Advice Requested: Pursuing Graduate Studies

[mnemosyne]

For the PhD: to apply or not to apply—that is the question.

Seeing as I graduate the fall semester of 2010, I am experiencing the obligatory educational crisis. Faculty have encouraged me to consider a PhD. I shall explicate my current feelings, and I hope I receive objective responses. Surely there must be others of/who had a similar situation. For the record, I am an undergraduate.

This may be a horribly reductive statement to make, but my perception, along with some of my professors’, is that graduate school in English literature generally trains one to be a teacher more than a scholar. I do understand that one must teach in graduate school, specifically the soul-sucking composition courses, and I have no problem doing that; however, teaching is not a career goal.

I do not possess grandiose illusions of going off to a PhD program and revolutionizing the study. I’ve had some exposure to literary theory. I guess what I’m attempting to communicate is that I’m not idealizing the venture, or at least I perceive myself not to be. I do admit to feeling some disgust over the mental masturbation that occurs in the programs. Another thing against me is that I do not feel myself to be very competitive. I learn to enrich myself and develop my passion, not to compete with others. I’m uncertain as to how I would fit into the dynamics of graduate study. Ultimately, earning a PhD would be a personal accomplishment for me.

As for career goals, I would be content editing—I’ve got the eye. I could dream and aim for a University Press. I’m also interested in archiving and digitization.

Given all of this, would it be wise to pursue a PhD, especially without concrete career goals? I believe part of the process is finding your way to them.

Thank you to those who actually read this far, and I extend further gratitude to those who reply. You deserve a cookie.

[bluellie]

Why not an M.A.? You continue your education, write a thesis and see if graduate school is something that appeals to you without committing to five plus years before you earn your degree. It seems that an M.A. may make you a more attractive candidate to a Ph.D. program, though that is only what I gather from here on the forums. You might also want to think about getting an M.A. in Rhetoric and Composition instead of literature. I don't know if that will help you attain your goals, but it's something to consider.

My advisor suggested that the M.A. was a positive experience, since you're taking classes in subject that you love. She said for the Ph.D. you have to deal with a lot of depression, anxiety and self-doubt, especially while you're doing your research and prepping for your dissertation. You're doing a lot of work for years and years and years without seeing any pay-off. I wouldn't say she used the term "soul-crushing," but the clear implication was that it was not a pleasant experience.

Do you want a Ph.D. or is it something you think you should have? Don't feel pressured by your professors. This is your life and ultimately your decision. No one's going to think less of you if you decide not to pursue your Ph.D. There are plenty of people who go to work after their B.A. and they're (probably) much better off financially for it. Perhaps see if you can get an internship at a publishing company this summer while you're still a student? Some of my undergraduate acquaintances have landed in the publishing industry that way.

If you're not 100% sure that you want to go to grad school, take a gap year to make sure. Work in the industry, if you can and go from there.

Probably not the clear answer you wanted. :-\

[hadunc]

If your ultimate goal is to work in publishing, I would not suggest pursuing a PhD in literature. I currently work freelance for an editing/marketing company and I can tell you that aside from teaching me to write effectively, my literature background did absolutely nothing to prepare me to enter the professional writing field. Scholarship and professional writing/editing are two very different animals, and I don't think you'd be helping your career much by spending 6+ years in a PhD program. I second bluellie's suggestion of looking for internships with publishing houses or journals.

I'm pursuing a PhD because I see it as an end in itself, and even if I do end up in some other career, the experience will have been worth it to me. If that's not how you feel, graduate school probably will feel "soul-crushing." If you still feel like you'd like to give academia a chance, a funded MA is a great way to go. But if I were you I would take at least a year off first. That year really clarified my goals for me, and I have a feeling it would probably do the same for you.

Good luck!

[strokeofmidnight]

At most of the top programs (at least the ones that i considered), the emphasis is heavily on scholarship rather than teaching. Teaching is largely viewed as either a complementary skill, or a necessary one to acquire for the sake of the job market--but the focus is always on research. Some might say too much so, but that's a personal choice/perspective. it may be true that at some programs, grad students are teaching slaves...but this is definitely not true among most programs within the top 25...most of those schools will provide as many (or close to it) teaching-free fellowship years as years spent teaching one course each semester while you continue your own work.

What makes you think that comp classes are soul-sucking? It depends on how the class is structure...how much freedom you have over the syllabus, how good your students are, how you handle teaching...etc, etc. I complain about my occasional awful students, but for the most part...I really enjoy working with most of them.

Unless I'm misreading what you mean by "competitive," I'm not sure why you see this as a virtue or necessity for graduate school? Very few of the programs that I looked at are actually "competitive" (read: cut-throat, combative, etc). Although many of them are quite challenging and rigorous, one is mostly competing against oneself, while maintaining collegial, even close relationships with one's cohort.

The mental masturbation part is a bit strange to me as well. While I have come across the occasional immature/insecure grad student who hasn't figure out just how unattractive and counterproductive obnoxious behaviors are in grad school...most of my colleagues manage to be both brilliant and cool people, who won't speak/write/air-their-thoughts only to prove how smart they are, and who know that an intellectual conversation requires listening and responding to their interlocutors. Maybe I've just been extraordinary lucky, but I feel as though this is the norm rather than the exception at most strong, functional graduate programs.

These clarification issue aside, i'd second the chorus: try an internship at a publishing house/editorial press if you're considering that career. While graduate school is a time for a certain level of self-discovery (you can certainly change sub-fields), it may not the best place to figure out whether or not academia is for you to begin with. You don't need to be certain...but it may be a red flag if you're not excited.

This may be a horribly reductive statement to make, but my perception, along with some of my professors’, is that graduate school in English literature generally trains one to be a teacher more than a scholar. I do understand that one must teach in graduate school, specifically the soul-sucking composition courses, and I have no problem doing that; however, teaching is not a career goal.

I do admit to feeling some disgust over the mental masturbation that occurs in the programs. Another thing against me is that I do not feel myself to be very competitive. I learn to enrich myself and develop my passion, not to compete with others. I’m uncertain as to how I would fit into the dynamics of graduate study. Ultimately, earning a PhD would be a personal accomplishment for me.

As for career goals, I would be content editing—I’ve got the eye. I could dream and aim for a University Press. I’m also interested in archiving and digitization.

Edited March 28, 2010 by strokeofmidnight

[8521679]

I think that virtually every person on this forum would recommend that you take (at a minimum) a year or two off before applying to graduate school. I don't think I've ever heard someone say that waiting was a bad idea, or that they should have applied directly after their undergraduate work. Everybody says the opposite. You'll be more competitive for admission and funding, you'll know yourself and your skills better, and, above all, you'll be an adult. Don't apply now. Just don't.

[wordslinger]

If you are interested in publishing and editing in the scholarly writing field, you will probably need an MA. Many universities offer GA positions working with scholarly journals, so that type of position while working on your MA would be ideal for you. That is not an easy field to get into, and the other benefit of grad school is that you will be able get to know the people who work in the field and they you.

Good luck on this decision. Obligatory crises are my least favorite kind.

[muffinlit]

This is quite weird because I too was in this situation 4 years ago. (oh goodness it has been that long!) I loved being an English major and really wanted to take the next step in analyzing and interpreting literature, and I thought well, a Masters would give me some more time to really just FOCUS on my passion.

I also worked at the library on campus in the archiving and manuscripts department, and loved every minute of it-- UNC has the biggest collection of southern authors and it was an amazing experience. I was encouraged by my boss to stay and get my MA in Library Science.

In addition, I had a crazy last two years of undergraduate, I interned at UNC Press, and learned that academic publishing is pretty awesome and was enthralled by the entire process.

I had these three things going through my mind and everyone was sort of telling me different things. Bottom line. I went and got my Masters with an open mind. My boss at UNC Press had a masters in English... the head of the manuscripts department had a masters in English, and everyone said it couldn't hurt only help. I too had no interest in teaching--- NONE. I got a graduate assistantship, which consisted of 2 semesters of tutoring and 2 semesters of teaching those "soul sucking" comp classes. Needless to say I fell in love with teaching on the college level. Somewhere in the last half of my first semester working on a seminar paper, I fell in love with researching and putting complete focus on my own interests, and trying to make sense of my ideas on paper. And here I am in my second round of applications, hoping for some sort of good news, and already contemplating round three.

So, moral of the story is you never know where your experiences will take you, but all your interests would only benefit from a MA, if that's what you want to do. I wasn't a super competitive candidate either, I want to make friends, not fear people. And that's all in program choice-- if you are applying to super crazy cut-throat programs-- you might run into that. I went to a small terminal program and made some really good friends, who were all very supportive. Hope this helps!

Edited March 28, 2010 by muffinlit

[mnemosyne]

I thank you all for your thoughtful responses.

As far as taking time off between undergraduate and graduate studies, I would prefer not to. I was an adult already when I entered undergraduate—I postponed and worked fulltime to help my parents with their financial situation. When I do get my undergraduate degree, I will be 25. I understand that I do have the rest of my life to devote to a path of study after I select the correct one. I’m just feeling time’s wingéd chariot. The hiatus between high school and college was abominable. If I must take time in between, and probably should, thankfully I will have my current professors to fall back on. I imagine they’d benefit if I’d whore myself out to do their research.

I know that I would like to pursue at least a Masters. I’m still trying to hone my focus too, which would benefit from time off. Lately I have been flirting with the idea of pursuing Medieval Studies or History of the English language, which I imagine if I find the right program I could focus on Middle English and Medieval literature. I haven’t had HEL class yet—I’m taking it in the fall. I am absolutely in lust with language. In my medieval literature course we read The Canterbury Tales in Middle English; I consequently fell hard for Chaucer. Going into such an area, I imagine a Masters would be attractive before starting a PhD because Medieval Literature requires some specialization beforehand. I feel this may be the right area because when I look at classes and their descriptions I geek out. The thought of learning Latin, in addition to other languages, excites me. My minor is Spanish, but I imagine French and German would be much more useful. As for what I can do with that study, I’m not too sure. I guess the thought of editing is just safe and placates my need to be practical.

And to finally address the competitive issue: my goal is to enrich myself, to thoroughly explore a passion, not to allow competition to taint the study. I guess I’m afraid to be swept away in competition; I do not want to wake up one day without remembering the exact reasons I am pursuing a graduate degree. I’m a quiet person who prefers to be behind the scenes. I want to be involved in a community of individuals with whom I can speak. Perhaps this is another reason why I wish to move directly onto graduate school—I live out in the boonies where quite a few people (including friends) do not understand my drive to pursue a graduate degree. I’ve been told I’m useless because I studied “nonsense” instead of something practical that can be applied to life, like math or science.

Edited March 28, 2010 by mnemosyne

[Bumblebee9]

For the PhD: to apply or not to apply—that is the question.

As for career goals, I would be content editing—I’ve got the eye. I could dream and aim for a University Press. I’m also interested in archiving and digitization.

Given all of this, would it be wise to pursue a PhD, especially without concrete career goals? I believe part of the process is finding your way to them.

Thank you to those who actually read this far, and I extend further gratitude to those who reply. You deserve a cookie.

Most professors will tell you, if you could be happy doing anything else other than teaching, don't get a PhD. Viewing a PhD as a personal accomplishment is good, but you also need to have some kind of career-minded goal to get you through, at best, 5 years of schooling or, at worst, a decade+ (like my cousin who is stuck on her dissertation). It sounds to me like you would be happy doing something else: editing. I would suggest an MA in rhetoric or technical writing, which really focus on editing as a means to an end other than teaching. Most English lit PhDs end up teaching (full or part time -- in education, civil, or government jobs) because there aren't that many other obvious outlets for utilizing a lit PhD.

Also, you don't need to attend a formal lit PhD program to continue investigating your scholarly interests. It helps--gives you mentors, academic atmosphere, community of learners, deadlines, etc--but the degree isn't 100% necessary even to get published in the field. It is 100% necessary to get most tenure-track teaching jobs. When applying, most PhD programs will ask you to address in your SoP what your personal and professional goals are and admit students based on whether those goals match the needs/wants of the program. (It seems like most English lit PhD programs want their graduates to get good tenure-track jobs at decent colleges/universities.)

[PaperChaser]

Why not an M.A.? You continue your education, write a thesis and see if graduate school is something that appeals to you without committing to five plus years before you earn your degree. It seems that an M.A. may make you a more attractive candidate to a Ph.D. program, though that is only what I gather from here on the forums. You might also want to think about getting an M.A. in Rhetoric and Composition instead of literature. I don't know if that will help you attain your goals, but it's something to consider.

My advisor suggested that the M.A. was a positive experience, since you're taking classes in subject that you love. She said for the Ph.D. you have to deal with a lot of depression, anxiety and self-doubt, especially while you're doing your research and prepping for your dissertation. You're doing a lot of work for years and years and years without seeing any pay-off. I wouldn't say she used the term "soul-crushing," but the clear implication was that it was not a pleasant experience.

Do you want a Ph.D. or is it something you think you should have? Don't feel pressured by your professors. This is your life and ultimately your decision. No one's going to think less of you if you decide not to pursue your Ph.D. There are plenty of people who go to work after their B.A. and they're (probably) much better off financially for it. Perhaps see if you can get an internship at a publishing company this summer while you're still a student? Some of my undergraduate acquaintances have landed in the publishing industry that way.

If you're not 100% sure that you want to go to grad school, take a gap year to make sure. Work in the industry, if you can and go from there.

Probably not the clear answer you wanted. :-\

This is very sage advice!!! Obviously, your professors think you're very bright. You sound like (and this is NOT a dig) more of an introvert and someone who would NOT enjoy teaching or even necessarily working with others as a major part of your job. If that's true, you'd probably really dislike having to teach, bury yourself in someone else's research, and have to do a dissertation that-given your interests-you'd probably have difficulty finding committee members with that level of skill.

Some other ideas (I don't want to repeat the good ideas already mentioned by others)....

You like archiving and language. Applied linguistics? I think there are both MA and PhD degrees focusing on applied linguistics that don't make you teach. It's a fascinating field but not so glutted that finding a job would be impossible.

I would ordinarily never suggest law school...BUT, if you could force yourself to tolerate law school (and find a school that will pay your way--age will NOT hurt you there!), you could then become a law librarian. Being a law librarian allows you all the benefits of being a university librarian, except that your expertise is limited to archiving/managing/researching only legal and related texts (not that you'd ever run out)...plus they make a TON of money. Also, another aspect of the law that might interest you is transactional law - any subfield of transactional law requires EXCEPTIONAL attention to detail and mastery of language. Tax, intellectual property, bankruptcy, etc are all detail-oriented areas that require less "teamwork" and more "focus." Not to pitch law over anything else, but if you do in fact have "the eye," the law would be one of the more lucrative ways to go. Plus---and I say this from experience--a law degree never hurts anything but your wallet! A lot of people go to law school wanting to be the next Atticus Finch; the jobs-what few there are in this economy-are for those of us transactional attorneys who can stand to read and proof the same contracts over and over.

When in doubt, I DO think that testing the waters with a master's program is a smart thing to do. I'd say take a year off and "see what happens," but the job market isn't great, so if you don't have something lined up...well, you know your options better than I do. A master's (depending upon where you go) degree WORST case scenario at least shows you what you do or don't want to do and isn't the huge time (PhD) or money (law) commitment that longer degrees are....

[mnemosyne]

You sound like (and this is NOT a dig) more of an introvert and someone who would NOT enjoy teaching or even necessarily working with others as a major part of your job. If that's true, you'd probably really dislike having to teach, bury yourself in someone else's research, and have to do a dissertation that-given your interests-you'd probably have difficulty finding committee members with that level of skill.

You are correct, and I would not take any such declaration about my character as an insult. I am encountering difficulty with a certain professor over my adamant desire not to teach. Often they will highlight my various habits/skills and proclaim, "See, this is why you need to teach." Just because I enjoy reading and correcting papers and am rather efficient at it does not mean that I "need" to teach. The professor has allowed me to mock grade some of their other students' papers.... Quite frankly, if I had to read those poorly written papers year after year, I would kill myself. I'm not saying that teaching isn't rewarding. It must be unbelievably satisfying to watch students develop and to spur that growth, but that is not my vocation. Also, I would like to add that I'm not declaring my writing to be superior.

Those are some interesting suggestions. I doubt that law is the right place for me. Not too sure about linguistics, or at least any useful application of my specific interest areas. I'm not sure how useful the study of Middle English would be, heh. I'm just so picky, I know. But I do appreciate reading the feedback because it gives me other avenues to explore and consider.

I know I'm going to have to sit down with a professor and have the dreaded graduate school talk. It won't be the one who is pushing me to pursue a PhD just to teach. That professor also researches in an area I rather dislike, so I imagine, while they probably have some great suggestions of what to do/how to pursue my various interests, they may not know the full extent of what can be done with them. I need to sit down with my Medieval and Renaissance professor, who also teaches a History of the English Language course that I will be taking next fall. I imagine they will not lead me astray--I do some research for them. By keeping me happy, they ensure that I remain highly productive for them!

[PaperChaser]

You are correct, and I would not take any such declaration about my character as an insult. I am encountering difficulty with a certain professor over my adamant desire not to teach. Often they will highlight my various habits/skills and proclaim, "See, this is why you need to teach." Just because I enjoy reading and correcting papers and am rather efficient at it does not mean that I "need" to teach. The professor has allowed me to mock grade some of their other students' papers.... Quite frankly, if I had to read those poorly written papers year after year, I would kill myself. I'm not saying that teaching isn't rewarding. It must be unbelievably satisfying to watch students develop and to spur that growth, but that is not my vocation. Also, I would like to add that I'm not declaring my writing to be superior.

Those are some interesting suggestions. I doubt that law is the right place for me. Not too sure about linguistics, or at least any useful application of my specific interest areas. I'm not sure how useful the study of Middle English would be, heh. I'm just so picky, I know. But I do appreciate reading the feedback because it gives me other avenues to explore and consider.

I know I'm going to have to sit down with a professor and have the dreaded graduate school talk. It won't be the one who is pushing me to pursue a PhD just to teach. That professor also researches in an area I rather dislike, so I imagine, while they probably have some great suggestions of what to do/how to pursue my various interests, they may not know the full extent of what can be done with them. I need to sit down with my Medieval and Renaissance professor, who also teaches a History of the English Language course that I will be taking next fall. I imagine they will not lead me astray--I do some research for them. By keeping me happy, they ensure that I remain highly productive for them!

Another semi-law (or just high level paid research and editing gig) is to research and edit technical texts. If you enjoy the technicality of writing/appreciation of the Harvard comma over the, in your words "soul-sucking," comp classes (I too prefer the latter, though I've had some great Comp students...just not enough to make grading the other 90 papers worth it)....LexisNexis, Kaplan, Thomson Reuters, Pearson, Aspen, etc have good jobs for editors that <gasp> actually have upward mobility and don't require participating in sales meetings or any of that BS. While you generally need a MA in technical writing, English, or a related field, it might be something that you like, especially if you'd like to live in a big city. Just another idea...

[Historiogaffe]

[...] because I studied “nonsense” instead of something practical that can be applied to life, like math or science.

Every morning I wake up and ask myself, "Would I be where I am today without my scant knowledge of chemical bonding equations?" Ohh, 21st-century. I'd LOL but the impact assessments ravaging the UK would make it bitter.