Ranking of linguistics programs

[longforit]

Now I'm starting browsing over the decision forum and saw all the discussions about higher/lower-ranked program. Just out of curiosity: how do you decide which program is higher/lower-ranked? I know there're a few top tier linguistics programs that almost everyone agrees with: MIT, UMass, Chicago, Berkeley, Stanford, UCLA, etc., but I could see some other programs like Michigan, OSU, NYU, etc. as good as these tops at least in the filed of (lab) phonology. How do people (maybe from other disciplines) speak so firmly about the ranking? I also looked back into the NRC ranking--maybe the only ranking of US linguistics programs out there, and found all these S-ranking and R-ranking quite confusing. For example, NYU (S-ranking 14-25; R-ranking 4-28), Chicago (S 15-27; R 1-14), UCLA (S 23-32, R 2-15), UCSD (S 24-38, R 3-20), Rutgers (S 27-41, R 4-39); UCSC (S 27-43, R 7-34), Cornell (S 28-41, R 7-23), Austin (S 28-44, R 2-17) are ranked top 10 in R-ranking but much lag behind in S-ranking; and some other programs like NWU (S 4-16; R 17-44) and Purdue (S 6-20; R 33-47) are just the opposite (high S-ranking but low R-ranking). I noticed that many of the first group are traditionally-thought top programs; a few tops in the second group but much less. Anyone knows how these two rankings work and how it is consistent with the real situation (in terms of research, reputation, job opportunities for PhD graduates, etc.)? Or simply don't take it seriously but look more into the specific subfields/big names in the subfields/projects they are working on and make your own list of ranking? I'm leaning towards the latter one, but nevertheless curious about how the "formal" rankings like NRC work.

Insiders or any comments?

[LinguisticMystic]

I don't know how I would use these rankings for personal decision making. So I'll go with the latter choice. I'm curious to know what other people think, though. I get having a crude (coarse-grained?) sense of top-/mid-/low-tier, but what do the specific numbers do for a single person?

 

Unless I were tasked with some objective which implicated the global perception and fate (destiny?) of particular graduate programs, then maybe I would care. Thank god it's just me and my cat out here!

[longforit]

haha that's a cute answer

 

I'm just curious how people (in other fields) can talk about things so precisely like "I was accepted into a top 20 but not top 10 program" or "I might choose a top 25 over a top 15". Also, we might have a more comprehensive view of the top/middle/low-tier things, but for people newly in the field, some self-explaining rankings might be a more handy guidance--only in the case of NRC, things get a little more confusing... 

Edited February 9, 2014 by longforit

[longforit]

Or maybe a more realistic ranking would be the one based on difficulty of admission? It might generally be in line with the academic ranking of a program. But that includes other factors like faculty's interests and the size of the program.. so.. probably not that decisive.

[hoviariel]

I think those rankings are based on how many citations their staff/student papers produce. But, meh, just go with your personal take on your program and what research interests are.

[Robertpt]

Does the job market of your choice after PhD (that lasts 5 years) really correlate with the department ranking? I would be surprise if it does.

[longforit]

I think those rankings are based on how many citations their staff/student papers produce. But, meh, just go with your personal take on your program and what research interests are.

I can see why this is important. But if fitness is not the issue (also financially comparable), should one choose a more productive program over the others? (so basically higher-ranked over lower ones?) Luckily I'm not making decisions myself for now. I'm very satisfied that I was accepted into a program where I could do what I like, with friendly peers and faculty, and in the exact same university my boyfriend is doing his PhD :D

 

 

Does the job market of your choice after PhD (that lasts 5 years) really correlate with the department ranking? I would be surprise if it does.

I have no idea.. but not every department has the stats for it's Ph.D. graduates' job placement, which is probably one of the most important factors applicants take into consideration when making the decision. 

 

 

Haha just all the best to those who need to make a decision among all the best programs

Edited February 9, 2014 by longforit

[LinguisticMystic]

Yeah, job placement and department productivity, etc. are stats that I think are incredibly important and are among the many factors I'm trying to weigh in my decision-making. It's not very easy, I'm finding. For example, UCLA of course has a great record in these respects... but I also like the program and faculty at McGill whose experimental linguistics track is pretty new. Makes it a challenge to compare.

 

Bluh. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just boil it down to one thing. I might just go with gut instinct!

[longforit]

Maybe academic neighborhood is also one important thing? As you said, West Coast is the big place for lab phonology. I would image more conferences/communications happen there. But it's all about what you like the most. Hope you make the best choice

Edited February 9, 2014 by longforit

[fuzzylogician]

I wouldn't take the NRC rankings too seriously and I certainly would not recommend choosing a school based on it. Assuming you want a job in academia, your school name will open some doors for you (if it's a good one) but your advisors' reputations are even more important. One way to get information about job placement and success is to find out where people who are getting jobs now graduated from. This will give you a picture of how good the school was a few years ago, so not perfect but not bad (with some exceptions, like the program at McGill which I personally think is an up and coming force in the field).

 

Really, I think fit is the key to a good graduate school outcome. By the time you graduate, you should have 3-4 scholars who form your dissertation committee and who write you letters of recommendation for jobs. The relationship you have with these people will determine to a large extent how competitive you are in your field. If you cultivate strong relationships with 3-4 influential people who will write you glowing letters, you are well on your way to success. If you work with obscure people, you'll have a harder time but still if you have a strong dissertation and publication record, that can be overcome (or, as happens to many, you end up working with just one person who writes you an amazing letter, but your other recommenders don't know you that well). The strength of your dissertation and other research will be largely dependent on your well-being in the program and how well-supported you are. If you are unhappy and don't get along with anyone, you'll have a hard time getting work done. For that reason, I'd choose a school where I felt like I connected with several professors over a more prestigious one where I didn't feel like I belonged. Same goes for student-student collaborations, which can be a great way to crank out research -- some schools have more of that than others, though you should keep in mind that it's unlikely you'll actually identify any potential collaborators in your cohort or in other years during your visit. But feeling like you get along with people you meet is a good initial indication. For better or worse, though, at this point you have several good options and it's likely that you will be happy and successful at any of them. There is no one correct choice. (Personally, I think I would have been happy at any of my top 3 choices, though I am convinced that I would have ended up with very different profiles and research activities at each one, but not in a way I could have foreseen when I was making the decision.) Feel free to PM me if you have questions about specific schools that I can help with. 

[Robertpt]

I can see why this is important. But if fitness is not the issue (also financially comparable), should one choose a more productive program over the others? (so basically higher-ranked over lower ones?) Luckily I'm not making decisions myself for now. I'm very satisfied that I was accepted into a program where I could do what I like, with friendly peers and faculty, and in the exact same university my boyfriend is doing his PhD :D

 

 

Wow, congratulations! No wonder you think it's a dream coming true! Even if other programs send in good news, it's a no-brainer isn't it?

Edited February 10, 2014 by Robertpt

[longforit]

haha Chicago might make me struggle a little, but they kindly didn't put me into such dilemma  

[linguotherobot]

McGill is becoming a stronger force to reckon each year, specially in experimental linguistics. Regarding job placement, I know for a fact that one PhD from there beat two from NYU getting a job at the University College in London... So I think McGill is top of the game right now...

 

 

 

Yeah, job placement and department productivity, etc. are stats that I think are incredibly important and are among the many factors I'm trying to weigh in my decision-making. It's not very easy, I'm finding. For example, UCLA of course has a great record in these respects... but I also like the program and faculty at McGill whose experimental linguistics track is pretty new. Makes it a challenge to compare.

 

Bluh. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just boil it down to one thing. I might just go with gut instinct!

[LinguisticMystic]

Thanks, linguo! I'm really looking forward to my visit ... soon! It would certainly be amazing to be a part of that growth at McGill.