Colleges Rescind Acceptance Offers

[lbullock]

Reading the result board posts (specifically for English) has officially become serial lobotomy. Does anyone think the next six years of any person's life should be reduced to an apostrophe? Is pernicious (not to mention banal) wit an appropriate response to the time, psychic energy, and financial expense required of the application process? It's troubling that PhD applicants can find no better use of their intellect than to impugn themselves, their prospective institutions, future careers, and presumed depth of understanding with so much bland brain matter. Sadly, no amount of good grammar can season it to taste.

This is a stressful time. Please remember, the eyes of more futures than your own look over those posts with alternating hope and pause. Own acceptance, rejection, and the creamy anxiety in between with a little class.

[waddle]

Cool story, bro.

[Medievalmaniac]

Reading the result board posts (specifically for English) has officially become serial lobotomy. Does anyone think the next six years of any person's life should be reduced to an apostrophe? Is pernicious (not to mention banal) wit an appropriate response to the time, psychic energy, and financial expense required of the application process? It's troubling that PhD applicants can find no better use of their intellect than to impugn themselves, their prospective institutions, future careers, and presumed depth of understanding with so much bland brain matter. Sadly, no amount of good grammar can season it to taste.

This is a stressful time. Please remember, the eyes of more futures than your own look over those posts with alternating hope and pause. Own acceptance, rejection, and the creamy anxiety in between with a little class.

I've just been depressed that those engaged in such shenanigans chose to do so as English candidates. Why can't some other discipline get picked on for a change....?

I know people perceive English as being an "easy" major...but I mean - especially for those of us who are medievalists - we're required not only to master our specialty area and two other areas of concentration in English, but also 2 or 3 (dependent upon the department's requirements) languages besides English, one of which must be Latin. We are also strongly encouraged to minor in one or more appropriate fields - Art History, Women's Studies, History, etc. etc. And it's no longer just reading books and journals and doing close readings and comparative work - now, you also have to be proficient in the mind-numbingly difficult practice of critical theory, as well as the exploding arena of online resources and research.

It's not exactly the walk in the park people think it is to be an English doctoral student/professor. I wish the discipline received more respect in the greater community.

[MoJingly]

Nice, yeah. Let's remember that the results board is anonymous. People are going to get on there and vent some frustration that they were rejected from their top school, leaving comments like "ugh" "damn" "well I didn't want to go there anyway." An adcomm is not going to rescind an acceptance because somebody went on the results board and posted "accepted! booyah!"

Of course, I'm not condoning the crude comments that have shown up lately.

[SuperPiePie]

I've just been depressed that those engaged in such shenanigans chose to do so as English candidates. Why can't some other discipline get picked on for a change....?

I know people perceive English as being an "easy" major...but I mean - especially for those of us who are medievalists - we're required not only to master our specialty area and two other areas of concentration in English, but also 2 or 3 (dependent upon the department's requirements) languages besides English, one of which must be Latin. We are also strongly encouraged to minor in one or more appropriate fields - Art History, Women's Studies, History, etc. etc. And it's no longer just reading books and journals and doing close readings and comparative work - now, you also have to be proficient in the mind-numbingly difficult practice of critical theory, as well as the exploding arena of online resources and research.

It's not exactly the walk in the park people think it is to be an English doctoral student/professor. I wish the discipline received more respect in the greater community.

I have the most respect for people in all fields and think no less of one or the other. However, the "respect' is lower simply because of the applications of English pale in comparison to many other fields which have far larger impacts and address more pressing needs in the world. To most people, this is why English and many other Liberal Arts seem less "important".

Edited February 10, 2011 by SuperPiePie

[jprufrock]

I have the mostly respect for people in all fields and think no less of one or the other. However, the "respect' is lower simply because of the applications of English pale in comparison to many other fields which have far larger impacts and address more pressing needs in the world. To most people, this is why English and many other Liberal Arts seem less "important".

This is perhaps the most contradictory statement about so-called 'respect' for English as a field as I've heard.

Did you know that science, as you know it, was condemned to mostly bullshit and stones until literacy flourished? I am sure you're making a point for others and not necessarily yourself, saying that some 'general population' doesn't recognize the equality of fields, but if your goal is to counter such sentiment then your statement fails. Hard.

English and the Humanities in general have applications just as varied, pressing and significant as the hard and soft sciences. Just because you know little about such fields and by extension are unable to see their effects, doesn't diminish their importance and prevalence.

Edited February 10, 2011 by jprufrock

[Medievalmaniac]

I have the mostly respect for people in all fields and think no less of one or the other. However, the "respect' is lower simply because of the applications of English pale in comparison to many other fields which have far larger impacts and address more pressing needs in the world. To most people, this is why English and many other Liberal Arts seem less "important".

Buuut...without English (in English-speaking countries), you wouldn't be able to read the textbooks and instructions on assignments for the disciplines you work in, to fill out the applications and to write the SOP that gets you into the programs you want to get into, to read the publications that lead you to your ideas for your groundbreaking research, to write the papers about your research that are published to let other people know about your important work, to avoid plagiarism that could end your career, or to write the acceptance speech for your Nobel prize. Let's face it - you can look down your nose at the English folks, but in the end, we're the ones on whose shoulders pretty much everybody else stands.

I'm OK with the fact that as English folks we are (generally) paid less, respected less, and more often than not dismissed as being the step-children of academia...but it would be nice to get some acknowledgement for our fundamental importance in getting everyone else where s/he wants to go.

We're kind of the Cinderellas of academia...without us, nothing gets done around the castle, but in the end, we don't get to go to the ball.

[neuropsych76]

Reading the result board posts (specifically for English) has officially become serial lobotomy. Does anyone think the next six years of any person's life should be reduced to an apostrophe? Is pernicious (not to mention banal) wit an appropriate response to the time, psychic energy, and financial expense required of the application process? It's troubling that PhD applicants can find no better use of their intellect than to impugn themselves, their prospective institutions, future careers, and presumed depth of understanding with so much bland brain matter. Sadly, no amount of good grammar can season it to taste.

This is a stressful time. Please remember, the eyes of more futures than your own look over those posts with alternating hope and pause. Own acceptance, rejection, and the creamy anxiety in between with a little class.

Am I the only one who had nefarious flashbacks of the verbal section of the GRE when I read this post?

[qbtacoma]

English professors have the task of teaching students to write well AND, more importantly, they must deal with the students who think that field is the fallback for failure - that they don't have to try, or be interested, or participate or learn and just get through to their degree.

English professors are champs.

[paigeski]

Am I the only one who had nefarious flashbacks of the verbal section of the GRE when I read this post?

Definitely. I need to brush up on my vocabulary.

Although, the post was very enjoyable to read because of the varied and interesting wording.

Edited February 10, 2011 by paigeski

[wtncffts]

This is perhaps the most contradictory statement about so-called 'respect' for English as a field as I've heard.

Did you know that science, as you know it, was condemned to mostly bullshit and stones until literacy flourished? I am sure you're making a point for others and not necessarily yourself, saying that some 'general population' doesn't recognize the equality of fields, but if your goal is to counter such sentiment then your statement fails. Hard.

English and the Humanities in general have applications just as varied, pressing and significant as the hard and soft sciences. Just because you know little about such fields and by extension are unable to see their effects, doesn't diminish their importance and prevalence.

This reminds me of my continual frustration with Obama and other policymakers who, when speaking of funding higher education, always and only talk about STEM fields, i.e., those fields which are seen as commercially/economically 'useful' to society. Whenever there are cutbacks, the first place they look is 'soft' fields like philosophy, languages, etc. I'm in a 'social science', so we're somewhat less denigrated, I guess, but it's still annoying.

[SuperPiePie]

This is perhaps the most contradictory statement about so-called 'respect' for English as a field as I've heard.

Did you know that science, as you know it, was condemned to mostly bullshit and stones until literacy flourished? I am sure you're making a point for others and not necessarily yourself, saying that some 'general population' doesn't recognize the equality of fields, but if your goal is to counter such sentiment then your statement fails. Hard.

English and the Humanities in general have applications just as varied, pressing and significant as the hard and soft sciences. Just because you know little about such fields and by extension are unable to see their effects, doesn't diminish their importance and prevalence.

The problem is usefulness has diminished greatly. Back in the day I agree it was important, but the importance of science and engineering as of today far exceeds that of the fine arts. My significant other and my mother are both artists and one is majoring in comparative literature. They are probably just as smart as I am and work just as hard, BUT the applications of what they are doing I will not admit are greater than the ones I am working on. Literacy is very important, and although in the past it has brought us to where we are, we have plenty of teachers to teach us how to read and write and at least interpret important papers or readings. If you want to do research about a certain writer's style or a certain time period, that's fantastic. But that does not mean that it will somehow make everyone later in the world better off even if you succeed and become famous.

My argument was speaking about the general public because their respect stems from application of study. I look at the individual and that is why I fully respect the field, but many people just want results and product. If any big revolutions are going to occur NOW (yes the past there were many in literature but also MASSIVE ones in science and engineering like the industrial revolution which pretty much changed the world flat out).

If you look to the future science and engineering have larger chances of changing out world and helping people who are sick or in need of food and water. That is why most people put money into these fields. Your argument about flourishing in the past is true, but now we have overcome that hump it is time for us to take over. You guys got us out of the stone age, now we will take you to the space age.

Buuut...without English (in English-speaking countries), you wouldn't be able to read the textbooks and instructions on assignments for the disciplines you work in, to fill out the applications and to write the SOP that gets you into the programs you want to get into, to read the publications that lead you to your ideas for your groundbreaking research, to write the papers about your research that are published to let other people know about your important work, to avoid plagiarism that could end your career, or to write the acceptance speech for your Nobel prize. Let's face it - you can look down your nose at the English folks, but in the end, we're the ones on whose shoulders pretty much everybody else stands.

I'm OK with the fact that as English folks we are (generally) paid less, respected less, and more often than not dismissed as being the step-children of academia...but it would be nice to get some acknowledgement for our fundamental importance in getting everyone else where s/he wants to go.

We're kind of the Cinderellas of academia...without us, nothing gets done around the castle, but in the end, we don't get to go to the ball.

I completely agree, without language we would be screwed over. However, now that we have it it's not like we need millions of English Ph.D. students to help teach people to read and write. We need English teachers to teach elementary school and high school. You can do that without a Ph.D. Like I said we are now in the age of science like it or not, and that is how the world is and represents it self as. So I thank all of you for your contributions in the past. But now that we got enough knowledge to communicate decently, let us take over. You guys got us out of the stone age, now we will take you to the space age. Just because you were the king once does not make you the king now. Just because no one gave a shit about us many centuries ago doesn't make us the paupers now. Things are not equal, and it has always been this way. Just learn to accept it.

Think of it this way, if 90% of the world's English students decided to be lazy and stop doing their studies, it would be sad but the world would still be alright for awhile. If 90% of scientists and engineers just gave up and stopped working, we would be in some... deep... you know.

Note: Once again RESPECT the people who work so hard, but money goes where it needs to go, not where respect needs to go.

Edited February 10, 2011 by SuperPiePie

[mandy june]

I didn't know that they could rescind an acceptance offer...

[qbtacoma]

I didn't know that they could rescind an acceptance offer...

They can, with various legal difficulties depending upon timing (e.g. if no contract has been signed then there are few legal ramifications), but they rarely, rarely would. They probably only would if, like, it comes out that you faked your undergrad degree or something.

[drumms9980]

little class.

[YA_RLY]

Last time I checked, the Results Section is not part of my application!

[jprufrock]

...

Again, your overly long and pompous post does nothing but further evidence your ignorance of the humanities and their impact.

I'd like to spell it out for you, but if you honestly think the fine arts are reduced to reading, writing and communication, then I doubt any rhetoric in the history of the world could convince you otherwise.

EDIT: And I do not even believe the humanities exceed science--I'm firmly affixed to a middle where both are fundamentally and differently important. Your scientific metrics are simply insufficient and inapplicable to judge the humanities.

Edited February 11, 2011 by jprufrock

[Oh the waiting game]

I was interested because of the topic but this post is false advertising. Booooooo

[SuperPiePie]

Again, your overly long and pompous post does nothing but further evidence your ignorance of the humanities and their impact.

I'd like to spell it out for you, but if you honestly think the fine arts are reduced to reading, writing and communication, then I doubt any rhetoric in the history of the world could convince you otherwise.

EDIT: And I do not even believe the humanities exceed science--I'm firmly affixed to a middle where both are fundamentally and differently important. Your scientific metrics are simply insufficient and inapplicable to judge the humanities.

I love your personal attacks. If I consider you ignorant and you consider me ignorant, at least I will not do not launch personal attacks. But whatever it doesn't matter, to each is own. If you want to argue against me that is fine, but at least use argument or provide examples. Regardless, as I have said I respect the people and the field just as much as any other. But there are reasons why most people, even many of those highly educated put science and engineering above humanities. I don't know if it's right or wrong, but that is just the way it is. They are not equal as of now and they never have been, either one way or the other.

Edited February 11, 2011 by SuperPiePie

[40 Rounds]

Offended humanities folks, let's take comfort in knowing that the arrogance, willful ignorance, and sense of privilege exhibited by a couple of science/engineering majors on this thread doesn't extend to everyone in those fields.

[SuperPiePie]

I just wish the humanities people stop would stop crying. Everyone has it rough. It's not like just because I'm an engineer I get automatic grants from everywhere. It's just as competitive. It's tough being an engineer. If you design something incorrectly you can get someone killed. May it be a drug, a building, a medical device, or even a car. The tiniest error of even nanoseconds or microns can cause disaster. So many accidents have occurred because of poor engineering, its terrible, yet engineering is unavoidable in anything so we need better and more engineers to keep up with the demands. It's what people want.

It's like some of you (not all) act like you are martyrs or something or actually better than us even though you didn't get admitted. I was chatting with a few people in humanities the other day saying they did what they wanted to do because it is what they loved, and I respect that. But when people start demanding respect because they feel underprivileged that just gets ridiculous. I'm sure if an English major and a engineer swapped shoes for a day both would actually realize how tough it is. And like I said, the world is the way it is because that's the way it is, so stop complaining and actually go do something. Maybe if you showed some strengths you would get more funding. If you showed Obama more progress in your field he wouldn't cut your funding first.

So far in this thread the only for-English argument posed was by one person about being the Cinderella of academia. All of the rest was just personal attacks or crying.So for all the tough ones out there in humanities , mad props. To all the sorry complainers, tough luck.

Edited February 11, 2011 by SuperPiePie

[Tahuds]

I just wish the humanities people stop would stop crying. Everyone has it rough. It's not like just because I'm an engineer I get automatic grants from everywhere. It's just as competitive. It's tough being an engineer. If you design something incorrectly you can get someone killed. May it be a drug, a building, a medical device, or even a car. The tiniest error of even nanoseconds or microns can cause disaster. So many accidents have occurred because of poor engineering, its terrible, yet engineering is unavoidable in anything so we need better and more engineers to keep up with the demands. It's what people want.

It's like some of you (not all) act like you are martyrs or something or actually better than us even though you didn't get admitted. I was chatting with a few people in humanities the other day saying they did what they wanted to do because it is what they loved, and I respect that. But when people start demanding respect because they feel underprivileged that just gets ridiculous. I'm sure if an English major and a engineer swapped shoes for a day both would actually realize how tough it is. And like I said, the world is the way it is because that's the way it is, so stop complaining and actually go do something. Maybe if you showed some strengths you would get more funding. If you showed Obama more progress in your field he wouldn't cut your funding first.

So far in this thread the only for-English argument posed was by one person about being the Cinderella of academia. All of the rest was just personal attacks or crying.So for all the tough ones out there in humanities , mad props. To all the sorry complainers, tough luck.

Here's the thing... everyone has it shitty, but you have it just a shitty as one of those humanities people, but make twice what they do in grad school, and many more times what they do later on for an "equivalent" amount of training. Furthermore it isn't as competitive for you. It simply isn't. There are many more positions for graduate students in Science/Math/Engineering than there are in the humanities and they are better funded by both the universities and the federal government. This means that not only are there more spots open, but a higher percentage of those spots are funded, even at the masters level.

As to the "showed Obama more progress" crack, well what kind of progress do you purpose? Because so far as I can see the main progress we get for funding graduate students in engineering to the degree we do is that we train people from other nations to go to other nations with their degrees and have essentially wasted our money.

Edited February 11, 2011 by Tahuds

[SuperPiePie]

Here's the thing... everyone has it shitty, but you have it just a shitty as one of those humanities people, but make twice what they do in grad school, and many more times what they do later on for an "equivalent" amount of training. Furthermore it isn't as competitive for you. It simply isn't. There are many more positions for graduate students in Science/Math/Engineering than there are in the humanities and they are better funded by both the universities and the federal government. This means that not only are there more spots open, but a higher percentage of those spots are funded, even at the masters level.

As to the "showed Obama more progress" crack, well what kind of progress do you purpose? Because so far as I can see the main progress we get for funding graduate students in engineering to the degree we do is that we train people from other nations to go to other nations with their degrees and have essentially wasted our money.

Firstly, thank you for actually presenting an argument

There are more spots but there are also more of us. Our departments are massive yes, but the amount of people trying to get in is ridiculous as well. You have to realize some people in basic sciences and math are trying to get into the same engineering programs as well.

As for training people from other nations. Although graduate schools give citizens priority, qualified people from other countries are welcome. Many countries have very strong engineering and math because a lot of this is universal around the world. I know that in certain humanities it is not as diverse as far as international students. Many of the people trained from different countries like to stay here at work. My father is an example. The pay here is better and there are more opportunities. Furthermore, the research done by these qualified international students is beneficial to the school and department. The money is given to help those individuals who show a desire to pursue a degree in applied sciences. I don't see why we discriminate.

Edited February 11, 2011 by SuperPiePie

[wtncffts]

I don't necessarily have a problem with the funding situation in comparative terms. It's obvious that science and engineering fields simply cost a whole lot more because of the technology and equipment involved. The LHC costs $9 billion; you can get the complete works of Shakespeare for, what, $26? (I just checked on Amazon). I expect that more funding will go into those resource-intensive fields, even on a per capita basis. What I take issue with is the utilitarian, 'tangible benefits', results-based paradigm which, unfortunately, seems to be on the upswing in many developed countries, certainly in Canada, the US, and the UK.

Now I'm in poli sci, not english, but I view both the humanities and social sciences as having the same basic purposes: making sense of society, relations among people and with their environment, finding better ways to govern ourselves, imputing value in an otherwise value-neutral physical reality, coming to terms with the human condition, finding beauty, and so on. These are things which you cannot measure in dollars and cents, but that doesn't mean they are any less valuable to a society. Science without culture is nothing, and a purely scientific world such as you seem to imagine would be unbearable. It's not either/or, or a question of science 'replacing' culture, as you seem to suggest (with the point about 'taking over'... what does that even mean?). I'm sorry, and don't take this as a personal attack, but there seems to be an incredibly narrow worldview going on here, far from the 'well-rounded individual' the academy is, ideally, supposed to cultivate. It just makes me sad, that's all.

[SuperPiePie]

I don't necessarily have a problem with the funding situation in comparative terms. It's obvious that science and engineering fields simply cost a whole lot more because of the technology and equipment involved. The LHC costs $9 billion; you can get the complete works of Shakespeare for, what, $26? (I just checked on Amazon). I expect that more funding will go into those resource-intensive fields, even on a per capita basis. What I take issue with is the utilitarian, 'tangible benefits', results-based paradigm which, unfortunately, seems to be on the upswing in many developed countries, certainly in Canada, the US, and the UK.

Now I'm in poli sci, not english, but I view both the humanities and social sciences as having the same basic purposes: making sense of society, relations among people and with their environment, finding better ways to govern ourselves, imputing value in an otherwise value-neutral physical reality, coming to terms with the human condition, finding beauty, and so on. These are things which you cannot measure in dollars and cents, but that doesn't mean they are any less valuable to a society. Science without culture is nothing, and a purely scientific world such as you seem to imagine would be unbearable. It's not either/or, or a question of science 'replacing' culture, as you seem to suggest (with the point about 'taking over'... what does that even mean?). I'm sorry, and don't take this as a personal attack, but there seems to be an incredibly narrow worldview going on here, far from the 'well-rounded individual' the academy is, ideally, supposed to cultivate. It just makes me sad, that's all.

You do make a good point, research in science and engineering does cost a lot more. Why? One thing, liability. If we screw up we can get sued for millions, and R&D can cost billions. I wish things were cheaper but the reason why so much money goes into this is because of this liability issue. I do have an appreciation for the humanities, don't get me wrong. Without culture the world would be a very boring and probably unbearable place. But I am bothered that a lot of these people complain or feel underprivileged which is really not the case. Furthermore, there are problems in the world I see which I have a strong desire do my part in alleviating it. It bothers me when people think this money is put to waste and they feel like the money should go to them. I'm sorry, but the money required to develop vaccines is RIDICULOUS. I wish it were cheaper, but it's just not going to happen. So I am going to defend the budget cuts which are happening to the humanities.

I guess I used a bit of strong language when I said "taking over". Notice it wasn't an attack on culture, but rather emphasis on English. When most people in the world could not even afford a book let alone read or even begin to understand the rich world of literature, we were all in the dark. But today things have changed and we have to admit. Things are much more digital and advanced, and the old studies are falling behind. Right now culture is just more focused on technology than it has been, lets say 100 years ago. Emphasis on sciences, as you have said yourself, have increased in developed countries so that is what I meant about "taking over".

Like I have said before, the person I love the most in the world is an artist and studies comparative literature. I will not judge people on their interests or how much money they make. But it really bothers me when people seem amazed that they can't get funding for their "insert something" literature studies in the "insert date" when there is some really terrible stuff happening to people around the world. I completely support what individuals want to do, but please understand that the lack of funding and space is just how things are because there are more dire needs right now, and the need of more jobs as well. We have to prioritize and there is a list. A list has a start and end and when you have to make sacrifices you gotta do what you gotta do.

Science is also part of culture. Technology dominates us more than anything else today. Just look at the media, Facebook, this forum, and our cars and everything around us.... good or bad? who knows

Edited February 11, 2011 by SuperPiePie