Are these institutions respected?

[kade.ivy]

Hi all!

I'm a first time poster who is just getting my feet wet in the world of grad school applications. I'm hopefully going to attend a top-tier university for a PhD in English.

My research interests are American popular culture and literature, particularly southern literature. Vanderbilt seems like a great fit, but I am unsure of their "prestige" in the English field. I know Vanderbilt is a top-tier school, but their placement record for English PhDs doesn't seem too impressive. I want to graduate from a program that will open up jobs at a top-tier public or private university, so my question is will Vanderbilt do that for me? I'm also considering Emory and Washington U in STL for these prestigious universities I'm unsure of and as far as definitely top-tiered schools, I'm heavily considering U of Chicago, U of PA, and Columbia. Thanks for any advice!

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

 I want to graduate from a program that will open up jobs at a top-tier public or private university,

Why?

I'm not trying to be a jerk: just curious as to why you want to be at a top-tier uni.

[echo449]

I think the short answer is: sure. All of these institutions are respected and worth applying to.

The long answer is: The job market being what it is, you should keep in mind that there is no guarentee of getting the kind of job you are talking about no matter where you go. All you are doing is optimizing your chances. I'm applying (probably foolishly) to only top programs not because I wanted to (there are a bunch of places I would have traded Ivies for b/c of cost/chances of acceptance), but because I was told, with all the thunder of Mordor, that there are just no jobs out there. It is important to keep in mind that you could go to Duke, be in the top of your class, and still wind up at a satellite campus of a state school. There is no guarentee. 

(edited for reading comprehension)

Edited January 7, 2014 by echo449

[champagne]

"Prestige" is such a problematic word to begin with, but, unfortunately, it still has a lot of utility in the world of higher education, especially with graduate studies in the humanities.

 

All of the programs you mentioned are, in some way or another, prestigious (particularly Vandy for southern literature), but, in the end, the job you obtain after getting your Ph.D. still comes down to the work you do individually and an inordinate amount of luck. No school will or should guarantee you a great job after graduation. It would be statistically irresponsible to do so.

[kade.ivy]

Why?

I'm not trying to be a jerk: just curious as to why you want to be at a top-tier uni.

No worries! My main concern is making a good, competitive salary. Maybe I should rephrase: I don't want my job options to be limited by the prestige of my graduate program. Thanks to all of you for your responses! Edited January 7, 2014 by kade.ivy

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

No worries! My main concern is making a good, competitive salary. Maybe I should rephrase: I don't want my job options to be limited by the prestige of my graduate program. Thanks to all of you for your responses!

You're in humanities for the money?!?!!?!?

The harsh truth is - job options are going to be limited regardless of where you go. I'm not entirely sure there is any sort of data correlating reputation to salary.

Certainly "better" programs will send their graduates off with more options so I'd advise you to offer up some more information about the programs you are looking into and what your research agenda is.

 

[hashslinger]

All those institutions are fine, and none of them will keep you out of the running for an R1 job when you're on the job market.

 

However, what gives me pause here is your attitude toward the field and the job market. These days, I hardly know anyone who's going to grad school with the expectation that they will work at a a top-tier R1. NO ONE expects to work at a top-tier R1 these days--not even people graduating from Harvard.

 

Why? As others have already emphasized, there are hardly any jobs at top-tier R1 institutions. Or: there are more PhDs out there from prestigious schools than there are jobs at prestigious schools. It's a lottery. If you want an R1 job, getting into the right school is only the half of it. You will also have to work very hard to publish, present, network, win national fellowships ... and then you will have to be very, very lucky. In fact, I can't stress how much a difference "luck" makes. I know people with Ivy PhDs and publications in major journals, and they still aren't getting hired.

 

I would recommend approaching this thing with a different attitude. The most successful people I know went into this field because they love what they do--writing, researching, and teaching--and they just want to continue. They don't care if they continue their work at Columbia or Wisconsin or a branch campus of a second-tier regional school. At the end of the day it's the actual work that has to pull you through--not the dreams of working at a certain type of institution.

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

All those institutions are fine, and none of them will keep you out of the running for an R1 job when you're on the job market.

 

However, what gives me pause here is your attitude toward the field and the job market. These days, I hardly know anyone who's going to grad school with the expectation that they will work at a a top-tier R1. NO ONE expects to work at a top-tier R1 these days--not even people graduating from Harvard.

 

Why? As others have already emphasized, there are hardly any jobs at top-tier R1 institutions. Or: there are more PhDs out there from prestigious schools than there are jobs at prestigious schools. It's a lottery. If you want an R1 job, getting into the right school is only the half of it. You will also have to work very hard to publish, present, network, win national fellowships ... and then you will have to be very, very lucky. In fact, I can't stress how much a difference "luck" makes. I know people with Ivy PhDs and publications in major journals, and they still aren't getting hired.

 

I would recommend approaching this thing with a different attitude. The most successful people I know went into this field because they love what they do--writing, researching, and teaching--and they just want to continue. They don't care if they continue their work at Columbia or Wisconsin or a branch campus of a second-tier regional school. At the end of the day it's the actual work that has to pull you through--not the dreams of working at a certain type of institution.

This.

 I was taking the long way to make the point. But my feelings exactly.

[hashslinger]

You're in humanities for the money?!?!!?!?

The harsh truth is - job options are going to be limited regardless of where you go. I'm not entirely sure there is any sort of data correlating reputation to salary.

Certainly "better" programs will send their graduates off with more options so I'd advise you to offer up some more information about the programs you are looking into and what your research agenda is.

 

 

To be honest, I'm not sure that top programs send their graduates into the world with more options. They definitely might have more prestigious options--options along the lines of what the OP is looking for--but they don't necessarily have more options. It is perhaps unfair, but there are a lot of lower-tier and regional schools out there who do not want to hire from the Ivy League. I've said before here, and I'll say it again: the job market works both ways. The most elite PhDs are often times shut out from job searches when their pedigree is perceived to be at odds with the committee doing the hiring.

 

I have a friend who's served on search committees for a lesser known state school, and he told me that they simply toss out all the CVs from Ivy League schools. They don't look at them for more than a second.

[rhetoricus aesalon]

To be honest, I'm not sure that top programs send their graduates into the world with more options. They definitely might have more prestigious options--options along the lines of what the OP is looking for--but they don't necessarily have more options. It is perhaps unfair, but there are a lot of lower-tier and regional schools out there who do not want to hire from the Ivy League. I've said before here, and I'll say it again: the job market works both ways. The most elite PhDs are often times shut out from job searches when their pedigree is perceived to be at odds with the committee doing the hiring.

 

I have a friend who's served on search committees for a lesser known state school, and he told me that they simply toss out all the CVs from Ivy League schools. They don't look at them for more than a second.

 

 

Oddly enough, I just heard this same thing for the first time today. It makes some weird semblance of sense, though. High prestige applicants are probably bad investments--the first opening at an Ivy and they're gone. Or so it is assumed.

Edited January 7, 2014 by Chadillac

[champagne]

We're highjacking kade.ivy's thread, but this is an interesting phenomenon that I hadn't really thought about before. It makes a lot of sense, though. I had the fortune of being in on the hiring processes of a couple of positions while at my undergraduate institution, and it is very much a two-way courting process. I was astonished at the temporal and monetary investment that was made in each one of the candidates, which doesn't even mention the investment made to the person that ends up with the position.

 

It appears that higher education is mirroring the general population in the United States in its widening of the gap between "rich" (i.e. prestigious) and "poor" (i.e. not prestigious).

[Swagato]

Hi all!

I'm a first time poster who is just getting my feet wet in the world of grad school applications. I'm hopefully going to attend a top-tier university for a PhD in English.

My research interests are American popular culture and literature, particularly southern literature. Vanderbilt seems like a great fit, but I am unsure of their "prestige" in the English field. I know Vanderbilt is a top-tier school, but their placement record for English PhDs doesn't seem too impressive. I want to graduate from a program that will open up jobs at a top-tier public or private university, so my question is will Vanderbilt do that for me? I'm also considering Emory and Washington U in STL for these prestigious universities I'm unsure of and as far as definitely top-tiered schools, I'm heavily considering U of Chicago, U of PA, and Columbia. Thanks for any advice!

 

Bear in mind that there are many factors that play into admissions at high-prestige programs, and that you will not be able to control for many of these. Institutional background plays a role, pure merit is not all that matters, etc. There are apparent factors, and others less visible. Luck, of course, is also very much a factor. Most of the programs at the top level likely receive 500+ applications and admit a fraction of that. Here, for example, are Yale's stats from the 2012 entering class: http://www.yale.edu/graduateschool/academics/profiles2012/englishlanguageliterature.pdf . I understand Columbia explicitly states they receive around 700 applications. 

 

All of this is to say that while you're taking the right approach in targeting top-tier programs with a view to future academic employment, that can only help a little bit; it doesn't offer any guarantees.

 

 

Why?

I'm not trying to be a jerk: just curious as to why you want to be at a top-tier uni.

 

All other things being equal (which, of course, they are not), a good pedigree can only help. In today's market, even a little help can be a good thing. 

 

 

I think the short answer is: sure. All of these institutions are respected and worth applying to.

The long answer is: The job market being what it is, you should keep in mind that there is no guarentee of getting the kind of job you are talking about no matter where you go. All you are doing is optimizing your chances. I'm applying (probably foolishly) to only top programs not because I wanted to (there are a bunch of places I would have traded Ivies for b/c of cost/chances of acceptance), but because I was told, with all the thunder of Mordor, that there are just no jobs out there. It is important to keep in mind that you could go to Duke, be in the top of your class, and still wind up at a satellite campus of a state school. There is no guarentee. 

(edited for reading comprehension)

 

While it's a good thing you're applying top-heavy, do please remember the importance of fit. 

 

No worries! My main concern is making a good, competitive salary. Maybe I should rephrase: I don't want my job options to be limited by the prestige of my graduate program. Thanks to all of you for your responses!

 

I think you need to seriously recalibrate your expectations of material returns in academic life. While, of course, salaries and benefits are competitive at the upper level of R1 universities and SLACs, there is *no* automatic relation between graduating from a top department and actually ending up at another top department as faculty. And definitely not in the early stage (i.e. anything below tenured status). You should be fully prepared for the possibility of adjuncting for a year, maybe more. And you should definitely be prepared to move wherever the job takes you. 

[hashslinger]

It's not just about the fear that an elite PhD grad will go job hopping--it also has to do with fitting in with the "culture" of the institution, understanding how to reach certain types of students, being able to engage in the institution's service activities, etc. Also, remember that search committees are trying to hire a potential colleague, and in that case they're looking for "fit." Look at any faculty page for any type of institution, and you'll notice that a lot of the professors have similar backgrounds. 

 

It's also how lesser-ranked programs sometimes manage to have placement rates of 90% while really top schools hover around 50 or 60%.

[PeakPerformance]

The prestige of the university you get your PhD from clearly matters in academia, but just as important is the prestige of the people in your field who will be mentoring you. For instance, if you're interested in posthumanism and none of the leading scholars in this field are at Harvard or Berkeley, then a PhD from either of these two "prestigious" schools wouldn't necessarily be as valuable as a PhD from a somewhat less prestigious school where your dissertation would be directed by the foremost scholar in your field. WHO you work with matters!

[georgestrait1982]

It's also how lesser-ranked programs sometimes manage to have placement rates of 90% while really top schools hover around 50 or 60%.

 

I think this also has to do with teaching experience, which is much more important to a lot of less prestigious unis/CCs than research. At a lower tier state uni, a MA student might teach a 2/2 load, while a PhD candidate at an Ivy might not teach at all for a year or two.

[ProfLorax]

During the first few weeks of the semester, an alum from my program gave a lecture about how she survived the post-PhD chaos. She spoke of her own hiring and tenure process, as well as her experience serving on hiring committees. She teaches at an R2 state school, one with a BA and MA in English program, with a medium teaching load. She told us the criteria of she uses for hiring, and even though it's pretty obvious, I appreciated that she listed it out in bullet points. For TT jobs, she looked for:

• one publication in a major journal (as opposed to several publications in smaller, unknown journals)
• diverse teaching experience (she won't interview someone who had a five year fellowship; she wants someone who has taught multiple classes)
• an interesting research trajectory (a book is required for tenure, after all, so she wants to see that a book is in the future)
• commitment to the university and location (if she senses that the applicant is using that position as a stepping stone for a "better" job in the future, she'll pass over the application)
• consistent presentations at the field's major conferences (to know that applicants are keeping up with their field)

And while I agree that prestige matters, she didn't mention it as one of her criteria, perhaps because her institution is a teaching-focused one. As I said, I appreciated her providing a list of what her hiring committee looks for, because I imagine it's pretty similar to other programs. It quickly became my to-do list for these next five years! 

[hashslinger]

I think this also has to do with teaching experience, which is much more important to a lot of less prestigious unis/CCs than research. At a lower tier state uni, a MA student might teach a 2/2 load, while a PhD candidate at an Ivy might not teach at all for a year or two.

Yep, bingo, this is absolutely the case. If you're at a top program, your eggs are all in the research basket and you don't necessarily get a lot of teaching experience--or teaching experience with the kinds of students that represent the 99% majority of college-going people. If the research doesn't quite come together the way you want it to, it's best to get experience adjuncting at other types of schools.

[danieleWrites]

There's some good news: you have better odds of getting into an Ivy than you do of getting a job at the new Washington DC Walmart stores.

[Graditude]

The question the original poster should be asking is, "Will this program help me to conduct interesting research and develop my teaching skills?" and not "Is University X prestigious?"

 

Your reputation as a researcher will come with meaningful publications and other work, not through rubbing shoulders.

[kade.ivy]

However, what gives me pause here is your attitude toward the field and the job market. These days, I hardly know anyone who's going to grad school with the expectation that they will work at a a top-tier R1. NO ONE expects to work at a top-tier R1 these days--not even people graduating from Harvard.

 

 

Thanks to all of you for the eye-openers. Obviously what is inspiring me to pursue graduate school is not the money but passion for the subject and for teaching. I know there are no guarantees in the academic world. I asked about these schools because I am concerned about optimizing my chances for employment in this rocky job market (although I do realize, like you say, that I could end up an adjunct, postdoc, etc. whether I graduate from a Vandy-level school or a low-ranked public uni). Thanks again!

[jrockford27]

I am a grad student at a major public R1, AAU university that is currently conducting a tenure track rhet-comp hire.  All three of the finalists coming to visit this month come from big, public universities (none of which are in the Top 10 of USNews) that are hundreds of miles from the nearest ocean.

 

Do good work, you'll rise to the top.  You can attend Harvard or Stanford, but if your work isn't compelling, you'll be in the adjunct line with everyone else.   

Edited January 21, 2014 by jrockford27

[iExcelAtMicrosoftPuns]

 

Do good work, you'll rise to the top.  You can attend Harvard or Stanford, but if your work isn't compelling, you'll be in the adjunct line with everyone else.   

 

I am in no position to make the following claim; nevertheless: even if your work is compelling you may not end up where you want.

[rhetoricus aesalon]

I am a grad student at a major public R1, AAU university that is currently conducting a tenure track rhet-comp hire.  All three of the finalists coming to visit this month come from big, public universities (none of which are in the Top 10 of USNews) that are hundreds of miles from the nearest ocean.

 

Do good work, you'll rise to the top.  You can attend Harvard or Stanford, but if your work isn't compelling, you'll be in the adjunct line with everyone else.   

 

Well, maybe. But in the good spirit of academia, I'm going to complicate this a bit.

 

First, most of the top 10 of US News do not offer PhD programs in rhet/comp. I suspect this has something to do with the fact that schools we would normally consider "the elite" typically admit students who test out of freshman-year composition, which is the backbone of composition studies and would often be justification for funding a large faculty of rhet/comp scholars and a cohort of rhet/comp graduates--even though a great deal of research in rhet/comp is happening outside FYC. Furthermore, this is why the best programs in rhet/comp are at large, public, land-grant universities that have lots and lots of students who take Eng 101 (or the equivalent), hundreds of miles from the nearest ocean.

 

Second, my R1 institution is holding similar tenure-track searches right now ... but for literature faculty (one American and one Victorian). The candidates I know of come from Yale, UC Berkeley, and Emory.

 

So, I guess what I'm trying to show is that schools with name recognition are different for rhet/comp and literature. And, even if it isn't the only factor that matters ... it still matters.