UChicago's MAPH Program

[susamli]

So, I was rejected from UChicago's Comp Lit PhD program and admitted by its MAPH program without any funding. That's cool - very fortunately, I have two other PhD admits with funding and a number-one-on-the-waitlist. A professor at UChicago wrote me a personalized email telling me about the MAPH program and why she thinks I specifically would do well in it. Very kind of her. Then I get to this paragraph:

"Whether or not you are interested in joining MAPH, we hope

very much that you will investigate the job placement records

of any doctoral programs that you consider before committing

yourself to one. Doctoral programs in the Humanities with

good placement records are rare (a good placement record is

one in which a program is able to place at least half of its

PhDs in tenure-track academic jobs within two years of the

students' completion of the degree). Since the main reason to

pursue doctoral work is as the first stage of an academic

career in a four-year institution or university, this means

that most students in doctoral programs

[ILikeCatsALot45]

I was accepted to this program too, after being rejected from the English PhD, and I'm definitely going to take a fully-funded spot somewhere else. I'm curious--what do you think you'll decide? Do you mind me asking what your others options are? I had a struggle because Chicago ranks higher than my other options, but I decided I don't feel like borrowing $45k more next year.

I didn't get a personalized e-mail, and I didn't read the letter from Chicago, since it went to my mom's house in Buffalo and I live in San Francisco right now, but I think she mentioned it said something to a similar depressing effect about jobs. I think it's a kind of backhanded way of saying we won't get into a good enough PhD program if we don't do this MAPH program (?), or maybe I'm just too cynical.

[orinincandenza]

m/

[susamli]

I'll definitely take one of the funded PhD spots somewhere else. What I found ironic about that paragraph was that on the MAPH website, there is a page devoted to a list of PhD humanities programs to which their graduates have been accepted. Kind of like a brag sheet, I guess. All three of the schools where I was accepted/waitlisted are on said list.

I'm trying to decide what/if I should write back or not. After all, the email was personalized, and because I know that academia can be so horribly political, I don't want to start out by giving anyone in the field a bad opinion of me. On the other hand, I found that paragraph to be discourteous and pompous. Ugh. Suggestions?

[ILikeCatsALot45]

It was an unnecessary paragraph to write. Everyone knows how hard it is to get a job in this field, and such smugness is uncalled for. But it was moreover elitist and even senseless. If I were to write back, I would say:

'"No reasonable hope for a future?" Is my life only eligible for a future if I get my PhD at a top university, go on to teach at a top university within "two years?" Is two years the time frame I have to prove that I'm worthy of a future? And is the only future that means something working at an ivy-league university? What about teaching in a private school, or even a public one, or even overseas--what if one of these AND getting my PhD from a good school completes my dream?--even if these aren't my dreams but end up being my only options, and I take them, does my future just not count? Does my life just simply end if I have to settle for a lucrative position in--GASP--PUBLISHING when I come out of the PhD, until I can find a job, or even until I never do? I don't understand! What are you telling me?!--that one of the fates will declare me "futureless," and therein zap me from the planet if I get my PhD at a school ranked 30-, 40-, or 50- something and end up teaching at State U or even a small 4-year college in east bumblefuck? Pick your words with more care, woman!"

But I really wouldn't write anything at all. Obviously the current academic climate doesn't call for diplomacy if this woman throws words around like that and doesn't even stop to think that YOU might one day kick ass, at which time you might conveniently remember her extremely elitist phrasing and decide to attribute it to her in print somehow.

[lyonessrampant]

So, was this on everyone's email/mail correspondence then? What is the name of the person who sent you the letter, if you don't mind my asking? If it was Joan Wellman, she's sort of like the coordinator of the program and can be unintentionally insenstive. However, this paragraph, not in the email I received from one of the MAPH directors in 2007, seems like a bad addition.

[ILikeCatsALot45]

Lyonness--I'm not knocking the program, I just have a problem with that one sentence--not sure if it was in my letter, since my mom read it to me and paraphrased it, but I think she mentioned something of equal tone. Anyways, don't be offended if us MAPH people are a little miffed. I know you were in it, and it's obviously a great program, but it's not cool that after someone tells you don't have funding, they insinuate that there's no hope of a future!

[lyonessrampant]

Oh yeah, I'm not defending that paragraph/tone. I think it was in poor taste to add it and am curious if it is part of the form letter now. I don't quite see why it would be added, and I don't know if any of you would want to do it, but I think emailing MAPH about the insensitivity of that addition would be a service to them (even if they potentially don't see it that way).

[ishicourt]

I think that I'm definitely going to be accepting the MAPH offer, as Chicago has always been one of my dream schools, and recently I've been leaning more and more towards putting off my PhD plans until I get a better sense of what I'm interested in doing.

The email I received included this paragraph, but I wasn't really taken aback, as I have family members who are profs at a top-ranking university (lol, one that I idiotically did not apply to) who repeatedly tell me basically the same thing and that I'm delusion for pursuing the PhD path in liberal arts. Despite all of their warnings, I'm still intent on pusuing graduate studies for as many years as possible, but I understand others' concerns and their need to send out rather blunt warnings. Especially given the poor mental health that seems rampant among PhD students. :/

Besides this paragraph, the rest of the email was shockingly personalized. Coming from a huge public university, I was pretty pleased with the individual attention.

[bowdoinstudent]

University of Chicago isn't public, FYI.

[wheel_of_fire]

These emails aren't really personalized. I got that same huge paragraph in my email from a different professor. I think they have professors send out standardized emails and add a few personalized sentences based on the statement of purpose. Seemed obvious from the disjointed email I got.

[susamli]

Yeah, that was my original suspicion, that it was a form letter tweaked by the professors to sound a bit more personalized. Just wanted to check and be sure though.

As to Chicago's concern for our well-being...One thing I found ironic about that paragraph is that on the MAPH website there is a page devoted to a list of PhD humanities programs to which its graduates have been accepted. It seems kind of like a brag sheet. And lots of the schools they list are definitely not top ten or top twenty schools. I just felt like I was being manipulated.

I have no doubt that MAPH is a fantastic program that does great things for its graduates. I think anyone who chooses to enroll is in for a wonderful year and opportunities. But I really do resent that paragraph, especially since their obvious agenda is to get us to enroll in their own program.

[ishicourt]

I didn't mean that Chicago is a public university, I meant that I come from a large public undergraduate university. So I'm not used to any personalized attention at all.

[orinincandenza]

I didn't even get an email from them, offensive or otherwise. Just the packet in the mail. Wassup w/that I wonder?

How many people got into this program? It seems like a lot. Not that that's a bad thing, but I am curious how many English PhD applicants were recommended to the MAPH.

[greekdaph]

Orin, I got the e-mail from UChicago just yesterday, about 10 days after I received the packet in the mail. From this, I'd guess that your e-mail is on its way....

[ILikeCatsALot45]

I just got that "personal" form email containing that thoughtful paragraph about my future. The part about how much he "loved my writing sample about [copy and paste the topic]" made me feel almost as awesome as that time my sister called me to tell me I got a big envelope from Chicago, only to reveal seconds later that it was just a ruse.

Again, I think it's an accomplishment to be accepted to this program because it is selective, but--someone used the word manipulated--I do feel like I'm being manipulated just a wee bit. And the feedback I got from one of my professors is that although it's selective, it's a "huge program that leads nowhere."

[sakura]

Hi all,

I got the e-mail as well. Mine was from David J. Levin, and it didn't include a paragraph like that. It talked about how MAPH gives you a theoretical and conceptual advantage over other programs whose approach is narrowed by being limited to "the contours of field-specific" study. Though, I was not also applying to their PhD Program. I applied only to Masters Programs this year. My plan is to work in journalism / publishing for a while before going for a PhD. I am not ready to settle into academia for the rest of my life...yet.

I was also accepted into the Creative Writing Option (creative non-fiction). This is pretty different from the other Masters Programs I applied to, which are mostly traditional English MAs. I'm trying to weigh my options. I think writing a creative thesis instead of a traditional one might be good for getting a job after graduation, but maybe work against me applying to PhDs later. How does a MAPH year look compared to other fields?

Anyone else doing the options?

Anyone have any thoughts on MAPH vs. traditional English MA? (Also got into NYU, waiting on Columbia and Northwestern)

[thatnarrowfellow]

I was also accepted in lieu of a PHD program I wanted (Social Thought), and also received a cobbled-together "personalized" letter. I'm wondering if anybody has any experience with this program and could speak to its benefits. I'm extremely tempted to go into a 2 year MA program in my chosen field (Religious Studies) rather than MAPH, considering I got into some good programs and, since they are two year, would better equip me for the PHD, in my mind. I just have a little bit of that star-struck "It's U of Chicago" thing going on.

So, seriously, anybody actually been to the program and have anything to report?

Thanks!

- C

[beenglit]

A recommender of mine who earned their MA and PhD degrees in English from Chicago, and frequently returns to do work on panels and conferences with the department, recommended that I be wary of this particular program. I have no personal, first-hand knowledge of the program, but they described it as "experimental" and alluded to the fact that the professors may not give the students in it as much attention or respect as they deserve. They also told me it was pretty much a terminal degree, so anyone seeking a doctoral degree would most likely have to go back and get an MA in their particular field of study (i.e. English Literature) before being able to pursue a PhD from another institution.

Like I said, I have no personal experience of the program - just thought I'd share one academic's opinion of it.

[needingspring]

Hmm, okay, so as someone who graduated from this program in 2008, I feel the need to jump in here and speak to this program's strengths. I disagree pretty strongly with the last post, which I know was second hand information (no, you don't have to get another master's in order to apply to a PhD, and, no, this program gets a lot of respect precisely because it's not your typical master's program).

First of all, because this program is only a year, it will be the most intense academic year of your life and make you feel (and actually be) immensely prepared to do PhD work. Thus, it can both serve as a great way to test the demands of graduate work and figure out if this is really what you want to do, and what it means to actually do it. I think what someone quoted from their email about its "theoretical and conceptual" advantages is incredibly true: it's a program (and university) that is incredibly reflective not just about the content of what you are studying, but the form in which you are studying it. You will constantly be "experimenting" in your writing and ways of thinking about how text and theory interact with and collide into one another, and this attention to the theoretical and methodological ways of approaching your particular area of study will challenge you in all kinds of good, scary (ok, sometimes painful) ways.

I believe the structure of the program is a strength as well, especially if your interests and ways of seeing this work tend at all towards interdisciplinarity. The "experimental" quality of this program isn't an accident, it's an actual philosophy: it enacts the idea that field-specifc work (and yes, you can do that too) cannot just exist in a bubble, but the work of, say, an English Literature student benefits from his or her interaction with other disciplines (and colleagues within other disciplines) like philosophy, art history, film and media studies, anthropology, etc. In other words, the program doesn't see disciplinarity as a static, hermetically sealed entity, but thinks about the ways cross-disciplinary work, etc. pushes the boundaries of respective disciplines. It encourages its students to push their own boundaires and pursue innovative work.

That said, it is a really challenging, different program, and it's not for everyone. I think it really helps if you know a little about what you are trying to get out of it and act accordingly. As for it's size, the incoming class would be larger then your average MA in English Lit program because it's drawing students from accross the Division of the Humanities. Yet, it has this helpful, anchoring structure that makes it feel a lot smaller: a preceptor and small precept group who you will work with most heavily in fall quarter, and in some capacity throughout your MAPH year. The faculty members and thesis advisers are, in my experience, incredibly open and receptive to MAPH students. You will not feel like you are treated differently b/c you are a master's student.

So, this program can be an amazing place to academically grow and expand. For me it was all the difference in getting into PhD programs this year, including, for example, an ivy (whatever that label is worth) doctoral program that had rejected me before my MAPH year. My advice would be to attend their visiting days, and ask as many questions as possible. The visit will be worth it and help you see either what makes it a unique and great opportunity, or something that doesn't make sense for you to pursue right now.

I hope some of this helps!

[Incitatus]

The impression I've gotten about Chicago's MAPH program is that it's a second-rate degree from a first-rate school.

I'm sure the program is strong and you can do interesting things there, but I wouldn't like that being a kind of lesser grad student to the ones who were admitted into the departmental PhD programs. Also, when I was in grad school I could detect some snobbery as far as who was funded and who wasn't. I got the impression that a student who gets a PhD (or MA) funded by a prestigious fellowship even if it's from a less prestigious school would look more impressive than someone who shelled out f their own money to get one from a school as good as UChicago. Talking to profs one of the things they always recommended was to go where the money was.

There are MA programs that are funded--even at Ivy League schools like Dartmouth (terminal comp-lit MA)--that I imagine will do just as much to get you in the door to a good PhD program. Being the darling of an MA program at Tulane or Vanderbilt or UVM or SIU or FSU or Washington University in St. Louis would probably come in handier than being one of the people who went through the MAPH to raise money to give the PhD students that Chicago really wanted.

And that paragraph in the email is tasteless.

[thatnarrowfellow]

I think those are good points, Incitatus. If I don't go for this MAPH program I will need to choose between NYU and Union Theological Seminary. My gut is to go with Union, but NYU's program is very small, and the head of the department has taken a special interest in my application, which makes it kind of an agonizing choice. I think there is something to be said for going to an even slightly lesser-ranked school where you will get a lot of personal attention and individual help on your thesis, rather than a better-ranked one where you will be forgotten. Relating this back to MAPH, the size of the entering class does make me nervous, although I'm happy to hear about the individual proctor, etc.

Oh well, no one said grad school was easy.

- C

[Incitatus]

If you've gotten into respectable departmental programs, I just don't see what advantage you would gain from going to Chicago for the MAPH. If both of the programs are offering you similar deals, a small program with a head that's pushing for your success sounds pretty good. And it's not as if anyone ever looks askance at NYU.

It certainly sounds better than the MAPH program.

[needingspring]

I'm not really sure what direct experience with the program Incitatus is basing his "impressions" on, but I'd be wary of basing your view of a program from random (positive or negative) posts online. I'd rely more on your own impressions while visiting.

[chopsticks]

Not to recycle platitudes, but what you get out of school is what you put into it. What ultimately makes the difference between acceptance and rejection with PhD programs is how competitive a candidate's entire application is, not just one aspect of it. While U. of C.'s MAPH definitely has something of a 'consolation prize' feel - I got the same cut-and-paste e-mail from two different faculty members, and it was pretty entertaining figuring out exactly which bits and where got the so-called personalized treatment - if one comes out of it having a clearer sense of academic/intellectual direction, and having made the right contacts to aid in that pursuit, then it's still money and time well-spent IMHO. The sense I've gotten from speaking to several professors during the application process is that oftentimes what makes a candidate stand out is his/her personal sense of purpose and drive, and less the reputation of the BA/MA. Achievement is personal I think, not institutional ...

I was in two minds about U. of C.'s offer. On the one hand, I didn't relish the idea of begging the parental units for another 50K for more school, but on the other I kept hearing - esp. from those faculty on admission committees - that every little bit counts these days, and having an MA does go a long way. At the end of the day though, what tipped the scales was the fact that the prof. I'd applied to study with reached out personally, and seemed genuinely keen on me as a student. He's a pretty big dog in both his field and his department too (and certainly has his pick of potential students), and I figured that if he was taking such an interest in a lowly MA admit then who was I to say no ?

So, yeah, its U. of C. for me come fall.