Current English PhD students - Q&A

[emprof]

1 minute ago, thismortalcoil said:

@emprof, piggybacking off this question: to what extent, in your opinion, does one's supervisor's reputation matter when one enters the job market? I've heard a variety of things on the matter and would love to hear your thoughts. Is a "famous" supervisor an alluring factor in one's application to a t-t- job? Or do other things (i.e. quality of research, publications) matter more? 

The quality of the research and the writing is definitely more important--and publications in peer-reviewed journals are certainly one attestation to the importance and quality of the research. A "famous" advisor isn't necessarily going to help if that advisor is so busy being famous that s/he/they doesn't offer much hands-on mentorship, doesn't read your work carefully, and doesn't know you or your work well enough to write a detailed and compelling LoR. So it's important to talk to current graduate students in the programs you visit and to inquire about the availability and responsiveness of the faculty you plan to work with. 

That said, our field functions on a kind of apprenticeship model--and even though I'm tenured, I am still sometimes identified as a Student of X (and thought of as part of a cohort of students, at various stages in our careers, who were trained by X--and I've even been identified before as a 2nd-generation Student of Y, who was X's advisor in graduate school). So that identity does stay with you and help to render you legible, on the job market as well as in other contexts, as a particular kind of scholar with a particular kind of training. Having an advisor who is well known and well connected can absolutely give you a leg up on the job market. If your advisor reaches out to a colleague at an institution where you're applying for a job and says "Look out for an application from thismortalcoil, who is my student and is doing really important work," that can get your application moved to the top of a pile and given more thorough attention. If a search committee is trying to sift through 300 applications for one position, a heads-up from a trusted colleague can make sure that it doesn't lose track of a promising candidate in the shuffle. But if the quality of the work isn't there, all the phone calls in the world won't matter. 

[thismortalcoil]

1 minute ago, emprof said:

The quality of the research and the writing is definitely more important--and publications in peer-reviewed journals are certainly one attestation to the importance and quality of the research. A "famous" advisor isn't necessarily going to help if that advisor is so busy being famous that s/he/they doesn't offer much hands-on mentorship, doesn't read your work carefully, and doesn't know you or your work well enough to write a detailed and compelling LoR. So it's important to talk to current graduate students in the programs you visit and to inquire about the availability and responsiveness of the faculty you plan to work with. 

That said, our field functions on a kind of apprenticeship model--and even though I'm tenured, I am still sometimes identified as a Student of X (and thought of as part of a cohort of students, at various stages in our careers, who were trained by X--and I've even been identified before as a 2nd-generation Student of Y, who was X's advisor in graduate school). So that identity does stay with you and help to render you legible, on the job market as well as in other contexts, as a particular kind of scholar with a particular kind of training. Having an advisor who is well known and well connected can absolutely give you a leg up on the job market. If your advisor reaches out to a colleague at an institution where you're applying for a job and says "Look out for an application from thismortalcoil, who is my student and is doing really important work," that can get your application moved to the top of a pile and given more thorough attention. If a search committee is trying to sift through 300 applications for one position, a heads-up from a trusted colleague can make sure that it doesn't lose track of a promising candidate in the shuffle. But if the quality of the work isn't there, all the phone calls in the world won't matter. 

Thank you for this detailed response! I figured quality of research and writing was important, for sure, but wondered to what extent the reputation of one's supervisor would impact one's potential for t-t jobs. I never thought to ask questions of the students currently being supervised by X or Y, but will definitely do so...

If I might ask: in your opinion, what are the, like, three most important things for a student to consider when deciding between offers, if each offer is (relatively speaking) a good fit, and each offer is (relatively speaking) at an equally prestigious institution? I've received a bit of advice on this recently, though as a Libra I cannot for the life of me make decisions autonomously, and would love any information you have the time to spare. 

[emprof]

9 minutes ago, thismortalcoil said:

Thank you for this detailed response! I figured quality of research and writing was important, for sure, but wondered to what extent the reputation of one's supervisor would impact one's potential for t-t jobs. I never thought to ask questions of the students currently being supervised by X or Y, but will definitely do so...

If I might ask: in your opinion, what are the, like, three most important things for a student to consider when deciding between offers, if each offer is (relatively speaking) a good fit, and each offer is (relatively speaking) at an equally prestigious institution? I've received a bit of advice on this recently, though as a Libra I cannot for the life of me make decisions autonomously, and would love any information you have the time to spare. 

This is a little tough to answer in the abstract without knowing your subfield or the institutions, as there are lots of different configurations that can make a place desirable. (For instance: what if there is not as much funding available to support travel to libraries, but the institution is within spitting distance of an archive that will be valuable for your research?) I suppose I would have to prioritize a "deep bench" of faculty in your field--ideally, enough that you would have multiple course offerings in your field, some choice of advisors and committee members, and fellow graduate students in your subfield in your cohort and neighboring cohorts. I would want to know that graduate students in the program felt supported financially, academically, and personally by the institution and the department. (This is the kind of information that I think is best gleaned from an on-campus visit.) And I would want to know that the department has some success in placing students despite the abysmal job market--and that perhaps there were efforts underway to help students recognize and secure alt-ac training during the program. 

[hgtvdeathdrive]

On 2/18/2019 at 11:21 AM, Ramus said:

Great question, and I can't stress this enough: go with rank! Yes, there are all the caveats about the rankings and the methodology that informs them. But they're essentially a loose measure of prestige, and *that* is what drives departmental hiring decisions above all else. Prestige is the name of the game, and if you're in higher ed, that's the game you're playing. (Even if, as some on this forum claim, they're not considering it.)

Hi! Is there any better way to understand prestige or rank besides US News? Is it just about asking many people? I'm stuck between two programs with similar rankings on that list (which seems difficult to understand) and I feel like I can't figure out which holds a higher prestige/ranking as a way to possibly make a decision.

[thismortalcoil]

2 hours ago, emprof said:

This is a little tough to answer in the abstract without knowing your subfield or the institutions, as there are lots of different configurations that can make a place desirable. (For instance: what if there is not as much funding available to support travel to libraries, but the institution is within spitting distance of an archive that will be valuable for your research?) I suppose I would have to prioritize a "deep bench" of faculty in your field--ideally, enough that you would have multiple course offerings in your field, some choice of advisors and committee members, and fellow graduate students in your subfield in your cohort and neighboring cohorts. I would want to know that graduate students in the program felt supported financially, academically, and personally by the institution and the department. (This is the kind of information that I think is best gleaned from an on-campus visit.) And I would want to know that the department has some success in placing students despite the abysmal job market--and that perhaps there were efforts underway to help students recognize and secure alt-ac training during the program. 

Thank you for this! I've been thinking a lot about the first and last of these questions, but have yet to ask current graduate students about how they feel within the department. I've also yet to ask the schools about their cohort make-up, or about the make-up of neighbouring cohorts. As always, you've been a huge help!   

[Musmatatus]

What would be the best way to prepare during the summer? I’m coming off a gap year, and I would like to try to get back into the swing of things. So far, what I have on my list is to brush up on my critical theory and language skills. 

[punctilious]

6 hours ago, sugilite said:

What would be the best way to prepare during the summer? I’m coming off a gap year, and I would like to try to get back into the swing of things. So far, what I have on my list is to brush up on my critical theory and language skills. 

That’s basically what husband did! And if you get your generals list you can also work through some of those!

[cyborg213]

On 3/7/2019 at 7:48 PM, emprof said:

Do they have tenure? Or, if they don't, are they on track to get tenure? You'll probably be in the Ph.D. program for around 6 years, which is enough time for a junior scholar to establish a name in the field and to achieve professional stature. Obviously, it depends a little bit on the institution. If you're talking about the "Big Three," they have a reputation for a revolving door of junior scholars; I wouldn't want to count on a junior professor getting tenure there. If, on the other hand, you're talking about a program that has a strong record of mentoring and tenuring its junior faculty, then I wouldn't worry about having advisors who are early in their careers--especially if the fit is good, as you say. If you were choosing between two institutions, and one had more senior scholars in the field, then perhaps it would be slightly "safer" to go with the latter--but even then, I think fit would be more decisive for me than seniority. If you can speak with your undergraduate (or MA?) advisors with more specifics (or if you'd like to PM me with specifics), you might be able to glean more inside-baseball information about the program, the advisors, and their career trajectories. But in general, I wouldn't worry too much about this issue. 

Thank you so much @emprof!! This is very helpful advice. To my knowledge, they all have tenure-track positions. What would be a good way to find out if the program has a strong record of mentoring and tenuring their junior faculty? 

[emprof]

3 hours ago, cyborg213 said:

Thank you so much @emprof!! This is very helpful advice. To my knowledge, they all have tenure-track positions. What would be a good way to find out if the program has a strong record of mentoring and tenuring their junior faculty? 

Honestly, this is the kind of information that is probably only going to be gleaned through unofficial channels, because programs rarely publicize their rates of tenure and promotion. (There's a lot of confidentiality entailed in both processes--and programs that tenure regularly worry that it might suggest a lack of rigor, while programs that tenure rarely worry that it might make them seem unable to nurture junior scholars, and/or inhospitable.) Do they hire lots of junior people straight out of graduate school? Do they usually tenure those people? Do those assistant professors stay after tenure? So I think that asking a trusted advisor or writer of your LoR might be the best route. When you visit the program, you can ask the advisors themselves--tactfully--about the culture of the department for junior faculty. Does the department have a strong record of tenuring its junior faculty? Are many of the senior faculty in the department people who were hired there as junior faculty--and then stayed? Professors are unfortunately not likely to disclose their own individual plans even if they hope to leave for another institution (because making that knowledge public could threaten their ability to do so), but they might be able to speak in general terms about the history and culture of the department. This can also be useful information because programs that treat junior faculty with respect and support are likely to extend the same courtesy to graduate students--and the inverse is also true. 

[illcounsel]

Sorry if this is wrong place to ask since I am referring to MA programs, but I wonder if someone could speak about how heavily funding played into their offer and if the regret that or not. A few of my programs are sitting at about 18k of funding, but the program that I have a closest fit to is at 13k (after a round of negotiating funding). I wonder how much worry I should place on the funding vs fit especially considering it is an MA program. It feels hard to accept an offer that is that much lower than the rest (especially given that it is a 3 year program, not 2), but also feels hard to not accept an offer that has closest fit. Any advice? Cost of Living estimates are relatively similar across the programs. 

[mandelbulb]

6 minutes ago, illcounsel said:

Sorry if this is wrong place to ask since I am referring to MA programs, but I wonder if someone could speak about how heavily funding played into their offer and if the regret that or not. A few of my programs are sitting at about 18k of funding, but the program that I have a closest fit to is at 13k (after a round of negotiating funding). I wonder how much worry I should place on the funding vs fit especially considering it is an MA program. It feels hard to accept an offer that is that much lower than the rest (especially given that it is a 3 year program, not 2), but also feels hard to not accept an offer that has closest fit. Any advice? Cost of Living estimates are relatively similar across the programs. 

fit isn't only about research; it's also about having access to a lifestyle that will allow you to thrive. funding is definitely entangled with fit for me. what do you really need in order to get the most out of your program? is it a really close research fit? or is it a better financial situation that'll allow you the freedom from stressing about money to really engage with your coursework and your professors? what is it that you want to accomplish outside of your coursework in your program and will that be feasible (such as attending conferences)?

[cyborg213]

21 minutes ago, illcounsel said:

Sorry if this is wrong place to ask since I am referring to MA programs, but I wonder if someone could speak about how heavily funding played into their offer and if the regret that or not. A few of my programs are sitting at about 18k of funding, but the program that I have a closest fit to is at 13k (after a round of negotiating funding). I wonder how much worry I should place on the funding vs fit especially considering it is an MA program. It feels hard to accept an offer that is that much lower than the rest (especially given that it is a 3 year program, not 2), but also feels hard to not accept an offer that has closest fit. Any advice? Cost of Living estimates are relatively similar across the programs. 

Is this funding a partial tuition remission, or is it a stipend? 

[illcounsel]

10 minutes ago, cyborg213 said:

Is this funding a partial tuition remission, or is it a stipend? 

Sorry this wasn't clear. It is a stipend on top of full tuition remission. 

[illcounsel]

18 minutes ago, mandelbulb said:

fit isn't only about research; it's also about having access to a lifestyle that will allow you to thrive. 

1

Thank you for this. This gives me a lot to think about. It seems like such a tough decision. I think I need to talk to a few students there to see how liveable that lower stipend is and if they have to pick up additional work to make it by. 

[beardedlady]

38 minutes ago, illcounsel said:

Sorry if this is wrong place to ask since I am referring to MA programs, but I wonder if someone could speak about how heavily funding played into their offer and if the regret that or not. A few of my programs are sitting at about 18k of funding, but the program that I have a closest fit to is at 13k (after a round of negotiating funding). I wonder how much worry I should place on the funding vs fit especially considering it is an MA program. It feels hard to accept an offer that is that much lower than the rest (especially given that it is a 3 year program, not 2), but also feels hard to not accept an offer that has closest fit. Any advice? Cost of Living estimates are relatively similar across the programs. 

What do you consider as "fit"? How do you determine it? I ask just because I think people may be able to give more specific, or just better advice depending on the answer, as this already nebulous term is used differently by different people  

If it were me, I wouldn't place too much of an emphasis on research fit (but again, my advice may be different depending on how you determine research fit). Unless the other programs have literally nothing of interest to you research-wise (which I can't imagine being the case), I'd suggest following the money, especially when talking about a nearly 50% higher stipend. Considering similar CoL, more money would relieve financial stress and allow you to focus on your courses and research, to attend conferences etc. 

[havemybloodchild]

For me, funding is turning out to be a bigger deal than the idealistic Kendall of yesteryear (fall 2018) thought it would be.  Maybe it's because of my age, but I have to be real with myself about what kind of lifestyle I'll be happy living for the next 6ish years.  If I'm miserable and overly stressed about money, I will not be capable of doing my best work.  The quality of my work is the most important factor in getting a job I want after graduation.  Therefore money is a big deal.

I also want to be at a program that values my work and my future enough to fund me a truly livable wage.  This should be a baseline expectation, imo.

However, in your case you're talking less of a time commitment, so maybe the funding doesn't have to be such a big deal.  I think you should trust your gut- it's done well by you so far!

[WildeThing]

I think funding and the fact that it is 3 years instead of 2 would push me towards another program, unless this one was significantly better at placing students in PhD programs. Never heard of a 3 year MA actually. 

Fit is important but it is less important at the MA level where you are doing coursework mostly, so will depend on what is being offered. I think the point of the MA is to expose you to different things within a graduate-level context and by the time you finish your interests will be different.

Edited March 12, 2019 by WildeThing

[illcounsel]

12 hours ago, WildeThing said:

 

Fit is important but it is less important at the MA level where you are doing coursework mostly, so will depend on what is being offered. I think the point of the MA is to expose you to different things within a graduate-level context and by the time you finish your interests will be different.

I think this is important for me to keep in mind. It feels so hard to possibly turn down an offer than has faculty very closely aligned to my interests, but I do need to recognize that it is an MA program and I want to eventually move on to a PhD program so research fit is perhaps less important at this level. 

[aporeticpoetic]

Everyone on here seems to keep stressing the importance of rank above much else, so my question is: If I have been accepted to programs with good funding (and tuition remission) that also seem like good fits for my focus, but they are not in the top 10 (or 20), should I wait it out and reapply next year--or accept one of the offers I've already been given?

[WildeThing]

Accept the offer. If you have a PhD offer that covers the basics (funding) take it. No guarantees you will do better the following year.

[fireandice]

Does anyone have a sense if, when looking at placement rates, how much one should pay attention to the type of schools where students are getting positions. I'm wondering how to think about comparing, for example, the placement success of one school that has fewer tenure track placements, but the ones they have are at more national and more R1 universities, compared to another school with students getting many more TT positions but at regional schools or secondary campuses of state universities etc. 

[Warelin]

7 hours ago, WildeThing said:

Accept the offer. If you have a PhD offer that covers the basics (funding) take it. No guarantees you will do better the following year.

I'd also like to stress that there's also a chance that you will even get accepted to the same school the following year.

 

1 hour ago, fireandice said:

Does anyone have a sense if, when looking at placement rates, how much one should pay attention to the type of schools where students are getting positions. I'm wondering how to think about comparing, for example, the placement success of one school that has fewer tenure track placements, but the ones they have are at more national and more R1 universities, compared to another school with students getting many more TT positions but at regional schools or secondary campuses of state universities etc. 

There are way too many factors to consider here. How recent are the placements? Are students refusing to take on certain tenure-track positions because they want to stay in their city or closeby due to family or culture? Some students choose to stay in their city even if the job is "lesser" because they really enjoy the feel of the city. Others choose to stay because they like the affordability of where they're living and/or starting a family makes going to the job market a bigger challenge. Some professors within universities really stress R1 universities and might not know as much about teaching-focused institutions. Small note here: Non R1 universities account for around 90 percent of schools and as such make up the majority of hiring. Teaching experience is often more important than research experience for them.

[Glasperlenspieler]

4 hours ago, fireandice said:

Does anyone have a sense if, when looking at placement rates, how much one should pay attention to the type of schools where students are getting positions. I'm wondering how to think about comparing, for example, the placement success of one school that has fewer tenure track placements, but the ones they have are at more national and more R1 universities, compared to another school with students getting many more TT positions but at regional schools or secondary campuses of state universities etc. 

@Warelin is certainly right that this is complicated, but I would suggest there are some patterns at work here. I think some programs do quite well at placing their students in permanent, TT positions, but rarely, if ever, place a student at an R1. Other programs might be more hit and miss in terms of placement, but the students they do place often end up at R1 universities. If you look around, I wouldn't be surprised if a handful of PhD programs produce 70+% of professors at R1 institutions (this is certainly true in my field, which is a non-anglophone literature). Academia can be pretty incestuous and this is especially true at the upper echelon of research universities. The catch, however, is that students from these programs often get overlooked for more teaching focused jobs. Someone with a PhD from an elite private university which does quite well at placing students suggested that people from that program rarely, if ever, got interviews from smaller, public universities. There are also other factors, such as regional notoriety (some programs place quite well at universities in the same part of the country but don't have as strong of a national reputation) or religious affiliation (PhD programs at Catholic universities tend to place quite well at other Catholic colleges/universities, all else being equal).

[Warelin]

12 minutes ago, Glasperlenspieler said:

Someone with a PhD from an elite private university which does quite well at placing students suggested that people from that program rarely, if ever, got interviews from smaller, public universities. There are also other factors, such as regional notoriety (some programs place quite well at universities in the same part of the country but don't have as strong of a national reputation) or religious affiliation (PhD programs at Catholic universities tend to place quite well at other Catholic colleges/universities, all else being equal).

I think this is really important to note. Equally important is that the college you graduate from determines your initial placement. Afterwards, it depends more on the reputation that you've built as a scholar and/or professor. It's often difficult to transition from a teaching-to-research school because the schools have different objectives they consider to be important. 

[havemybloodchild]

14 hours ago, Glasperlenspieler said:

or religious affiliation

This is so funny to me. I am a staunch atheist and all my PhD options now are at religiously affiliated schools. I didn’t even think of religion as a factor when looking at where to apply, except for wondering how it might impede my research interests.  Weird to think that it might impede my job search...