Degree Geography

[goldfinch1880]

I've heard conflicting advice from established sources in academia and I'm hoping you all can weigh in....Do you think geography of undergrad/grad degrees matters in reference to one another?

 

Meaning if I got my BA in California, and have the opportunity to get my PhD from CA or from somewhere else, should I go for the one in a different state/area of the country? Or if I have my BA from a SLAC in the South, is it better to choose a program in the Northeast or does it matter if I get the PhD also in the South, if it's in a different state? Etc....

[Appppplication]

In my experience, I've never heard of this making any difference on admissions or on job prospects. Others may feel differently?

[lifealive]

I've never heard such a thing. I've only heard that getting all your degrees at the same institution doesn't look good.

 

I can think of more than a few successful professors off the top of my head who got degrees in the same state or general location--Berkeley and Stanford, for instance, or Swarthmore and UPenn. And truly, I think that some specializations are strong in particular areas of the country, which might explain why people stay in one place. Rhet/comp is big in the Midwest. Medieval lit seems to thrive on the East and West coasts. Early American seems to have its strongest programs in the Mid-Atlantic cities and in New England--I'm guessing because of the libraries and resources there. Southern lit is big in the south, obviously.

 

Really, you should go to the best school you get into that serves your interests regardless of where it is. 

Edited March 24, 2015 by lifealive

[empress-marmot]

Goodness, I've never thought about that. While it wouldn't be the first thing I would consider when choosing a program, I can imagine that high school in one part of the country, college in the same part of the country, MA in the same part of the country, and PhD in the same part of the country might feel a little...confining? If you're the type to feel confined. 

 

Actually, way down on my list of reasons for declining a program (after research fit, professor fit, program requirements, courses, etc.) was that it was in the Midwest, and I wanted to try out a different part of the country. However, if it had matched my research interests better than other programs, I would have squashed my wanderlust. 

[goldfinch1880]

Do you think the South should be a special consideration however? I have a friend who got his BA from a Southern school and is accepted at a Southern university for his Phd, in addition to a few in the NW and NE....do you think biases against the South could make the geography question valid in his case? For some reason people perceive of the South as a less adequate environment for free thought in universities, and maybe that's why he received the advice he did? Personally I find that kind of ridiculous but I wouldn't want him to limit his job opportunites for something so stupid, especially if he has other options. IF it's actually something that would affect his prospects at all.

[lifealive]

Do you think the South should be a special consideration however? I have a friend who got his BA from a Southern school and is accepted at a Southern university for his Phd, in addition to a few in the NW and NE....do you think biases against the South could make the geography question valid in his case? For some reason people perceive of the South as a less adequate environment for free thought in universities, and maybe that's why he received the advice he did? Personally I find that kind of ridiculous but I wouldn't want him to limit his job opportunites for something so stupid, especially if he has other options. IF it's actually something that would affect his prospects at all.

 

That's where you should look at placements. I do think that certain schools place most of their students in certain regions. A glance at placements will tell you if the school tends to place people regionally or all over the country. But if the southern school is a better fit and had a national reputation (like I can't imagine going wrong with a degree from Duke or Vanderbilt, for instance) then that would be a compelling enough reason to stay in the south.

[allplaideverything]

I think where you get your PhD can strengthen your job prospects at regional schools (a CUNY grad might have a better chance at SUNY or NYC schools, for example), but I don't think it matters where you did your MA after you get your PhD.

[empress-marmot]

I took a look at placements for my field, and it seemed like PhDs from the southwest placed at schools in the region. I don't have any real numbers on this, and I am certainly not implying that some PhDs "only" place in regional schools. As other users pointed out, you would have to look at placements and draw your own conclusions. 

 

...perhaps regional biases do exist. If I were on a hiring committee in the Midwest, and I interviewed a candidate who had spent his or her entire life on the East/West coast, I might ask a question about how he or she would feel about moving to a new part of the country. That being said, I'd be happy if the worst question I face in an interview is "Marmot, you moved from the midwest to the south to the (other region)...are you sure you can settle down here?"

[goldfinch1880]

Hypothetically, what if I'm a student who got a BA in the Midwest, and the Midwestern PhD I've been offered is a 7/10 in terms ofprogram fit, but the location is ideal for my life situation and funding is great, whereas the California degree is an expensive, less than ideal location, funding is full but has a lower stipend and in a more expensive area, but the program is a 8 or 9 out of 10? Would it be stupid to take the Midwestern PhD?

[lifealive]

Hypothetically, what if I'm a student who got a BA in the Midwest, and the Midwestern PhD I've been offered is a 7/10 in terms ofprogram fit, but the location is ideal for my life situation and funding is great, whereas the California degree is an expensive, less than ideal location, funding is full but has a lower stipend and in a more expensive area, but the program is a 8 or 9 out of 10? Would it be stupid to take the Midwestern PhD?

 

It's really impossible to answer this question without the specifics of what programs you're looking at and what area you're planning to study. You should ask a professor or advisor who knows the specifics of your situation. This is the point in the conversation where GC advice can do more harm than good--because none of us here is a professor on a hiring committee.

[goldfinch1880]

It's really impossible to answer this question without the specifics of what programs you're looking at and what area you're planning to study. You should ask a professor or advisor who knows the specifics of your situation. This is the point in the conversation where GC advice can do more harm than good--because none of us here is a professor on a hiring committee.

 

I guess I'm just trying to get a general sense for if staying in the same area, because the area is a great location, and going for a program with less-than-perfect fit is somewhat foolish.

[echo449]

I think there's a kind of common idea (though I've never seen any data to back it up), that certain places do well regionally, and other places send graduates all over the country. For instance, when I looked at Austin, it did strike me as significant that, compared to other top schools, many of their students remained in the south after finding positions. 

[rising_star]

Not in your field but I've heard that it matters, especially if you're looking to work at a regional comprehensive school or more teaching-focused institutions. I was actually told this directly by profs in my MA program when I was trying to decide where to go for my PhD. They pointed out that smaller state schools in my home region might be reluctant to hire me if I did a PhD outside the region since they might not be convinced of my investment in that region. Schools hate to invest in someone that will leave the area for a different (or more prestigious) institution in a few years so having regional ties can bolster your ability to get a job. I interviewed at a smaller, semi-rural campus last year, and they were very concerned with whether I would move there and stay or if I was just going to use my time there as a pseudo-post-doc to gain teaching experience and get publications out so I could get another position. When I've interviewed for those positions and it isn't an area I'm from or have gone to school in, it hasn't led to an offer, though there could be myriad factors contributing to this of course. 

[allplaideverything]

I've been reading it as more of a discourse community thing than a "will they want to live here" thing, personally (though I could certainly be wrong.)

By way of analogy: at the Catholic college where I started my undergrad career, when I told my old professors where I'd been accepted, they all perked up at the mention of Fordham, even though it's arguably the least prestigious school on my list (and not even all those profs are Catholic). They just operate in a community where they hear more about that school. Alternatively, all my friends who do Black Studies perked up when I mentioned Riverside because Fred Moten is there.

So, analogically, I feel like job placement can often be regional: while Washington University in St. Louis certainly enjoys a national reputation as a great school, folks in the Midwest probably just hear about it and talk about it more than, say, folks in the Southeast. And while I never knew anything about the University of Wyoming personally, I learned a couple years ago that a bunch of their MFA grads had landed jobs at other schools nearby--conceivably because the school is more known out there.

[goldfinch1880]

I've also read placement rates in areas like the South, PNW, etc. phrased something like: "Most of our students look for jobs in a specific geographic area, so our placement rate is 50%, but of those that search nationally it's 65%." So I suppose there's probably a factor of students wanting to stay in that geographic area (for a variety of reasons such as spouse's job, cost of living), creating placement rates that are slightly skewed geographically. (For instance, if I attended UCSD and loved the area I'd at least look at nearby job possibilities!) 

[Romanista]

I attended a community college panel at C's last week and asked a similar question: does the prestige of where a job applicant went to school or the location of where a job applicant went to school matter to the search committee? The panel unanimously said no but with a couple exceptions. First, if you happened to get a PhD from a well known program then you may have to justify why you want to teach at a community college in order to dispel the underlying assumption that you're waiting out the bad job market, planning to jump ship the moment a TT job appears at a 4 year school. Second, in comparison to four year schools, the transition from adjunct to full time faculty member is more common at two year institutions (community colleges and satellite campuses of large state universities). The panelists suggested that adjuncting at a CC is useful for determining whether a CC faculty job is right for you. Also the fact that you have part time teaching experience at the same institution considering you for a full time position may help you in getting the job, whereas universities tend not to think this way.

 

This may not be applicable outside of teaching English at a two year school.