Rutgers Linguistics

[historicallinguist]

Hi. Everyone! Greetings from the U.K. I am currently doing a one-year Master course in a U.K. university. (presumably a well-known school, but poorly funded for American students, yes! not a penny for master student!, and now I am kind of aware of why this program is poorly funded.). It is unfortunate that I gradually realize that my current program is not quite the right one for me. It is basically a structuralist linguistics program that focuses on the description of one specific language. I feel that I am more interested in linguistics theory on its own than the linguistics (discourse analysis, functionalist analysis, etc) of a specific language. 

Fortunately, it is a one-year program, and I cannot wait to finish it! Now, it is time for me to apply to PHD programs back in the U.S. I applied to Rutgers while I was an undergraduate last year (non-linguistics BA), and I was put on a waiting list, and eventually didn't get in. I am planning to reapply to Rutgers linguistics for Fall 2016 Admission this year again.

Now, here comes the question of practical concerns. Is there any current Rutgers linguistics PHD students in the forum who can tell me a little bit more about supervision in Rutgers? 

Are profs. in the department willing to help students to prepare for QPs and diss. beyond the minimal supervision required by departmental regulations?

I want to make sure that I am not going to a place where, whenever asking for help or suggestions or comments, students are told that it is the way the program is set up and turned down, and are left alone to self-study for the examinations with nominal and minimal supervision, or imposed teachings that are only remotely relevant to the preparation of QPs, diss., and my own research interest .

Thanks!

 

 

 

[fuzzylogician]

I am not from Rutgers and I understand you've had some bad experiences in your current program, but for what it's worth, what you are describing sounds like a typical program in the UK. Programs in the US tend to be a lot more hands on, but if you expect not to study anything that's unrelated to your research, you are very much misguided. You will most certainly have to take courses that you don't want to, and spend time doing homework that's not going to contribute to your research, QPs, or dissertation. It's the way programs in the US are structured, so you had better adjust your expectations. Beyond that, any questions about advising that goes "beyond the minimal supervision required by departmental regulations" should be relativized to potential advisors, because there is quite a bit of variation.* And since that is the case, I don't think you will get useful responses in this public forum. I certainly wouldn't share my thoughts about individual professors' advising style here in this way. This is information that you can get from current PhD students working with your people of interest, if you email or (better yet) meet them in person. At this point, though, you are unlikely to get honest responses, as someone who hasn't even applied to the program. You can try, but I think you will just have to apply, and if/when you get in, you'll find that people will be a lot more forthcoming then. And with that said, I hope you're planning to apply to more than just one school, because Rutgers is a pretty selective program. 

* FWIW baseline expectations for supervision are higher in the US than in the UK. But whether they meet you needs is another question, and highly depends on the individuals involved. 

[759]

1 hour ago, fuzzylogician said:

...Programs in the US tend to be a lot more hands on, but if you expect not to study anything that's unrelated to your research, you are very much misguided...

I have to second this and add, from what I know about Rutgers, that one of their primary goals is to produce 'well rounded linguists' instead of 'semanticists' or 'phonologists'...meaning you'll be taking quite a few courses outside your interests. This is what I've been told, anyway. 

[historicallinguist]

Thank you for your response! In fact, I have couple more in mind, UIUC (funding available for MA), U of Alberta(for this one, I am still considering, for from what I have learnt from their website, they are quite experimental/empirical in terms of methodology, and I am not sure whether this is a good fit for me), George Mason (A relatively small program, but good funding).

As for my current program, please allow me to say a little bit more. It is not a problem that there is SOME lectures/seminars/classes that are remotely relevant to my examinations. The real problem is that a predominant majority of them (probably more than 80 percent, I should say) are remotely relevant.(Please note that evaluation will not take place until the end of the academic year here, and evaluation does take place in a specific lecture/seminar/class. We got examinations (more like a general examiantion) as scheduled in the course (=degree program) handbook).

 Another problem is the overall organization of the teaching component of the program. Take the following case for example. I have a lecture A and lecture B. Lecture A assumes definitely no previous knowledge about linguistics at all, and is about basic concepts such as what are phoneme, morpheme, phonetics, phonology, etc. Lecture B assumes great deal of previous knowledge about theoretical linguistics, and presumably is designed for someone who has passed the general examination. What is problematic is that A and B are required to go at the same time. The prerequisite of understanding the content in lecture B is having known everything in lecture A. If this is the case, what would the point be to attend Lecture A? Conversely, if lecture A is a necessary component, the presupposition is that I have not yet known everything to will be presented in lecture A. If this is the case, then what is the point to attend lecture B given that I don't even satisfy the prerequisite to attend lecture B. Either way, this shows the problematic organization of teachings available.

The second thing I should point out is that there is no core at the heart of the program. To put it in another way, the lectures/seminars/classes required to attend are either one of the followings, 

1. UG classes designed speficially for UG

 2. classes in a different faculty designed specifically for students in that faculty for their degree programs.

To put it in a different way, this is to say no class is designed only for this course.

Even worse, there is no office hour to ask questions.

Also, opportunity to do submitted written work for comments is rare, and I have only 1 opportunity to get comments for the whole term. I attempted to request more, but it is to no avail and what I am told is that this is the way the course is set up (this reason is probably the panacea for all these defects of the program for them).

So, overall, I am left alone to self-study whatever I wish (of course, I could also do this at home in the U.S. without paying academic fees).

Finally, I should also point out that many of the books that could easily be checked out in most U.S. public library are NOT allowed to be checked out here. For most part, I have to read in a library during business hours (not open in the night and very limited hours in weekend). This, of course, is another afflicting experience, as I have spend quite a lot of time to walk back and forth between the dorm and the libraries which are located quite far away at different locations of the city.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fuzzylogician]

Okay, got it. You chose a program that's not a good fit for you and you're unhappy. Since it's a one-year program it sounds like you're staying anyway. If so, I suggest you use your energy to focus on finding better fitting PhD programs and not on judging your current one. There is nothing to be gained by doing it, and I assure you that unsolicited criticism is not something your program will welcome. Some of what you describe can be made to work (e.g. some programs don't have a core required set of courses but instead a breadth requirement that can be satisfied in any number of ways, and lots of programs don't have special courses just for their MA students). I'm sure there are lots of reasons why your program is set up the way it is. I'm also sure it's not perfect--no program is. I think it's clear that it's not right for you, but that ship has sailed. Take what you've learned about what you need to be a successful student and use it to find PhD programs that would be right for you. I'm confused about the UIUC MA funding comment -- I assume that you'll already have an MA so why aren't you applying for a PhD? It's also hard to guess based on the few schools you name what your interests might be, so I'll refrain from making any more suggestions, only that you should be identifying researchers who do interesting (to you) work and schools that would give you the training you want. 

[historicallinguist]

On 11/19/2015 at 1:26 AM, fuzzylogician said:

Okay, got it. You chose a program that's not a good fit for you and you're unhappy. Since it's a one-year program it sounds like you're staying anyway. If so, I suggest you use your energy to focus on finding better fitting PhD programs and not on judging your current one. There is nothing to be gained by doing it, and I assure you that unsolicited criticism is not something your program will welcome. Some of what you describe can be made to work (e.g. some programs don't have a core required set of courses but instead a breadth requirement that can be satisfied in any number of ways, and lots of programs don't have special courses just for their MA students). I'm sure there are lots of reasons why your program is set up the way it is. I'm also sure it's not perfect--no program is. I think it's clear that it's not right for you, but that ship has sailed. Take what you've learned about what you need to be a successful student and use it to find PhD programs that would be right for you. I'm confused about the UIUC MA funding comment -- I assume that you'll already have an MA so why aren't you applying for a PhD? It's also hard to guess based on the few schools you name what your interests might be, so I'll refrain from making any more suggestions, only that you should be identifying researchers who do interesting (to you) work and schools that would give you the training you want. 

I agree and I have been researching on finding better fitting Ph.D programs. For the UIUC MA, please allow me to say a little bit more. Sure, I will have an MA (or they call it MST here) by the end of this academic year. But UIUC requires the following for admission to the Ph.D program: "Students who complete the M.A. in Linguistics at the University of Illinois by passing the Qualifying Examination may apply to the Student Evaluation and Examination Committee to enter the Ph.D. program." So, their MA program is more like an MA en route to Ph.D. 

As for research interests, I am primarily interested in OT. I also researched on the websites of other schools.

Umass is a good place for OT because John McCarthy is there and because in principle I am eligible to apply. But I am not sure whether it is a practical choice in terms of getting admission, as this place is just as competitive as MIT in terms of linguistics admission.

I also looked at UCSC and emailed them about the funding possibility. It turned out that UCSC can rarely fund any of out-of-state student. This is because they have TAship that generally pays about 20k per year. But this TAship does not cover tuition and fees. So, the director of the program told me that they rarely admit those who will have to pay out-of-state tuition.

Any other good suggestions besides Rutgers for OT?

 

[fuzzylogician]

I am not a phonologist, so the best I can do is list some schools that you should look into and decide whether they seem right for you (in no particular order): UCLA, UCSD, U of Chicago, U of Arizona, NYU, Northwestern, U of Maryland, Harvard, Yale, ... I'm sure there are others that I'm not thinking of. 

Re: UCSC, I'm surprised by that answer. I know they definitely have a hard time funding international students, but my understanding was that any US citizen can become a CA resident after living in CA for one year, so all US citizens end up paying in-state tuition and that's not a problem. I suppose things might have changed more recently, but that was the arrangement when I was applying.

[759]

What I'm about to say may be very naive, since I'm no phonologist, but isn't OT sort of the predominant theoretical approach? Wouldn't finding a place to work on OT be as simple as finding a theoretically inclined department? Like I said, this may be naive on my part. OT applied in a wider sense (beyond phonology) would be another story though...

[fuzzylogician]

To my knowledge OT is the predominant theoretical approach in North America, but not in Europe. The OP is studying in the UK, and I assume therefore is not the most familiar with US schools that might be appropriate. That said, I do know some schools where OT isn't taught or used by phonology profs (e.g. UConn comes to mind), and since I'm not a phonologist myself I can't say I know what theoretical approach different profs in the US are using these days. I think it'd be easy enough to find out if you know the right schools to look at and you take the time to read their websites, hence my suggestions above. 

[Francophile1]

Just saw your post and gonna return the favor and reply. I went to Rutgers to a different department but I have had some communication with the Linguistic department as well, as I have reached out to them to observe several classes and find out more about their program.

It is theoretical, so if that's what you are looking for- that's great!

As far as classes: You will have to take classes that you are probably not interested in- at least for the 1st - 2 years. Any PhD program in the U.S will make you take at least some general coursework, because they want you to have a broad range of knowledge in the subject as a whole. You can probably research all of this on the Linguistics site at Rutgers, but you will be required to take your standard, Syntax, Semantics, Phonology etc.. courses. If you have an M.A they might let you transfer some credits, but probably not more than 12 or 15 credits max. 

 

As far as research and getting help from Professors:

This is generally applied to all U.S programs. Faculty are there to help you but you have to seek out the help. They will not treat you as an undergrad. and follow up with you all the time. You have to do the work, to reach out to them etc. An MA/PhD in the U.S is about you being extremely independent and well organized and the faculty are there in the background to help you if you seek it. I would definitely compare it to a sink or swim approach. Not to scare you- but that is just how it is!

 

Teaching:

It is almost guaranteed that you will NOT teach the classes that you want. I would say whatever humanities PHD it is, the 1st year- you get to teach very elementary courses and then advance on. Seniority is also in place so Grad. students who are further in the program get better priority of interesting classes to teach.

Hope this helps.

P.S most of the above information is from my experience at Rutgers but NOT directly in the Linguistic department.

As far as my experience with them, their advisor seems very open minded and helpful and their grad classes are small and diverse.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Francophile1

[melinh.maryjane]

It's probably too late for my input to be of much help for this application cycle but FWIW I was an undergraduate linguistics major at Rutgers. Sadly I didn't interact with a lot of the department that much because they didn't really encourage that much intradepartmental interaction with the undergrads while I was there, although I think they're working on changing that now. But if you want a very general summary of the mentoring atmosphere: it changes from person to person. Overall, Rutgers linguistics is much more invested in their graduate students than their undergraduates, so it's not like they'll admit you and ignore you. And some faculty (more than a few actually) are the whole package for a great mentor: patient, understanding, and highly invested their students. Others are also eager at the prospect of new research with new students but then will maddeningly never check their email often enough to get it off the ground. There were a couple of professors who I couldn't even imagine stepping out of their own personal research long enough to teach intro to ling let alone mentor someone long enough to give them their doctorate. 

And yet, they do it. In the few instances that I got to mingle with linguistics grad students and faculty at the same time, it was always clear that grad students felt pretty comfortable just chatting with thefaculty, which I always took as an indication of frequent interaction. But Rutgers is a huge school so you'll find that a lot of departments, including the teeny linguistics department, generally have this attitude: if there's something you want out of your education, there's a chance you'll have to hunt after it like a shark. That includes your faculty mentor's attention and their assistance with your grad school endeavors. 

Feel free to message me if you want to talk more about Rutgers. I'll say this right now though: the department building is more on the "complete dump" side of "slightly shabby". It's an extremely old house that was converted into some office space, and its age is really showing. I'd say it's charming but one time I was almost late to a meeting because the door was quite rudely being blocked by a very large swarm of bees. If you're really interested just don't expect certain basic amenities is all I'm saying.