How Elite Schools Admit PhD Students

[MaxWeberHasAPosse]

New book just published reviewed by Inside Higher Ed. One of the first ethnographic accounts of PhD admissions: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/06/new-book-reveals-how-elite-phd-admissions-committees-review-candidates?utm_content=bufferf6b3b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=IHEbuffer#.Vo3lr-Zy90o.facebook

 

I found it to be fascinating and disturbing.

[sociologyapp2016]

Here's the summarized version: 

-GRE scores matter. "...every department had a GRE cutoff. Posselt said this is particularly surprising since all of the departments boast of “holistic review,” in which each applicant is evaluated on a range of criteria and not a formula...One professor told Posselt: “I have impressions that some of my faculty -- senior members -- were simply looking for the GRE. They have a threshold such as, ‘If it's not over 700, I won't read anything.’ And that cuts usually two-thirds of applicants.”"

-Prestige of undergrad pedigree matters. "Prestige of undergraduate program counted for a lot."

-(High) grades don't matter so much. (However, low grades will still hurt your application.) "But grade point average? Not so much. One astrophysicist Posselt quotes said, “Grade point, most people said it doesn't affect them very much because basically everybody in the pool -- everybody in the final pool -- has such high GPAs that it's not meaningful.” A sociologist said this was especially a problem with the many finalists from top colleges. “Grades are increasingly a lousy signal, especially at those elite places that just hand out the A’s. So you don't even have that anymore,” he said."

-The "what other schools are you applying to?" question on applications. Yes, schools care about that. "For instance, those whose programs were not at the very top of the rankings frequently talked about not wanting to offer a spot to someone they believed would go to a higher-ranked program. They didn't want their department to be the graduate equivalent of what high school students applying to college term a safety school. In this sense many of these departments turned down superior candidates, some of whom might have enrolled. Many of the professors sound insecure about their programs even though they are among the very best."

-Asian international students are held to a higher standard. "The departments observed by Posselt appear to practice a form of affirmative action for everyone who is not an international Asian student in that professors de-emphasize the (typically extremely high) GRE scores of such applicants to avoid admitting what they would consider to be too many of them. This is in contrast to the attitudes of many professors with regard to considering American applicants of various ethnicities -- and who insisted on a single (high) standard there."

-Bias/racism against Chinese international students. "Chinese applicants appear especially challenging to many American professors, who report that they “seem alike” and hard to distinguish, when the admissions process is designed to do just that. One humanities professor told Posselt, “How do you compare six students from China, who all have the same last name?”...While departments are trying to do a better job of understanding Chinese applicants and are certainly admitting many of them, Posselt writes of a “troubling tendency to think of students from China not as individuals, but a profile of group averages.”"

-You can be discriminated for your religious beliefs/political positions. "The applicant, to a linguistics Ph.D. program, was a student at a small religious college unknown to some committee members but whose values were questioned by others. “Right-wing religious fundamentalists,” one committee member said of the college, while another said, to much laughter, that the college was “supported by the Koch brothers.”"

-There are affirmative action considerations for race, possibly gender. "Many faculty members...appeared more comfortable considering race and ethnicity as a slight tip among otherwise equal candidates who had advanced to a finalist round. One professor said, “I try not to pay too much attention. I try to admit students that are the best in my intellect with no regard for gender and race.” Only with two applicants who are “equal on intellectual merit, then I will prefer a minority,” the professor said.""

Disclaimer: Please note that the departments that were observed as a basis for making these claims are "ranked as among the top programs in their disciplines." They are also not necessarily sociology departments. 

[MaxWeberHasAPosse]

I think one of the departments was sociology. The author makes mention of a sociologist she interviewed. It could, however, be a sociologist in a non-sociology department. 

[sociologyapp2016]

Yeah, a sociologist was mentioned. But what I mean to say was that not all observations in the article necessarily reflect comments by sociologists. For example, one of the observations was that "White males “dominated” the admissions committees." I seriously doubt this applies to sociology departments as much as, say, econ, which is much, much more white and male.

On the whole, however, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the general findings hold true across fields, including sociology.

[gingin6789]

Interesting. I feel bad for leaving the "other schools I'm applying to" field blank. I mainly did that because I was filling out the apps that included that before I really knew my final list anyway. 

[hippyscientist]

@gingin6789 I left that field blank too for precisely the same reason. When I had an interview I was asked about it, and I told them the truth and stipulated that the reason I was applying to those 4 schools specifically was that the research fit was excellent in all 4, but there were 2 schools that I could truly picture myself at (one being the one I applied to and the other is actually the top rated programme in the world so a total longshot and not the reason I applied there!). They seemed impressed at the schools I was applying to and also grateful for my honesty so maybe leaving the field blank is a good thing as it gives you more of a chance to explain yourself when this question inevitably arises.

[Pennywise]

This is really interesting -- I would suggest current applicants consider leaving the "other schools" field blank. As Piglet wrote, better to get the interview and have to explain it, than to be disqualified before even getting an interview. 

(ETA: Unless this would be considered dishonest by schools, and then get you in trouble if they deemed you to be a liar -- that's a tough call).

I wonder if this issue torpedoed my application last year to a medium ranked school I really thought I was going to get into. I would have seriously considered it for personal reasons, so that would be a shame if they had assumed I was only applying as a safety school.

Edited January 7, 2016 by Pennywise

[hippyscientist]

This might be the reason why people say there is no such thing as a safety school at grad level?

[gingin6789]

18 minutes ago, piglet33 said:

@gingin6789 I left that field blank too for precisely the same reason. When I had an interview I was asked about it, and I told them the truth and stipulated that the reason I was applying to those 4 schools specifically was that the research fit was excellent in all 4, but there were 2 schools that I could truly picture myself at (one being the one I applied to and the other is actually the top rated programme in the world so a total longshot and not the reason I applied there!). They seemed impressed at the schools I was applying to and also grateful for my honesty so maybe leaving the field blank is a good thing as it gives you more of a chance to explain yourself when this question inevitably arises.

Yeah, I can't remember if I filled out *all* such applications before I knew my final list (I think only three or four programs asked about this), but I'd say for nearly all of them I did. If they ask about the other programs, I'll be happy to tell them about the programs, as I definitely have my final list now haha