice isn't someone you can work with, they leave, they aren't taking students, or something else. 

The advice I give my grad-school bound students is to not strongly consider a school unless there are at least 3 faculty you'd be very interested in working with, ideally more. They may not be "perfect", but you should be able to see yourself happily working with them. 

That allows for picking someone that turns out to be completely off their rocker and still having an escape plan. It also covers you in case your dream professor leaves when you're halfway through the program and you can't go with them. 

[ThePastelCalico]

I feel like this question becomes more complicated depending on the field people are entering. Sure sociology programs are known for their work on inequality, demography, and (insert other concentration of your choice), but some fields of the discipline don't enjoy as much institutional support. Environmental sociology, which is one of my primary interests, is a good example of this. There are very few top 20 programs that have an environmental speciality (Wisconsin is the only program in the top 10 that has environmental sociology as a core research area, and Arizona, Maryland, and Brown are now situated outside of the top 20) and most other programs only have a smattering of faculty that do environmental soc research. So in a field like that, it's more necessary to choose a superstar advisor that can help to overcome the lack of degree prestige that often comes with a PhD in one of those concentrations. 

 

I am probably biased, as I could enjoy the possibility of working with Tom Shriver (a well respected and renowned environmental sociologist) at a more midrange program (NCSU), and I'm still waiting to hear back from Oregon about any movements on the wait list, but some of us don't have the opportunity to choose a program that can be separated from the professors identified in their SOP. Any advice for folks like me? 

[faculty]

47 minutes ago, ThePastelCalico said:

...but some of us don't have the opportunity to choose a program that can be separated from the professors identified in their SOP. Any advice for folks like me? 

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't know much about NCSU, but a cursory look at the webpage shows me a lot of grad students study environment and no one seems to obviously work with or study under Tom Shriver. That bodes well for someone like you because, if he left (or any one of them did), it looks like you'd be able to continue with what you're interested in. Like eigen notes, it's okay if you do somewhere that multiple people could be advisors. If the webpage showed that everyone who was studying environment had him chairing their committee, I would be worried there could be fallout for students if he left. Places that have strengths in something, like Stanford's social psychology tradition or UMass's gender/family/sexuality core, are unlikely to shift radically with the exit of one professor. Those places are also likely to be committed to replacing people with others who study in that area.

Any student needs to go to the best place for them. To decide that, look at placements, look at funding, look at department culture, look at methodological training and professional development (publishing, grant writing, etc.), look at fit, but do not let the one star who you'd love to work with lure you in if there isn't enough offered in those other attributes to see you through to a PhD and a job. 

 

[qeta]

5 hours ago, faculty said:

Any student needs to go to the best place for them. To decide that, look at placements, look at funding, look at department culture, look at methodological training and professional development (publishing, grant writing, etc.), look at fit, but do not let the one star who you'd love to work with lure you in if there isn't enough offered in those other attributes to see you through to a PhD and a job. 

 

How does one figure out whether the department has this? This has been hardest to determine by looking at department websites.

[Valerian]

@faculty Thank you for starting this thread. I also have a question:

Is there any situation in which prestige supersedes supposed fit? For instance, I'm being told that my research interests will likely change. Therefore, is it better to simply go to the best program that I've been admitted to even if the department's strengths don't necessarily encompass my primary interests? Continuing with your Stanford example, let's say that I was accepted at both Stanford and Harvard, and I love social psychology (among other things). Stanford is the highest ranked department for social psychology, but Harvard is the most highly ranked sociology department period. Would I be better off going with Harvard even if I'm not super thrilled by, say, the sociology of race or urban sociology because my interests will likely change anyway?

[faculty]

@Valerian Yes, many students' interests change in graduate school, but let's assume all these hypotheticals are true. Your interests are more likely to change if you go to Harvard and there isn't anyone doing what you do (although, Ellis Monk's work combines social psychology and race). But if the choice is actually between these two schools, that's not really a difference in ranking at all. These are two VERY highly ranked schools. People sometimes complain about Stanford's job placement and Harvard had a banner year with a number of market stars coming out of their program, but whatever decision you make will be a good one. If you're interested in social psychology, I would attend to differences in the type of social psychology that various schools do and also think about other in the department who do work that you would see as complementary (e.g., gender, race, networks, health, etc.).

@qeta Look at student CVs and see if they were awarded grants and their publication records. Contact current students and ask about professional development in schools and departments. Ask about this on visits, as there is sometimes a special office on campus that works with students on funding or a course or workshop to help students prepare papers for review. Even if these don't exist, if a lot of students are publishing or getting external funding, it suggests that there is a strong culture among students to work hard and take risks. Other departments that might have these resources, but can't seem to translate them into success for students, could be a sign that something in the department, or among students, is holding students back.

[pinoysoc]

What's your take on lower ranked schools like UAB? They specialize in Medical sociology and has a lot of great resources such as research centers in the medical school, a great school of public health, etc.?

[qeta]

Dear @faculty, I hope you won't mind me posting some similar advice from my mentor. I just had a Skype call with her yesterday, in preparation for visiting three schools, and this is the advice she gave me:

• Make sure you are going to a program where at least two professors can advise you.
• Assign at least equal value on feedback from current grad students (vis-a-vis feedback from faculty) on sensitive issues like funding, professional development, and placement.
• If you're coming in with an MA, ask the department whether your previous thesis can take care of the MA paper requirement. If you have sufficient quant training, ask if you can take fewer introductory stats classes.
• Teaching load in the first and second year can hugely affect your progress in the program. A lower teaching load in those two years would ensure you have time to (almost) finish your coursework and prep for your comprehensive in the third year. Ask the department what possibilities there are for lessening your teaching loads, whether through fellowships within the department, an associated research centre or the university, research assistantships, grading work (instead of teaching), and outside funding (ask if students from the department routinely win external fellowship competitions).

Hope this helps!

Edited March 6, 2018 by qeta