New Rankings

[KikiDelivery]

I know many of us (including myself), prioritize fit over rank. Still, even if rank is not a top concern, it is interesting to see shifts from the 2013 us news list.

Here are the new rankings: https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/english-rankings

I would love to hear thoughts from others!

[Dr. Old Bill]

All three of my potential programs fell. In other words, these rankings are awful!! I kid, of course. But while the methodology looks transparent on the surface, it's rather useless without knowing what questions were asked of those surveyed. As with the last rankings, these still feel rather arbitrary.

That being said, extra kudos to those of you who got in to University of Chicago. Welcome to number one...(?)

[zombiekeats]

Meh, even with UT Austin falling in the rankings I wouldn't have made a different decision. 

Did UC Irvine jump up several spots, or were they always in the top 20?

[Warelin]

1 minute ago, zombiekeats said:

Meh, even with UT Austin falling in the rankings I wouldn't have made a different decision. 

Did UC Irvine jump up several spots, or were they always in the top 20?

Irvine was previously ranked 22.

[CarolineNC]

UC Davis jumped up quite a bit! 

[Warelin]

"Rankings of doctoral programs in the social sciences and humanities are based solely on the results of peer assessment surveys sent to academics in each discipline. Ipsos Public Affairs conducted the surveys in fall 2016. Each school offering a doctoral program was sent two surveys per discipline.

Questionnaires were sent to department heads and directors of graduate studies – or, alternatively, a senior faculty member who teaches graduate students – at schools that had granted a total of five or more doctorates in each discipline during the five-year period from 2011 through 2015, as indicated by the National Center for Education Statistics' Completions survey.

The questionnaires asked respondents to rate the academic quality of the programs at other institutions on a five-point scale: outstanding (5), strong (4), good (3), adequate (2) or marginal (1). Individuals who were unfamiliar with a particular school's programs were asked to select "don't know."

Scores for each school were determined by computing a trimmed mean – eliminating the two highest and two lowest responses – of the ratings of all respondents who rated that school for the last two surveys; average scores were then sorted in descending order."

These surveys are still too opinionated until they consider placements, resources offered, publication rates and other things.

[positivitize]

Rankings are bogus.

That said, WOO! Indiana went from 22 to 20!

[Warelin]

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/medieval-renaissance-literature-rankings

I'm also confused here. Wasn't Notre Dame previously ranked in this section?

[Dr. Old Bill]

2 minutes ago, Warelin said:

The questionnaires asked respondents to rate the academic quality of the programs at other institutions on a five-point scale: outstanding (5), strong (4), good (3), adequate (2) or marginal (1). Individuals who were unfamiliar with a particular school's programs were asked to select "don't know."

Scores for each school were determined by computing a trimmed mean – eliminating the two highest and two lowest responses – of the ratings of all respondents who rated that school for the last two surveys; average scores were then sorted in descending order."

These surveys are still too opinionated until they consider placements, resources offered, publication rates and other things.

After my last post, I've been thinking more and more about this, and it makes me a little cranky, to be honest. This methodology is ridiculous. How could respondents truly know the strength of other programs? Most simply cannot, meaning that their answers are based purely on specious speculation and casual hearsay. Is that really what you want to base your rating system on? Sheesh.

[Warelin]

5 minutes ago, Old Bill said:

After my last post, I've been thinking more and more about this, and it makes me a little cranky, to be honest. This methodology is ridiculous. How could respondents truly know the strength of other programs? Most simply cannot, meaning that their answers are based purely on specious speculation and casual hearsay. Is that really what you want to base your rating system on? Sheesh.

To their credit, at least they took down Bryn Mawr's nonexistent English PHD =P

Edited March 14, 2017 by Warelin

[Yanaka]

If you look up specific sub-fields, Berkeley is still #1 for modern British Lit, for instance. Which seems weird to me, but I'm no expert! 

[loganondorf]

26 minutes ago, Warelin said:

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/medieval-renaissance-literature-rankings

I'm also confused here. Wasn't Notre Dame previously ranked in this section?

It was, and I don't know what to make if it. In my undergrad and MA, it was widely accepted that Notre Dame was one of the best possible options in the US for medieval scholars, so I'm not sure what to think of the sudden soap disappearance.

[positivitize]

10 minutes ago, loganondorf said:

It was, and I don't know what to make if it. In my undergrad and MA, it was widely accepted that Notre Dame was one of the best possible options in the US for medieval scholars, so I'm not sure what to think of the sudden soap disappearance.

 

Maybe some of their faculty left or retired?

[jungThug]

Does anybody else think that Harvard's top 10 ranking is manifestly unjustified? They haven't placed any of their grads in a TT position for over 2 years now. On the other hand, CUNY Grad Center has had a much better placement rate despite having a bigger program and a fraction of the resources at Harvard; moreover CUNY's faculty/grad students are getting published with more frequency than Harvard. Yet CUNY is 20 and Harvard is 8. It is also telling that the 2 "hottest" fields in English studies -- Rhet-Comp and Digital Humanities -- remain unrepresented in Harvard's English faculty, a sign that shows how entrenched Harvard's English program is in outmoded conversations. These rankings are pretty stupid and they uphold the illusion of elitism even when there's no substance in the matter. 

[loganondorf]

21 minutes ago, positivitize said:

Maybe some of their faculty left or retired?

I'm sure that's a major part of it! Since 2013, several faculty members have left and others have been added to the mix; I think I'm just surprised that it was possible for them to go from #6 to being completely unranked, even as their program rose in the rankings overall. 

EDIT: To be fair, my surprise also probably comes from a place of disappointment, as I'm adjusting from thinking I'd been accepted into a top 10 program. It's all part of the game, but it sure stings!

Edited March 14, 2017 by loganondorf

[drezzel]

55 minutes ago, Warelin said:

To their credit, at least they took down Bryn Mawr's nonexistent English PHD =P

THIS. That's the first thing I looked for. 

[eadwacer]

I never know what to do with rankings since I've decided I'm going to Canada. What's the best way to compare Canadian universities to US? World rankings don't seem especially helpful, and I've never really thought about it before, since I grew up in the US and didn't anticipate leaving until quite recently.

[Warelin]

45 minutes ago, jungThug said:

Does anybody else think that Harvard's top 10 ranking is manifestly unjustified? They haven't placed any of their grads in a TT position for over 2 years now. On the other hand, CUNY Grad Center has had a much better placement rate despite having a bigger program and a fraction of the resources at Harvard; moreover CUNY's faculty/grad students are getting published with more frequency than Harvard. Yet CUNY is 20 and Harvard is 8. It is also telling that the 2 "hottest" fields in English studies -- Rhet-Comp and Digital Humanities -- remain unrepresented in Harvard's English faculty, a sign that shows how entrenched Harvard's English program is in outmoded conversations. These rankings are pretty stupid and they uphold the illusion of elitism even when there's no substance in the matter. 

I do believe CUNY is under ranked.  However, Harvard has placed grads in TT positions over the past 2 years: http://english.fas.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Placement-Results.pdf

[brontebitch]

UGH, was starting to seriously consider Villanova and then I see that the other school that accepted me rose to 35 which is a significant change (I think it used to be 48 or 50). Rankings are bullshit, I'm not saying that they are everything, but it would be tempting to accept the offer from CU Boulder since they are evidently doing a lot right now that is reflected in the new rankings. 

Thank you @KikiDelivery for posting! :~) 

[FeetInTheSky]

1 hour ago, jungThug said:

 It is also telling that the 2 "hottest" fields in English studies -- Rhet-Comp and Digital Humanities -- remain unrepresented in Harvard's English faculty, a sign that shows how entrenched Harvard's English program is in outmoded conversations. 

I mean, it's also telling that US News doesn't even bother including either of those disciplines in their subfields drop-down... it's almost like those organizing the ratings have a vested interest in keeping established structures the way they are! 

[KikiDelivery]

40 minutes ago, natalielouise said:

UGH, was starting to seriously consider Villanova and then I see that the other school that accepted me rose to 35 which is a significant change (I think it used to be 48 or 50). Rankings are bullshit, I'm not saying that they are everything, but it would be tempting to accept the offer from CU Boulder since they are evidently doing a lot right now that is reflected in the new rankings. 

Thank you @KikiDelivery for posting! :~) 

Of course! Yeah CU-Boulder is one of the schools I got into, and I was wonderfully surprised to see such a big jump!

[anxiousphd]

41 minutes ago, natalielouise said:

UGH, was starting to seriously consider Villanova and then I see that the other school that accepted me rose to 35 which is a significant change (I think it used to be 48 or 50). Rankings are bullshit, I'm not saying that they are everything, but it would be tempting to accept the offer from CU Boulder since they are evidently doing a lot right now that is reflected in the new rankings. 

I didn't go to Villanova, but after applying from an MA-only institution this year, I got the impression that certain programs were less inclined to accept students from programs that don't also grant a PhD. Ohio State's website, for example, seemed to indicate that they only considered MAs for transfer credit if they came from a PhD-granting institution. I may very well have been denied for a myriad of other reasons, but their website made it sound like if I had been admitted, I would have been required to repeat my MA coursework.

Take that FWIW, I don't have any inside info or anything.

[brontebitch]

2 minutes ago, anxiousgrad said:

I didn't go to Villanova, but after applying from an MA-only institution this year, I got the impression that certain programs were less inclined to accept students from programs that don't also grant a PhD. Ohio State's website, for example, seemed to indicate that they only considered MAs for transfer credit if they came from a PhD-granting institution. I may very well have been denied for a myriad of other reasons, but their website made it sound like if I had been admitted, I would have been required to repeat my MA coursework.

Take that FWIW, I don't have any inside info or anything.

Thanks for the insight; I hadn't thought of this and I think you're right. I have had some concerns about Villanova for a few reasons, and I was really happy to get another offer from one of my top choices (even though it was into the MA program). I will have to wait and see on funding, but I am definitely leaning towards Boulder! 

[Warelin]

On 3/14/2017 at 11:08 AM, anxiousgrad said:

I didn't go to Villanova, but after applying from an MA-only institution this year, I got the impression that certain programs were less inclined to accept students from programs that don't also grant a PhD. Ohio State's website, for example, seemed to indicate that they only considered MAs for transfer credit if they came from a PhD-granting institution. I may very well have been denied for a myriad of other reasons, but their website made it sound like if I had been admitted, I would have been required to repeat my MA coursework.

Take that FWIW, I don't have any inside info or anything.

 

On 3/14/2017 at 11:13 AM, natalielouise said:

Thanks for the insight; I hadn't thought of this and I think you're right. I have had some concerns about Villanova for a few reasons, and I was really happy to get another offer from one of my top choices (even though it was into the MA program). I will have to wait and see on funding, but I am definitely leaning towards Boulder! 

OSU has accepted students with MAs from Utah State University, Millersville University of Pennsylvania, College of Charleston, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University  & others. As far as I'm aware, none of these institutions have an English PHD program. They may or may grant PHDs in other areas.

As a sidenote: Transferring credit is limited at most colleges. Most of them will not offer you a full year release even with an MA. Most colleges will only offer you 2-4 classes worth of credits; others may elect to count it towards certain requirements but still require the same amount of classes to be taken. Others prefer to start you fresh regardless of whether you possess an MA or a BA.

 

[imogenshakes]

3 hours ago, CarolineNC said:

UC Davis jumped up quite a bit! 

I'm not surprised by this. My mentor told me that they've been working REALLY hard to improve their PhD program the past few years, and they're still working on it. I'm so excited because they're my number 1 right now! It's nice to see vertical movement with my top choice, though I know this is all arbitrary and doesn't really mean anything. haha