Factors to consider when choosing comps?

[surefire]

Hi there GC hive mind!

 

I'd be interested in your input on what factors I should consider - and weight - when choosing a comprehensive exam area.

 

I'm finishing my second year in a Sociology PhD program and my first comprehensive exam choice was a no-brainer - law and socio-legal studies, as this is my dominant research area. I took this exam last year, in the summer between my first and second year. (And I passed, woot!).

 

My supervisor has been prodding me of late to commit to a second comp area and set a date for the next exam (as early as January if I can make a decision soon, but next June is an option as well). When I first came into the program, I figured that I'd take the second exam in "health", as I invoke some sociology of health stuff in my research - but it turns out that the exam is largely quant-based mental-health stuff, which isn't helpful.

 

So, I was thinking about doing the second comp in a "fundamental" sociological area - like theory or methods. I'd gotten the impression that this is beneficial for prospective university teaching gigs down the line and that a "fundamental" comp plus a "specialty research" comp would make me a well-rounded candidate. Plus, I tend to enjoy theory (that counts for something, right?). I have a prospectively publishable theory paper, but I'm not sure if I'll make a habit of publishing in this area.

 

But, now I'm not so sure. My supervisor thinks that I should consider the "policy" comp. She's on this comp committee and, while this comp tends to be a less popular choice among students in our department (you have to "request" this comp, it's not automatically offered), I have to admit that I have seen a trend in policy-specialty hires in sociology of late and the notion of having a maybe concrete/pragmatic second comp area is appealing. I only recently got hold of a reading list, and I could see some prospective benefit to my research options from it. I'm hesitant though; I've taken policy courses in the 4th year of my undergrad and my MA and, while I find the material interesting, it DOES NOT come easy to me. Plus, I would probably need to take a policy course leading up to the exam (outside of my department), which is fine (I have one more elective, but I was kind of hoping to expend it on a "fun" course in ethnography or something instead).

 

So, there seems to be a lot of factors to consider here, how should I weigh them? Or, what would you consider most viable/important?

 

- Should one choose a comp that relates to research, even if the connection isn't wholesale?

- Is there something to be said for doing a comp that is "fundamental" to your discipline?

- Is the comp selection a strong signal, at all, to hiring committees regarding prospective teaching? Or do they consider it in a different way? Is it wise to try and divine hiring trends here? Would taking a more "pragmatic" second comp make me a more viable candidate outside academia (I'm just hedging here...)?

- To what extent do you permit your own general interest to guide your choice?

- Anything else I haven't thought of?

 

Thanks in advance for any input! I didn't anticipate that this choice would be giving me a bit of an academic identity crisis!

[juilletmercredi]

Do you have an intersecting area of interest that you might want to pursue in the future?  Your main area may be sociology and/of law, but there might be a 'minor' area of a secondary area that you also want to do research in.  Do you have a dissertation topic?  If so, is there a tangential area that it could be helpful to investigate for the purposes of the dissertation?

 

Methods is always a good thing to do an exam in.  It is beneficial for teaching (they always want someone who can teach research methods and/or statistics) but is also great for your dissertation.

 

Don't do a comp in a "sexy" area if you don't like it.  So maybe there are lots of policy-specialty sociology hires in your field, but if policy doesn't come easier to you and ethnography sounds like more fun - is it really worth it to take the comp in that area that you sound like you really don't want to teach or do research in anyway?  Also, personally when I chose my comp areas I tried to avoid anything I would have to take an additional class for.  The readings take enough time and work.  I think how much your comps bear upon your job readiness really depends on your field and how your comps are structured.  So the way I'd answer this is

 

1. Yes.

 

2. Yes.  That foundation is essential, and you'll be surprised how much more deeply you absorb literature and new ideas if you explore the fundamentals really well in a comp.  One of my oral comp areas was a fundamental one in my field and it changed the way I looked at the subfield.

 

3. I don't think it is.  They wouldn't even know unless you told them, and unless you did something really cutting-edge or different for your comps, they probably won't care very much.  It's not really about how you acquired the knowledge - just what you know.  Will taking this comp help you be able to teach an undergrad-level sociological policy class?  If yes, then it may be worth it; if no, then...I can't imagine it would matter.  I take a pragmatic approach, but I also don't think you should get yourself really into a 'marketable' field if you don't like it.

 

4. All of my comps (and classes, and dissertation work) were based on my personal/professional interests.  Personally I refused to be goaded into things I didn't want to do because of...whatever people thought.  My advisor tried to get me to add a qualitative component to my dissertation, and while I like qual methods I was adamantly against doing it for my dissertation, so I said no and didn't do it.

 

5. Pick something you're going to pass on the first try.  Also, you may want to pick something that you can publish on.  How great would it be to be able to publish a conceptual paper from your comps research?

[Sigaba]

 

1. Should one choose a comp that relates to research, even if the connection isn't wholesale?
2. Is there something to be said for doing a comp that is "fundamental" to your discipline?
3.  Is the comp selection a strong signal, at all, to hiring committees regarding prospective teaching? Or do they consider it in a different way? Is it wise to try and divine hiring trends here? Would taking a more "pragmatic" second comp make me a more viable candidate outside academia (I'm just hedging here...)?
4. To what extent do you permit your own general interest to guide your choice?
5. Anything else I haven't thought of?

 

Thanks in advance for any input! I didn't anticipate that this choice would be giving me a bit of an academic identity crisis!

 

1. Yes. Specifically, to the extent possible your fields should relate to the research you're interested in doing for your dissertation.
2. Yes. Doing a field on an area/topic/method/subject that is central to your discipline will help you understand where you and your work fit into the bigger picture of the profession.
3. IMO, no. Your fields of interest in and of themselves don't send signals. What you do with those fields and how you do it will send signals. That being said, you can leverage the time you spend preparing for your exam so you can later send signals. (As an example, as an undergraduate, I was mentored by a graduate student who prepared for his quals by writing the lectures he intended to use later as a professor.)
4. My selection of fields were determined solely by my interests. However, as my interests were and are out of fashion, my choices mean that I will never be hired as a professional academic historian. But I'm not bitter.
5. Bear in mind that the selection and definition of a field is an iterative process that includes a significant amount of negotiation with the professor administering the exam.

[surefire]

Thank you both very much for your thoughtful responses on this! Much appreciated!

 

It is helpful to know that my impression of the benefits of a comp in a "fundamental" area are not misplaced. It is also helpful to hear that it is not out of the question to over-rule my supervisor, potentially, on this decision or to (gasp!) let my interests be my guide here. Thinking about the comp as an iterative process that will continue to be (re)negotiated after it's completed makes the decision feel less dire; that is, the notion that I'm not locked-in to a proscribed route upon taking it - I can utilize and frame it in ways that make sense for my own academic trajectory - is comforting and empowering.

 

This all helps to plot some recon. I've been talking to those in my cohort who are struggling with similar decisions, but from here, I might seek out some ABD colleagues to find out how they have bolstered/framed their comps in their own academic narrative as they work towards completing their dissertations and start to approach the job market. And, of course, I'll permit myself the luxury of some thoughtful self-reflection and what would benefit my research while reviewing the reading lists, without the preoccupation of "what's trendy".

 

Thanks again!