Know Before You Go

[KnowBefore]

I'm sure many of you know how bad the job market for tenure-track jobs in history is. Still, it can be hard to know, concretely, just how bad. Anecdotally, I'm in a top U.S. history program. Almost no one from our program besides an occasional colonialist (their market is healthier) has gotten a job in years. The placement of other top programs isn't much better. Make sure you ask programs detailed questions about their placement rates: don't just rely on lists of who has gotten a job where in the last year, as these lists often 1) include people who graduated in previous years who just got a job or are moving to a better one, 2) makes it impossible to know how many people did not get jobs. What you want to know is how many people, say, in the last 4 or 5 years in your field have gotten a tt-job vs those who have not.

You should also look at the Academic Job Wiki for history (google it), which lists almost every tenure track job by field for the last several years. This can give you a sense of how many jobs you could apply to. Remember that, depending on the school and subfield, many jobs will get between 200-400 applicants. (Hopefully, of course, the job market will get better by the time you'd have a PhD. This is just a snapshot in time.)

Best of luck to everyone who is applying.

[TMP]

On point, especially for 20th century.

[Neist]

Yeah, I've nearly written off the possibility of getting a PhD. I can find a job that I'd like with the MLIS, and I can't see me going into more debt to finish the PhD.

I only need to take out a couple thousand dollars a year (because I'm supporting a family of three on my stipend), but it's hard to justify the cost when there's no jobs, given my interests. And if there were jobs, it's likely that people in more prestigious programs would get them.

My two cents.

[neat]

Toward the end of my undergrad program (in History), I really wanted to pursue further study. Like many people in this forum, I dreamed of some nice tenure track job in a pleasant little college town, writing and teaching my days away. Before applying to grad programs, I dove into the research on careers in academic history, job prospects, etc, and was horrified. The reality was (and is), that even for those with the right academic pedigree, there simply are no jobs out there. I ran to (well, set up a couple appointments with) my favorite professors in the department and shared my angst with them, hoping against hope that they would disabuse me of this idea (that it was not a realistic option). I remember in particular a conversation with an early Americanist that I particularly admired. He was the star of the department: Ivy league PhD, a host of articles and 2 books out already at the age of 40, etc. He told me in no uncertain terms that it was a staggeringly steep hill to climb, and that he couldn't in good conscience recommend that path to me. He mentioned that there had been over 200 applications for his position, and that he had lucked into being hired by virtue of having a bit of experience in a particular subfield the dept. was interested in.

As I sat there talking to this distinguished scholar of American history with a sterling resume, my heart sank- here's a guy that has worked his tail off, has a sterling pedigree, and he's still lucky to get a job at State U in the middle of the country. The sad reality was that I felt it unwise to pursue that path. 

Disclaimer: My particular story is anecdotal, of course, but it squares pretty well with what the current literature says, too. With the changing nature of how universities are delivering content to students (online, etc) there are more adjuncts and part time lecturers than ever. Best of luck to the brave souls who do choose to embark on that journey, but you should certainly know the risks involved.

 

[Neist]

1 hour ago, 918Philosophizer said:

Toward the end of my undergrad program (in History), I really wanted to pursue further study. Like many people in this forum, I dreamed of some nice tenure track job in a pleasant little college town, writing and teaching my days away. Before applying to grad programs, I dove into the research on careers in academic history, job prospects, etc, and was horrified. The reality was (and is), that even for those with the right academic pedigree, there simply are no jobs out there. I ran to (well, set up a couple appointments with) my favorite professors in the department and shared my angst with them, hoping against hope that they would disabuse me of this idea (that it was not a realistic option). I remember in particular a conversation with an early Americanist that I particularly admired. He was the star of the department: Ivy league PhD, a host of articles and 2 books out already at the age of 40, etc. He told me in no uncertain terms that it was a staggeringly steep hill to climb, and that he couldn't in good conscience recommend that path to me. He mentioned that there had been over 200 applications for his position, and that he had lucked into being hired by virtue of having a bit of experience in a particular subfield the dept. was interested in.

As I sat there talking to this distinguished scholar of American history with a sterling resume, my heart sank- here's a guy that has worked his tail off, has a sterling pedigree, and he's still lucky to get a job at State U in the middle of the country. The sad reality was that I felt it unwise to pursue that path. 

Disclaimer: My particular story is anecdotal, of course, but it squares pretty well with what the current literature says, too. With the changing nature of how universities are delivering content to students (online, etc) there are more adjuncts and part time lecturers than ever. Best of luck to the brave souls who do choose to embark on that journey, but you should certainly know the risks involved.

 

I feel you.

My undergraduate capstone adviser applied to 47 positions before he got hired at the school I attended. In any other field, 47 positions might not seem that daunting, but 47 faculty position in history is pretty daunting. It must have taken years to find a job. Although, playing devils advocate, it is apparently much easier to obtain a position if you study something desirable and not overly common. Anecdotally, I hear Asianists have a little bit easier go at jobs.

I have considered going for a PhD in library science because I'm interested in bibliographic studies, and I can probably do more or less what I want to there. Plus it's a way better job market. In this last year's almanac, The Chronicle reported that there were ~1050 History PhD graduates in the reported year. That is insane. In contrast, LIS programs awarded ~50 PhDs.

Bad job market is bad.

[Quickmick]

This reality makes the decision to move forward a difficult one. I do have some other possibilities (both in school and out) and they are looking more and more attractive in terms of the prospects. A TT professor at a tier 2 told me it took them 3 years to get the job--and they didn't think that was uncommon. An emeritus (who still sticks around) told me that applications at the same level are in the 100's with every level of university grads (by some ranking) represented in the pool. That being said, Forbes suggests that for every job opening there are 118 applicants.http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/04/17/7-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-your-job-search/#2f339e564e67

I am just pointing out that it is--to some extent--tough all over. For me, the apps are out, the die has been cast...I am not going to worry about problems I don't have. If I am fortunate enough to garner some admits I will worry about it then. It would have to be something very attractive for me to be able to justify the risk. Who would have ever thought I might tell my little girl that you can be anything you want--even President--anything you want...except a History professor.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Quickmick

[Neist]

I kind of feel like this thread needs to be pinned.  

I don't want to discourage people, but people need realistic advice, and I feel as if realistic advice is that it's highly unlikely that most people who get history PhDs will even obtain a tenure track position, at least until the job market gets a little bit better. Of course, it might get way better, given that fewer people are majoring in history. 

[dr. t]

NB: All of history is bad, but AmHist is particularly bad.

[NoirFemme]

With this in mind, should alumni placement not be the number one consideration when choosing between programs (who've accepted you)? Should you focus on the program that fits best, and then work your behind off with publications, presentations, awards, and teaching? 

Because going through the threads over the previous years, a few people mentioned the excellent placement of U-W Madison being the result of the students needing to aggressively seek funding and teaching to pay for their doctorates. Therefore, I presume that whether you attend an Ivy, a reputable private, or a solid state school, your success is based on your own tenacity.

 

Edited October 23, 2016 by NoirFemme

[Warelin]

12 minutes ago, NoirFemme said:

With this in mind, should alumni placement not be the number one consideration when choosing between programs (who've accepted you)? Should you focus on the program that fits best, and then work your behind off with publications, presentations, awards, and teaching? 

Because going through the threads over the previous years, a few people mentioned the excellent placement of U-W Madison being the result of the students needing to aggressively seek funding and teaching to pay for their doctorates. Therefore, I presume that whether you attend an Ivy, a reputable private, or a solid state school, your success is based on your own tenacity.

 

There are a few ways which affect this
1.) Different programs do differently each year. (UPenn had an awful placement record last year in Literature; this year they've done much better)
2.) Programs have different meanings of what "Placement" means. Some might take it to only mean a tt job; others will count any academic job as placement.
3.) Some students in programs actively pursue an alt-ac career or a post-doc.
4.) Some people decide to drop out of a program.
5.) Some grad programs exclude anyone who doesn't get a job while others include everyone in their stats

[TMP]

2 hours ago, Warelin said:

There are a few ways which affect this
1.) Different programs do differently each year. (UPenn had an awful placement record last year in Literature; this year they've done much better)
2.) Programs have different meanings of what "Placement" means. Some might take it to only mean a tt job; others will count any academic job as placement.
3.) Some students in programs actively pursue an alt-ac career or a post-doc.
4.) Some people decide to drop out of a program.
5.) Some grad programs exclude anyone who doesn't get a job while others include everyone in their stats

Which is why it is important to ask for placement record-- what happened to every single one of the PhDs who graduated in the last 3 years?  Not just those who got tenure-track job but everyone who graduated.  As you evaluate the list, consider that there are more and more PhD students looking for non-academic jobs anyway. 

I've known people in my program who came in thinking they want to teach, or at least be professors, and they realize that they hate it so they're considering other opportunities.  Despite that shift, they still want to pursue and finish the PhD.  Teaching, whether taking a load of 2 or 4 classes per semester, is not for everyone.

[AfricanusCrowther]

3 hours ago, NoirFemme said:

Therefore, I presume that whether you attend an Ivy, a reputable private, or a solid state school, your success is based on your own tenacity.

 

Unfortunately, if this were true in general, then you wouldn't see the massive inequalities in placement between programs, even within the top tier. Wisconsin may claim that they have strong placement, but what percentage of their massive cohort gets a tenure track job? What is that percentage compared to Harvard or Yale? And in what fields (other than African history)? I've done a little bit of the data crunching myself, and it isn't pretty. And I wouldn't presume that the many thousands of PhDs on the market fail to get a job each year because they lack tenacity. Completing a dissertation requires tenacity. That said, it obviously doesn't hurt.

You have probably seen this study: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/1/e1400005

Edited October 24, 2016 by AfricanusCrowther

[Warelin]

54 minutes ago, TMP said:

Which is why it is important to ask for placement record-- what happened to every single one of the PhDs who graduated in the last 3 years?  Not just those who got tenure-track job but everyone who graduated.  As you evaluate the list, consider that there are more and more PhD students looking for non-academic jobs anyway. 

I've known people in my program who came in thinking they want to teach, or at least be professors, and they realize that they hate it so they're considering other opportunities.  Despite that shift, they still want to pursue and finish the PhD.  Teaching, whether taking a load of 2 or 4 classes per semester, is not for everyone.

Different programs will word their e-mails differently though to make numbers seem bigger than they are. We also haved no idea how many chose an alt-ac job versus took one due to not finding something to their liking. Some programs strongly encourage their applicants to pursue alt-ac jobs because it's their main audience despite having the resources of having great placement records in the past.

UPenn has had a strong placement record in Literature for the past 6 years (64% TT). However, in 2015, they only placed 1 of their 12 graduates in a tenure track position. They are still considered a powerhouse. Should they not be?

Another thing to consider is that some programs have numbers that have applicants going on the market for one year and also increase it to show promotions within a short time period. Some programs are much more transparent than others no matter how you ask.

[neat]

On 10/21/2016 at 0:22 PM, Neist said:

it is apparently much easier to obtain a position if you study something desirable and not overly common. Anecdotally, I hear Asianists have a little bit easier go at jobs.

I can't substantiate this claim with any data, but my experience while researching was similar. Several professors even acknowledged as much- one particular professor I spoke with had entered grad school hoping to do Renaissance Europe, but after surveying his professional prospects, switched to a different field. For those who desperately want a career in academic history and aren't married to a particular field, perhaps the opportunities are a bit better. 

[poliscar]

On 10/23/2016 at 5:09 PM, TMP said:

Which is why it is important to ask for placement record-- what happened to every single one of the PhDs who graduated in the last 3 years?  Not just those who got tenure-track job but everyone who graduated.  As you evaluate the list, consider that there are more and more PhD students looking for non-academic jobs anyway. 

I've known people in my program who came in thinking they want to teach, or at least be professors, and they realize that they hate it so they're considering other opportunities.  Despite that shift, they still want to pursue and finish the PhD.  Teaching, whether taking a load of 2 or 4 classes per semester, is not for everyone.

I think it's also important to pay specific attention to the placement records of students who have worked with potential POIs, as well as placement by field/subfield. A department may consistently place Medievalists in TT positions, but rarely have success in Africanist or Modern European searches. You'll notice as you look closely that there are some scholars whose students are hired on a very reliable basis, and others whose students rarely get jobs. While this is often tied to prestige, it's not always the case that superstar scholars have the best placement rates, so be careful.

Practically speaking, I've found that you can get a rough idea of the placement rates of specific advisors/chairs by going through Proquest, and then googling the names of the various dissertation authors. 

[dr. t]

Your current professors should also be able to give you a sense of who's well-respected as an adviser, as well, though it may take some careful work to extract this information.

[Sigaba]

On 10/23/2016 at 1:56 PM, NoirFemme said:

With this in mind, should alumni placement not be the number one consideration when choosing between programs (who've accepted you)? Should you focus on the program that fits best, and then work your behind off with publications, presentations, awards, and teaching? 

IMO, placement should be a consideration, but not the top one. Factors that enable you to maximize your potential as an academic historian are more important: research interests of faculty, departmental commitment to teaching and mentoring (will you be invited to sit in on job talks), level of departmental collegiality, library system, archives, and  financial support.

My $0.02

[AP]

This is not a minor issue, and I'm glad we are talking about it.

On 10/21/2016 at 9:06 PM, telkanuru said:

NB: All of history is bad, but AmHist is particularly bad.

True. Very true. Yet, there is also more creativity for AmHist such as Library Studies, Archives, Public History, etc. An AmHist recent graduate told me that it's also a matter of theme/approaches. Tell me if I'm wrong but African American Studies, Latino/a Studies, and the sort have been on the rise and there is more room for adjusting a history PhD to such positions.

On 10/23/2016 at 5:56 PM, NoirFemme said:

With this in mind, should alumni placement not be the number one consideration when choosing between programs (who've accepted you)? Should you focus on the program that fits best, and then work your behind off with publications, presentations, awards, and teaching? 

Because going through the threads over the previous years, a few people mentioned the excellent placement of U-W Madison being the result of the students needing to aggressively seek funding and teaching to pay for their doctorates. Therefore, I presume that whether you attend an Ivy, a reputable private, or a solid state school, your success is based on your own tenacity.

 

Meh. In the past four years I have seen previous cohorts in my field (not AmHist) elbow they way about jobs. In general, yes, they all start with Post-Docs, but there are a few exceptions. I can think of three out of eight who landed TT jobs. One of them not in history but in XX Studies.

Overall, I think it's good that we talk about the market and how to make ourselves more marketable. But we also need to acknowledge that a plain PhD in History drives no one anywhere today. We need to intersect disciplines, converse with other methodologies, use different types of sources, whatever. I have friends who are getting a certificate in Gender Studies, and another friend who decided to make a big deal about language and spent one year before and one year in the middle of the program in Taiwan. I don't know, we also try our best.

Incoming cohorts should be aware that landing a job may take three years, or more, or that 'the' job may not be academia but alt-ac or admin. When I get my job, I'll you about it. Oh yes, I'm getting one of those.

 

[landscapes-of]

On 10/26/2016 at 11:35 PM, poliscar said:

I think it's also important to pay specific attention to the placement records of students who have worked with potential POIs, as well as placement by field/subfield. A department may consistently place Medievalists in TT positions, but rarely have success in Africanist or Modern European searches. You'll notice as you look closely that there are some scholars whose students are hired on a very reliable basis, and others whose students rarely get jobs. While this is often tied to prestige, it's not always the case that superstar scholars have the best placement rates, so be careful.

Practically speaking, I've found that you can get a rough idea of the placement rates of specific advisors/chairs by going through Proquest, and then googling the names of the various dissertation authors. 

I use AHA's history dissertation directory so much. I guess I can't say how reliable it is overall. It doesn't give you a sense of a whole dissertation committee in the same way the actual dissertation or somebody's CV can, and it's absolutely not interdisciplinary. But it makes it very easy and quick to get a sense of who is connected to who,* intellectually and institutionally. I use it to search for the dissertations & PhD institutions of scholars when I can't find it quickly by other means, but you can also select scholars and get a list of dissertations they supervised. Which can be very handy from a fit perspective, if not a prestige perspective.

*"Always read the acknowledgements section." 

Edited October 30, 2016 by landscapes-of

[TMP]

16 hours ago, landscapes-of said:

I use AHA's history dissertation directory so much. I guess I can't say how reliable it is overall. It doesn't give you a sense of a whole dissertation committee in the same way the actual dissertation or somebody's CV can, and it's absolutely not interdisciplinary. But it makes it very easy and quick to get a sense of who is connected to who,* intellectually and institutionally. I use it to search for the dissertations & PhD institutions of scholars when I can't find it quickly by other means, but you can also select scholars and get a list of dissertations they supervised. Which can be very handy from a fit perspective, if not a prestige perspective.

*"Always read the acknowledgements section." 

Can't emphasize the acknowledgement section enough.  Make sure you read it when you're reading the books for  your seminars.  There will be questions of the author's influences and pedigree.  (You'll also see some fun stories...)

[JKL]

If the possibility of landing a university gig deflates, there's always the community college or private school option. And I'm pretty sure that many private schools pay more or as much as an Assistant Prof position. 

Edited November 13, 2016 by JKL

[etoile89]

On 11/13/2016 at 3:42 PM, JKL said:

If the possibility of landing a university gig deflates, there's always the community college or private school option. And I'm pretty sure that many private schools pay more or as much as an Assistant Prof position. 

One of my advisors from undergrad accepted a fulltime position at a private school teaching history.  He loves it.  He fell in love with secondary education while he was writing his dissertation and teaching.  The benefits are also excellent.

A tenure track position in academia is great, right?  But there are many roads that lead beyond the PhD.