Who Wants To Bet On Acceptances/Rejections?

[dazedandbemused]

I see what you're saying by disputing that "pedigree matters" and I think we could have a better word for it than "pedigree" which connotes a million different class biases, but, honestly, you're being dismissive to a major socioeconomic issue in our culture. A lot of us on here don't come from a "pedigree" and we are continuously reminded that it does, indeed, matter in the long run. And it's not just the name of the school that does it -- it's the entire culture and environment for fostering learning that differs. I totally dig that you're trying to be the opposite of people like don'thate by being optimistic and pc about the whole thing but, really, it does matter. The same way that coming from a family with money is better than being from a family with no money, that being a man is better than being a woman, being white is better than being black, being straight is better than being gay, etc. etc. etc. throughout all of history ever. It's getting better, definitely, but it's certainly not over. Walk into any top ranking law school in the country and see how many of those kids come from a background where their parents made less than AT LEAST (and I mean AT LEAST) 100 grand a year. There will be one or two who get in through hard work, affirmative action, and it makes the school look good to take one or two kids from "nowhere" but, mostly, it's kids from private, ivy or ivy-ish schools who came from prep schools who came from families that supported their educations, gave them the resources needed, they didn't need to work a side job, etc. etc. So it's not as simple to say that "ranking" matters (I changed to "ranking" because it's less offensive than pedigree) because the socioeconomic culture of our country isn't that simple. We like to think that those who work the hardest get what they deserve, but it doesn't exactly work that way -- Horatio Alger was wrong. So yes, ranking matters because ranking as ALWAYS mattered and will continue to matter. 

 

And on another note, there are various reasons why someone would pursue an MA in English that doesn't lead to a Ph.D. It's totally fine to ask what someone plans to do, but condensation is suggested when we ask, "Well what you expect to do with that degree?" Of course, we cannot read tone through the internet, and assuming intention doesn't get anyone anywhere, but it does connote condensation. I got my MA from a school that only offers MA's in English, and out of 20-something of my graduating class, only two of us applied for PhD's. The rest are secondary education, special education, technical writing, private school education, want to go into non-profits, blowing time before getting a real job, just wanted to read a little before they had to get a "real" job, etc. etc. Not everyone enters into higher ed with the end goal of a PhD and teaching -- some do it for varying reasons. I even went to school with one guy who wanted to go into environmental protection stuff, and said that getting ahead in those nonprofits depends on your level of degree and not what it's actually in so having an MA in English would get him a good job starting out in the field. 

 

Eh, I don't know if I was being PC so much as making myself feel better about my chances. My undergraduate degree isn't from a school with a pedigree because of religious considerations, and as someone without an MA who is hoping to go straight to PhD I know that my chances are seriously slim. So while I think that in many ways, you're correct about pedigree, I'm more likely to attribute it to circumstances like what proflorax describes than purely because of the pretty name in the flowery font on your diploma. Maybe it is overly optimistic, but it is what it is.

 

Again, I'm not judging anyone's undergraduate degree; I was speaking specifically to where you get your PhD and how that would affect job prospects. I certainly wasn't trying to rain on beet-nik's choices; I was legitimately curious about her career path.

 

of course. I was trying to get people to calm down, since it seemed that the arguments were getting heated. But apparently being angry produces endorphins so I shall leave people to their kicks.

 

I'm surprised you felt this way; out of all the arguments that I've witnessed/joined on here this season, this one seemed as far from angry as you can get without being high.

[bfat]

My undergraduate degree isn't from a school with a pedigree because of religious considerations...

 

 

I don't mean to pry, and feel free to ignore my question, but could you elaborate? I don't mean "tell me about your religion," I'm just curious about religious connections to universites. There are some prestigious universities with religious affiliations (Notre Dame) but then there are schools like Bob Jones "University."

 

Just curious!

[rems]

I think the issue with these discussions is we keep separating concepts of "what you do while you're in school" and "ranking." We all seem to assume that people in the ivies are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses whereas us on the bottom shelf are producing amazing work and no one is paying attention. Now, before everyone says that you can create amazing work anywhere (which is true), we have to stop seeing these ideas as separate and look at the climate and culture of where you get your degree. Higher ranking schools have better resources, funding, profs, money, fostering climates, etc. etc. etc. If you have your undergrad from MIT, you probably have top-notch training in some science or math thing. This isn't saying that people who attend schools that are less prestigious as MIT AREN'T good students, AREN'T smart enough, or AREN'T prepared enough to attend a top ten program. The problem is that SO ARE the kids from MIT, and they have a degree from MIT. 

 

Not every student at a top ranking school is going to produce great work, and if their application isn't strong enough for them to get into school ANYWAY the ranking of their program probably won't matter much. The issue is that those kids who are qualified for admissions from a top ranking school are qualified AND they have a degree from a top ranking school. This isn't an A, B, or C issue, it's a bigger picture issue. So it's not JUST a flowery name at the top of the diploma, it's what that flowery name ADDS regarding an applicant's profile. 

[DontHate]

I think the issue with these discussions is we keep separating concepts of "what you do while you're in school" and "ranking." We all seem to assume that people in the ivies are sitting around with their thumbs up their asses whereas us on the bottom shelf are producing amazing work and no one is paying attention. Now, before everyone says that you can create amazing work anywhere (which is true), we have to stop seeing these ideas as separate and look at the climate and culture of where you get your degree. Higher ranking schools have better resources, funding, profs, money, fostering climates, etc. etc. etc. If you have your undergrad from MIT, you probably have top-notch training in some science or math thing. This isn't saying that people who attend schools that are less prestigious as MIT AREN'T good students, AREN'T smart enough, or AREN'T prepared enough to attend a top ten program. The problem is that SO ARE the kids from MIT, and they have a degree from MIT. 

 

Not every student at a top ranking school is going to produce great work, and if their application isn't strong enough for them to get into school ANYWAY the ranking of their program probably won't matter much. The issue is that those kids who are qualified for admissions from a top ranking school are qualified AND they have a degree from a top ranking school. This isn't an A, B, or C issue, it's a bigger picture issue. So it's not JUST a flowery name at the top of the diploma, it's what that flowery name ADDS regarding an applicant's profile. 

 

I think the issue is that people are so resentful of what they see as the "unfair advantages" that big name schools give just by being on a person's CV that they overcompensate in these sorts of discussions by belittling aforementioned big name schools. The fact is, these schools are famous for a reason: they are excellent schools. Not every student at Harvard is a genius, but Harvard has a very strong English department. Once you see through the silly mystique of brand names (which belittling only serves to INCREASE, because it further distances whoever is speaking from the reality of these schools), you can accurately speak to the advantages and disadvantages of particular programs in the upper echelon without sounding like an insecure jackass.

 

I'd also like to add that, in order to make it in this esoteric career, you will have to make sacrifices. People without a ton of money will have to make more sacrifices than rich people (but isn't that always the case?) -- as in they will have to take out big loans, and work part-time jobs while they study, in order to afford the education that will pave their way to fellowships and job opportunities down the road. I personally chose to take out a great big loan in order to attend a top MA program. I made that choice because I want so badly to be a professor, and I know this will help me get there. I don't care about money and debt as much as getting into this profession, so I'm willing to work this loan off later and be poorer while doing what I love most. If you choose to go to a less-recognized school because of financial concerns, that is a perfectly valid choice, but it has consequences for your future just like taking out a loan would have.

 

That's all I have to say about that. 

[bfat]

Rems:

 

I agree completely. I think what is really the nugget of what is behind some of the frustration that has come out on this thread is the same as what causes so much frustration in the culture as a whole: the illusion of social mobility (and confronting its illusory nature). There is a sense that education is the one place where merit really can move you upward, but unfortunately this really isn't the case for a lot of people, and coming to a point where you have to accept this realization is incredibly difficult. For me, it's been one of the most difficult struggles of my life. I don't want it to be true, and I think that's the case for a lot of people here. My first semester in college, I thought that my perfect grades and the fact that I was admitted to my dream school and did so well meant that I deserved that brand-name degree, but I couldn't pay, and they kicked me out without so much as a "sorry to see you go." And now, I really really hope that my applications will get the same consideration as someone from a more prestigious university, but the hard naked truth is that they probably won't, and that hurts.

 

ETA:

 

DontHate: the problem is that it is not always a choice. Sometimes there are no other options but to go to the less-prestigious school. Also, I don't think anyone has bashed any ivies in this thread.

Edited January 8, 2013 by bfat

[rems]

I think the issue is that people are so resentful of what they see as the "unfair advantages" that big name schools give just by being on a person's CV that they overcompensate in these sorts of discussions by belittling aforementioned big name schools. The fact is, these schools are famous for a reason: they are excellent schools. Not every student at Harvard is a genius, but Harvard has a very strong English department. Once you see through the silly mystique of brand names (which belittling only serves to INCREASE, because it further distances whoever is speaking from the reality of these schools), you can accurately speak to the advantages and disadvantages of particular programs in the upper echelon without sounding like an insecure jackass.

 

I'd also like to add that, in order to make it in this esoteric career, you will have to make sacrifices. People without a ton of money will have to make more sacrifices than rich people (but isn't that always the case?) -- as in they will have to take out big loans, and work part-time jobs while they study, in order to afford the education that will pave their way to fellowships and job opportunities down the road. I personally chose to take out a great big loan in order to attend a top MA program. I made that choice because I want so badly to be a professor, and I know this will help me get there. I don't care about money and debt as much as getting into this profession, so I'm willing to work this loan off later and be poorer while doing what I love most. If you choose to go to a less-recognized school because of financial concerns, that is a perfectly valid choice, but it has consequences for your future just like taking out a loan would have.

 

That's all I have to say about that. 

 

Wait, are you saying that I sound like an insecure jackass or are you supporting what I wrote? Because I think we said pretty much the same thing I'm just confused on "who" you're referring to. 

[DontHate]

Wait, are you saying that I sound like an insecure jackass or are you supporting what I wrote? Because I think we said pretty much the same thing I'm just confused on "who" you're referring to. 

 

I was agreeing with you. Insecure jackass, to me, is someone who spends all their breath talking about how bad the work coming out of X program is and how they would never want to go there in a million years, when secretly they just know they would never get into X. It's a straw man person, not anyone on this thread.

 

Bfat: of course, people don't always have the choice to go to the best schools. They don't always get into the best schools. If you are truly poor and get into an Ivy, they award scholarships. But not everyone is able to do that. Of course, people also don't always have the choice to be what they want to be. And it often is beyond their control -- due to the injustices of class, race, all sorts of discrimination, unplanned family mishaps, etc. I'm specifically talking about the things we CAN control. I don't see the point of talking about what we can't control. We try our best, but the best laid plans of mice and men...

Edited January 8, 2013 by DontHate

[ProfLorax]

Speaking of factors we can't control in pursuing selective careers... have any of you seen the 1994 documentary Hoop Dreams? I'm a little late to the party, but I just watched it for the first time yesterday. The film follows two basketball prodigies in their high school years. Both young men are infused with raw talent, but racism, classism, a lack of connections, family issues, injuries, and the like continue to interfere with their dream on reaching the NBA. It's streaming on Netflix right now. I particularly recommend the documentary to fans of Friday Night Lights; it has a lot of the same plotlines, except the students play basketball and the pitfalls are more heartbreaking because they really happened. 

 

I do think the larger question of what societal forces can help or hinder our trajectory in academia is an important question to ask. It may not be the most helpful question for a bunch of anxious PhD applicants to ask while they await decisions, but the question is certainly worth examining-- especially once we find ourselves in positions of power as tenured professors at a university. 

Edited January 8, 2013 by proflorax

[Two Espressos]

Ok, now onto "pedigree" and ranking. There seems to be two discussions: the ranking of the BA/MA program for PhD applicants and the ranking of the PhD program for job searchers. We are all agreed that it absolutely matters where we get our PhD's for the job search. However, I do firmly believe that the source of our BA/MA degree is not as important in PhD applications as what we do while we are enrolled in our BA and/or MA programs. Of course, I'm sure it helps if an applicant has a degree with a pretty name stamped on the top-- name recognition and prestigious connections are invaluable in academia. But while an Ivy league undergrad degree may get someone in, I don't know if a public, state school degree will keep a qualified student out. I went to a California State University for my MA, and a bunch of us worked our butts off to present at conferences, publish our own journal, volunteer with professional organizations, and the like. From my cohort, students went to Northwestern, University of Arizona, Brandeis, USC, UC Davis, University of Illinois--Urbana-Champaign, and UC Berkeley. No Ivies, but still top schools in their fields. So, I believe it is possible to come from a "no name" program and do well within the world of PhD applications. 

 

From what I've heard, read, and seen on grad program websites, I'd lay this out as a general rule of thumb: M.A. ranking matters less than B.A. ranking, which matters less than Ph.D. ranking.  Where you get your Ph.D. is vital on the job market, despite what some people would like to believe.  I think we're all in accord on this point.

 

It's limited and anecdotal, but I've seen more people from non-prestigious M.A. programs in strong Ph.D. programs than people strictly with B.A.'s from non-prestigious programs.  There are several reasons why this might be the case.

 

Really though, I think we're pretty much all agreeing with each other here.

 

At the risk of inciting another argument, I was wondering if anyone had any insights regarding my current concern:

 

Will a 162 V (158Q/5AW) keep me "out"? I have a BA from Rutgers with a 4.0 GPA.

 

Note, I had planned on retaking the GRE, but geographic conflict (they relocated my testing center two hours away) prevented that from happening.

 

Schools to which I applied: Duke, Chapel Hill, Vanderbilt, Columbia, Penn, Maryland, Brown.

 

Your verbal score is low for an English Ph.D. applicant, but your GPA is great and from a strong program, so I think you'll be competitive.

 

I think the issue is that people are so resentful of what they see as the "unfair advantages" that big name schools give just by being on a person's CV that they overcompensate in these sorts of discussions by belittling aforementioned big name schools. The fact is, these schools are famous for a reason: they are excellent schools.

I was agreeing with you. Insecure jackass, to me, is someone who spends all their breath talking about how bad the work coming out of X program is and how they would never want to go there in a million years, when secretly they just know they would never get into X. It's a straw man person, not anyone on this thread.

 

This.

Edited January 8, 2013 by Two Espressos

[ProfLorax]

It's limited and anecdotal, but I've seen more people from non-prestigious M.A. programs in strong Ph.D. programs than people strictly with a B.A. from non-prestigious programs.  There are several reasons why this might be the case.

This has been my experience as well. Many of these non-prestigious universities, especially public schools, are under pressure from administrators and politicians to refocus on "job training." In English departments, this means more TESOL and technical writing classes, and fewer resources on preparing students for an academic career. This line of thinking hurts undergraduate students who want to continue in their humanities education-- and really, the other students as well, because everyone could benefit from a world class humanities education. 

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

Don't mind me- just coming in to make some noise.



 

[rems]

I was agreeing with you. Insecure jackass, to me, is someone who spends all their breath talking about how bad the work coming out of X program is and how they would never want to go there in a million years, when secretly they just know they would never get into X. It's a straw man person, not anyone on this thread.

 

Bfat: of course, people don't always have the choice to go to the best schools. They don't always get into the best schools. If you are truly poor and get into an Ivy, they award scholarships. But not everyone is able to do that. Of course, people also don't always have the choice to be what they want to be. And it often is beyond their control -- due to the injustices of class, race, all sorts of discrimination, unplanned family mishaps, etc. I'm specifically talking about the things we CAN control. I don't see the point of talking about what we can't control. We try our best, but the best laid plans of mice and men...

 

Haha word. 

[Porridge]

I think this conversation needs come from a place of open mindedness. Language matters. I am not an American. "Pedigree" is a rather insulting term in my country. Others have clarified what it implies in American English. I understand now the context in which it was meant.

[BookGeek]

I see what you're saying by disputing that "pedigree matters" and I think we could have a better word for it than "pedigree" which connotes a million different class biases, but, honestly, you're being dismissive to a major socioeconomic issue in our culture. A lot of us on here don't come from a "pedigree" and we are continuously reminded that it does, indeed, matter in the long run. And it's not just the name of the school that does it -- it's the entire culture and environment for fostering learning that differs. I totally dig that you're trying to be the opposite of people like don'thate by being optimistic and pc about the whole thing but, really, it does matter. The same way that coming from a family with money is better than being from a family with no money, that being a man is better than being a woman, being white is better than being black, being straight is better than being gay, etc. etc. etc. throughout all of history ever. It's getting better, definitely, but it's certainly not over. Walk into any top ranking law school in the country and see how many of those kids come from a background where their parents made less than AT LEAST (and I mean AT LEAST) 100 grand a year. There will be one or two who get in through hard work, affirmative action, and it makes the school look good to take one or two kids from "nowhere" but, mostly, it's kids from private, ivy or ivy-ish schools who came from prep schools who came from families that supported their educations, gave them the resources needed, they didn't need to work a side job, etc. etc. So it's not as simple to say that "ranking" matters (I changed to "ranking" because it's less offensive than pedigree) because the socioeconomic culture of our country isn't that simple. We like to think that those who work the hardest get what they deserve, but it doesn't exactly work that way -- Horatio Alger was wrong. So yes, ranking matters because ranking as ALWAYS mattered and will continue to matter. 

 

And on another note, there are various reasons why someone would pursue an MA in English that doesn't lead to a Ph.D. It's totally fine to ask what someone plans to do, but condensation is suggested when we ask, "Well what you expect to do with that degree?" Of course, we cannot read tone through the internet, and assuming intention doesn't get anyone anywhere, but it does connote condensation. I got my MA from a school that only offers MA's in English, and out of 20-something of my graduating class, only two of us applied for PhD's. The rest are secondary education, special education, technical writing, private school education, want to go into non-profits, blowing time before getting a real job, just wanted to read a little before they had to get a "real" job, etc. etc. Not everyone enters into higher ed with the end goal of a PhD and teaching -- some do it for varying reasons. I even went to school with one guy who wanted to go into environmental protection stuff, and said that getting ahead in those nonprofits depends on your level of degree and not what it's actually in so having an MA in English would get him a good job starting out in the field. 

 

Well said. I think you pretty much summed up how I was feeling and gave a great response. I agree (obviously) with what has been said (repeatedly) about school/class/whathaveyou affecting job choice & PhD acceptances. I admit it is a question our generation needs to keep raising. My concern was more with the perceived tone, which I'm willing to accept was unintentional. Mostly, I think we're all just anxious about our acceptances, which aren't guaranteed no matter what Ivy/backwater/foreign school any of us attended & asking each other whether or not we think we'll get in is really just a way for us to hear what we expect to anyways, good or bad. 

[asleepawake]

For the morbid, here's an outdated list of average GRE scores (verbal only, old format) of admitted students. It helps to remember averages mean a number of students have lower (and of course, higher) scores, so there's really no purpose to this list besides make you better worse/better/whatever.

Edited January 9, 2013 by asleepawake

[practical cat]

For the morbid, here's an outdated list of average GRE scores (verbal only, old format) of admitted students. It helps to remember averages mean a number of students have lower (and of course, higher) scores, so there's really no purpose to this list besides make you better worse/better/whatever.

Dear god, Harvard. They know that's above 99%tile, right?

[dazedandbemused]

On 1/8/2013 at 1:35 PM, bfat said:

I don't mean to pry, and feel free to ignore my question, but could you elaborate? I don't mean "tell me about your religion," I'm just curious about religious connections to universites. There are some prestigious universities with religious affiliations (Notre Dame) but then there are schools like Bob Jones "University."

 

Just curious!

 

Not prying at all! I come from a religion that has an extensive international educational system that makes it very easy to spend your entire academic life, from kindergarten to PhD inside of that system. I think it's only second to the Catholic system in scope (and no, it's not  Mormon). My university managed to crack the top 200; not prestigious, but in the grand scheme of America's thousands of colleges/universities it's nothing to to ridicule. It's small, but we do have MA programs in almost every discipline, and even about 20 PhDs.

[Datatape]

 Basically, better than your average "Bob Jones University."

 

Well, I suppose it is just a penny off everybody's policy...

[dazedandbemused]

Well, I suppose it is just a penny off everybody's policy...

 

Erm.. I don't get it. Insurance joke?

[Datatape]

Hee.  No, just a reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ladykillers_(2004_film)'>the worst Coen brothers film of all time.

[dazedandbemused]

Hee.  No, just a reference to the worst Coen brothers film of all time.

Ah. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?) not a film that I've ever seen.

[Deadinthewater]

Dear god, Harvard. They know that's above 99%tile, right?

How heavily does AW weigh alongside verbal? I scored 169 V but only 3.5 AW...

[Two Espressos]

For the morbid, here's an outdated list of average GRE scores (verbal only, old format) of admitted students. It helps to remember averages mean a number of students have lower (and of course, higher) scores, so there's really no purpose to this list besides make you better worse/better/whatever.

 

OH GOD

 

How heavily does AW weigh alongside verbal? I scored 169 V but only 3.5 AW...

 

I don't think it matters much, seeing as they have (hopefully!) a great piece of writing by which to evaluate your writing skills instead.

[Arezoo]

I'm from a top-ranked university in Iran where i got my Masters in Linguistics. My target is the best universities in the US (likeeveryone else), but i think i cannot go straight from an unknown university into the best universities, so i decided to study another masters degree in a university where the opportunity for working par-time is available for international students, and the chances of getting scholarships after spending a semester or so is high. My area of interest is cognitive linguistics, and from my point of view, i have to put the highest value on the state i choose because it will make me be in contact with the best professors in my area of interest, and i also have the opportunity to attend conferences and show myself to them. Taking all these into account, i chose California (because of being in vicinity of UCLA, UCSD, UCSB, Berkeley, Stanford, etc). Searching for all the universities that aren't highly-ranked, i found SJSU. There i found a professor specializes in cognitive linguistics, and her name is among the most prestigious professors in this field of study in different great books. 

[slvitale]

How heavily does AW weigh alongside verbal? I scored 169 V but only 3.5 AW...

Wow--great Verbal! I really doubt committees will consider a short piece about why City Z should or shouldn't build a new parking deck (as was my prompt) over a 20-page writing sample in your area of inquiry. (i.e. I agree with TwoEspressos.)