Academic Incest

[pausanias1223]

What do you all think about going to grad school at the same institution where you attened undergrad? I was accepted to my undergrad institution to work with a different mentor than those who advised me as an undergrad (although in the same psychology department), with full tuition funding and a hearty stipend. My concern is whether "academic incest" is a factor that may hurt my ability to get a post-doc or even a tenure position down the road at any school. If I don't accept this admission offer I'll have to find a job once I graduate and re-apply to grad programs in a year or two. What would you do?

[socialpsych]

I know there have been threads on this before. My view is, it's a tradeoff. If it's a top school (like top 3 in your area of interest), people will understand. If it's a way more prestigious school than the others to which you've been accepted, sure it will hurt but it might be worth it. Otherwise, yes, it will probably be a liability. Good luck deciding!

[pewtered]

Unless it's an amazing, amazing school, go elsewhere. Almost everyone I've spoken to has implicitly indicated that they frown upon individuals who go to the same institution for undergrad and grad. If you've already been working elsewhere in the meantime, that might change things a little. Otherwise I recommend getting experience somewhere else, which includes getting more people in the field to know you and back you up as a good scientist.

[boo]

If you have all three degrees from the same uni its imposssible to get tenure anywhere. If you have two from the same uni it makes it hard but it is possible. Its best to get it from three different places

[MissRyan]

Wow! I never knew or heard of this....can someone explain why?

thanks : )

[pewtered]

I can't speak to specific tenure issues, but going to the same place runs into a couple problems. The feeling I get from people is that they believe undergrads who go straight to grad school at the same place don't necessarily know what they want to do and are just applying to the same place because it's what they are comfortable with/it's what they think they want to do (I'm not saying that people can't know what they want to do, they are just perceived that way).

Another factor is that regardless of the truth, people will probably think the person had a slight edge getting into the grad school because they were already familiar with the people in the department. Regardless of actual chances of admission, there is a moderate difference between being accepted at a familiar versus new place. Think of the faculty sitting around deciding who they want; at a school where the department is deciding on someone they already knew and one faculty has to say "I really want this person" it does mean something different than at a school where the department only knows the individual based on a 30 minute interview. Not that the person would automatically be rejected from the non-undergrad institution, it just means more coming from somewhere where the people are less familiar with the individual.

Recommendations mean different things when your whole string of recs has come from the same person. If someone applies for a job, and has a recommendation who was their post-doc adviser, their grad adviser, and their undergrad adviser, the people reading that rec are going to be like "Oh yeah, he/she is Dr. X's favorite student/person ever, Dr. X could never write anything bad about him/her". Not that people write bad recs, but they know Dr. X will never say anything bad because Dr. X has been the person's adviser forever, obviously they love the person.

Finally, the field itself is incestuous and everyone knows everyone. The more people who know you, the more overall support you basically have from the field itself. If a lot of people can say, "I've worked with him/her, he/she is awesome" it's just generally more beneficial. If there were a cohort of five professors who study ABC and four of them had worked with someone (and could recommend them), I'd imagine professor number five would be wondering why he/she hadn't worked with the person.

Anyway, sorry for the long run on, but I think in most cases it's best to get a wide range of experiences with different advisers, schools, etc.

Edited March 20, 2010 by pewtered

[liszt85]

What do you all think about going to grad school at the same institution where you attened undergrad? I was accepted to my undergrad institution to work with a different mentor than those who advised me as an undergrad (although in the same psychology department), with full tuition funding and a hearty stipend. My concern is whether "academic incest" is a factor that may hurt my ability to get a post-doc or even a tenure position down the road at any school. If I don't accept this admission offer I'll have to find a job once I graduate and re-apply to grad programs in a year or two. What would you do?

I would accept the offer, get started on some serious research and try it out for two years (and get the MA) and decide if the research is awesome enough for me to stay. If not, consider transferring (but be careful not to burn bridges.. that can be difficult). In the end, it all boils down to how awesome your research has been. If you've done truly marvelous work, nobody is going to stop you from getting a tenure track position regardless of where your degree is from.

[pangur-ban]

For another perspective on the academic incest thing, try reading the top (after tip 4) of this page:

http://members.terracom.net/~dorothea/gradsch/success.html

If your professors want to keep you, you are giving up a treasure beyond price if you go elsewhere. You are giving up people who know you and your work, like both, want to see you succeed, and want to be your mentors and advocates. If you give this up in favor of trying to impress a bunch of strangers in a strange new department, you are being abominably stupid. Moreover, you are familiar with the professors, know something about the department and its politics, and already live in and understand the campus and surrounding area. These are all valuable things. I gave all this up—no fewer than three of my undergraduate professors asked me to consider staying for graduate study—for no reason at all, and it was just plain dumb of me.

NB: I don't necessarily agree with everything on the website, but it's a different point of view than one normally gets, and it's well worth reading through.

[jlee306]

This is my personal story:

I have known since high school what I wanted to be but did not want to move off to a huge university and feel overwhelmed. I graduated high school from a very small 1A school with my graduating class being that of 18. So I went to a community college and got my AA degree. Because I knew the degree I wanted in high school, I had already done the research of what schools would be the best for my degree. I transferred to the university that held the graduate program I wanted to finish my undergrad degree because I wanted to get the feel of the university and make sure it was the best place. I was recently accepted into the grad program at my undergrad institution and that is were I will be attending. It has been my top choice since high school and I am thrilled. As of now, I only want my Specialist degree (between a Masters and of PhD) and then I will begin my career. But if later I feel that I want a PhD, I will apply to the same school again...because, in my opinion, it is the best school for what I am pursuing.

[socialpsych]

If you have all three degrees from the same uni its imposssible to get tenure anywhere. If you have two from the same uni it makes it hard but it is possible. Its best to get it from three different places

That's not true at all...it is easy to turn up counterexamples using Google.

Edited March 21, 2010 by socialpsych

[ScreamingHairyArmadillo]

If you have all three degrees from the same uni its imposssible to get tenure anywhere. If you have two from the same uni it makes it hard but it is possible. Its best to get it from three different places

There's a prof at my school that got his BA, MA, and PhD at, well, my school.

[digits2006]

If you will do great research and you are funded... go for it! I do not think that these people on this forum actually sits on the tenure board of their school. Also, if you do great research, and make a name for yourself, that is all that matters.

[Jtdrum10]

There are two professors at my school that received all of their degrees from the same school and they are both tenured track. From the people I have talked to they recommend going somewhere else but if you have a great offer from the same school you got your undergrad degree or you didn't accepted anywhere else beside that school it's okay to go there. It is more about the research you do there than the actual name on your degree sheet.

[peppermint.beatnik]

That's not true at all...it is easy to turn up counterexamples using Google.

It's not true, but it does look good if you get your degree from three different schools.

[sem]

I spoke with a few professor about this. The overall consensus is that it depends upon the school. Although I have been told that it is a natural progression to desire a student to continue to work on a project if they have done excellent work with you as an RA or undergraduate research which helps for PhD & grad school.

Most professors I've spoken with say that they hear more cases of PhD programs not wanting to hire faculty that attended their own PhD. It definitely happens, but I have been told it is probably more difficult to get a faculty position directly from where you attended. This is just what I heard from 3 professors at 3 different institutions, but they all didn't want to make definitive statements and said well it happens, and depends on the school, so I am not sure if I am adding anything new or especially insightful.

I just heard that it is less important/frowned upon for school to school "incest" than PhD program to faculty tenure track job.

[sem]

S

Edited March 24, 2010 by sem

[cogneuroforfun]

As most people in the thread have already said, what is most important is going to the strongest program you can and doing the best research you can. If you did undergrad at Stanford and got into a grad program at Stanford that's ranked #1 with research that matches your interests, you would be ridiculous to turn that down. At the same time, you don't want to settle for your undergrad school when deciding on a graduate program just because its convenient and easy. If literally all else is equal and you're deciding between your undergrad and another school, take the other school. But in the real world, everything else won't be equal, and concerns about 'academic incest' should be some of the least of your worries. Besides, if you're in any science-related field (including psychology), what is more important is doing your postdoc somewhere different from your PhD!

[pausanias1223]

Another factor is that regardless of the truth, people will probably think the person had a slight edge getting into the grad school because they were already familiar with the people in the department. Regardless of actual chances of admission, there is a moderate difference between being accepted at a familiar versus new place. Think of the faculty sitting around deciding who they want; at a school where the department is deciding on someone they already knew and one faculty has to say "I really want this person" it does mean something different than at a school where the department only knows the individual based on a 30 minute interview. Not that the person would automatically be rejected from the non-undergrad institution, it just means more coming from somewhere where the people are less familiar with the individual.

Thanks very much for your detailed response, it was helpful. I see your point above, but I've also been told that many grad programs don't even consider their own undergrads as applicants because they want "fresh talent", while other schools are much more critical of applicants who attended that school for undergrad as well. Do you think it just depends on the program, or does the view you present above the prevalent view in most institutions?

[pausanias1223]

For another perspective on the academic incest thing, try reading the top (after tip 4) of this page:

http://members.terra...ch/success.html

NB: I don't necessarily agree with everything on the website, but it's a different point of view than one normally gets, and it's well worth reading through.

Wow, thanks for posting this site. It's nice to get a different perspective on the "incest" issue. I also like the realistic view in axiom #4, "Graduate schools offer students freedom to study what their professors like."

[pausanias1223]

I just heard that it is less important/frowned upon for school to school "incest" than PhD program to faculty tenure track job.

I've heard this as well, which bodes well for me because I will definitely want to get away from here for a post-doc if I stay for grad school. Its good to know it applies more to that situation than undergrad-> grad.

[pausanias1223]

If you will do great research and you are funded... go for it! I do not think that these people on this forum actually sits on the tenure board of their school. Also, if you do great research, and make a name for yourself, that is all that matters.

I am so glad you pointed this out! It seems like it is easy to get caught up in school names and programs that we forget what really matters is the fit with your advisor and the research you do while you're there.

Also thanks to everyone else for their contributions!

It's very helpful to get outside opinions on this issue, as the people I've been talking to are of course primarily affiliated with the program that I would be attending, thus their motivations and answers may be biased.