Does publish or perish begin before starting a PhD program?

[mutualist007]

I am throwing this out here because it may be of concern to others who like me.

 

So how much does previous CV type material like presenting and publications weigh in on decisions to accept a student?

 

Is coursework really secondary in Anthro?

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at request of poster.

[nadimishka]

I can't speak for other subfields, but for forensics- yes. Programs are so competitive for forensics that if you don't have research, publications, or presentations, you are at a serious disadvantage. To be fair, it doesn't have to be forensic-related, you just have to have it. Coursework isn't necessarily "secondary" though. They expect EVERYTHING (caps intended). You need a high GPA, good GRE and well-rounded CV (SoP, recs, etc.)

If you're still in undergrad, it can be hard to find the outlets- even in a Master's it can be hard unless you have an assistantship. If you still have time, try to find a prof you like and bring it up. Most will be more than willing to help. As for presentations, look at the professional organizations and their annual meetings. Most have a student paper section and you can get in that way.

[anthropologygeek]

Nadi- I'm not forensic but I do try to attend AAFS and have many friends in so called forensic programs. Some got in without publishing. Also MSU only accepts students from a certain back east university. And I know Florida always says they are taking students but rarely due but if they don't you can apply the next year without repaying the app fee, from a friends experience. Also since you are applying for forensics may I ask why you aren't applying to alot of the best forensic programs? Are you a masters student applying or an undergrad? Depending on that I may be able to help you with some other university such as undergrad applying what about Texas state university or masters student what about Ohio State.

Publishing is good if it is the correct type. I could pay 10 dollars and get whatever I wanted publish or send it to a low level journal but those are the same as not doing or presenting is only good at major conferences and posturing holds very little little opinion for the admin committee

[nadimishka]

Sorry if that came off the wrong way, you can get in without publications, it's just less common (or so I've heard/experienced).

I have my B.A. in Anthropology with a natural science concentration and will have my M.S. in Justice Administration in May. All the schools I've applied to (my alma mater aside) have the facilities I need to do my research and are near family (I have two kids, so family support is necessary). I need to have access to donors, space for field experiments, and a clean forensic-level lab. My approach for the PhD is more biological/forensics/forensic science while my thesis has been archaeology/forensics/law enforcement. Honestly, UTK is the only place I want though. I'm just making sure I have several viable options.

And yes, publications and presentations have to be done the right way, through peer-reviewed journals/encyclopedias/etc. and respectable professional organizations. I just thought all of that was assumed.

[anthropologygeek]

Nadi- you would be surprised about how some people go at publishing

[NoSleepTilBreuckelen]

To the OP, grad schools are looking for students who can product high quality, original work, and while publishing is one way to demonstrate that, it's certainly not the only one! They'll also be looking at your LORs, writing sample, and SOP to get a sense of this, as well as any relevant experiences. Did you attend a field school, join or start an anthropology reading group, write for the student newspaper, have an interesting minor (a language, art, literature, biology, chemistry - any of these and way more could be relevant depending on what your interests for grad school are)? I think anything like that that makes you stand out, especially if you mention it in your SOP or a LOR mentions it, can help you stand out to the committee. 

 

When I was in my Master program, there were a lot of PhD student who didn't have publications when they came in. So, in short, there are other ways to show your dedication and aptitude for the field and your creative thinking to AdComs other than publications!

[anthropologygeek]

I do believe fit is the absolute most important criteria. If you have to force a fit don't send in the app since it will be rejected

[mutualist007]

To the OP, grad schools are looking for students who can product high quality, original work, and while publishing is one way to demonstrate that, it's certainly not the only one! They'll also be looking at your LORs, writing sample, and SOP to get a sense of this, as well as any relevant experiences. Did you attend a field school, join or start an anthropology reading group, write for the student newspaper, have an interesting minor (a language, art, literature, biology, chemistry - any of these and way more could be relevant depending on what your interests for grad school are)? I think anything like that that makes you stand out, especially if you mention it in your SOP or a LOR mentions it, can help you stand out to the committee. 

 

When I was in my Master program, there were a lot of PhD student who didn't have publications when they came in. So, in short, there are other ways to show your dedication and aptitude for the field and your creative thinking to AdComs other than publications!

 

Your response helped me a bit, but Nadi's response may yet hold true. We'll see. It would be nice if all schools sent rejection letters, and in them, explicitly explained how you could improve your application for the future. Wouldn't it be nice?

 

I know it's asking a lot, but if they find time to find reasons to reject, why not make notes and have an assistant type those into the reject letters...

 

Also. I'm more curious than ever about how faculty determine who has a plan and who is likely to succeed. I am also feel I would like to know a lot more about how "fit" is measured.

[HrdyWordy]

This is a question I've asked myself a thousand times and the only weak point in my entire packet. I'm hoping I don't perish because I haven't published, yet. 

[NOWAYNOHOW]

This is a question I've asked myself a thousand times and the only weak point in my entire packet. I'm hoping I don't perish because I haven't published, yet. 

 

Don't write yourself off just yet.  I have come to the conclusion, after talking to a lot of faculty and PhD students, that publishing IS important, but it's only one of the four things adcomms like to see: publications, presentations, research experience and teaching experience.  I was told that if you have three of these, you are in really good shape.  All four is probably quite rare. 

Edited January 9, 2014 by NOWAYNOHOW

[HrdyWordy]

Don't write yourself off just yet.  I have come to the conclusion, after talking to a lot of faculty and PhD students, that publishing IS important, but it's only one of the four things adcomms like to see: publications, presentations, research experience and teaching experience.  I was told that if you have three of these, you are in really good shape.  All four is probably quite rare. 

Thanks for the advice. I do have 3 of those. Great to know. Not quite the big sigh of relief that comes with the acceptance letter, but feeling a little better about the process. 

[mutualist007]

Don't write yourself off just yet.  I have come to the conclusion, after talking to a lot of faculty and PhD students, that publishing IS important, but it's only one of the four things adcomms like to see: publications, presentations, research experience and teaching experience.  I was told that if you have three of these, you are in really good shape.  All four is probably quite rare. 

 

What if you only have 1-2 of those at the end of your Master's? I felt like I barely taught a class and though I have research experience I have not been asked to submit to major conferences (I found one myself - submitted - have not heard back. I am working on others). One publication may be on the way though but it's in a sub-specialty that is a little removed from my primary interests.

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at the poster's request.

[NOWAYNOHOW]

What if you only have 1-2 of those at the end of your Master's? I felt like I barely taught a class and though I have research experience I have not been asked to submit to major conferences (I found one myself - submitted - have not heard back. I am working on others). One publication may be on the way though but it's in a sub-specialty that is a little removed from my primary interests.

 

It sounds like you have these qualities, even if you do diminish them in this post -- I hope in your SOP you played up your research and teaching experience! 

Also, maybe it's a subfield difference, but it's on me to present or submit to publications.  I support the research of the faculty I work for, but they don't submit me as an author and I work on my research independently at the same time.  That is what I present and write about.  It seems like the STEM-ish fields are a much different story, ie. "grooming," group publications...

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
quote edited for privacy.

[dtpowis]

One of my best friends in undergrad was the laziest son-of-a-bitch that I ever knew. His personal mantra was, "I don't do homework unless it's Sunday." He did the absolute minimum to get a 4.0. He never had interest in presenting research (let alone doing research), he never went to lectures at the museum, he never attended meetings of our student group. He barely made it to the national conferences with us where he used his super drinking powers to network and make connections. Despite all of this, a top ten R1 school gave him a full ride for his MA and PhD. (Oh, the devilish smile on his face when he got that letter. What a bastard.)

I think you'll be fine. You just have to make up for shortcomings in other ways. Usually that means writing a very strong SOP.

[mutualist007]

One of my best friends in undergrad was the laziest son-of-a-bitch that I ever knew. His personal mantra was, "I don't do homework unless it's Sunday." He did the absolute minimum to get a 4.0. He never had interest in presenting research (let alone doing research), he never went to lectures at the museum, he never attended meetings of our student group. He barely made it to the national conferences with us where he used his super drinking powers to network and make connections. Despite all of this, a top ten R1 school gave him a full ride for his MA and PhD. (Oh, the devilish smile on his face when he got that letter. What a bastard.)

I think you'll be fine. You just have to make up for shortcomings in other ways. Usually that means writing a very strong SOP.

 

And most people say charm and personality only go so far. 

 

About to enter my rejection from Emory. I think I knew what would happen but I was hoping for at least an interview. I think this season may yet prove that going into an MA program was not a good use of my time. A professional Master's would have been good, but an MA does not create a useful stepping stone to PhD programs. I would have been better off if I had gone into a PhD program back in 2011 accepting debt knowing that I could have reapplied for funding the following year. I would now me in my third year and that much closer to a PhD. Now, I wasted 2 years on an abortive thesis experience, and I am about 1 year into an MPH that I'm not sure I want anymore. Even if I start a program in 2014, I will not have the benefit of transferring the courses taken in my Master's programs. My choice was a big mistake and I think the committees see that and see that I was not closely aligned to any of the faculty in my MA program, therefore showing also that I would not make a good doctoral student.

 

I know I am ranting, but I am also making a testament here for the benefit of others considering a Master's in Anthropology who may stumble upon this page looking for advice or insight regarding that choice. Unless you are considering a professional vocational based Master's like one in Counseling Education, Business or Public Health, you are better off focusing your efforts and energy on experiential pursuits that will help you make a great applicant for PhD programs.

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at poster's request.

[dtpowis]

I was the other Emory rejection. Not like I wanted to live in Hotlanta anyway, amirite?

[mutualist007]

I was the other Emory rejection. Not like I wanted to live in Hotlanta anyway, amirite?

 

Make that Hothlanta now  

I was somewhat put out at first because rejections without explanations sometimes leaves the details up to your imagination to fill in. IOW I assumed that it meant that no school would value my background a bit. But now I have a schedule interview with another program and I am really hoping it will work out. The program will lead to some really novel research and I think it may actually work better for me anyway. We'll see. Now I just need to figure out what to do and what to expect on interview day.

[sarab]

I was the other Emory rejection. Not like I wanted to live in Hotlanta anyway, amirite?

 

Who'd want to move to Atlanta after the snow disaster we just experienced?!

Anyway, sorry about Emory 

[anthroflea]

And most people say charm and personality only go so far. 

 

 

I know I am ranting, but I am also making a testament here for the benefit of others considering a Master's in Anthropology who may stumble upon this page looking for advice or insight regarding that choice. Unless you are considering a professional vocational based Master's like one in Counseling Education, Business or Public Health, you are better off focusing your efforts and energy on experiential pursuits that will help you make a great applicant for PhD programs.

 

I think one of the reasons weall  might have such disagreements on whether an MA/MS is useful is because we all go into it with very different expectations. I went into my MA precisely because I knew I lacked the publication/teaching/research/presentation skills I needed to get into a PhD program. In the beginning it was  up to me  to find labs to volunteer in and conferences to present at. I might have been very lucky though because once I initiated something, my school's faculty was very supportive. (I also have some friends who did not have a teaching assistantships who got their teaching experience simply by asking intro teachers whether they could teach a class.) So for these kinds of things, the MA is great. But again, it all very much depends on why you go into it in the first place. I wonder whether the subfield makes a huge difference as well. 

 

I have heard from numerous people that an undergraduate or master's thesis will go a long way if you do not have any publications yet because they demonstrate that you are capable of original research:) Also, many schools will publish honors and master's theses. It is not the same as a publication in a peer-review journal, of course, but it is published by an academic institution. 

 

So, having taught a few classes and doing graduate research is not the same as having no experience at all;) 

 

I also think we need to remember that we are applying to individuals and not robots. All of them went through the same application process through which we are going right now. Some adcom members might have gotten into their PhDs  without any publications, others might have had 4. So I think while there are common things adcoms will look for, individuals will always have different opinions on how important different points are. I think, even though many say publications are very helpful, a particular adcom might end up being more impressed by coursework, research interests and field schools... 

 

Besides, I know several people who have gotten into PhD programs with no prior publications;)

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
quote edited for privacy.

[mutualist007]

I wish I could have edited one of my earlier posts, but I can't so I will just say that not all is doom. The Emory rejection just came at the perfect time to create a perfect storm of doubt and frustration with my MA experience. I think for some people the MA/MS option works great, however I think it should be approached with awareness of its limitations. Be mindful that it’s best and maybe only certain use is to build a stronger PhD application.

 

I am back online with the MPH and looking forward to an interview later this month.

 

 

Cheers

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at poster's request.

[mutualist007]

I think one of the reasons weall  might have such disagreements on whether an MA/MS is useful is because we all go into it with very different expectations. I went into my MA precisely because I knew I lacked the publication/teaching/research/presentation skills I needed to get into a PhD program. In the beginning it was  up to me  to find labs to volunteer in and conferences to present at. I might have been very lucky though because once I initiated something, my school's faculty was very supportive. (I also have some friends who did not have a teaching assistantships who got their teaching experience simply by asking intro teachers whether they could teach a class.) So for these kinds of things, the MA is great. But again, it all very much depends on why you go into it in the first place. I wonder whether the subfield makes a huge difference as well. 

 

 

I have to respond because in some cases some students start with much better opportunities than others in their cohort. I was admitted to an MA program that has maybe a total of 35 or so students (not sure) in a small department. Several students in my cohort started their first semester working with their primary POI and adviser. I like many others started with no funding. I found an assistantship in another department but the work I was doing was completely unrelated to what I wanted to study. That was not the case for the students who got right into lab work and teaching. This is an important difference and something to beware of going in.

 

I also argue that starting right off working with a POI and possibly in their lab, is an advantage that other students do not have. It also makes it easier to pick up advice and suggestions for thesis work. I know because some have told me that one of the professors was practically asking students to base their thesis work on the materials in their lab.

 

"Grooming" may have been too harsh a word, but I do feel that some of the cohorts each year are the stars who start right out with funding and working directly with their adviser or POI -- the rest of us are the cash cows that bring money to the program. I got an anthro assistantship my second year, but it was working as a TA with someone whose research had very little relevance to my interests.

 

So there.

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at poster's request.

[mutualist007]

*waves* 

 

Nice profile graphic and screen name. As for the quote about the unpublished being admitted, I think it's possible and it gives hope, but I think this may apply more to applicants coming straight out of undergraduate programs. Maybe we need to collect the data here if we can and post the results

[sweetpearl16]

I want to reiterate what some other posters have already said. Publishing is not necessary for admission into a PhD. program if you can demonstrate your dedication, research skills, ability to produce original work through other means. I applied to PhD. programs while finishing up my MA. I still haven't published anything yet. I spent two summers doing archaeological field work, including one as a TA. I also spent two years as a research assistant in the archaeology department of a well known living history museum. I won a fellowship from the living history museum in order to conduct research for my thesis. I got into three PhD. programs including my top choice. 

[mutualist007]

I consider it important to add my observations by giving an example that explains how merit and go-getting doesn't always mean you start with equal access. I have seen it replicated before by other posters on other forums. From my point of view I was making an objective observation. I think most of us here understand Bourdieu and Durkheim. My example was an explanatory extension of some of their arguments, but only on a much smaller scale. I thought it was clear that for the most part, master's students and undergraduate students do not all start with the same access to resources whether it's time, geographic access, money, access to professors, etc. I don't think that is untrue or even pessimistic to state that.

 

As I mentioned previously, the scenario where large numbers of students are admitted yet funding is restricted to a few is systemic and it happens at a lot of places. My school was good to me in a lot of ways. The rank and file professors could not help that administrators and deans want full departments brimming over with students, yet they are expected to run departments with a scarcity of personnel and financial resources. That's another issue for another time.

 

Sure, maybe some students need to weigh their options more carefully and choose not to attend if they are not funded, but if everyone could do that then everyone everywhere should be capable of being careful with their financial choices and they should all live within their means. That doesn't happen. We gamble and take out chances to improve our position -- and sometimes our status so that we can have a better chance at resources in the future.

 

So what was my point? To offer a counterpoint and example of differential access to research resources that argues against the boot-strap argument that if you push hard enough all things are more or less equal -- except for merit of course. 

 

I will try be more careful with my wording in the future. It is possible to substitute actual journal publishing with other forms of presenting or producing original work. 

Edited March 8, 2014 by fuzzylogician
Edited for privacy at poster's request.