The role of "individual effort"

[That_One]

We all know that the quality of placement (and where one ends up as a tenured professor) is a function of several variables with different weights. For instance, we all know that the reputation or rank of the degree-granting institution plays a great role. I am wondering, however, how far "individual effort" can take somebody coming from a relatively lower ranked university. Can you guys cite anyone who obtained their PhD from a relatively lower ranked university and are currently a faculty at a reputable institution regardless of their initial placement?

I look forward to the discussion!

[hoobers]

I don't know if Top 15 to Top 3 is a big enough jump, but Rob Willer, who is the young star at Berkeley, got his degree at Cornell three years ago.

I wonder if, in addition to the stellar names on the CV and the benefit of being more selective at admissions, the top schools are also able to provide social and cultural capital in ways that lower ranked schools cannot.

[coqui21]

There are probably a number of examples where this is the case. Though, I'm not sure I would necessarily call it 'individual effort.' There are likely a VERY LARGE number of people who have put forth a great deal of 'individual effort' but have not been able to climb the academic ladder. There are a multitude of possible factors that one should think about before chalking it up solely to individual effort. (We're sociologists, remember? )

With that said, William Julius Wilson is a great example of someone who earned their PhD at a much less prestigious school than they presently work at.

[misterpat]

I don't know if Top 15 to Top 3 is a big enough jump, but Rob Willer, who is the young star at Berkeley, got his degree at Cornell three years ago.

I wonder if, in addition to the stellar names on the CV and the benefit of being more selective at admissions, the top schools are also able to provide social and cultural capital in ways that lower ranked schools cannot.

Rob Willer is the man. I've never met him, but he's very nice in e-mails and even sent me one of his articles that was in the process of being published because I expressed interest in the topic.

[misterpat]

We all know that the quality of placement (and where one ends up as a tenured professor) is a function of several variables with different weights. For instance, we all know that the reputation or rank of the degree-granting institution plays a great role. I am wondering, however, how far "individual effort" can take somebody coming from a relatively lower ranked university. Can you guys cite anyone who obtained their PhD from a relatively lower ranked university and are currently a faculty at a reputable institution regardless of their initial placement?

I look forward to the discussion!

Some cutoffs for "relatively lower" and "reputable" might make this a bit easier.

But I feel like there is usually one or two people in most departments who has their PhD from a program outside the top 20. For instance, Stanford has Douglas McAdam (Stony Brook), Gi-Wook Shin (Washington), and Nancy Tuma (Michigan State).

[waitinginohio]

Stanford has Douglas McAdam (Stony Brook), Gi-Wook Shin (Washington), and Nancy Tuma (Michigan State).

Yeah, and their current rankings from US News and World reports are Stony Brook - 38, Washington - 17, Michigan State - 42. Granted I don't know what the rankings of these schools were when these Prof's were there, but the UW is currently in the top 20, and the other two certainly aren't unknown.

[migrationdude]

I'm in a similar situation right now. I just got an offer to work with a very reputed professor in my sub-field; the only problem is he's at a lesser-ranked institution. Except for the rankings, everything would be great about this option, but I am wondering if I wouldn't be giving up better career opportunities at a top school.

[hoobers]

Another thing I wonder is just what percent of the Sociology PhDs come from the top 10 schools? Since the top 10 includes the biggest schools (Berkeley, Wisconsin and Michigan), and since there's only about 60-70 programs total with some of the smaller depts being truly tiny, I wouldn't be surprised if 20-25% of all PhDs came from the Top 10. This, of course, is just speculation -- but has anyone seen any data on this?

[misterpat]

Yeah, and their current rankings from US News and World reports are Stony Brook - 38, Washington - 17, Michigan State - 42. Granted I don't know what the rankings of these schools were when these Prof's were there, but the UW is currently in the top 20, and the other two certainly aren't unknown.

Hence my confusion about cut-offs for "relatively lower" and "reputable."

I was wrong about UW's rank, and I wasn't knocking the reputations of SB or MSU. But jumping from 40ish to a top 10 is probably bigger news than going from Cornell to Berkeley, as mentioned above.

[misterpat]

Another thing I wonder is just what percent of the Sociology PhDs come from the top 10 schools? Since the top 10 includes the biggest schools (Berkeley, Wisconsin and Michigan), and since there's only about 60-70 programs total with some of the smaller depts being truly tiny, I wouldn't be surprised if 20-25% of all PhDs came from the Top 10. This, of course, is just speculation -- but has anyone seen any data on this?

One would think it has to exist, somewhere.

[waitinginohio]

It's interesting how much emphasis we're all putting on numbers and rankings - I would have guessed that as soc students we would understand how much more is involved than just the ranking of the school you get your PhD from. Another thing to keep in mind is that just because a scholar went to a lesser-ranked school, it doesn't mean they weren't accepted to others with higher rankings, it just means that for whatever reason (being close to family, preserving a relationship, school fit, advisor fit, closer to research site, etc.) they chose that school.

I'm in a similar situation right now. I just got an offer to work with a very reputed professor in my sub-field; the only problem is he's at a lesser-ranked institution. Except for the rankings, everything would be great about this option, but I am wondering if I wouldn't be giving up better career opportunities at a top school.

Did you apply to any schools that aren't in the top 25ish? If you and others in the field know that this guy is top-notch, I would assume that they will be impressed by his name even if the school isn't #1. (And once again, even though he could work at a higher-ranked school, there are likely personal reasons for why he is where he is.) You could also search for the placements and publications of his former students...

[chillinlikeavillain]

An important thing to note is that the "rankings" (such as the ones in US World and News Report) are aggregate rankings of departments...when you get into areas of specialization the rankings change significantly. For example, one institution in the top 5 or 10 might not be one of the best departments for the area you are interested in studying. From speaking with professors, reputation matters most in a more specific way...when you are trying to get a job you want to have worked with professors in your FIELD that are producing top-notch research. If you are just in a highly ranked department that is not known for producing good scholarship in your field, it doesn't hold as much weight. Who you work with matters.

[Tritonetelephone]

Another thing to keep in mind is that just because a scholar went to a lesser-ranked school, it doesn't mean they weren't accepted to others with higher rankings, it just means that for whatever reason (being close to family, preserving a relationship, school fit, advisor fit, closer to research site, etc.) they chose that school.

Yes!

when you get into areas of specialization the rankings change significantly. For example, one institution in the top 5 or 10 might not be one of the best departments for the area you are interested in studying.

And Yes!! My favorite example: FSU is #42 for soc in general but #10 for sex/gender.

I'm glad those have been mentioned already. I'll also add that (I've been told) it actually works both ways: lower-ranked institutions are also often hesitant to hire PhD's from very prestigious universities. They think you'll get bored or won't be a good fit (or maybe become irritated with their students?). I wouldn't have thought that would be the case, but it makes sense if you think about it. This info is coming from my recent-Stanford-grad prof after I said "well, you went to Stanford, so I'm sure you had no problem finding a TT position."

Also, as far as individual effort goes, I think a LOT of it has to do with publications (another easy, quantitative assessment... and we thought the GRE was rough). Another of my profs gave me the example of a (degree from their university) + (3 publications) = (a degree a top 15) + (0 publications), in the job market. After all, number of publications have a lot of do with school ranking and salary once in a faculty position, no?

[migrationdude]

I am getting more and more enthusiastic about this seemingly amazing little department, which seems extremely up-and-coming. It feels like they would give me a lot of research opportunities which may be unavailable elsewhere, including a chance to work closely with two very reputed scholars in two fields I want to pursue in grad school (race & ethnicity, and social networks). I will be visiting next week, but was wondering if anyone else has any thoughts or (for those who are already grads) has faced a similar dilemma.

[slothy]

I am getting more and more enthusiastic about this seemingly amazing little department.

Just out of curiousity would this department happen to be Duke (since it looks like you didn't mention it by name)? If so, could you PM me if you don't want to post a public reply?

[ejuliast]

I am getting more and more enthusiastic about this seemingly amazing little department, which seems extremely up-and-coming. It feels like they would give me a lot of research opportunities which may be unavailable elsewhere, including a chance to work closely with two very reputed scholars in two fields I want to pursue in grad school (race & ethnicity, and social networks). I will be visiting next week, but was wondering if anyone else has any thoughts or (for those who are already grads) has faced a similar dilemma.

This is a good point. Will that situation ultimately put you in a better position for the job market? Or will a better name/rank lead to more opportunities? I'm debating the same thing.

[socion]

It is a tough trade-off... Personally, I would hate to be in a position where I go to a relatively less prestigious department dependent on a handful of stars; if I do not get along with them, then I would be in a tough spot. Of course, if you end up striking a productive relationship, then it could be wonderful in helping your placements. I guess the campus visit would be crucial in gauging the kind of environment fostered by the department and knowing more about the individual faculty members.

[misterpat]

Just out of curiousity would this department happen to be Duke (since it looks like you didn't mention it by name)? If so, could you PM me if you don't want to post a public reply?

I assumed it was Duke, too, for some reason.