Reputation Real Talk

[silenus_thescribe]

I think Apppp...'s point is a good one, or at least clarifies that discussions of power and privilege aren't limited to what kind of TT position a humanities PhD can hope to be hired for based on their grad institution's prestige. Indeed, if that was what anybody was saying, that'd obviously be lacking in vision.

 

Instead, the problem with the Ivy League isn't limited to humanities PhDs, or professorial hiring, or graduate school at all: the problem is that all sectors of our society, both economic and political, reify the prestige of a small network of massively wealthy institutions, and the institutions combined with their networks work hard at maintaining their exclusive power. That's a social problem at large which isn't at all limited to "the Ivory Tower." And indeed, while the main benefits conferred upon students of elite institutions are largely socioeconomic, the problem is exacerbated and compounded by the fact that Ivies and other elite institutions (and, really, most 4-year universities across the country regardless of prestige) make admissions decisions which adversely affect people of color, trans* folks, working class immigrants, and other already marginalized groups.

 

So, yeah, I think "trans* people get killed so fuck your TT position conundrum" is maybe not the best articulation of the argument, but Appp is right to expand the conversation beyond the woes of professional academia.

 

EDIT: and this is indeed what I mean when I talk about "fuck the Ivy League"--not that the folks who do their English PhDs there are bad people, but that the very nature of such a "League" is grounded in systematic inequality based on prestige and inheritance.

 

That last edit is an important and necessary qualification. This isn't, to say, meant to start a #NotAllIvies thing, but rather to say the problem is institutional first and foremost. If the universities didn't inordinately valuate Ivies over other schools, students wouldn't either. After all, since placement is a concern for those of us looking to enter the professorial job market, if Ivy X got hiring treatment equivalent to State School Y or small liberal arts college Z, then there is no reason to put X on a pedestal, all other things being equal. 

 

Even the things that one can reasonably quantify when comparing universities don't necessarily prove the decisive factor when making a decision, nor does it prove one way or another that a university is better. (In fact, I find the discussion of a "better" university problematic, particularly at the graduate level, where specialization is quite important, meaning that evaluating schools wholesale seems a fruitless enterprise.) For instance, by most ranks Oxford is the best place to study English literature in the world. Having been there for a semester during my undergrad, I can confirm that the libraries and resources there are gargantuan, and would understandably be the envy of any English scholar. 

 

However, even though Oxford's resources are "objectively" more plentiful than most of the universities I applied to, I nonetheless was not compelled to apply there. I very much enjoyed Oxford and found it refined me as a scholar for the time I was there, but when considering doing a D.Phil there for four to five years, I ultimately found their educational model too individualistic for my tastes. So while places like Oxbridge and the Ivies get lionized because of their resources, it's not the case that one is guaranteed a better or, more importantly, a more "fit" education by attending them. I myself applied to two Ivies, not because of being Ivies as such but rather because their programs were a genuinely good fit. Even though Harvard is undeniably top-tier, I had no desire to apply there.

 

Part of the "Ivy bias" seems to me to stem from the reasonable recognition that in terms of funds, faculty, and resources, they are truly excellent institutions. When it comes to hiring PhDs or accepting people into PhD/MA programs, however, this recognition is carried out to unwieldy extremes. That someone was able to work with a particularly vast scholarly treasure trove for their PhD says nothing about students who do incredible work at comparatively smaller institutions. When you add in things like family legacy and particular donor bases, this issue of prestige becomes even more magnified.

 

Worst of all, though, is that this prestige bias enhances societal-wide prejudices, of the kind that have been identified: racism, sexism, transphobia, and homophobia. Appplication is certainly correct to point these out, as they are at the fore of the issue of hiring (in all sectors of the economy, to wit). Nevertheless, as hypervodka points out, these discriminatory practices aren't unique to Ivies:

 

Myopic hiring practices at certain institutions (which, again, I honestly don't think was ever the focus of this thread) are indicative of myopic hiring decisions at ALL institutions

 

So while I think there does need to be a serious re-valuation of the way Ivies are perceived in hiring practices, pervasive social discrimination of groups like racial minorities and LGBTQA* folks would still be a major issue absent the preference for elite institutions. 

Edited February 25, 2015 by silenus_thescribe

[1Q84]

That's a social problem at large which isn't at all limited to "the Ivory Tower." And indeed, while the main benefits conferred upon students of elite institutions are largely socioeconomic, the problem is exacerbated and compounded by the fact that Ivies and other elite institutions (and, really, most 4-year universities across the country regardless of prestige) make admissions decisions which adversely affect people of color, trans* folks, working class immigrants, and other already marginalized groups.

 

So, yeah, I think "trans* people get killed so fuck your TT position conundrum" is maybe not the best articulation of the argument, but Appp is right to expand the conversation beyond the woes of professional academia.

 

 

I'm not sure I agree with your last statement. What was Appp's purpose of bringing up transphobic violence in relation to reputational hiring biases in academia aside from trying to derail the conversation or minimize the importance of what's being discussed in this thread?

 

Being worried about getting a TT job and caring very deeply about stopping transphobic violence are not mutually exclusive. It's ridiculous to even suggest that if one cares about getting a TT job, they don't care about anything else. Unfortunately, Appp wasn't making the argument that you so eloquently expressed here. He/she is saying that the two concepts are separate while you're saying that they're intertwined, which is absolutely on the nose. 

Edited February 25, 2015 by 1Q84

[Appppplication]

I never said they were mutually exclusive and clearly I don't think that. But focusing solely on the Ivys and getting hired at an Ivy grossly minimizes the injustices that happen across the world both on the streets and in institutions.

[Appppplication]

I would further say that to act as if someone not getting a job at an Ivy because said person went to a "lesser ranked" institution is anywhere comparable to larger struggles of inequality or subsitute for said inequalities is ridonculous.

Not getting hired at an Ivy is NOT a symbol for social inequality

Edited February 25, 2015 by Appppplication

[Dr. Old Bill]

I never said they were mutually exclusive and clearly I don't think that. But focusing solely on the Ivys and getting hired at an Ivy grossly minimizes the injustices that happen across the world both on the streets and in institutions.

 

It's all relative. At the precise moment that the first of the Twin Towers was hit, fifty people across the world were pitching a fit at various Starbucks because the barista got their order wrong. They're completely different issues on completely different levels.

 

I would further say that to act as if someone not getting a job at an Ivy because said person went to a "lesser ranked" institution is anywhere comparable to larger struggles of inequality or subsitute for said inequalities is ridonculous.

Not getting hired at an Ivy is NOT a symbol for social inequality

 

I'm really not sure who suggested this or what you're responding to here...

[allplaideverything]

I would further say that to act as if someone not getting a job at an Ivy because said person went to a "lesser ranked" institution is anywhere comparable to larger struggles of inequality or subsitute for said inequalities is ridonculous.

Not getting hired at an Ivy is NOT a symbol for social inequality

 

Well, OK, I think lots of folks have been notably clear that they're worried about more than simply not getting hired at an Ivy. If this is a good faith discussion and you disagree, we can dig more deeply into some quotes.

 

More generally, though, I think there are ways of talking about all of these issues together without holding them to be "comparable" or one to be "a symbol for" another. Instead, the thing that connects professorial hiring woes with other kinds of social inequality is causality. If we're interested in dismantling oppressive and unequal systems, then we need to look at how those systems work and what effects they have on a broad scale. I agree that not getting hired at an Ivy is not as important as, say, the rising problem of student loan debt, or the racial gap in income and wealth. However, all of these problems are caused, at least in part, by the same system--and part of that system is the concentration of massive resources in protected and exclusionary zones (whether Ivies or SLACs or universities in general).

[silenus_thescribe]

Not getting hired at an Ivy is NOT a symbol for social inequality

 

As hypervodka and others have articulated, this is not the germane issue here. Of course no one should act like not getting hired at Harvard is a social injustice. Getting a tenure-track job at any institution, let alone an Ivy, is difficult. For anyone to expect that they're owed a job at any one university (Ivy or otherwise) is indeed ridiculous. 

 

The various criticisms regarding Ivy prestige are about the bearing it has on applying to/getting hired at all universities. 

[hypervodka]

Again, getting hired/not getting hired at Ivies has never been the focus of the conversation here, and no one here is clamoring about the injustice of being refused a tenured position at Yale.

 

Worrying over whether or not you will actually get a job at all because of the school you were able to go to is a legitimate concern, and it doesn't make sense to devalue it based on the larger concerns plaguing the globe. Even if this had been a conversation preoccupied with getting us all jobs at Ivy League institutions, I don't understand how that "minimizes the injustices that happen across the world." If someone had complained about their desperate need for a post-doc at Princeton, they wouldn't have been doing so to put that need in direct competition with other, far greater and dire social needs. There are threads here fretting over the weather in Chicago during campus visit weekends, how to make a good impression, what music people like, the price of and preparation for ETS's endless exams, and a wide host of cosmically insignificant topics that do nothing to minimize macroscopic social issues.

 

I'm not sure I'm really understanding you, so please correct me. It does not make sense to point out that not getting a job at Harvard is a far lesser problem than violent transphobia, because no one has been arguing any different.

Edited February 25, 2015 by hypervodka

[lifealive]

I would further say that to act as if someone not getting a job at an Ivy because said person went to a "lesser ranked" institution is anywhere comparable to larger struggles of inequality or subsitute for said inequalities is ridonculous.

Not getting hired at an Ivy is NOT a symbol for social inequality

 

Which thread have you been reading?

[Appppplication]

Not getting a TT job is such a great problem to have.

That's all I'm saying.

[Appppplication]

Which thread have you been reading?

The one on waitlists.

[allplaideverything]

The one on waitlists.

 

we should be frenemies at UCR

[Appppplication]

Lol. i dont do frenemies.

But This is good fun.

[ProfLorax]

Bullshit. Not getting a TT job isn't just a mild disappointment. It's emblematic that the heart and soul of higher education is eroding in a tidal wide of corporatization. Who suffers from the most from this trend? College students, and often the most disadvantaged, who no longer have access to office hours or commited advisors because all their adjunct instructors are teaching seven classes to make ends meet. Is it surprising that students of color, low income students, and disabled students are dropping out of college in record numbers just as the powers that be put all their efforts into streamlining everything in higher education? It's all connected: adjunctification, the gutting of student services, caps on financial aid, caps on basic skills courses, the devaluing of the humanities. And there are awfully big stakes.

[Appppplication]

everyone aggrees it's all connected And of course these are good points.

But sometimes reading this site I wish everyone would start every sentence that refers to a TT job or a PhD program acceptance or admission with "i know I'm privileged, but....."

[kurayamino]

everyone aggrees it's all connected And of course these are good points.

But sometimes reading this site I wish everyone would start every sentence that refers to a TT job or a PhD program acceptance or admission with "i know I'm privileged, but....."

By that token should we extrapolate and suggest that everyone who is on this website is privileged because we exist in a society that has Internet and allows for informed discussions? Should we carry the argument out to its farthest point until it becomes meaningless? The hierarchy of privilege is stratified, it is not black and white, all or none. Getting into a PhD program is A privilege, but I would hesitate to argue that all who get in ARE privileged. They are certainly not privileged in the same way or for even the same reason.

[Appppplication]

Carrying it out quite far may be useful.

But yes privilege is complex and different networks have different implications.

[unræd]

When I left the thread this morning… I mean, you know when you're walking down the street, and you look up, and all of a sudden you have no idea where you are, or how you got there?

 

Yeah. That.

[fancypants09]

Yeah, I'm with everyone who is scratching their heads at how this thread has devolved into a fetischization of the Ivies.

everyone aggrees it's all connected And of course these are good points.

But sometimes reading this site I wish everyone would start every sentence that refers to a TT job or a PhD program acceptance or admission with "i know I'm privileged, but....."

I'm privileged in certain ways, but severly not in others and have no problems owning up to it, though I'm not sure whether GCers want to hear my story. How about you own up to your own prescription, App, eh?

And I am still very much up for discussing viable alternatives to TT professorships. I do share your sentiments, ProfLorax, but perhaps we can think of alternatives that will take some of the concerns you mention into account?

[Appppplication]

I'm gonna start every post from now on with "I know I"m privileged in _____X____ way, but....."   

 

Watch. I'll stick by my word. 

[cloudofunknowing]

Since the inferences and assumptions are really starting to go off in wild lines of flight, it seems important to establish that, from a particular intersectional point of view, that is a disclaimer *anyone* posting *anything* on this forum should make each time they post, Apppplication, including you. I trust you aren't suggesting otherwise? (Just so we're clear.)

[Appppplication]

I know I'm privileged in that I'm able to own and pay for a smart phone with internet access so I can type this, but I already established that I was going to acknowledge my privilege at the beginning of every post in the post just before yours. 

Edited February 26, 2015 by Appppplication

[cjmullis]

I really don't think that acknowledging privilege before each time one speaks, writes, or acts is really accomplishing anything. People should recognize that they are privileged and approach situations with that knowledge, but I don't think we are morally required to apologetically announce our privilege before expressing any sort of opinion. 

[1Q84]

I'm beginning to think Apppplication has Camille Paglia'd us all and is just saying random, fallacious crap for the sake of pushing buttons. 

[Appppplication]

Lol. I do strongly believe we all need to check our privilege as we type out all our PhD-related problems, and I was coming from more of a provocative reality check this is the vibe I'm getting kinda serious rather than a quote-driven, research paper type of serious. 

 

 

So yes I did enjoy pushing the buttons, but yes I am seriously committed to social change.

 

 

That being said, I can't stand Camille Paglia. She's the worst. 

Edited February 26, 2015 by Appppplication