Give it to me straight about Claremont Graduate University

[Nothung]

I'm feeling very conflicted right now, and could use some advice.

Essentially, I was accepted, fully-funded with a TA-ship, to a mid-ranked program that I was not initially in love with but have since found the faculty extremely welcoming and encouraging. I grew increasingly thrilled by this, but also hoped that my girlfriend would be accepted by any of the nearby schools to which she applied. This unfortunately did not pan out, but we were both accepted to Claremont Graduate School, a program that we admittedly did not research quite enough before we decided to submit applications. What we've since learned is that CGU does not offer fully funded PhD's (merely scholarships which cover a percentage: 70% in my case and 30% in hers), and has no opportunities for TA-ships, though one could theoretically apply for an adjunct position themselves at any of the sister schools in the area. Originally we thought it better for me to accept my first offer, and for her to follow me there while she plans for the upcoming application season. Now that the deadline to submit a $200 deposit is here however, I'm having some second thoughts.

My main problem is that I cannot tell how legitimate CGU is: it is ranked a bit higher than the school that offered me a funded opportunity, sure, but without funding it does seem significantly easier to be accepted here. The location seems a million times lovelier than the other school I am considering, but I'm worried that the program at CGU will feel too shoddy -- more like I am investing in them than they are investing in me. I don't want to regret turning down a great opportunity, but I also can't shake the thought that CGU could work, and that even without full funding (granted, I would have to figure out some sort of employment/perhaps take out more loans...) CGU might still offer me an excellent education and career opportunities while keeping a personal relationship that is very important to me intact.

Any thoughts? I would be so grateful.

[Gauche]

First off, I know very little about Claremont other than the fact that the campus is beautiful (I've been there during a PAMLA conference one year), but I know a year or two ago they got in trouble for lying about either their SAT or GRE scores so that their ranking could be higher, so that's one thing to keep in mind. The other is that Claremont is in California, which everyone should know isn't the most ideal place to live on a small budget. If I were you, I would look into the cost of living in the area and compare it to the other school that you were accepted at. Be realistic about how much money you could actually make and survive on if you went to Claremont. If the other school allows you to breathe a little easier, you should probably take that one.

The other point I wanted to make is that you should never pay to go to grad school in the humanities especially if your sole goal in life is to become a professor. Go where the money is. When a school offers you a fully-funded package, that means they want you. Trust me, you'll thrive in a program that makes it very clear to you that they want you. If you didn't feel that kind of vibe from Claremont (whether during your visit or through other methods of communication), it's best that you let it go.

[1Q84]

Seconded. Never pay for a humanities Ph.D. Ever.

 

I was accepted to Claremont as well a couple years ago but was very turned off by the lack of funding for students. 70%? What the heck is that all about?

 

I did hear their creative writing program is really awesome, though. 

[mikers86]

Fully-funded offer every time. The fully-funded is more likely to be able to support you in other ways - conferences, etc. If there was the potential for a fully-funded package say in the second year at Claremont, then I would say consider it. But from what you've said, it doesn't appear to be the case. If you think you could be happy at the other school, go with the money.

[Romanista]

Now that the deadline to submit a $200 deposit is here however, I'm having some second thoughts.

 

 

That tells you everything you need to know really. I've never heard of a deposit for a PhD program in the Humanities.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Romanista

[mikers86]

I mean, it should go without saying that the market isn't pretty. You should do everything possible to reduce the amount of debt you take on through the entire process, including not paying for a PhD. You should be focused on developing as a scholar, not worrying about how much extra money you're taking on to complete your degree. It's an irresponsible practice.

 

Another thing to consider is what is each dept's time to degree. For example, 6 years of 70% versus 5 of funded is a big difference. 

Edited April 15, 2014 by mikers86

[StardewDropIn]

I'm a Scripps student (one of the surrounding undergrad schools).  I'll warn you: CGU has a pretty pathetic reputation amongst english profs at the Claremont schools. Their program is "a mess" according to my advisor. They don't fund many students because they want to raise money-- it's a business, not a strong education program.  Don't go into debt over CGU.

There are some awesome professors at Scripps and the other sister schools, though. 

[Horb]

That tells you everything you need to know really. I've never heard of a deposit for a PhD program in the Humanities.

 

Really? I had to pay to hold my spot. It is a very common practice, from my understanding, as it tells the university that you are invested in going there the next year.

[readallthethings]

I don't know much about Claremont, other than it has a very pretty campus. I know of someone who went to Claremont for a theology PhD, which was also not fully funded, and they are in extraordinary debt because of it. I honestly don't know anything about the school academically, though.

 

Even if you say Claremont is a little bit better ranked than the program that offered you full funding, I'd say the fully funded program will probably be able to offer you more support and resources overall (financial and otherwise). I agree with what everyone's been saying thus far.

[1Q84]

I'd pay $200k for a PhD if it meant I got a job afterwards. 

Or, you know, you could go to a fully-funded program with a solid placement record. Just a thought.

[ExponentialDecay]

I am not an expert, but in my understanding, most schools don't harvest funding for research from undergraduate tuition. Typically that funding comes from research grants or endowments. Undergraduate tuition goes to the benefit of the, you know, undergraduates.

 

And damn, if you go $200k in debt to get a teaching job, you're gonna have to make a lot of sacrifices to pay that off...

Edited October 8, 2015 by ExponentialDecay

[bhr]

I am not an expert, but in my understanding, most schools don't harvest funding for research from undergraduate tuition. Typically that funding comes from research grants or endowments. Undergraduate tuition goes to the benefit of the, you know, undergraduates.

 

And damn, if you go $200k in debt to get a teaching job, you're gonna have to make a lot of sacrifices to pay that off...

Depends on the field. Rhet/Comp is heavily subsidized by undergrads, but that's because grad students serve as TAs/instructor of record for their own classes. I would imagine that's the case in a lot of fields where grad students teach

[1Q84]

Definitely! But that wasn't one of the options :/

I really don't want to link you here but I will...

[1Q84]

8 hours ago, drugazi said:

Where do you teach?

I'm not teaching at the moment. I'm beginning my Ph.D. program.

[ProfLorax]

5 hours ago, drugazi said:

As I suspected. But you're killing it at forum posts, so that's good. But if you want input on how to actually get a job, feel free to ask someone on the other side of the podium. 

1Q84 was giving very sound advice that folks should only attend fully funded PhD programs. This response isn't warranted or even relevant to the conversation. 

(Eta: to clarify, I'm not speaking as a moderator here.)

[1Q84]

5 hours ago, drugazi said:

As I suspected. But you're killing it at forum posts, so that's good. But if you want input on how to actually get a job, feel free to ask someone on the other side of the podium. 

And it only took you 46 days to come up with that burn...!

But I should add that you don't know anything about my employment history so your assumption that I've never taught before entering my Ph.D. program is off-base. (For future reference, I've adjuncted for a few years so I have a decent sense of the vicissitudes of the academic job market, thanks.)

[dr. t]

On 10/7/2015, 6:05:40, drugazi said:

Many full professors have PhDs from there.

Oh? And where exactly are they? What's their placement rate?

[Guest]

22 hours ago, drugazi said:

As I suspected. But you're killing it at forum posts, so that's good. But if you want input on how to actually get a job, feel free to ask someone on the other side of the podium. 

And where did you get your PhD? Oh wait, you didn't. At least not according to your profile. 

Glad to hear that Claremont is setting up their grad students with "adjunct jobs," however. That's comforting. 

Edited November 28, 2015 by my_muse

[ExponentialDecay]

Damn, it's like a house on fire over here.

 

Just to add another perspective to drugazi's data here, from my own empirical observations of a field I am intimately familiar with, to get a professorship teaching Russian Lit at almost any college, your chances are best if you have immigrated from the former USSR in the 80s. 

[Guest]

8 hours ago, drugazi said:

I'm 25

8 hours ago, drugazi said:

It took me 46 days to login again and see your patronising actually ... 

No, the one being patronizing here was you, suggesting that people take advice from you because you're "on the other side of the podium." Your reaction--to question people's credentials--was uncalled for.

The original advice stands: it's right to suggest that people not attend unfunded programs--especially when there are programs in the same area of the country that DO have decent funding. 

[dr. t]

9 hours ago, drugazi said:

See above 

A placement rate is a percentage, i.e. the number of graduates who have secured tenure-track or permanent NTT jobs in academia over the total number of graduates. Adjunct positions (and several of the people on your list are adjuncts, others are ambiguous) are not counted as "placements", and for good reason.

I have $40k in debt, personally. To live comfortably, the federal government informed me in my exit paperwork that I should be looking for a job with a salary of around $70k per year. I shudder to think of what they would "recommend" if I had to pay just my living expenses for the duration of my PhD.

Edited November 29, 2015 by telkanuru

[Joan Callamezzo]

On 11/29/2015 at 11:22 AM, drugazi said:

I didn't name any adjuncts

Maybe not "adjuncts," but the first three on your list work at CCs (that was as far as I went). Also - a classy and collegial move on your part to associate these poor profs' names with the weird point you are trying to prove on the internet. 

[dr. t]

37 minutes ago, drugazi said:

I didn't name any adjuncts

Oh?

10 hours ago, drugazi said:

Stephen Parise

 http://www.apu.edu/theology/faculty/sparise/

"Stephen Parise, Ph.D.
Adjunct Professor, Department of Philosophy"

 

Yes, yes you did.

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, telkanuru said:

A placement rate is a percentage, i.e. the number of graduates who have secured tenure-track or permanent NTT jobs in academia over the total number of graduates. Adjunct positions (and several of the people on your list are adjuncts, others are ambiguous) are not counted as "placements", and for good reason.

I have $40k in debt, personally. To live comfortably, the federal government informed me in my exit paperwork that I should be looking for a job with a salary of around $70k per year. I shudder to think of what they would "recommend" if I had to pay just my living expenses for the duration of my PhD.

This. 

I did some searching on CGU's alumni page, and they do list some English PhDs and where they've gone: http://cgu.edu/pages/11733.asp

This doesn't look to be a complete list, though--or at least I hope it isn't a complete list, because it only has two placements from the last 5 years or so (and one of them is working as an adjunct). In any case, I wouldn't be wild about attending a program that isn't forthcoming enough about its placement record to put it on their webpage. 

If I were an incoming grad student, I would also want more info about how CGU has weathered the job market recently (everything post-Recession), because that's what's going to count for anyone starting grad school in this financial climate. Placing a student 15 years ago really doesn't tell us much about the value of the degree in the here and now. 

By googling around a bit, I was able to find a few professors who got a PhD at Claremont--one at SIU, one at CSU-Northridge, one at Chapman and a VAP at Harvey Mudd College. They all graduated pre-Recession and most of them graduated back in the 80s or 90s. 

If there is indeed a placement page from CGU's English program that indicates a more robust and recent placement record, then I'll be happy to be corrected on this. 

[ProfLorax]

I'd also be willing to believe CGU has produced scholars who have gone on and gotten TT jobs. I don't think 1Q84 was denying that. But I imagine some of the folks you name (like your mom) graduated and were hired 5+ years ago. Times have changed. The academy is a precarious place right now; even attending an Ivy no longer comes with a job guarantee. I see some full-time NTT jobs listed at $30-40,000 a year. Given the economic climate, it's just not sound advice to suggest that someone take $200K out in loans for a PhD in the Humanities. It's just not. This isn't about CGU as an institution or the people who graduated from there. It's about adjunctification, shrinking English departments, and anti-humanities rhetoric (if I hear another GOP candidate mention philosophy majors...). 

I know it feels like folks are attacking your institution, drugazi. I know it feels personal. But the advice isn't personal: it's prudent. That's all.