Fall 2012 Applicant Chit Chat

[crazedandinfused]

Then to turn this argument around to a point I made previously: what's the excuse for private schools w/their own private endowments? Why are they following this trend? I can understand (SOMEWHAT the rationale & logic behind the state governments) but from say a Princeton or Harvard or Columbia perspective, I can't see why they would want to lower their cohort sizes.

BTW I would never rip you for stating your views and I would certainly not expect anyone else on here to do that. We all have crazy ideas of our own but I think we are in a somewhat safe, academic (using the term loosely here folks) setting, where we encourage the sharing and exchange of ideas. As long as you aren't rude or hateful of someone else's beliefs, then I think it's all fair game

I think that if private universities are indeed scaling back their admissions (and I kind of saw a sub text in that article which suggested that this is in no way a broad or a deep trend) it's both a reaction to shrunken endowments and perhaps an anticipation of the depressed job market.

The former is understandable in a practical sense. The latter is seemingly a reaction to a long-term trend of the job-market spiraling downward - a plunge in the demand for profs which has been driven by ever more hollowed-out state funding for the public and mixed universities who drive a huge proportion of the overall demand for faculty.

And thanks for being welcoming of all political beliefs. I just don't know when I'm being too radical because in this political climate I feel like a darned Trotskyite.

Edited March 12, 2012 by crazedandinfused

[oseirus]

And thanks for being welcoming of all political beliefs. I just don't know when I'm being too radical because in this political climate I feel like a darned Trotskyite.

Fear not my friend, for any person regardless of their, race, gender, creed, color, religion, political affiliation, social status, financial status, facebook status, personal hygiene status ... are welcomed here ... unless of course they are Swiss or a member of the western Branch of American Reform Presbylutheranism, then eff em

[RevolutionBlues]

Another huge problem affecting the job market, as I see it, has been administrative growth in higher education. While the overall cost of college (not accounting for state subsidies) has risen substantially in recent decades, the professor:student ratio has been steady or fallen and professor pay has often failed to keep pace with inflation. The major change as I see it has been the professionalization of administration, leading to huge growth in the number of administrators and their salaries. I think this reflects a drive to compete for undergraduates by offering the most enriched "college experience." It can be nice to have somebody organize activities for students in the dorms, put together rafting trips, or maintain connections with volunteer placement sites. However, I become concerned when this trend towards extracurricular fulfillment replaces education as the institution's chief priority. I also worry that excessive handholding will do students a disservice in the long run. I end by relaying that last year my small state college laid off numerous professors (including the forced retirement of one of the most popular history professors by threatening to end his insurance coverage as his wife struggled with cancer) and a cut in faculty salary in the name of state-budget driven austerity, but created and hired several new administrative positions, many wih higher starting salaries than tenured professors receive. Please forgive my rant, but I spent the last year working in that administration.

[Sigaba]

Are the troubles confronting professional academic historians the result of external factors alone or has the House of Klio also contributed to the current state of affairs? (This is a rhetorical question. The answers await many of you--and not just in the sequence of classes in historiography you'll be required to take.)

When it comes time to pick an outside field, keep in mind that while there are disciplines that will help you as professional historian, there are others that will help you as a professional academic.

[oseirus]

Are the troubles confronting professional academic historians the result of external factors alone or has the House of Klio also contributed to the current state of affairs? (This is a rhetorical question. The answers await many of you--and not just in the sequence of classes in historiography you'll be required to take.)

When it comes time to pick an outside field, keep in mind that while there are disciplines that will help you as professional historian, there are others that will help you as a professional academic.

Maybe it is the artificial time (curse you Benjamin Franklin, farmers and ALL other states except Arizona for this pox known as daylights savings) or it's just me but I am SO confused by that last line ... can you expand upon it a little? Pretty please? Not w/a cherry but close to it?

[Sigaba]

Maybe it is the artificial time (curse you Benjamin Franklin, farmers and ALL other states except Arizona for this pox known as daylights savings) or it's just me but I am SO confused by that last line ... can you expand upon it a little? Pretty please? Not w/a cherry but close to it?

Often, history graduate students will do a field directly related to their interests. For example an Americanist who focuses on the presidency may do a field in political science. Or someone who is focused on European culture may do a field in art history.

I'm suggesting that one consider fields that will help in the arenas of a historian's career outside of the archives For example, many institutions have a school of education that offers graduate degrees. In which case, one can do an outside field that helps one become a better teacher.

Alternately, one can do a field that will make one a more adept administrator in an academic environment. Since bean counting is more and more the name of the game in the Ivory Tower, one might do an outside field so one can understand how the beans are sorted and counted. Other options include facility operations, IT, fundraising, industrial psychology, marketing, and (facility) master planning. All of the options in these options can enable a professor to do committee work more efficiently and effectively, and, potentially, give a hiring committee something to think about beyond an applicant's dissertation topic, CV, and fields of interest.

[hanlin]

Virmundi, thanks!

[StrangeLight]

the oversupply of PhDs argument is a myth. when universities see a tenured professor retire, they replace that prof with 3 adjuncts rather than another tenure-stream faculty member. it saves them a ton of money and there's always someone desperate enough to take a $2500 per course adjuncting position. sigaba is right; academic institutions are preoccupied with bean counting. administrators have formulae to determine the optimum enrollment in graduate seminars and they will give department chairs the gears for low enrollment, even as they waste money on bloated sports programs that don't break even financially.

i fear that until adjuncts unionize (either by institution or on a national scale), there will always be someone willing to teach that course for a little less than the previous person, and schools will continue to replace tenure streams with adjuncts (particularly in american and european history). i wish that more adjuncts had the courage to walk away from academia rather than agree to those contracts. but then, i also wish that aspiring grad students with unfunded offers had the courage to reject them and reapply rather than pay their own way.

on the one hand, i am saddened to see that so many programs are buying into the overproduction myth and scaling back their programs. on the other hand, if a school really fails to place students from X subfield in tenure-track positions, then they probably should stop admitting students to that subfield until they retool their faculty.

also, i'd like to defend the small programs out there. with a smaller incoming class, students end up stepping outside of the people in "their year" and making friendships and connections with other students further along in the program and/or outside of their subfield. all of this is a good thing. it's actually kind of ridiculous to think that, at larger programs, students confine themselves to spending time with the students in their subfield and/or the same year of the program.

[Hilversum]

the oversupply of PhDs argument is a myth. when universities see a tenured professor retire, they replace that prof with 3 adjuncts rather than another tenure-stream faculty member. it saves them a ton of money and there's always someone desperate enough to take a $2500 per course adjuncting position.

If there are easily three qualified adjunct professors available to fill every position vacated by a retiring tenured professor, then surely there is an oversupply of PhDs?

Thanks for posting, Virmundi!

Edited March 12, 2012 by Hilversum

[Sparky]

If there are easily three qualified adjunct professors available to fill every position vacated by a retiring tenured professor, then surely there is an oversupply of PhDs?

Thanks for posting, Virmundi!

1. Many (most?) adjuncts have to work at multiple schools in order to eke out something that might approach a living wage (the "freeway flyer" phenomenon).

2. Many adjuncts do not have PhDs, whether they are ABD and writing, "terminal ABD," or just never planning on going beyond a master's.

As I have said before, if U.S. News & World Report started making "percentage of undergrad classroom hours instructed by tenured/permanent* faculty" and "percentage of undergrad classroom hours instructed by faculty with the terminal degree in their field" part of their college rankings, the PhD 'oversupply' would shrink overnight.

Reducing the number of grad students by a handful per program--especially given the dropout rates--is not even going to put a dent in the problem.

* ETA: My undergrad has a "permanent non-tenure" track for faculty who have a job for 'life' like tenured profs but focus on teaching rather than research.

Edited March 12, 2012 by Sparky

[Kelkel]

I received my rejection from BC on Friday via email from department. Woo. They stated I should have already been informed and misspelled my last name. Definitely made me feel special and not forgotten about one bit. I was out of town most of the weekend though so that was nice.

[Hilversum]

1. Many (most?) adjuncts have to work at multiple schools in order to eke out something that might approach a living wage (the "freeway flyer" phenomenon).

2. Many adjuncts do not have PhDs, whether they are ABD and writing, "terminal ABD," or just never planning on going beyond a master's.

As I have said before, if U.S. News & World Report started making "percentage of undergrad classroom hours instructed by tenured/permanent* faculty" and "percentage of undergrad classroom hours instructed by faculty with the terminal degree in their field" part of their college rankings, the PhD 'oversupply' would shrink overnight.

Reducing the number of grad students by a handful per program--especially given the dropout rates--is not even going to put a dent in the problem.

* ETA: My undergrad has a "permanent non-tenure" track for faculty who have a job for 'life' like tenured profs but focus on teaching rather than research.

That helps clarify the issues, thanks!

[TMP]

I will indeed report what the UW DGS says when he runs that panel on "Looking beyond academia" or something like that during the Recruitment Weekend. I will admit that I was a little surprised to see that clause in the acceptance letter, followed by tooting its horn as one of the best departments in the country.

I am simply going to look out for my best interests as I go through this program. I knew that I didn't want to walk out solely with US or Modern European history degree because I didn't want to compete with 200 other people for that just one job. I knew that I would have to adapt my interests and projects to meet the "demands" of the universities, which are globalization and diversity. I told every single of my POIs that I did not want to teach or study US history through WASP lens. So I hope that by being very progressive with my views, I can at least try to avoid that pitfall that so many single-minded PhDs find themselves in.

As for reaching across years and subfields in the program. or even departments, honestly, it's really up to the students to decide who they want to be friends with. If they don't learn to talk to the older or younger students, or somebody in opposite field, that's just their loss for not enriching their own perspectives and potential support when your own subfield turns its back on you because you want that highly coveted dissertation fellowship and they're too jealous to admit it.

There's a reason why it's almost never a good idea to date somebody in your own department. especially as they get smaller and smaller...

But in any case, we are losing focus on the point of the article: the professors and how they view graduate programs and see their graduate students. I seriously forwarded this to my parents and wrote "Why X and Y want me so badly" on the subject line of the e-mail. I have talked to a number of professors, particularly those who haven't had whole lot of students, whether junior or senior. It's clear how much having graduate students mean to them- they have the opportunity to mentor someone of their very own instead of always co-advising or being one of the readers on the dissertation committee. They clearly seem to crave a chance to pass down their craft and knowledge of history that their own advisers gave them. They talk about how much they learned from their own advisers and what being one themselves would mean (whether they intend to do better than their advisers or want to emanate them). It's a different kind of relationship for them than running seminars or sitting on dissertation committees or mentoring another graduate student whose adviser always seems to be MIA.

[runner09]

Hi all,

I know this isn't the best place to post it... but I don't know where else you all will check and see what I've written.

I am going to visit Penn this weekend and am wondering what people do for attire on these visits. A couple of things make me unsure of what to do: 1) We're already accepted, so it's just a matter of impressions and not of acceptance per se (which is important, don't get me wrong!) 2) we will be walking a LOT 3) it's supposed to be 75 degrees. I was wondering if nice jeans and a NICE top will suffice (I ask about jeans because it makes the shoe choices better for us females..) I didn't know what you all had done on your respective visits. I know a lot of it depends on the culture of the school. The DGS seemed to think jeans were ok (I called!) but I wanted to see what your experiences had been. Goldie? Pugsley? Safferz? Anyone else?

[goldielocks]

My go to is a pair of dark jeans, a plain tee or blouse, and one of my vintage suit jackets (I have way too many from being a thrift store addict), and heels/flats. I haven't felt over/under-dressed at any visits. And there have been people dressed in all manners, from jeans and hoodies, to full on suits.

Hope this helps, and have fun!

[CageFree]

I can only speak of my experience at Davis, which is incredibly laid-back, even by California standards. Although I had with me a set of business-casual clothes and shoes, we were told that there was no need for any formality at any event. We did a lot of walking (around the town as well as the school) so comfortable shoes are a must; I would not wear heels just to look "the part." At this point, they are selling the school to you so don't worry about being "interviewed," unless you're going to a place where you haven't been formally admitted yet.

A nice top with jeans and flats would most likely be appropriate.

[uhohlemonster]

I'm going to be wearing dresses and skirts primarily because it's warm out here in NY (hell yeah, thanks early spring!), but I agree about dark jeans a nice top, flats or boots... I think as long as you look nice, you're good! (I never fall into the trap of 'business casual'-- gives me the creeps!)

[Nordicllama]

and what might a male wear on such a visit? Nice jeans and collared shirt/ collared shirt-sweater suffice?

[Nordicllama]

[pugsley87]

So I'm a California girl...take this with a grain of salt since Californians take casual to a whole new level.

I think dark jeans, flats, and a nice blouse are great! I've also done a cute dress with informal tights. I really think as long as you look presentable, ie not t shirt with stains and ripped shorts/ flip flops, it'll be ok! I'd go for comfy over stuffy. A suit is probably overkill since the profs probably wont be doing suits.

[Safferz]

Hi all,

I know this isn't the best place to post it... but I don't know where else you all will check and see what I've written.

I am going to visit Penn this weekend and am wondering what people do for attire on these visits. A couple of things make me unsure of what to do: 1) We're already accepted, so it's just a matter of impressions and not of acceptance per se (which is important, don't get me wrong!) 2) we will be walking a LOT 3) it's supposed to be 75 degrees. I was wondering if nice jeans and a NICE top will suffice (I ask about jeans because it makes the shoe choices better for us females..) I didn't know what you all had done on your respective visits. I know a lot of it depends on the culture of the school. The DGS seemed to think jeans were ok (I called!) but I wanted to see what your experiences had been. Goldie? Pugsley? Safferz? Anyone else?

I went for business casual at all my visits, so heels, dress pants, nice blouse, cardigan/sweater. A lot of people were dressed like me, others went with jeans and 'regular' outfits. So when my feet were KILLING me after all the walking on the first day of my last visit, I didn't hesitate to wear what I wore traveling for the second day -- skinny jeans tucked into knee-high riding boots, a long sleeved tee and a beanie hat to hide my messy curls

[New England Nat]

Nice jeans and a blouse or jacket works for most places. For those of you planning a Princeton visit I am going to warn you up front, this is a very dressy department and I wouldn't nessecarily say you have to wear a suit... but for the love of god don't wear a tshirt (unless it's like a tshirt blouse women can get away with).

Edited March 12, 2012 by New England Nat

[oseirus]

and what might a male wear on such a visit? Nice jeans and collared shirt/ collared shirt-sweater suffice?

Sir: french cuffs, an European cut suit, a $200 hair cut, crocodile shoes and then finally a pinky ring.

[oseirus]

Ladies and gentlemen ... Nordicllama is the TRUTH .... that is all

Fear the Llama ... FEAR HIM

Edited March 12, 2012 by oseirus

[Nordicllama]

Sir: french cuffs, an European cut suit, a $200 hair cut, crocodile shoes and then finally a pinky ring.

I like I like. Well you know with the incredible seven-figure stipend I'll be getting next year I'm planning on hitting Florence and picking up the latest fashion in shoes. Then it's off to Paris for 365 brand new 3 piece suits. I won't be repeating any outfit on any day. Oh and 24k gold, ruby encrusted cuff-links and a $25,000 Gucci snakeskin laptop bag. I'm only going to eat in the finest of restaurants and have filet mignon for every meal. And in my abundant spare time I shall race motor cars and golf at the finest country clubs. Ah, yes, I can't wait to be a graduate student.