Possible connundrum between PhD this year vs Next

[Supernovasky]

So I got an email back from the grad coordinator at LSU. Apparently two of my LOR writers were not very good at all. They were not from academic sources (although they are people I respected very highly, one of them is a writer for a major magazine). He said that I should have an academic professor send them a rec ASAP, along with all the other schools I applied to.

I am doing that right now, however, I feel I may be too late. I think LSU wants to accept me, in which case, I've got a great shot at funding. LSU was my absolute last resort safety school though, and now that I've got a job in environmental lobying and community organizing, I feel like I'd have a GREAT shot next year at getting into some upper tier schools, with the following tweaks:

Better LOR writers. One of them was great, apparently two of them were terrible.

Targeted applications... Do a LOT of research on the schools I apply to and target my applications a little better.

Cleaning up my SOP and Writing sample.

Raising my GRE score (its not bad, but I know if I studied all year, I could definitely improve it)

And then a year and a half added of work experience in community organizing and lobying for environmental issues, considering I'm thinking of going into environmental sociology....

So if I get accepted into LSU with full funding... do I take it and quit the job I just got in 4 months, or do I stick with this job, focus on all of the above, and reapply to top 50 schools?

And by the way, I certainly wouldn't MIND LSU, I just feel like I just discovered something that hurt my application and chances of getting into some of my dream schools.

[Darth.Vegan]

So I have to ask, what have you learned from this application cycle?

Also why did you need to resort to people who were not in academia for letters? Did you not develop relationships with three faculty?

[Supernovasky]

I've learned a lot,

And I felt like I wanted to give a fuller picture of the person I was not just inside of academia but also outside. But apparently that's not in vogue, haha. I can get 3 letters from academia next time around if it doesnt work out this time.

I MIGHT still go to LSU, depends on the funding package and stuff... although I want to see how I like this job here first.

[lovenhaight]

Always go with academic LORs...adcomms tend not to care about who you are as a person, just how you perform academically. If academic LOR writers throw in personal info, then that's all well and good.

Getting to your question though, I don't think that you can really make the decision based on what people on this forum tell you is the best choice because only you know your situation. If you like this job and it is one that you can hang onto for a while, then maybe the job is what's right for you right now. If you just want to go to a PhD program, then do that. With PhD programs, there is always next year. You just have to have a gut-check moment and decide what works for you at this point in time.

[Supernovasky]

It'll probably be a in the moment decision. I really am 50-50 on it.

[RefurbedScientist]

Getting to your question though, I don't think that you can really make the decision based on what people on this forum tell you is the best choice because only you know your situation. If you like this job and it is one that you can hang onto for a while, then maybe the job is what's right for you right now. If you just want to go to a PhD program, then do that. With PhD programs, there is always next year. You just have to have a gut-check moment and decide what works for you at this point in time.

I agree with this entirely. We cannot say whether or not you should forgo starting at LSU this year with the hopes of getting into someplace preferable next year. We don't know your stats, we haven't read your SoP, we don't know you. Even if we did, it would be a very personal decision.

That all being said, should you decide to apply again next year, it is imperative that you get letters of recommendation from academics. Unfortunately, professional references have very little value to adcoms (which is not necessarily how it should be, but that's how it is). I would say at least 2 out of your 3 LORs should be from academics (aim for 3, then if you have a strong letter from a non-academic, send it as a fourth or supplementary material). If you can't get 3 academic LORs from your UG institution, and you're set on going straight to PhD, then I would recommend enrolling at a local college in the sociology department and getting one. Take a couple of classes with one prof who interests you, develop a strong relationship, explain your goals, and get the LOR. It's also worth going back to your UG institution and meeting with some profs and seeing if any of them remember you. They have longer memories than we might expect. Remind them of a term paper you did with them, fill them in on current work and interests, have a few conversations with them to show them you know what you're getting yourself into.

[Supernovasky]

I had no idea the LORs had this much weight. I thought they might help you get in if your stats were otherwise not so good, but I had no idea that if your stats were good, your SOP and Writing sample were decent, but your LORs werent from the right sources, that could stop you from getting in.

I learned a WHOLE lot this application cycle. I feel like knowing what I do now, + a year in this new community organizing job, + studying for another round of the GRE and getting academic LOR writters, I could make it into a top 20. Its all about playing your cards right... and I played mine WRONG!

[jenjenjen]

Yeah I think it's good for anyone planning to apply for a PhD program in the future to realize the importance of letters of rec., especially having two or three good ones from faculty. One professor told me that the reason many graduate programs don't hold interviews is that the LOR essentially fulfills that role. It is an evaluation by a person who is familiar with what it takes to survive and excel in graduate school and academia, and ideally they know the applicant's history well enough to decisively say whether they are capable. The GREs are known to be flawed and a SOP can be bullshitted (or bought), so really it's your academic record in combination with your LOR that reveal your academic past, and your LOR with (some help from the SOP) that show your potential in the future.

EDIT: That kinda sounded like i was undercutting the importance of the SOP. I think it's also crucial, but in showing a little more about who you are as a person, and demonstrating your grasp of why you want to pursue a PhD in sociology, and at that particular school.

Edited February 16, 2012 by jenjenjen

[sociology27]

Everyone is saying that this is a subjective decision but I think one question can really tell you which way to lean... what do you want to do with your degree? There are a lot of great jobs out there for PhDs from lower ranked schools. BUT, if you're intent on being a professor at an R1 research university, I'd say take the year and take another shot at it. It seems like you can be a better applicant than you were this year. There's no shame in taking an extra year; in the long run, it means that you might do 44 years of sociology work instead of 45.

I'm not saying that it's impossible to come out of a lower (maybe under 50?) ranked school and be a professor. And I'm definitely not saying (like I've heard some people say, ridiculously) that if you don't go to a top ten school you're fucked. All you need to do is look at the websites of places like CUNY, Rutgers, USC (just some places I applied), UCSB, UCSD, etc. to see that if you produce you can still land professorships at great (not just good) schools. BUTTTT, going to a school pretty far down in the rankings list is just going to make it more difficult, significantly so. So if you can avoid it, I don't think you should put yourself in that position.

But like I said... if you want to be a research analyst or work for government or an NGO, I think LSU would definitely do the trick.

[Supernovasky]

Everyone is saying that this is a subjective decision but I think one question can really tell you which way to lean... what do you want to do with your degree? There are a lot of great jobs out there for PhDs from lower ranked schools. BUT, if you're intent on being a professor at an R1 research university, I'd say take the year and take another shot at it. It seems like you can be a better applicant than you were this year. There's no shame in taking an extra year; in the long run, it means that you might do 44 years of sociology work instead of 45.

I'm not saying that it's impossible to come out of a lower (maybe under 50?) ranked school and be a professor. And I'm definitely not saying (like I've heard some people say, ridiculously) that if you don't go to a top ten school you're fucked. All you need to do is look at the websites of places like CUNY, Rutgers, USC (just some places I applied), UCSB, UCSD, etc. to see that if you produce you can still land professorships at great (not just good) schools. BUTTTT, going to a school pretty far down in the rankings list is just going to make it more difficult, significantly so. So if you can avoid it, I don't think you should put yourself in that position.

But like I said... if you want to be a research analyst or work for government or an NGO, I think LSU would definitely do the trick.

I'm leaning more towards the beginning of your stuff than the end. I'll wait to see what happens though. Its a decision I'll have to think very carefully out.

[Darth.Vegan]

As far as lower ranked it depends, schools like Oregon, UCSC and The New School are all tied for #57 and I would say you would have a decent shot for tenure track job placement. Personally, I would like to find myself at a liberal arts college where you still conduct research regularly, but the emphasis is on teaching and community interaction. Plus I prefer the smaller class sizes.

[sociology27]

okay, the "top 50" was not meant to be a strict, objective classification (hence the question mark). I just mean that yes there of course is a difference in prestige between 25 and 75, duly or not. Beauty is in the eye of the hire-er, but it's not completely subjective.

And the R1 research university stuff, that's just what I want. That wasn't meant to mean "this is the highest thing one can possibly shoot for, oh ye noble research institutions how I exalt thee."

[giacomo]

can someone define "R1 research universities/institutions"?

[sociology27]

http://www.washington.edu/tools/universities94.html

[sociology27]

But the list changes/is longer than this list indicates. It just means that they award doctorates and receive a lot of government money for research.

[giacomo]

yeah, okay, i thought there was a definitive definition of it, so to speak

[sciencegirl]

@giacomo.. generally, R1 is thrown around to refer to a school that has both undergraduates and a graduate program, and has a decent reputation - oftentimes R1 is used to contrast a liberal arts college, which is more focused on teaching and generally only has undergrads. In R1s, your emphasis is on your research and not generally teaching, where teaching is the focus if you are at a liberal arts college.