The sad truth

[bdon19]

Yes, we hear all this talk about finding a good fit and everything, and I'll be the last one to deny that fit is important. I could rant all day about the best decision I've ever made to choose a small, lesser-known LAC for undergrad than one of two prestigious institutions, one of which gave me a hugely generous merit aid package at the eleventh hour.

But here I am looking at grad programs, and I'm finding that what some of my professors are saying is, unfortunately, the sad truth. Prestige matters. My dream job would be to teach at an LAC like the one where I'm currently finishing my undergrad. And all of my profs went to top-25 schools. So did all the ones at similar schools.

I'm trying to be realistic, but I also realize that the job market is a scary place. At this point, most of the programs I'm looking at fall within the top-25 or so. I know there's a chance I won't get in anywhere, and I may have to go through this whole process again. I may apply to one or two funded MAs just in case, but I may just wait it out if need be. I'm just not sure if I'm comfortable with getting a degree from a lesser institution when the job market is as bleak as it is. And most of the top programs are the ones that seem to be the best fits for my particular interests, anyway.

I know this is a controversial topic. Discuss.

Edited August 10, 2011 by bdon19

[Grizbert]

I tend to agree with old Thomas H. Benton (as someone who is coming to this process as a "mature" student who has an unfunded MA and the student debt to go with it, and who has worked for four years as admin staff in a humanities department at a large R1): unless you're independently wealthy, don't do grad school in the humanities unless you have a very strong idea of what you want to work on, what your long-term goals are, what the real situation is in the job market (clue: dire), and what your Plan B is. That said, if you are competitive enough to get into a top ten program with funding, and you can finish the program (while doing more-than-average on the professionalization front - conferences, publications, etc.), you will stand a good chance of getting a TT job - somewhere.

I, too, think I would prefer to land a job at a SLAC. But I'm only bothering applying to top programs. If I don't get in anywhere, or don't get funded, I might give it one more whirl next year (at which point I will have 3-4 further graduate courses under my belt, showing proven academic potential, since I can take a free class each term at said R1).

If you are able to do a short-term move (no spouse or kids to worry about, etc.), a funded MA is a great option, too. But you need to take that opportunity and run with it - view the MA as your job, and set and meet very high goals for yourself during the program so that you can use it as a springboard for PhD applications.

In the humanities, do not take on debt to go to graduate school. Ever.

$0.02

Edited August 10, 2011 by Grizbert

[Timshel]

I don't know. I currently go to a state school with some amazing instructors at the size of school I would love to teach at (around 12,000 undergrad), and while some of them got their PhDs at places like WUSTL, some of them got them at schools that aren't even ranked, like Ball State and Duquesne. I've been told that it doesn't ALWAYS matter WHERE you go, it's WHAT you do while you're there.

[ZeeMore21]

This will be an interesting discussion, and I look forward to seeing how this thread turns out. This is such a difficult topic...you are right, the job market for the Humanities is horrible...and I don't know how the job market will look like in 6-7 years when I am finished with my doctorate- it could be just as bad as in the present, could be even worse, or (I am praying) it gets better. We will see.

But to offer up my own story, although I did apply to mostly reach schools, I did make sure to apply to programs that were top in my specific field, which is African American Literature. Though the school that I am going to, Vanderbilt, is ranked at #30 overall as far as top English PhD programs (which in my opinion, is pretty good), this school is also ranked as #5 out of 15 schools as a top program for African American Lit...it is right behind Harvard, Princeton, Berkeley, and Columbia. Some of the top scholars in my field teach at Vanderbilt, which can only be helpful for me when I get on the job market and do some networking. Plus, the African American studies center at my school is well-funded, which is great since there are so many resources that I can take advantage of when I pursue my research.

I say all this to suggest that it may be important that you go to a school that is strong in your field. For example, though Vanderbilt is not a top-25 school, when I go on job interviews saying that I want to do African American literature, professors will know that I attended an institution that prepared me well to pursue this specific field. If all the schools you have listed are top-25 AND are top in your field specifically, that is great. However, I wouldn't limit yourself to strictly top-25 schools, as you might be missing out on programs that are not top ranked generally but may be strong in your field and provide you with a great amount of resources.

I personally do not regret at all not going to a top-25 institution, and I actually picked Vanderbilt over CUNY, which is in the top-25. I got waitlisted at Princeton, which was also one of the top in my field...and I probably would have attended this program had I gotten in. But I am still very happy and honored to be attending Vanderbilt. But to wrap my post up, I am glad that I paid attention to what was going on in my field, and made sure to look closely at programs that would prepare me to go into African American literature.

Edited August 10, 2011 by ZeeMore21

[ZeeMore21]

Another small example to add: The English program I was at this past year (a top Research institution) had a job talk I attended, where there were 2 professors competing for a tenure-track position. One was from Yale and the other was from CUNY. Although the first candidate obviously had a prestigious degree, he really wasn't able to articulate his research and its importance as eloquently as the other candidate from CUNY. At the end, the CUNY doctoral student ended up getting the position. This is also just to say that regardless of what school you go to for your doctorate, if you don't do good work or are not able to articulate what you research effectively, it will be tough finding a teaching position.

[Phil Sparrow]

The OP is right--prestige and reputation do matter. And I agree that it's unfortunate, because it can shut even some superstar scholars out of parts of the job market. In the last few years, I've learned more about what the TT job search looks like from the hiring institution's end, and it's true that R1 schools (and, I would assume, "top" SLACs, as well) have particular...cutoffs for job candidates. As in, one's PhD must come from a program that is prestigious to the X degree (what degree varies, depending on the program doing the hiring), and candidates whose degree-granting institution doesn't meet that benchmark will be held at a real disadvantage, or in some cases will not be considered at all for the position. (Exceptions are often made, however, in the case of well-established scholars, later-in-career with some seniority in the field.) Sad but true. Edited to note: reputation isn't everything, though. A prestigious degree doesn't count for much if you haven't distinguished yourself as a scholar and teacher.

However, I will echo the poster who noted that your program's reputation in your subfield matters more than the overall prestige of the program, and certainly than the overall reputation of the institution.

I should also note that ranking does not always correspond well to a program's reputation/prestige at any given moment in time. A quick glance at placement records can confirm this. If we base this mysterious "reputation" on where and how often PhDs from a given program get TT jobs, it seems apparent that there is a new crop of "top" programs joining (and in several cases, supplanting) those traditionally ranked at the top. The point: prestige surely matters, but don't count on the "rankings" to reflect the reality of any program's current reputation.

Edited August 10, 2011 by Phil Sparrow

[Phil Sparrow]

This is also just to say that regardless of what school you go to for your doctorate, if you don't do good work or are not able to articulate what you research effectively, it will be tough finding a teaching position.

Also, this.

[Timshel]

I would agree that if you want to teach at an R1 school, you will probably have to attend an R1 school, but thankfully, I'm not interested in working at an R1 school. I would love to just teach at a state school and make livable money.

[Grizbert]

I also agree with the above posters, based on my experience behind-the-scenes in hiring in a humanities department at a large R1 which is not a top 10, perhaps borderline top 25, program in its field.

The general consensus is that you will likely land a job at an institution/department of slightly less prestige than your degree granting one. Most of our faculty have PhDs from Ivies or top private universities, with the odd high-ranking public R1 thrown in. It does matter.

You should definitely select programs based first on strength in your subfield, then your field, then the prestige of the overall institution. If you already know what area you what to research, narrow even further and consider the reputation and research output of target professors within that program. And it's also definitely true that you may want to apply to below-25 programs that are exceptionally strong in your field. Check their recent placement rates to get an idea, if possible. Ask the graduate coordinator for this information if it isn't on their web site. Read the most current literature in your field and find out where those scholars studied, and under whom.

[ZeeMore21]

I would agree that if you want to teach at an R1 school, you will probably have to attend an R1 school, but thankfully, I'm not interested in working at an R1 school. I would love to just teach at a state school and make livable money.

Exactly.

[ZeeMore21]

The general consensus is that you will likely land a job at an institution/department of slightly less prestige than your degree granting one. Most of our faculty have PhDs from Ivies or top private universities, with the odd high-ranking public R1 thrown in. It does matter.

This is an interesting observation.

[Grizbert]

On 8/10/2011 at 12:45 PM, ZeeMore21 said:

This is an interesting observation.

To be more specific, one of our elder faculty, who went to Penn, was heard bemoaning the fact that we hired a PhD from WUSTL.

[Timshel]

WUSTL is actually a very prestigious program. That is surprising to me.

[Grizbert]

On 8/10/2011 at 12:57 PM, Timshel said:

WUSTL is actually a very prestigious program. That is surprising to me.

This wasn't in English, but it was in another humanities department. And the assistant professor in question has proven to be prolific and popular. So

[andrewthomas]

A professor of mine once told me that while there are many reasonably excellent programs, the job market is not reasonable. It seems there are more than enough PHDs emerging from the top 25 schools to fill pretty much every tenure track position in the country. Are those people the smartest/best/wisest candidates for those jobs? Not necessarily, but they have been academically "vetted" by reputable, trustworthy institutions.

It's an unfair, nonobjective crap shoot, but I realize (for myself) that if I don't get into a top-25, then the 6-9 years investment won't be worth it.

Edited August 10, 2011 by andrewthomas

[Grizbert]

My feelings align with yours, Andrew. But I am also 32 and therefore will be well into middle age upon completion - not too much time to "change careers" or go find myself. If I don't get into a top program with full funding, I'll settle for reading medieval research on the side and taking free classes at the university where I work (and where, incidentally, I could easily be making as much or more than a newly-hired TT professor in less time than it will take to earn a PhD - I'm in fundraising. )

[Timshel]

A professor of mine once told me that while there are many reasonably excellent programs, the job market is not reasonable. It seems there are more than enough PHDs emerging from the top 25 schools to fill pretty much every tenure track position in the country. Are those people the smartest/best/wisest candidates for those jobs? Not necessarily, but they have been academically "vetted" by reputable, trustworthy institutions.

It's an unfair, nonobjective crap shoot, but I realize (for myself) that if I don't get into a top-25, then the 6-9 years investment won't be worth it.

As I said before, some of the professors at my university went to un-ranked or lesser known schools. I would say less than half of them were from top 25 schools, and they have all told me that it matters more what you do while you're there. You should publish, present, etc., and that will help more.

[andrewthomas]

My understanding is that those hirings are getting rarer and rarer, but I know every school is different. My university (ranked in the 70s for English, and in the 50s for undergrad) has one prof from Trinity Dublin, and everyone else is from a top 25 US program.

Often, if you're from a lesser known institution, it's more difficult getting manuscripts read or articles seriously considered. It's terribly unfair and pathologically elitist--but then again there are just far too many of us (aspiring scholars, that is) and it's a convenient way to eliminate a great number of potential applicants and job-seekers.

@Grizbert: I wish you the best of luck!

[truckbasket]

A couple additional things to consider:

1. Rankings are somewhat slippery in that a program’s prestige can sometimes shift within a relatively small period of time (five years or so). If a program catches your eye that’s not in the top 15, but is pioneering some relevant advances within the field, it might still be worth pursuing further. It’s a bit more of a crapshoot than sticking with the safety of the Ivies, but there may be some advantages to jumping in with a more progressive, forward-thinking program if that lends itself to the kind of work you’re interested in. (Digital Humanities, Rhet/Comp spring to mind).

2. The humanities have trends that come and go, and those trends can be very effective when on the market. Hiring institutions will often align their needs to what’s hot in the field, in addition to looking for scholars who show transdisciplinary research. The ability to keep your thumb on the pulse of professional trends and marketing yourself as a scholar who owns several academic hats will also increase your chances of catching a committee's attention. (Of course this can be tricky as what’s fashionable now might not be so in six years, but at least being mindful to the direction of the field is important.)

3. Ivies have problems that are unique to them regarding the job market. Greg Semenza makes some good points about the state of the Ivies in the current market: “Many Ivy League Ph.D.s find themselves being systematically excluded from certain kinds of job searches [. . .] because of unfair assumptions regarding their willingness to profess in nonelite colleges and university settings. In fact, job placement has become an extremely difficult matter for faculty and administrators at many prestigious universities, where placement rates have in many cases sunk below those reported by institutions usually ranked lower.” While it’s still true that the Ivory tower is still the best guarantee of a TT position, they face their own set of obstacles that lower-ranked programs don’t have to deal with.

4. It’s been mentioned, but if the work you’re doing is innovative and relevant, and you’re in a situation where you have good support to actively do the work and build your name as a new scholar, this can serve to somewhat level the playing field against better-ranked programs. On one of my visits to a medium-ranked program, I met with a student who is essentially being courted by several institutions based on his unique dissertation that was already picked up to become a published monograph. I also know several academics who landed their TT positions, not solely through their scholarly writing, but through side work writing articles / texts that are less erudite and have a more accessible role in the world. In a prickly political climate in which the humanities constantly has to justify their existence, finding meaningful ways to bridge scholarly erudition and throw a rope down from the Ivory tower is becoming increasingly important.

5. Lastly, teaching experience is vital. In the hilariously dated, yet still useful, “Getting What You Came For,” Robert Peters says “The amount of teaching-free financial aid you are offered by different schools should be a major factor in deciding which school to attend – the less teaching, the better” (54). Although dangerously misleading on a nuclear scale, this demonstrates just how rapidly the nature of the field has shifted (the revised text came out 1997). And this is one of the problems that the Ivies (or very well-funded programs with fewer teaching requirements) can be faced with. In his book, Semenza mentions a well-respected institution that won’t even consider a potential applicant who has fewer than ten classes taught under her belt. So having the ability to fine tune your teaching chops while completing your Ph.D. is hugely important, and having a spectrum of courses on your C.V. will only work in your favor. Although not greatly ranked, one of the programs I was looking at offered a fantastic stipend (almost 30k) and was quite boastful of the fact that very little teaching would be required (only two classes taught during the five year duration). I ended up going with a program that offered me half the money, and a butt load of teaching experience. Although it’ll be challenging, I’ll come out of that program having taught a variety of courses in a variety of styles, which, I think, will help in the long run.

Of course, attending an Ivy is going to provide you with a degree of insulation on the job market that simply can’t be matched. However, to reiterate Semenza’s main point: there are ways in which the playing field can still be leveled. If you’re able to do work that is meaningful, pertinent, and fresh while receiving the support you need to do so – and gaining that all important teacher training – the market should (hopefully) be somewhat responsive to that (I know that it is from firsthand experience on committees). So much of this process is serendipitous, but I’ll speak for myself by saying that I busted my ass to get to this point, and I’m more than willing to keep on busting it to do some cool work. And as long as I do that, I’m sure things will fall into place however they’re supposed to.

Edited August 10, 2011 by truckbasket

[ZeeMore21]

It's an unfair, nonobjective crap shoot, but I realize (for myself) that if I don't get into a top-25, then the 6-9 years investment won't be worth it.

Definitely agree, the Humanities job market is unfair, and it does take a certain amount of luck to land a TT position. However, I will be attending a #30 school and still think that I will see my investment as worth it in my opinion.

[truckbasket]

One last thing to chew on that plays a big role in the process is just how much energy does the program invest in placement. What training, specific to the profession and the job market, do they offer?

A friend’s husband is a prof at a NY institution ranked somewhere in the 70s. He recently took on the role of Director of Placement and Professional Development, and in just one year, their placement rate went from less than 15% to 100% (no exaggeration). Obviously the program didn’t change in this time, nor did its reputation. But the relentless effort that this guy put into getting these students placed made all the difference. So that’s a key factor as well.

Edited August 10, 2011 by truckbasket

[ahembree]

On 8/10/2011 at 2:48 PM, ZeeMore21 said:

However, I will be attending a #30 school and still think that I will see my investment as worth it in my opinion.

I wouldn't be surprised if WUSTL made a little jump in the next 5-6 years. They seem to be getting a good rep as a smaller, "up-and-coming" program. Maybe I'm biased as a prospective applicant...

[Timshel]

One last thing to chew on that plays a big role in the process is just how much energy does the program invest in placement. What training, specific to the profession and the job market, do they offer?

A friend’s husband is a prof at a NY institution ranked somewhere in the 70s. He recently took on the role of Director of Placement and Professional Development, and in just one year, their placement rate went from less than 15% to 100% (no exaggeration). Obviously the program didn’t change in this time, nor did its reputation. But the relentless effort that this guy put into getting these students placed made all the difference. So that’s a key factor as well.

Very good point. Some of the schools that I am looking at that are ranked below 50 seem to put an emphasis on placement and have things like you listed in place.

[Sparky]

As I said before, some of the professors at my university went to un-ranked or lesser known schools. I would say less than half of them were from top 25 schools, and they have all told me that it matters more what you do while you're there. You should publish, present, etc., and that will help more.

This is true, but remember that the people who will have PhDs from Harvard and Berkeley are facing exactly the same lousy job market and getting exactly that same advice. Do you really want to bet your future on the odds that the top 25 programs will spend five years accepting only slackers who don't publish, present, or seek out teaching fellowships?

Where things get interesting, IMHO, is the question of "top-ranked program with well-known advisor" versus "lower (say, 25-50esque, and understand that I'm not referring to any set of rankings but just general impressions of what's successful versus not) ranked program with ZOMGSUPERSTAR advisor."

Edited August 10, 2011 by Sparky

[Timshel]

I kind of feel like those who get into Top 25 programs, though, are going to be a little less-willing to take a job at a lesser known, non-prestigious, small state school is BFE America. Idk. That's just how it seems to me.

I just don't want to put all my eggs in one basket and only shoot for top schools. I am going to apply across the board of ranked schools, focusing on schools that actually do what I do, which is actually harder to find (trauma studies).