Decisions about Programs

[RefurbedScientist]

Not to stir up a hornets' nest, but what about rank?

I'm choosing between a program in the ~25 area and a program in the ~5-10 range. The ~25 ranked program has world class, big name faculty in my subfield and decent resources. The top ~5/10 program is probably the best in the top tier for my subfield, but the faculty are just younger and less accomplished by comparison (still very accomplished in absolute terms, though). They're both public schools, so let's assume funding is equal.

Research fit is a tiny bit better represented at the lower ranked program than at the higher ranked program. Also the lower ranked program has famous faculty who are enthused about being advisors. The top ranked program also has great and enthusiastic advisors, but my research fit isn't quite as snug.

So feel free to respond either directly to my personal dilemma or share how you're weighing ranking in your own decisions.

[abc123xtc]

Not to stir up a hornets' nest, but what about rank?

I'm choosing between a program in the ~25 area and a program in the ~5-10 range. The ~25 ranked program has world class, big name faculty in my subfield and decent resources. The top ~5/10 program is probably the best in the top tier for my subfield, but the faculty are just younger and less accomplished by comparison (still very accomplished in absolute terms, though). They're both public schools, so let's assume funding is equal.

Research fit is a tiny bit better represented at the lower ranked program than at the higher ranked program. Also the lower ranked program has famous faculty who are enthused about being advisors. The top ranked program also has great and enthusiastic advisors, but my research fit isn't quite as snug.

So feel free to respond either directly to my personal dilemma or share how you're weighing ranking in your own decisions.

I would personally go with the better research fit, especially if the advisers are well-known in your field. However, rank isn't nearly as important to me, so I might be the wrong person to ask.

[RefurbedScientist]

I would personally go with the better research fit, especially if the advisers are well-known in your field. However, rank isn't nearly as important to me, so I might be the wrong person to ask.

I think it's a good suggestion. Rank, per se, also has little intrinsic value to me (i.e. rank for prestige's sake). However, I am concerned with job placement, particularly because I have a rather specific geographical outcome in mind for my career, and it's extremely difficult to simply choose where you want to live and work in academic. I would rather not have to follow a job, so I worry that program rank may be decisive in landing me job talks at schools in my cities of choice.

[Darth.Vegan]

I think it's a good suggestion. Rank, per se, also has little intrinsic value to me (i.e. rank for prestige's sake). However, I am concerned with job placement, particularly because I have a rather specific geographical outcome in mind for my career, and it's extremely difficult to simply choose where you want to live and work in academic. I would rather not have to follow a job, so I worry that program rank may be decisive in landing me job talks at schools in my cities of choice.

Well given the job market recently I am not sure you can be that picky regardless. I know plenty of people that graduated in the top 5 with amazing accolades from their departments and still had to take job offers where they could get them. It seems at this point prestige can help you get a tenure track job offer from an R1, but not much more than that. The job market is tough!

[RefurbedScientist]

Well given the job market recently I am not sure you can be that picky regardless. I know plenty of people that graduated in the top 5 with amazing accolades from their departments and still had to take job offers where they could get them. It seems at this point prestige can help you get a tenure track job offer from an R1, but not much more than that. The job market is tough!

So would you suggest that rank (and I mean rank as a proxy for reputation alone but nothing else, such as networks or resources) is moot in this job market? Or is it just that it's less influential, such that scarcity of jobs has an equalizing effect? I would speculate that, on the contrary, when jobs are scarce, reputation might become even more important a factor because, when positions open up, the competition is greater and departments have their choice. It's a buyer's market.

[Darth.Vegan]

So would you suggest that rank (and I mean rank as a proxy for reputation alone but nothing else, such as networks or resources) is moot in this job market? Or is it just that it's less influential, such that scarcity of jobs has an equalizing effect? I would speculate that, on the contrary, when jobs are scarce, reputation might become even more important a factor because, when positions open up, the competition is greater and departments have their choice. It's a buyer's market.

Oh I definitely think rank makes a difference, although I am not convinced that in the top 25 it really matters all that much. As the job market gets scarce it's going to be who you know, or better yet, who your advisors know. If there are more well known/connected advisors in a T25 program vs T10, one might want to consider the the T25.

[abc123xtc]

While rank does matter, the second school has great connections because those advisers are well known. IMO, you can't go wrong either way. However, in this situation, I would go with the T25 because the advisers are well known and sound like they've been in the field longer, so they could do wonders for your own research; they will also have connections that will prove beneficial to you later. Of course, it is up to you and what you think is most important.

[RefurbedScientist]

Oh I definitely think rank makes a difference, although I am not convinced that in the top 25 it really matters all that much. As the job market gets scarce it's going to be who you know, or better yet, who your advisors know. If there are more well known/connected advisors in a T25 program vs T10, one might want to consider the the T25.

True that.

[FertMigMort]

Not to stir up a hornets' nest, but what about rank?

I'm choosing between a program in the ~25 area and a program in the ~5-10 range. The ~25 ranked program has world class, big name faculty in my subfield and decent resources. The top ~5/10 program is probably the best in the top tier for my subfield, but the faculty are just younger and less accomplished by comparison (still very accomplished in absolute terms, though). They're both public schools, so let's assume funding is equal.

Research fit is a tiny bit better represented at the lower ranked program than at the higher ranked program. Also the lower ranked program has famous faculty who are enthused about being advisors. The top ranked program also has great and enthusiastic advisors, but my research fit isn't quite as snug.

So feel free to respond either directly to my personal dilemma or share how you're weighing ranking in your own decisions.

I think that rank is more important if you want an R1 job when you graduate. Rank is a rough proxy of networks and I know that people have mentioned before the articles showing that the top 20 schools are pretty inbred. Otherwise, probably pick the better fit where you have more potential people to work with.

[sciencegirl]

@social groovements.. have you visited the programs with the potential cohort? Do you know the sizes of the incoming classes? Actually met with the faculty and felt out the vibe of the programs?

I don't think this is emphasized enough actually.. I was recently on an admit visit at a top 5, and I bumped into another member of this forum.. and we had a really nice conversation about the importance of cohort..fellow students, and also the faculty.. we had both done visits to our own respective T 20/T30 programs that we are choosing between, and noticed that it wasn't about rank at all.. but that the higher ranked program we were at, had better resources and just felt like a stronger program (other graduate students, faculty, rigor of program/classes).

This is not to say that the T20/30 school is not great - but that in our own respective comparisons, between T5 and T30, we noticed a difference - small but perceptible - of strength. I think the way we go about thinking of rank here is kind of incorrect.. that we seem to just think that the rank is there "just because USNWR says so," without thinking of things such as why the ranking is there.. and I think that while the differences might not be extreme, they may be enough to sway you to the T5 simply because the quality of "something" is better.

Basically, you need to visit and feel out your fellow students and faculty and the programs itself. If you don't feel a difference, then disregrad the rankings. I'm a bit tired right now so I don't know if this message is as well written out as I should have made it.

[ohhello]

What about the quality of your cohort? I was recently visited a T30 and would say a good chunk of the accepted (perhaps half) could only narrow down their interests in sociology down to an area of sociology ("sociology of education," "economic sociology," etc.) While it would be absurd to expect all of the members of my cohort to have a specific, niche area in mind for dissertation research, I think I would like to work wih people who have already figured out they are passionate about something they could investigate. We would be able to talk about so much more! It was kind of awkward taking up more time during group discussions to talk about my own research interests. It'll be interesting to see if there are any differences in the cohorts of higher-ranked programs.

Also, it already appears that I will face difficulties in finding racially diverse cohorts no matter where I go in academia. The problem now lies in whether I will be able to find solidarity among the graduate students in the program or support from members of the faculty. I just don't want to become a box a faculty member can check when applying for research grants.

[abc123xtc]

While I am developing a niche for myself, I don't really think it's fair to expect others to do so (even if it would beneficial for them in the long run). There are so many issues that are important and need attention, and I don't think I could blame someone else for not having a niche of their own. Personally, while I love my niche and am very passionate about it, I think it would be unrealistic to expect me to stay in this niche for the rest of my life. I'm only 22, and my interests will change as I have more/different life experiences. I think that is natural.

[msafiri]

ohhello, have you considered the possibility that people weren't being that specific because it's a visit weekend and that's not what you're there for? I'm a fourth year PhD student and ABD so obviously my research is pretty specific. But, when people I ask, I tend to start with a general description and only get into more detail if the person really asks.

[Chuck]

ohhello, have you considered the possibility that people weren't being that specific because it's a visit weekend and that's not what you're there for? I'm a fourth year PhD student and ABD so obviously my research is pretty specific. But, when people I ask, I tend to start with a general description and only get into more detail if the person really asks.

I think that Msafiri is onto something here. The visit weekends that I've been on (both T5 and all the way down the line) have all been such whirlwinds of activity and logistical exhaustion that it's been difficult to try to meet everyone, much less have a detailed discussion about research background and interests. Given the time and effort required simply to participate in these events, I very rarely find myself in the position of wanting to have a nuts and bolts discussion about research.

That said, when there is significant overlap between my interests and that of another students, these conversations do happen organically. Some students are more prepared and "polished" in these conversations than others. I wonder if it's just a matter of interpersonal social skills? heh.

[chibuku]

What about the quality of your cohort? I was recently visited a T30 and would say a good chunk of the accepted (perhaps half) could only narrow down their interests in sociology down to an area of sociology ("sociology of education," "economic sociology," etc.) While it would be absurd to expect all of the members of my cohort to have a specific, niche area in mind for dissertation research, I think I would like to work wih people who have already figured out they are passionate about something they could investigate. We would be able to talk about so much more! It was kind of awkward taking up more time during group discussions to talk about my own research interests. It'll be interesting to see if there are any differences in the cohorts of higher-ranked programs.

Also, it already appears that I will face difficulties in finding racially diverse cohorts no matter where I go in academia. The problem now lies in whether I will be able to find solidarity among the graduate students in the program or support from members of the faculty. I just don't want to become a box a faculty member can check when applying for research grants.

Is this a big issue in Grad schools? While diversity is certainly important I would hesitate to use categories of 'race' to define people, and would be surprised if solidarity in academia was substantially influenced by such categories.

I'm not from a visible minority group though, and have only studied at very diverse universities in the UK and Canada so perhaps I'm ignorant and would be curious to hear more on the subject.

[FertMigMort]

ohhello, have you considered the possibility that people weren't being that specific because it's a visit weekend and that's not what you're there for? I'm a fourth year PhD student and ABD so obviously my research is pretty specific. But, when people I ask, I tend to start with a general description and only get into more detail if the person really asks.

I'm an advanced graduate student and I'd second this. Also, abc123xtc brings up the excellent point that interests change over time. I know that whatever I said at my recruitment weekend has COMPLETELY changed compared to what I'm doing now. While it's a good idea to have an idea of what you want to do, I wouldn't base any decisions on how specific my future cohortmates interests are.

Is this a big issue in Grad schools? While diversity is certainly important I would hesitate to use categories of 'race' to define people, and would be surprised if solidarity in academia was substantially influenced by such categories.

I'm not from a visible minority group though, and have only studied at very diverse universities in the UK and Canada so perhaps I'm ignorant and would be curious to hear more on the subject.

The short answer... yes. It's a bigger problem at some universities than others. In the U.S. professors are still overwhelmingly white males and many departments have few POC or women to help guide graduate students through the complexities of those intersections. I know that my department has been woefully inadequate in this area. I would be more upset if I'd thought that other programs I'd applied to would have been less deficient. My specialty area (demography) has something to do with that though.

[splitends]

In Ohhello's, defense...I feel like the issue being addressed here might not be the specificity of research interests per se, as much as it might be about what I imagine will be the touchy subject of the "quality" of the cohort at the schools you're considering. "Quality" is the word a professor used when giving me this advice, which I think he meant as a metric of how smart/interesting do you find your prospective cohort. I don't think this is necessarily an absolute measure, but I do think it's important to feel intellectually stimulated by your colleagues and/or supported in whatever arenas you value.

Of course, I'm totally reading into the original comment, and this might not be what Ohhello meant at all. But I do see how specificity of research interests coming into the program could be (though isn't necessarily) a proxy for how familiar students are with the field of Sociology in general, or how serious they have been as students (especially if they're not coming from another discipline), which could be a proxy for "quality". This might not matter in the long run as you'd all end up with similar training, but I think it's totally reasonable to be concerned about feeling like a big fish in a small pond while others play catchup. In more general (and maybe slightly less arrogant sounding) terms, I think it's reasonable to be concerned if you feel like you're not intellectually or otherwise on the same page with your cohort, whatever that might mean.

[msafiri]

Is this a big issue in Grad schools? While diversity is certainly important I would hesitate to use categories of 'race' to define people, and would be surprised if solidarity in academia was substantially influenced by such categories.

Yes, it's definitely an issue. Often, when departments talk about diversity, they are only referring to the balance between the number of male and female graduate students. The faculty are overwhelming white, male, and from middle class or higher backgrounds. They do not understand the struggles that minority graduate students face (for example, teaching and lower evals or networking at conferences), have no experience helping said students apply for diversity-related fellowships and grants (and may even dissuade one from doing so!), and, in some cases, are not even aware that such issues exist. It can be a problem, to say the least.

[socscholar]

Does anyone else feel incapable of making a final decision?

[Chuck]

Does anyone else feel incapable of making a final decision?

Yes! I am almost paralyzed with indecision. I know that each of my remaining options is most certainly going to take me in significantly different research directions. There is certainly no one clear best option. Just different paths which I know will lead to quite different careers down the line. Sigh.

[socscholar]

Yes! I am almost paralyzed with indecision. I know that each of my remaining options is most certainly going to take me in significantly different research directions. There is certainly no one clear best option. Just different paths which I know will lead to quite different careers down the line. Sigh.

Exactly!

I know I'm in a lucky place. Both choices are great. But one is an apple, the other is an orange. Only problem is, I don't know if I want to end up like an apple pie or an orange smoothie..

shitty metaphor, but you know what I mean.

[RefurbedScientist]

Does anyone else feel incapable of making a final decision?

Yes! I am almost paralyzed with indecision. I know that each of my remaining options is most certainly going to take me in significantly different research directions. There is certainly no one clear best option. Just different paths which I know will lead to quite different careers down the line. Sigh.

I am in the same position as you two. The two programs I'm choosing between could not be more disimilar. One is urban, the other is rural. One is heavy quant, the other is heavy qual. One is super strong in my subfield, the other appeals to more of a diversity of my interests. One is a "sure thing" top 5 program, the other is a top 15 (OK, I recognize that I can't really go wrong here with "ranking").

What to do!

Would anyone be interested in either starting a thread or exchanging some PMs about weighing programs against each other? We could all post the two or three top choices in question and debate their merits. This has the risk of making posters' identities known, but we can try to be as discreet as possible.

[ohhello]

ohhello, have you considered the possibility that people weren't being that specific because it's a visit weekend and that's not what you're there for? I'm a fourth year PhD student and ABD so obviously my research is pretty specific. But, when people I ask, I tend to start with a general description and only get into more detail if the person really asks.

Like splitends explained, the cohort "quality" is what I was attempting to refer to. This is something that I've been going to visiting days to figure out. I don't want to go to a program where I'm not excited about the work of my cohortmates, where I can't gain or give any intellectual stimulation from or to my peers. I realize that that academia has been characterized as a "lonely" pursuit and that most of our tenure during graduate school will be spent alone. However, I think it's foolish to go to a program solely based on the research interests of your advisor(s). One of my letter writers regretted doing this-- the only saving grace of her program was that she could bounce off and share ideas with her cohortmates. I want to be able to work with or co-author papers with the people in my cohort not because networking and publishing are important aspects of a Professional Development Plan, but because I think ideas are incredibly powerful when shared and reinterpreted and reconstituted.

Warning signs show up for me when students say they never co-author papers with their peers, or when graduate students don't talk about their work "outside" of work. I know people are stressed and mentally drained and vulnerable from experiencing impostor syndrome during these visitation days. But if I can't figure out a baseline of why you're interested in graduate school after much conversational probing, I start to question the motives of the admission committee. Did they look for people with shiny GREs/GPAs/accolades? Do they think the SOP matters? Are they only looking for people who have the skill sets and backgrounds to win them funding or space in AJS/ASR/mainstream sociology? To completely ignore or gloss over the other stressed individuals sitting beside you at these visitation events would result in a thin interpretation of a program.

[msafiri]

ohhello, I'm going to give you three pieces of anecdata from my own experience which you are, of course, free to ignore. The first is that the people I turn to for advice/support academically are not my cohortmates primarily because they're in the same place I am and thus not really in a position to offer me helpful advice. Number 2, I haven't and won't co-author with the others in my program because, at least right now, there aren't enough similarities in what we're working on for any of us to do with without putting aside our own dissertation research. While this is definitely not true for everyone in my program, it is true for at least half of us, if not more. Third, you don't really know what you're getting when you meet people at a visitation weekend. Personally, I don't pay much attention to those visiting or give them very much of my time. They get that if they show up on campus in August, not by visiting in March or April. I doubt I'm a very good representative of my department then but that's because I'm usually wrapped up in my own stuff and trying to find 30 minutes to spare to potentially waste on someone that I'll never even see again. I realize this sounds rude but it's true and becomes even more true the more visiting weekends you have to suffer through.

Two more points and then I've gotta go do some work.

1) When I was visiting programs, I was not at all concerned with impressing the other people visiting. If you don't know why I want to go to graduate school and you want to, that's your problem, not mine.

2) All cohorts will have their superstars, the majority of the folks in the middle, and a few people that struggle and/or eventually drop out, for whatever reason. If departments could predict who those students would be in advance, admissions would certainly be different than they are. You get what you get, in a lot of ways. Not every student at Harvard is a superstar, you know? And, sometimes the people that you would least expect to be successful are. I was a solid "middle of the pack" grad student my first few years, then I steadily started writing successful grants to fund my research and ended up with better funding than anyone else in my cohort. I can assure you that no one, not the adcom, not my advisor, and certainly not me, would've guessed that would happen 4 years ago when I decided to enroll.

[sociologygradgirl]

Still haven't made a decision... This sucks... My mind might cave in... and I have to present at NCSA and defend my thesis right when a decision is due... ugghhhhhhhhhh