"Department Dirt"

[blogstarphd]

I searched through the forums and found a topic titled "department dirt" that detailed the culture of different school's sociology department. I think it would be helpful for us to describe the departments (funding, competitive versus collaborative, supportive faculty, etc.) for future posters and for ourselves, in case we aren't able to attend a visitation weekend.

[NotSure]

Good idea!

[sociologyinthepast]

I'll throw something out there.

 

My experience at Michigan was that the department is very collaborative, and the faculty (especially the junior faculty) are extremely supportive. More senior faculty not so much. But Michigan has recently hired a lot of very strong junior faculty who are a pleasure to work with, and most topical areas have a very strong weekly(ish) workshop where faculty and students can come together to share in-progress research and practice job talks (the style and tone of these workshops differs by substantive area; econ soc is run much more formally than gender and sexuality, for example, but they're all useful).

 

One concern of some students (although I didn't have this problem) is that there are occasionally disconnects between admin staff, faculty, and grad students; not all faculty are necessarily up-to-date on the latest policies regarding things like funding, teaching/research assistant appointments, and degree progress rules. This means it's often incumbent on grad students to take the initiative and do a little fact finding of their own, though. I assume that's true almost everywhere - in general I think it's important for phd students to assume responsibility for knowing all dept. rules and regulations, especially pertaining to stuff that could seriously affect their degree progress.

 

In general, Michigan is an awesome environment if you can handle the Ann Arbor cold.

[akcrabtr]

I would be really interested to "get the dirt" on UGA's program. Ive read a lot of their faculties work and I know the university party line. I'm really looking for more of a current/previous student perspective.

[blogstarphd]

I've heard that U. Chicago's department accepts more students than they plan to grant PhDs. They weed out about half of the students through intense comprehensive exams.

[jacib]

I've heard that U. Chicago's department accepts more students than they plan to grant PhDs. They weed out about half of the students through intense comprehensive exams.

I'm going to stop you right there and say I do not think this is true.  If this were true, no one would go to Chicago.  No one is trying to "weed out" students in graduate school.  Comps might be intense at Chicago, but they're still designed to be passed.  They already weeded out the students they wanted during a different selection process called "applications".

[blogstarphd]

I'm going to stop you right there and say I do not think this is true.  If this were true, no one would go to Chicago.  No one is trying to "weed out" students in graduate school.  Comps might be intense at Chicago, but they're still designed to be passed.  They already weeded out the students they wanted during a different selection process called "applications".

 

I respect that. I just heard this from a graduate student today (that doesn't go to Chicago). I'm not saying from my experience but from word of mouth. I should have said that in the post.

[SocioEd]

I respect that. I just heard this from a graduate student today (that doesn't go to Chicago). I'm not saying from my experience but from word of mouth. I should have said that in the post.

I think the weed-out design might still apply to econ at Chicago (not sure). But definitely not sociology.

[Illusio80]

I'm going to stop you right there and say I do not think this is true.  If this were true, no one would go to Chicago.  No one is trying to "weed out" students in graduate school.  Comps might be intense at Chicago, but they're still designed to be passed.  They already weeded out the students they wanted during a different selection process called "applications".

 

It is true beyond a reasonable doubt that certain departments at certain times have admitted "haves" and "have-nots", which is a cruel irony, being that it is sociology.  You can't tell me that said departments have had the same level of commitment to have-nots as they have had to haves.  And it is not true that nobody would attend departments that operate by attrition, because they do over and over.  Think of it from the department's perspective.  We have X amount of resources, but need Y amount of research and teaching labor, and Z number of butts in seats.  But we are fine with graduating W number of PhD's.  From the students' perspective, it's a slice of the American Dream.  Of course I will persevere over others, of course funding will materialize once I get there...  People have limited information when making decisions.

[socscholar]

I feel like schools that offer full funding have no need to intentionally admit "have-nots." From their perspective, the ideal situation should be to pump out the complete cohort into high-ranking R-1s, to enhance their department's reputation.

 

Also, the spirit of this thread has some sense, but I think you'll have more success PMing people who went to the visit that you had to miss. Any current grad or admitted student should be wary of posting serious "dirt" online. Also, visit day impressions can be seriously inaccurate (in my own experience seeing a number of schools last year).

[Illusio80]

I feel like schools that offer full funding have no need to intentionally admit "have-nots." From their perspective, the ideal situation should be to pump out the complete cohort into high-ranking R-1s, to enhance their department's reputation.

 

Schools that offer full funding to everyone are, by definition, not schools that have "have-nots."  But full-funding schools could still have attrition mechanisms, and enough students would still choose to enroll at these institutions given enough reputation.

 

 

Also, the spirit of this thread has some sense, but I think you'll have more success PMing people who went to the visit that you had to miss. Any current grad or admitted student should be wary of posting serious "dirt" online. Also, visit day impressions can be seriously inaccurate (in my own experience seeing a number of schools last year).

 

Quite right -- quite the reign of terror isn't it?

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

Great funding, collaborative, and very supportive faculty. Honestly, I couldn't be happier. 

[blogstarphd]

Great funding, collaborative, and very supportive faculty. Honestly, I couldn't be happier.

Chicago?

[ThisSlumgullionIsSoVapid]

Chicago?

 

Notre Dame

[dawgle]

"Grad Skool Rulz: Everything You Need to Know about Academia from Admissions to Tenure is for students in Ph.D. programs. These programs have a poor track record. Less than 50% of students who begin their Ph.D. program will leave with their degree. Many of those who graduate will needlessly spend a decade or more pursuing their degree."

[sociologyinthepast]

"Grad Skool Rulz: Everything You Need to Know about Academia from Admissions to Tenure is for students in Ph.D. programs. These programs have a poor track record. Less than 50% of students who begin their Ph.D. program will leave with their degree. Many of those who graduate will needlessly spend a decade or more pursuing their degree."

Lemme give a +1 to Fabio's Grad Skool Rulz ebook. It's a great list of sober, reasonable tips for students that I wish I'd had before my first admissions cycle. 

[blogstarphd]

Still, does anyone want to give their insight into a program or their opinions on a program? This will surely still be invaluable to readers on the forum.

[FertMigMort]

Also, the spirit of this thread has some sense, but I think you'll have more success PMing people who went to the visit that you had to miss. Any current grad or admitted student should be wary of posting serious "dirt" online. Also, visit day impressions can be seriously inaccurate (in my own experience seeing a number of schools last year).

I'd echo this thought.

However, current grad students are (almost) always good resources for this kind of info. Either email them now (I've received these emails in the past and this year) or ask to talk to them over the weekend one on one. I don't have any problem answering very direct questions from prospects. My view is that being up front with people is going to reduce attrition later and lead to happy, productive colleagues.

[Ambigiousbuthopeful]

Any thoughts on Minnesota? 

Edited February 10, 2013 by Mixdpikle

[La_Di_Da]

Mixdpikle -  Two people I know who went through the program at UMN, Twin Cities, only had great things to say about the program and faculty.  One of them is teaching at Emory now and the other at CSU, Sacramento.

[blogstarphd]

Thoughts on Ohio State?

[Ambigiousbuthopeful]

Mixdpikle -  Two people I know who went through the program at UMN, Twin Cities, only had great things to say about the program and faculty.  One of them is teaching at Emory now and the other at CSU, Sacramento.

 

Great, thanks. That's good to know, because I've just made a conclusive decision.

 

Anyone have anything more to add?