OK, let's talk about UChicago's MAPH. I need some advice...

[frenchphd]

Don't waste your money or your time. The MAPH program is how Chicago fills its classes and brings in funding for the university. I'd much rather attend, for example, UMass-Amherst and get a TA salary rather than pay to attend UChicago's MAPH program and spend so much money for what is a mediocre degree. It's quite easy to get into MAPH programs or at many masters programs at Columbia/Penn/Brown etc. The degree is practically worthless. This is how the university sells its reputation. Don't fall for it. Chicago is currently in a lot of debt and has funding issues. I've seen lots of people go into debt for "prestigious" degrees and they will all tell you it wasn't worth it. Admission committees know that the MAPH isn't a prestigious degree... it's NOT AT ALL the same thing as being an undergrad at Chicago, which is an insanely competitive process, allowing the school to have some of the brightest students in America. Chicago's undergrad program also has SUBSTANTIAL financial aid -- so most people aren't pay full freight to attend the school.

I mean, unless you are really wealthy... then my comments do not apply to you at all! By all means, do the program if you can pay the price. Remember that you might not make it into a top English PhD program anyway -- it's a highly competitive process.

Edited March 11, 2019 by frenchphd

[Ramus]

10 hours ago, adr12 said:

 7) It is shitty and elitist and snobby, and it shouldn't be this way, but a MA from UChicago opens a lot of doors and gets people's attention. That's just the way it is, because people who are on ACs know and respect the institution.

I want to push back on this a bit. No offense, but when I see someone with an MAPH degree from Chicago, I see someone who has attempted to buy prestige that they couldn't attain through 'merit' alone.^* Having an MAPH is not the same thing as having another graduate degree from Chicago; hell, it doesn't even approach the prestige accorded to an undergraduate degree from Chicago. And if I know the circumstances surrounding the MAPH degree, you can be assured that admissions committees do, too. They may indeed respect Chicago, but they won't look at the MAPH program the same way.

As I've said earlier in this thread, this does not mean that the MAPH necessarily bars you from later academic success. You can get the degree and advance to a good PhD program. But the people that do that are the smart ones who would have gone on to be successful anyway. I have serious doubts that the nominal prestige of the Chicago affiliation has much, if anything, to do with that success. 

You might think of the MAPH as something of a prestige trap. You go there because you want to get a prestigious degree, but they very fact that you've paid for such a degree communicates that you're not entitled to the prestige you sought in the first place. 

 

(* 'Merit,' of course, includes not only the 'actual' merit of an individual's work but also the many other factors, including class-related ones like where you did your undergrad, which affect admission into a PhD program.)

[Rootbound]

11 hours ago, adr12 said:

 This is important: I re-read my SOP from when I applied originally (shutout, except for MAPH), and realized that I didn't understand the exercise at all - I had no clue what grad school was really about. Being at MAPH gave me a much clearer understanding of the field, and made my applications this round a lot stronger. 

I'm glad the MAPH program is working well for you, clearly there are benefits to it. But, I would be a little hesitant to accept this as one of the benefits; I was shut out last year (with only a BA), and came to a similar realization. As a result of my shut out, I spent a serious amount of time reading both recently published scholarship by current faculty in my area of interest and by current or recently graduated students. I also re-read my SoP and thought, "Wow, that's a cute lil narrative about my undergraduate experience, not really a great grad school application though." The point here is that just having the rejections as feedback ("you did not do this right") and the perspective granted by a couple months of not being in an academic environment led to my application being much stronger and more mature this year. I don't doubt that you have a much better understanding of the field currently than I do, but I also think admissions committees have different expectations for students with only a BA vs students with an MA of some sort with regards to their currency in their chosen field. I just think that to advocate going into debt in order to strengthen a PhD application is a little extreme, especially as there are other ways to strengthen it (the one that worked for me being time and reflection). Academia may be an elitist beast, but we can still try not to feed it. 

[hgtvdeathdrive]

don't forget also that among their notable alumni is Richard Spencer ?

[silenus_thescribe]

On 3/11/2019 at 10:52 AM, Ramus said:

And if I know the circumstances surrounding the MAPH degree, you can be assured that admissions committees do, too. They may indeed respect Chicago, but they won't look at the MAPH program the same way.

Ramus illustrates an important principle I was thankfully told early on in my application season: when it comes to grad school: programs, not universities as a whole, have reputations. There are plenty of top-tier schools which, depending on your discipline/area of specialty, wouldn't scream "prestige."

[adr12]

On 3/11/2019 at 10:52 AM, Ramus said:

No offense, but when I see someone with an MAPH degree from Chicago, I see someone who has attempted to buy prestige that they couldn't attain through 'merit' alone.^* Having an MAPH is not the same thing as having another graduate degree from Chicago; hell, it doesn't even approach the prestige accorded to an undergraduate degree from Chicago. And if I know the circumstances surrounding the MAPH degree, you can be assured that admissions committees do, too. They may indeed respect Chicago, but they won't look at the MAPH program the same way.

Except for the first sentence, I think you're probably mostly right. I think the admissions landscape is way too competitive to discount that MAPH is simply the only choice given to some students who by 'merit' would be able to perform in PhD programs, including Chicago's. We all know how seemingly arbitrary these things can be, and how many incredible candidates are rejected every year. Not to mention that most MAPH students are deferred from PhD programs at Uchicago - meaning, from what I understand after talking to MAPH admissions people, "you are not ready for a PhD here, but you have the potential to be." In part, I went to MAPH because I wanted to be a professor and it was the only option available to me that was a proactive step forward towards that career. I don't see it as buying prestige as much as investing in your career, if it's coming to that.

Also, being on the inside: I think that MAPH students work harder than anyone else at this school. In part because of the accelerated nature of the program, in part because some of them, frankly, have a hard time performing at the UChi level, or have not previously been exposed to graduate level work, or have never worked with theory (which is an absolutely central aspect of any kind of work being done at Chicago). It has never struck me that anyone here is just paying for prestige; they're also working hard to earn it. 

 

But yes, totally, MAPH definitely does not carry the prestige of UChi undergrad or PhD programs. But it nevertheless undoubtedly draws on the UChi name, especially for careers outside of academia. I also doubt the attitude is universally negative towards MAPH in admissions committees, many of whom know and respect the Chicago professors who are writing the applicant's recommendations; at the very least, I doubt that having gone to MAPH will be an impediment to a candidate who has a really good SOP and writing sample. 

 

 

 

[adr12]

On 3/11/2019 at 11:39 AM, Rootbound said:

As a result of my shut out, I spent a serious amount of time reading both recently published scholarship by current faculty in my area of interest and by current or recently graduated students.

Totally; MAPH is absolutely not necessary, and there are other ways of doing it. I had spent an entire year out of school before I applied the first time, and was working a demanding job that left me with no time or energy to immerse myself in a way that would've put me ahead in my apps (this is something that is specific to me, of course), and being at MAPH provided me not only with the time but also with the guidance and support I needed to strengthen my applications, as well as an immersion in academia and discourse that I could not have experienced from the outside.  

Definitely am not trying to advocate going into debt as the only way of going about it, or going into debt at all; people need to judge these things for themselves and their own situations. I just wanted to point out that one does get something out of the program. 

[MetaphysicalDrama]

I went through MAPH.  It's taken me some time to get into a PhD program (I switched fields from philosophy to English), but a lot of what has been said on this thread is more prejudicial than actual.  While my PhD admissions are more so based on the strength of my second MA, I will confess that I didn't really take advantage of MAPH as well as I could have.  However, most of the teaching experience I have is based on MAPH credentials.  All I'm trying to do is paint a more realistic picture of the peaks and valleys of the program.  

Is it too much debt, probably, but is it buying prestige?  No, I would argue it is not.  I think about 10% of applicants from each humanities department at Chicago (English, philosophy, classics, art history, and etc.) are referred to MAPH after their PhD apps are rejected.  There is merit in that admission.  There may be more applicants from the English department, but I think the number of people in the philosophy cohort was about twenty at most.  

I do like that MAPH is a one-year MA for the purposes of teaching.  Two year MAs are great for intellectual development, but I really don't think that spending a ton of time on an MA is such a great idea.  The problem with MAPH is that writing a strong thesis is pretty much impossible in one year unless you come in with a great plan already.  

Most faculty will not support you very well.  While you won't necessarily be treated like a second-class citizen, you can't really take advantage of their time throughout the year.  What I'm trying to say is that UChicago faculty do so much research and so little teaching, one year is not nearly enough time to build any kind of significant relationship with their more senior faculty.  However, some of their younger faculty will treat you quite well.  I did form quite a nice relationship with a newly-hired assistant professor there and a visiting faculty member from University of Oslo.  The crusty old guards, not so much. 

Finally, that UChicago name does count.  During my visit weekends, the schools that have accepted me want to talk about my Chicago experience.  The first school that hired me as an adjunct emphasized my UChicago degree.  In fact, one of the faculty at a PhD program that accepted me completed MAPH before doing his PhD at NYU.  MAPH isn't perfect, but don't pitch it like it is worthless.

 

[ennisshue]

10 minutes ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

I went through MAPH.  It's taken me some time to get into a PhD program (I switched fields from philosophy to English), but a lot of what has been said on this thread is more prejudicial than actual.  While my PhD admissions are more so based on the strength of my second MA, I will confess that I didn't really take advantage of MAPH as well as I could have.  However, most of the teaching experience I have is based on MAPH credentials.  All I'm trying to do is paint a more realistic picture of the peaks and valleys of the program.  

 Is it too much debt, probably, but is it buying prestige?  No, I would argue it is not.  I think about 10% of applicants from each humanities department at Chicago (English, philosophy, classics, art history, and etc.) are referred to MAPH after their PhD apps are rejected.  There is merit in that admission.  There may be more applicants from the English department, but I think the number of people in the philosophy cohort was about twenty at most.  

I do like that MAPH is a one-year MA for the purposes of teaching.  Two year MAs are great for intellectual development, but I really don't think that spending a ton of time on an MA is such a great idea.  The problem with MAPH is that writing a strong thesis is pretty much impossible in one year unless you come in with a great plan already.  

Most faculty will not support you very well.  While you won't necessarily be treated like a second-class citizen, you can't really take advantage of their time throughout the year.  What I'm trying to say is that UChicago faculty do so much research and so little teaching, one year is not nearly enough time to build any kind of significant relationship with their more senior faculty.  However, some of their younger faculty will treat you quite well.  I did form quite a nice relationship with a newly-hired assistant professor there and a visiting faculty member from University of Oslo.  The crusty old guards, not so much. 

Finally, that UChicago name does count.  During my visit weekends, the schools that have accepted me want to talk about my Chicago experience.  The first school that hired me as an adjunct emphasized my UChicago degree.  In fact, one of the faculty at a PhD program that accepted me completed MAPH before doing his PhD at NYU.  MAPH isn't perfect, but don't pitch it like it is worthless.

  

Can I ask (as I'm hovering between going to NYU or MAPH at the moment) is the support thing true? If the legendary faculty base doesn't really take you through things, how does the "thesis workshop" work? I'm not a native speaker and if I choose MAPH in the end it'd be the assumption that the faculty can provide better support in taking my writings to a new level while I doubt if people in NYU even have time for students as they have so many other jobs to do in the city. But after seeing what you said I do have to rethink that.

Also I wonder how many people are in the core course and is the course taught with the same material every year? Sorry for sounding so demanding tho.

[Dogfish Head]

There are so many funded MA programs from good schools that any sort of unfunded MA program just genuinely makes me nervous. Beyond that, most (though not all) funded MA programs will let you (and teach you how to) teach English composition classes for multiple semesters. A lot of us will have to teach English composition courses occasionally at *insert university where we god willing get a TT position* so learning how to teach those sorts of classes (or maybe even teach at all) is imho crucial. Funded MAs are also (in my experience) not incredibly competitive to get into if you have a good undergrad record and a solid application. Take this advice with a grain of salt because I, in general, think that universities charge far too much in general (particularly private universities) for tuition and usually that tuition cash goes to pad the pockets of various deans and presidents (for instance, my current institution just hired a president who is earning an over $600k annual salary which is a salary that no one ever should have).

[MetaphysicalDrama]

55 minutes ago, ennisshue said:

Can I ask (as I'm hovering between going to NYU or MAPH at the moment) is the support thing true? If the legendary faculty base doesn't really take you through things, how does the "thesis workshop" work? I'm not a native speaker and if I choose MAPH in the end it'd be the assumption that the faculty can provide better support in taking my writings to a new level while I doubt if people in NYU even have time for students as they have so many other jobs to do in the city. But after seeing what you said I do have to rethink that.

Also I wonder how many people are in the core course and is the course taught with the same material every year? Sorry for sounding so demanding tho.

At UChicago, you are assigned a "preceptor," an advanced graduate student in the dissertation phase who oversees your development.  The cohort for each preceptor is probably about six or seven students.  The thesis workshop is a review of your work by your thesis advisor, preceptor, and maybe a small group of students in your precept.  These people give you the best feedback you're going to get.  I strongly advise you select your thesis advisor from a professor you will take classes with in the fall or winter quarter.  It just fosters a better relationship and gives them more reason to meet with you.   

The content of the core course is determined by whatever professor teaches it that year.  The lectures are attended by about one hundred students, but there's a weekly discussion with your precept.  The preceptor authors your assignments for the core. 

[ennisshue]

24 minutes ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

At UChicago, you are assigned a "preceptor," an advanced graduate student in the dissertation phase who oversees your development.  The cohort for each preceptor is probably about six or seven students.  The thesis workshop is a review of your work by your thesis advisor, preceptor, and maybe a small group of students in your precept.  These people give you the best feedback you're going to get.  I strongly advise you select your thesis advisor from a professor you will take classes with in the fall or winter quarter.  It just fosters a better relationship and gives them more reason to meet with you.   

The content of the core course is determined by whatever professor teaches it that year.  The lectures are attended by about one hundred students, but there's a weekly discussion with your precept.  The preceptor authors your assignments for the core. 

Thanks so much for details and if you don’t mind me adding something else, how do you think of the workload of the program? Like how an elective is assessed, as I heard MAPH don’t do sit in exams so I guess the courses are all assessed by essays and how long should they be normally? 

Also, are you free to choose any thesis advisor in your field, or are limited by only a few? 

Again, can’t be more grateful for your reply.

 

[MetaphysicalDrama]

27 minutes ago, ennisshue said:

Thanks so much for details and if you don’t mind me adding something else, how do you think of the workload of the program? Like how an elective is assessed, as I heard MAPH don’t do sit in exams so I guess the courses are all assessed by essays and how long should they be normally? 

Also, are you free to choose any thesis advisor in your field, or are limited by only a few? 

Again, can’t be more grateful for your reply.

 

Well, it's on the quarter system.  That means you are under pressure to write a pretty polished term paper of 15-20 pages in ten weeks.  One way I tried to manage my time was to be working on at least one paper in earnest by week five.  If you come into the program with some significant reading gaps, then that will really hurt you.  It takes time away from writing.  Classes don't usually do much in terms of exams or presentations or bibliographies, but you do have to be at the top of your game in that term paper.  All of your eggs are in one basket.  

 

You can choose any advisor, but you're preceptor and the MAPH brass will likely try to steer you towards the best choice.  You can choose to take advantage of that or not.  However, the faculty ultimately decides whether or not to take up the advising project.  

[frenchphd]

"I think about 10% of applicants from each humanities department at Chicago (English, philosophy, classics, art history, and etc.) are referred to MAPH after their PhD apps are rejected."

You are going to have to verify this claim. I would argue that 90%+ of PhD-rejected applicants are referred to MAPH, looking at the results page on thegradcafe. More anecdotally, everyone I know who was rejected by UChicago's PhD program was admitted to the MAPH. Of course, all these people were smart enough to realize that it would be difficult to get much, if anything, out of an overpriced, 1-year MA program. The vast majority of these "offers" do not turn into yields for the university. 

Wow -- an adjunct position through a UChicago MA... I know lots of adjuncts with MAs from Portland State. Not really selling anything here. In my view, it takes a lot of privilege to even consider accepting an adjunct position: a spouse hired full-time, perhaps, or family wealth, and certainly good health. The amount of privilege required to go through Chicago's MA program... now that's just beyond my conception.

If your goal is to be a full-time college professor in the humanities, no university can guarantee that, not even Harvard. Shelling out thousands of dollars in the process and raising the opportunity cost -- that's just silly, particularly since there are many MA programs that have funding. I would strongly discourage paying to attend Chicago's MA program.

Chicago isn't the only school with cash-cow MA programs. Columbia is another big one -- and, at least anecdotally, I know several people who regret getting such a degree because they thought it would lead to good employment prospects outside of academia -- just because it's Columbia. Wrong. Unsurprisingly, the 'real world' isn't desperate for people with MAs in humanities.

[Glasperlenspieler]

8 hours ago, frenchphd said:

"I think about 10% of applicants from each humanities department at Chicago (English, philosophy, classics, art history, and etc.) are referred to MAPH after their PhD apps are rejected."

You are going to have to verify this claim. I would argue that 90%+ of PhD-rejected applicants are referred to MAPH, looking at the results page on thegradcafe. More anecdotally, everyone I know who was rejected by UChicago's PhD program was admitted to the MAPH. Of course, all these people were smart enough to realize that it would be difficult to get much, if anything, out of an overpriced, 1-year MA program. The vast majority of these "offers" do not turn into yields for the university. 

 Wow -- an adjunct position through a UChicago MA... I know lots of adjuncts with MAs from Portland State. Not really selling anything here. In my view, it takes a lot of privilege to even consider accepting an adjunct position: a spouse hired full-time, perhaps, or family wealth, and certainly good health. The amount of privilege required to go through Chicago's MA program... now that's just beyond my conception.

 If your goal is to be a full-time college professor in the humanities, no university can guarantee that, not even Harvard. Shelling out thousands of dollars in the process and raising the opportunity cost -- that's just silly, particularly since there are many MA programs that have funding. I would strongly discourage paying to attend Chicago's MA program.

 Chicago isn't the only school with cash-cow MA programs. Columbia is another big one -- and, at least anecdotally, I know several people who regret getting such a degree because they thought it would lead to good employment prospects outside of academia -- just because it's Columbia. Wrong. Unsurprisingly, the 'real world' isn't desperate for people with MAs in humanities.

Edited March 19, 2019 by Glasperlenspieler

[caliguy]

anyone else get a more personalized follow-up email from a chicago phd?

Edited March 19, 2019 by sidmeier

[Bumblebea]

On 3/18/2019 at 12:59 PM, frenchphd said:

Wow -- an adjunct position through a UChicago MA... I know lots of adjuncts with MAs from Portland State. Not really selling anything here. In my view, it takes a lot of privilege to even consider accepting an adjunct position: a spouse hired full-time, perhaps, or family wealth, and certainly good health. 

This. 

And while we're on the subject, I'm going to have to drop in to do a little PSA about adjuncting. Please don't adjunct unless it's a matter of survival. When you adjunct, you basically eliminate your future line of employment. Moreover, you deserve better than adjuncting--we all do. We all deserve a job with benefits that pays a living wage, even if it's outside academia. I know that there are people out there who HAVE to adjunct ... but again, that's why those of us who have some sort of choice in the matter (i.e. other, better prospects) should not do it. (I could never have afforded to adjunct for an actual living anyway--it just doesn't pay enough where I live to support a single person unless you're willing to live with five roommates in a bad part of town. As @frenchphdpoints out, those who need to be self-supporting usually can't do it.)

Just say no to MAPH and just say no to adjuncting. 

 

On paying for master's degrees--so many people here have already made excellent points, so I won't belabor the matter. I will say, however, that I had a friend who did MAPSS, which is the "social science" equivalent of MAPH. She originally applied for PhD programs in anthropology and applied only to top-flight schools. She did not have a BA from a prestigious university, which I think is what set her back in the admissions process. For that reason, she was also very impressed with the Chicago name and really wanted a Chicago degree. She dropped a ton of money on MAPSS with the intent reapplying to PhD programs with a stronger and more elite background ... but when she was finished, she realized it wasn't feasible. She just had so much debt. She's been working a "soul-sucking" job (her words, not mine) ever since, struggling to pay off this ginormous Chicago debt. Her proposed anthropology projects were fascinating, and I feel that she should skipped MAPSS and reapplied, maybe to less-prestigious schools or maybe to the same schools but with an improved application. But in any case, she's not only not an anthropologist; she's not-an-anthropologist with debt and a job she really did not ever intend to take. 

Edited March 19, 2019 by Bumblebea

[MetaphysicalDrama]

On 3/18/2019 at 11:59 AM, frenchphd said:

"I think about 10% of applicants from each humanities department at Chicago (English, philosophy, classics, art history, and etc.) are referred to MAPH after their PhD apps are rejected."

You are going to have to verify this claim. I would argue that 90%+ of PhD-rejected applicants are referred to MAPH, looking at the results page on thegradcafe. More anecdotally, everyone I know who was rejected by UChicago's PhD program was admitted to the MAPH. Of course, all these people were smart enough to realize that it would be difficult to get much, if anything, out of an overpriced, 1-year MA program. The vast majority of these "offers" do not turn into yields for the university. 

Wow -- an adjunct position through a UChicago MA... I know lots of adjuncts with MAs from Portland State. Not really selling anything here. In my view, it takes a lot of privilege to even consider accepting an adjunct position: a spouse hired full-time, perhaps, or family wealth, and certainly good health. The amount of privilege required to go through Chicago's MA program... now that's just beyond my conception.

If your goal is to be a full-time college professor in the humanities, no university can guarantee that, not even Harvard. Shelling out thousands of dollars in the process and raising the opportunity cost -- that's just silly, particularly since there are many MA programs that have funding. I would strongly discourage paying to attend Chicago's MA program.

Chicago isn't the only school with cash-cow MA programs. Columbia is another big one -- and, at least anecdotally, I know several people who regret getting such a degree because they thought it would lead to good employment prospects outside of academia -- just because it's Columbia. Wrong. Unsurprisingly, the 'real world' isn't desperate for people with MAs in humanities.

The results posts, I think, can be misleading.  Keep in mind, most people aren't going to post rejections there because very few would apply to the program directly.  They'll instead post their rejection to a PhD.  Furthermore, Grad Cafe isn't exactly an official results board.  When you think about the number of humanities programs that fly under the MAPH banner, a class of 100 isn't all that big.  It's serving like six or seven major fields.  For what it is worth, the UChicago philosophy department claims that they send a select few applications to MAPH.  They receive about 200-300 applications a year. They send about 15 students to MAPH.

What else would you get with a UChicago MA if you wanted to stay in academia?  There aren't tenure track jobs for MAs and most community colleges in the humanities are trending towards hiring applicants with PhDs and EDs. When I applied for adjuncting jobs in 2012, believe it or not, they were hard to find.  Schools were under a lot of pressure to cut offerings at the time because of the state of the economy. 

It's really easy to say just say no to MAPH or just say no to adjuncting, but some of us want to stay in academia.  MAPH and adjuncting turn out to be our only options at one point or another, and I don't think taking a gap year to "read" is all that helpful.  It certainly doesn't look good on a CV to interrupt your pursuit of an academic life with a year or two of selling copy paper at Office Max.  While adjuncting might end your potential for employment with that school, it doesn't end your job prospects absolutely (Provided you haven't been adjuncting for like five years). 

The problem with adjunct positions is that they exist, and they shouldn't.  The fact that over 50% of courses at community colleges are taught by adjuncts is downright shameful, and organizations like the MLA and accrediting bodies should expect more from their institutions.  Colleges claim that healthcare is too expensive to offer to all of their faculty, but I think we all know that colleges have all the money they need to pay those benefits.  They just don't care to spend that money on faculty benefits.  People will adjunct as long as there are adjunct jobs, and I hope that the university will one day realize what a horrible mistake adjuncting was.  However, I don't think its trending in that direction.  Soon enough, the university will be an administrative office and a server room to host online classes and collecting credit card numbers.

Edited March 20, 2019 by MetaphysicalDrama

[punctilious]

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

I don't think taking a gap year to "read" is all that helpful.  It certainly doesn't look good on a CV to interrupt your pursuit of an academic life with a year or two of selling copy paper at Office Max.

I think this is a bit unfair. Husband took two years between undergrad and his PhD to work a non-academic job and, yes, read and write. He chose not to attend any of the MA programs he got into during that time (Trinity College Dublin, Edinburgh, and Cambridge) because they didn't provide funding. I think it is absolutely helpful that he took the time to read, refine his research interests, and write (getting some book review & short story publications). I do not think whatsoever that it "didn't look good" on his CV, and instead of spending a ton of money on an MA, we saved money and he's now at Harvard for his PhD...

[havemybloodchild]

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

The problem with adjunct positions is that they exist, and they shouldn't.

THIS

[Bopie5]

Like @punctilious, I wanna push back on the idea that a gap year isn't that helpful, or that a year off will hurt the way your CV is perceived. Especially if you're early in your academic journey, I think it's normal to take a gap year even before starting to apply. And if you're pursuing presentations and publications, or if you're reading and writing and refining your research, that will be reflected either in your CV or your SoP/WS. I doubt an adcomm would look at a CV where someone was publishing while working at an Office Max, or waitressing, or bartending, or whatever, and have a negative reaction to the fact that the person had to take a non-academic job to sustain their existence.

Choosing MAPH is probably the right choice for some people! I don't think MAPH is unilaterally bad or abusive. But choosing to take a gap year to refine interests, read, research, write, publish, and present is also not bad, and could be just as beneficial as MAPH.

People have different and messy journeys. Personally, if I were to go to MAPH with my financial situation, that debt would probably cripple me for the foreseeable future. If I don't get into Villanova, I'm going to spend the next year revising old papers, pursuing a few new ideas, submitting to journals and conferences, etc, instead of going to MAPH. Maybe adcomms on my next go-around will look down on me being a part time yoga teacher/waitress while also publishing, researching, and presenting at conferences. But somehow, I doubt it! 

[Warelin]

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

When you think about the number of humanities programs that fly under the MAPH banner, a class of 100 isn't all that big.

100 is actually pretty very big for a class. 15 students per program is actually considered huge for most programs. Most programs also have to accept 1.5 - 3x as many students to obtain their target class size. I imagine that the number is significantly higher for unfunded programs.  When I was an undergrad, everyone I knew that applied to Chicago was offered a spot in their MAPH program. As far as I'm aware today, the only people who aren't offered referred to the MAPH program are those who have a master's in the program they originally applied to. Because the program is not fully funded, I imagine the number of acceptances is somewhere between 500-1,500. 

 

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

What else would you get with a UChicago MA if you wanted to stay in academia?

You're making this sound as if only a MAPH degree from Chicago would get you noticed to get an adjunct job. I can assure you that there are plenty of adjuncts who have obtained their Master's degree elsewhere and have been offered similiar positions.

 

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

It's really easy to say just say no to MAPH or just say no to adjuncting, but some of us want to stay in academia. 

There are ways to stay in academia without adjuncting and without MAPH. I think @punctilious' story does a great job in explaining the success her husband has had. I'm also convinced that @punctilious' husband could have pursued work as a private tutor or writing consultant if he were interested.

 

1 hour ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

It certainly doesn't look good on a CV to interrupt your pursuit of an academic life with a year or two of selling copy paper at Office Max.

I think most programs are aware that sometimes life happens. I don't think a program is going to fault you for having to tend to any of life's emergencies. Most people are aware that there are certain things that we have no control over. I also think that it depends on how you handle things. That Starbucks job you had during the summer? You learned how to work in a fast-paced environment, learned the importance of service and how to serve a large diverse group of individuals. Summer spent copyediting? You learned the importance of maintaining deadlines and the true importance of grammar. 

 

23 minutes ago, Bopie5 said:

Maybe adcomms on my next go-around will look down on me being a part time yoga teacher/waitress while also publishing, researching, and presenting at conferences

FWIW, If I were on the adcomm and I received an application like this, I'd flag the application for interest. I'd be curious to know more about you. I'd want to know about how certain yoga techniques would influence your writing and how it might impact the way you approach thinking and teaching writing in the classroom. I'd also be more interested because I know you must have a lot of experience in time management to ensure that you were able to accomplish everything you did. Your experience as a waitress would also intrigue me because this would show that you have a lot of experience in dealing with a large diverse set of people (some who may have little to no respect for you as a server) and it would also showcase to me that you've had your downs and will do anything to make ends meet. I think that would show that you're willing to do anything to reach your end goal and I think that would make an adcomm more interested in learning about you.

[amphilanthus]

yeah, also want to push back on the idea that a gap year will hurt your application! I graduated undergrad in 2017, and while it wasn’t exactly my original plan, I think it’s been incredibly helpful to take two years off. I’ve had multiple faculty members at my accepted schools mention my time away as a positive, actually, by suggesting that it must have helped clarify what I want to do (and it did!)

and to go a step further: I haven’t done a single academic thing in these two years. I’ve been working full time in an office job with no connection to my academic interests, haven’t written anything more academic than my SOP, read...a little bit. ish. of course I’m sure people who spend their time off researching/reading/writing are in better shape than me! in an ideal world I would have done those things. I only want to mention this to emphasize that if for whatever reason you need to take a year off, it’s also totally okay to focus on your life. it’s fine to try other paths, or fine to focus on a job and saving money, or fine to just enjoy not being in school for a bit.

anyway. if you’re reading this thread, thinking about something like the MAPH, and you’re worried that a gap year will hurt your application next time around: please don’t worry about that or let it be a deciding factor. the only “right” path is whatever feels right for you. 

[Rootbound]

2 hours ago, MetaphysicalDrama said:

It's really easy to say just say no to MAPH or just say no to adjuncting, but some of us want to stay in academia.  MAPH and adjuncting turn out to be our only options at one point or another, and I don't think taking a gap year to "read" is all that helpful.  It certainly doesn't look good on a CV to interrupt your pursuit of an academic life with a year or two of selling copy paper at Office Max.

Little bummed about this part of your post here. ‘scuse my close reading here, but by putting “read” in quotes it kind of feels like you don’t think people who are, oh I don’t know, working in retail to help pay back their undergrad student loans or just keep there head above the financial waters, aren’t really reading because reading only has value if you do it in an institutionally sanctioned environment. I don’t know if this is your view, or the view you believe adcomms hold, but I would like to add some further anecdata to the perspectives that @Warelin, @amphilanthus, and @punctilious shared. After getting shut out last year, I emailed a number of the programs for feedback on my application, and all of the ones I heard back from advised me to 1)continue to work on my current material, and see if anything is publishable 2) “read” 3) do something entirely outside of academia. In other words, adcomms told me there was benefit to interrupting my pursuit of an academic life. Of course, some people might need to stay institutionally involved in academia regardless of the short or long term cost, but I would like to add to the choir of voices saying that not only is it not necessary to go to an unfunded MA just to avoid academic interruption, but in fact academic interruption can be a good thing!! And, also, if you sell copy paper, you can be a skilled and productive reader. 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Rootbound

[Bopie5]

19 minutes ago, Warelin said:

FWIW, If I were on the adcomm and I received an application like this, I'd flag the application for interest. I'd be curious to know more about you. I'd want to know about how certain yoga techniques would influence your writing and how it might impact the way you approach thinking and teaching writing in the classroom. I'd also be more interested because I know you must have a lot of experience in time management to ensure that you were able to accomplish everything you did. Your experience as a waitress would also intrigue me because this would show that you have a lot of experience in dealing with a large diverse set of people (some who may have little to no respect for you as a server) and it would also showcase to me that you've had your downs and will do anything to make ends meet. I think that would show that you're willing to do anything to reach your end goal and I think that would make an adcomm more interested in learning about you.

Yes! Thank you for this encouragement. It's like the Sanskrit saying "sarvam annam"--"everything is food." All experiences offer nourishment, all experiences give us something, all experiences contribute to the cycles of our lives in one way or another. Even negative experiences have things to teach us (have DEFINITELY been learning that in the shutout), and like your post really demonstrates, all experiences (even non-academic ones) can teach us things about ourselves as scholars and as people. It's all about your perspective.