Funding eligibility if I work p/t at university?

[NYCStudent]

Hi all! I am interested in applying to History PhD programs. That was my original plan after receiving my BA in History in 2010, however, after talking with many grad students about the dismal academic job market, I decided to go for the more practical higher education administration master's degree, which I received last spring. I've been working in student affairs the last 4 years and really love it, however, I'd like to also build a career in academia.

 

While in grad school, my coursework focused on the history of higher education, with a specific emphasis on how the role and purpose of the U.S. university has changed over time. My research mainly focused on the growth of the research university, the role of the university in shaping the U.S. into a global superpower, and current trends and implications for public higher education in the current age of austerity. I am interested in continuing researching the history of higher education -- and its resulting cultural and political implications -- at the PhD-level. I'm mainly looking at U of MN, because I'm originally from the Minneapolis area, and after years of living on both coasts (where I've had a lot of fun, but have also been hemorrhaging money due to the high costs of living!) I'm looking to settle down in the midwest. I'm thinking of applying for Fall 2019.

 

My question for all of you is do you think I'd still be eligible for funding and TA positions if I were to continue working part-time in student affairs? I really love working with students, and I see that as a great safety net to shield me from all the uncertainty of the academic job market. Plus, I'd like to have a better financial cushion, since I'm turning 30 next year and don't want to have to go back to just barely skimping by financially like I've done for most of my 20s (I can't imagine the stipend is anything more than $30K...). I'm thinking the stipend + part time advising position could roughly equal what I'm making now.

 

Thanks, all, for your input!

[AP]

1 hour ago, NYCStudent said:

My question for all of you is do you think I'd still be eligible for funding and TA positions if I were to continue working part-time in student affairs? I really love working with students, and I see that as a great safety net to shield me from all the uncertainty of the academic job market. Plus, I'd like to have a better financial cushion, since I'm turning 30 next year and don't want to have to go back to just barely skimping by financially like I've done for most of my 20s (I can't imagine the stipend is anything more than $30K...).

I honestly think it is highly unlikely that any university would give you a stipend if you have a part time job because the requirement is to be a full time student in good standing to get any stipend. A stipend is a compensation (which explains why many of us are fighting for a union). A basic stipend (which wouldn't require TA/RA) would still require you to be full time, unless –of course– you enrolled part time. 

Now, from their website (History Dept), it seems you need to be a full time student to apply for any TA or RAship. Have you contacted them? Have you read the handbook? 

[NYCStudent]

Hey AP - thanks for your response. I'm trying to schedule a call with someone in the department to see if this would be an option, as I can't seem to find any definitive information. The website does link to on-campus job opportunities as additional sources of funding, so I'm hoping it could actually be an option. Ideally, I'd like to be a FT student with a TA/RA position, as well as work 20 hours per week in student affairs (that way I'm still getting stable benefits and income). I know many grad students work in external positions, so it seems unfair that I would be disqualified from funding if my side job was at the university. 

 

[TakeruK]

Whether or not you're allowed to work external/side jobs depends on the policies related to your department and your source of funding. For international students, there is also another layer of work visa/permit rules. I know in some fields, the funding is tied to only a small number of hours of work per week and therefore they don't expect you to pay all the bills and aren't against you working.

At other places, like my PhD school, everyone gets full funding with the expectation that we do not make any major commitments outside of our assistantship and our studies. In particular, for students in my department, we are considered to be paid to be fully committed to the program, not paid for specific amount of work. In this case, in theory, we should ensure any outside work we do does not interfere with our commitment to the school, otherwise we must sign some formal agreement so that either we drop to partial student status (or take a leave of absence) or set up some arrangement to ensure we remain 100% committed to our school. In reality, this means for very small side jobs (e.g. tutoring a few hours on the side), no one will care. You can report it to the school if you'd like and they will likely approve it. But if you take on an actual job that could call you in for hours of work that interfere with your expectations as a student, then it's less likely to be approved and you should probably talk to the school to come up with some formal arrangement (e.g. perhaps you agree that you will only work on weekends etc.). The examples they give for when you definitely want approval is for things like you are starting a startup or joining a startup as a CFO, CIO, or some C-level executive.

So, in reality, there are probably many students who have side jobs that they're not supposed to have. If they don't get caught then it's not a big deal as long as they get their work done. But if you are at a school where you're expected to be fully committed unless otherwise excused, and then you fall behind in your work and they find out that it's because you are taking on unapproved commitments, it could have very negative consequences for your funding and for your status in the program. I know of at least one case where a student had to leave their program because they were doing these side jobs without proper authorization.

So, in your case, you really should check with your program. There are at least three levels of policies to check with: the source(s) of your funding, your department grad student guidelines, and your university-level grad student guidelines. If you're okay to work then great! If not, then while I cannot really suggest you violate policies, but what you do with your life is your decision! If you do go that path, perhaps employment not directly related to your school would be more discreet though.

[Sigaba]

51 minutes ago, NYCStudent said:

... it seems unfair ...

I very strongly recommend that you focus more on The Way Things Are than on The Way Things Should Be / The Way You Think Things Should Be, especially on the topic of TA positions.

In the event you're offered admissions, you will be joining a department that has requirements and needs. Generally, both will trump the wants of newly admitted students who are working as TAs. If you don't manage your expectations well, if you focus on what is or isn't "fair," you will be messing with your own head space and potentially undermining opportunities to maximize your potential. 

In the event you receive information indicating that you can both work as TA and your current position, I would get confirmation from another source, get it in writing, and even then not be surprised if, down the line, I found that the option was never available.

[ploutarchos]

1 hour ago, NYCStudent said:

Ideally, I'd like to be a FT student with a TA/RA position, as well as work 20 hours per week in student affairs (that way I'm still getting stable benefits and income). I know many grad students work in external positions, so it seems unfair that I would be disqualified from funding if my side job was at the university. 

 

Even if you find a program that will contemplate such an arrangement, the scenario you describe is really just impossible in practice. TA/RA jobs generally count as 50% appointments, sometimes 33%, so that's 13-20 hours of work per week. That means, adding in your hypothetical 20 hours per week in student affiars, you'd be working roughly 33-40 hours per week before touching any coursework (which is at least a full-time job in itself). That is a recipe for burnout at best or simply failing out at worst. 

[ThisGreatFolly]

In addition to what has been said regarding before, another reason a school may limit the amount of hours you can work on campus has to do with benefit eligibility and union status. At my institution all grad students in our program are considered employees of the university and paid through university payroll, regardless of whether we TA/RA. We are capped at 15 hours maximum of work in other university positions both because the department wants us to focus on our primary job of being a grad student, and, I suspect, because anything more than that would trigger the university to consider us as a full-time employee. 

[_kita]

Maybe you can look to see if the department you work (or want to work at)offers a GAship. Just change you employment status to GA instead. Most student affairs departments offered a lot of graduate assistantship. Also consider, if you're an employee, you may not need the GAship to begin with. Most universities will let you take classes for free if you work for them. So you'd get money + tuition.. And more than many GAs get...

[ThisGreatFolly]

I would also add that you should try to get as realistic as possible of a look at what stipends might be. I doubt that most non-coastal institutions would have a stipend anywhere close to $30k and more likely will be in the low $20k range. Obviously funding varies between institutions, but when I was looking nothing outside of major metro areas (Boston, LA, NYC) or Ivies came close to $30k without additional fellowships. 

[NYCStudent]

3 minutes ago, _kita said:

Maybe you can look to see if the department you work (or want to work at)offers a GAship. Just change you employment status to GA instead. Most student affairs departments offered a lot of graduate assistantship. Also consider, if you're an employee, you may not need the GAship to begin with. Most universities will let you take classes for free if you work for them. So you'd get money + tuition.. And more than many GAs get...

Hi Kita, the U only offers a 75% reimbursement, which is a pain. I've already paid for one masters...I don't need to pay for another (even if it is still at a discount!). Plus, I'd really like to TA to get teaching experience. It's a stretch, but just looking into all my options

[cowgirlsdontcry]

3 hours ago, NYCStudent said:

My question for all of you is do you think I'd still be eligible for funding and TA positions if I were to continue working part-time in student affairs? I really love working with students, and I see that as a great safety net to shield me from all the uncertainty of the academic job market. Plus, I'd like to have a better financial cushion, since I'm turning 30 next year and don't want to have to go back to just barely skimping by financially like I've done for most of my 20s (I can't imagine the stipend is anything more than $30K...). I'm thinking the stipend + part time advising position could roughly equal what I'm making now.

 

Thanks, all, for your input!

I don't believe you are being realistic about stipends. Humanities departments are notorious about low stipends. At my particular university, English and History are tied for lowest stipend on campus. I agree with the other posters here. On my campus, all TAs/RAs work a half-time position of 20 hours per week. I looked at the compensation and TA/RG/RAs History at the U of MN. MN requires a half-time commitment, and as most universities do, requires a commitment to the university with regard to outside employment. I did not find compensation listed, but didn't look extensively.

6 minutes ago, _kita said:

Maybe you can look to see if the department you work (or want to work at)offers a GAship. Just change you employment status to GA instead. Most student affairs departments offered a lot of graduate assistantship. Also consider, if you're an employee, you may not need the GAship to begin with. Most universities will let you take classes for free if you work for them. So you'd get money + tuition.. And more than many GAs get...

What you are talking about _kita is possible only if a student is registered as a non-degree student. At some point, NYC would have to apply and be accepted into the PhD program in order to accomplish all the things a PhD student must accomplish before they can graduate.

Edited October 31, 2017 by cowgirlsdontcry

[NYCStudent]

4 minutes ago, ThisGreatFolly said:

I would also add that you should try to get as realistic as possible of a look at what stipends might be. I doubt that most non-coastal institutions would have a stipend anywhere close to $30k and more likely will be in the low $20k range. Obviously funding varies between institutions, but when I was looking nothing outside of major metro areas (Boston, LA, NYC) or Ivies came close to $30k without additional fellowships. 

Dang....MPLS is no NYC in terms of rent, but still, surviving on $20k is damn near impossible. As much as I would love to pursue a FT degree, there is no way I could make that work without a side job... 

I believe many grad classes are at night, so hopefully that would make it easier to balance everything. I imagine a full course load is 3-4 courses, correct?

[_kita]

Oh, okay. Nevermind then. A small state school I attended offered full waiver for someone working FT for their masters in student affairs. Bad info then, sorry!

[TakeruK]

16 minutes ago, NYCStudent said:

Dang....MPLS is no NYC in terms of rent, but still, surviving on $20k is damn near impossible. As much as I would love to pursue a FT degree, there is no way I could make that work without a side job... 

I believe many grad classes are at night, so hopefully that would make it easier to balance everything. I imagine a full course load is 3-4 courses, correct?

I don't think this is a good generalization. I know we're in different fields here, but you're talking about PhD programs right, not a professional masters or other qualification. These programs are not just about courses. It's about seminars, discussions with colleagues, research work etc. Grad students are generally expected to have some sort of presence in the department.

This part is more field dependent since not everyone works in an office/lab. But for my PhD program, the general expectation is that you're in the dept and in your office (or lab) 40 hours per week, approximately 9 to 5. Classes are during the day too, but there will be meetings and TA office hours and all that stuff that will mostly be scheduled during the work day. Some students work something like 6am to 2pm or 1pm to 9pm or even 3pm to midnight, but only after they have settled into a routine with their research group (e.g. nothing wrong with a 1pm-9pm workday if all of your stuff can be scheduled in the afternoons).

And especially since you say you are transitioning to a career in academia....this means you really do need to be "present" at your program to make the connections and become a scholar. I don't think a part-time graduate program will cut it if you want to really pursue a career in academia. Most of the students that I know who end up being fairly "distant" with their grad program (commuting in only a few days a week etc.) are doing in this their last few years and are planning an exit route from academia. Or, they have special circumstances that require them to be away so that they make extra effort to remain connected in other ways.

I do think grad students need to be paid much more, especially those in the humanities, but the reality is that grad students are generally underpaid because we're considered not-even-trainees. Many schools view the tuition waiver and the opportunity to take classes / study with them as part of our compensation (personally, I think this is BS because we provide valuable teaching and research labour and we should be compensated justly but that's a discussion for another topic). As Sigaba said, at this stage, it's not helpful to focus on the way things "should" be but instead on the way things are.

I know a few people who have gone back to grad school after working in the "real world" and a common theme is the big adjustment back to frugal student life. The exceptions are the people that worked in very lucrative jobs before, saved up a bunch of money and are living off their savings because they are happier doing something they love than having those savings. Or some people have family or partners that are earning way more to support them.

What are your motivations and goals from a PhD program? You don't have to say them here or defend them or anything. Just suggesting that you should check to make sure what you're trying to do in terms of school will actually lead you to the goals you want. Going back to a frugal student lifestyle is a big change and it's important to ensure the sacrifice will advance you towards your goals.

 

[NYCStudent]

26 minutes ago, TakeruK said:

I don't think this is a good generalization. I know we're in different fields here, but you're talking about PhD programs right, not a professional masters or other qualification. These programs are not just about courses. It's about seminars, discussions with colleagues, research work etc. Grad students are generally expected to have some sort of presence in the department.

This part is more field dependent since not everyone works in an office/lab. But for my PhD program, the general expectation is that you're in the dept and in your office (or lab) 40 hours per week, approximately 9 to 5. Classes are during the day too, but there will be meetings and TA office hours and all that stuff that will mostly be scheduled during the work day. Some students work something like 6am to 2pm or 1pm to 9pm or even 3pm to midnight, but only after they have settled into a routine with their research group (e.g. nothing wrong with a 1pm-9pm workday if all of your stuff can be scheduled in the afternoons).

And especially since you say you are transitioning to a career in academia....this means you really do need to be "present" at your program to make the connections and become a scholar. I don't think a part-time graduate program will cut it if you want to really pursue a career in academia. Most of the students that I know who end up being fairly "distant" with their grad program (commuting in only a few days a week etc.) are doing in this their last few years and are planning an exit route from academia. Or, they have special circumstances that require them to be away so that they make extra effort to remain connected in other ways.

I do think grad students need to be paid much more, especially those in the humanities, but the reality is that grad students are generally underpaid because we're considered not-even-trainees. Many schools view the tuition waiver and the opportunity to take classes / study with them as part of our compensation (personally, I think this is BS because we provide valuable teaching and research labour and we should be compensated justly but that's a discussion for another topic). As Sigaba said, at this stage, it's not helpful to focus on the way things "should" be but instead on the way things are.

I know a few people who have gone back to grad school after working in the "real world" and a common theme is the big adjustment back to frugal student life. The exceptions are the people that worked in very lucrative jobs before, saved up a bunch of money and are living off their savings because they are happier doing something they love than having those savings. Or some people have family or partners that are earning way more to support them.

What are your motivations and goals from a PhD program? You don't have to say them here or defend them or anything. Just suggesting that you should check to make sure what you're trying to do in terms of school will actually lead you to the goals you want. Going back to a frugal student lifestyle is a big change and it's important to ensure the sacrifice will advance you towards your goals.

 

Hi TakeruK, thanks so much for all the information. I would love to say that I am rolling in cash right now to save up for my PhD, but that is not the case! Student affairs doesn't pay very well and I still have some debt from graduate school, so that is why I'm trying to make a financially responsible decision, while still following my passions.

To answer your questions about my motivations and goals for a PhD, ideally I'd love to be a tenure track professor, and this is certainly what I'd strive for, but at the same time I understand the market and I certainly don't want to put all my eggs in one (very unlikely) basket. My more realistic plan B would be to continue working on the administrative side of higher education and be either an academic program manager or move up to a student affairs director role - both of which often require PhDs. I've looked into higher education PhDs, which I'm definitely considering, but my passion is really with history and I figure if I'm going to be spending so much time on it, I better love it. Plus, if I go the full time administrator route, I'd love to be able to teach on the side as an adjunct, and a history PhD, as opposed to higher education, would open up a lot more doors for that. 

 

[NYCStudent]

42 minutes ago, _kita said:

Oh, okay. Nevermind then. A small state school I attended offered full waiver for someone working FT for their masters in student affairs. Bad info then, sorry!

Yes, most schools do!! U of MN offers full waivers for undergrad, but only 75% for graduate. Even with that steep discount, for 70ish credits, I'd still be on the hook for $31,500

[Sigaba]

30 minutes ago, NYCStudent said:

To answer your questions about my motivations and goals for a PhD, ideally I'd love to be a tenure track professor, and this is certainly what I'd strive for, but at the same time I understand the market and I certainly don't want to put all my eggs in one (very unlikely) basket.

You are basically saying that because you think your objective is only X% attainable, you're only going to put X% effort into achieving it. IMO, professors who have put in maximum effort to get to where they are will notice your ambivalence and be more receptive to supporting students who are committed. That is, unless you're really good at history and your X% is more than the 100% of others.

Also, keep in mind that you're seeking to join a profession. While you've been very clear as to what you want to get out of it, are you able to make an even strong case regarding what you're going to contribute?

[NYCStudent]

7 minutes ago, Sigaba said:

You are basically saying that because you think your objective is only X% attainable, you're only going to put X% effort into achieving it. IMO, professors who have put in maximum effort to get to where they are will notice your ambivalence and be more receptive to supporting students who are committed. That is, unless you're really good at history and your X% is more than the 100% of others.

Also, keep in mind that you're seeking to join a profession. While you've been very clear as to what you want to get out of it, are you able to make an even strong case regarding what you're going to contribute?

All very good points. I see myself as an asset first and foremost because of the original scholarship I would be conducting that is directly relevant to the careers and livelihoods of the current faculty. Public research institutions have been nearly bled dry in the last decade, and we're only now seeing just how troubling these cuts have been for state economies, as well as for innovations in STEM/health fields. Case in point: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/10/midwestern-public-research-universities-funding/542889/ 

Many disciplines such as political science and sociology are actively publishing on this, but I haven't seen as many scholars who have brought in the historical angle. My hope is with more research and attention to these issues we can reverse the troubling trends of state budget cuts that threaten all academic disciplines.

Additionally, an asset I bring would be my ability to help bridge the academic/administrative gap. As more and more universities move towards operating more like businesses (due to said budget cuts), individuals who can navigate both worlds become key figures to any department. 

I know that I wouldn't' be a traditional applicant, but I'm hoping that this may still be appealing to departments....?

[Sigaba]

8 minutes ago, NYCStudent said:

All very good points. I see myself as an asset first and foremost because of the original scholarship I would be conducting that is directly relevant to the careers and livelihoods of the current faculty. Public research institutions have been nearly bled dry in the last decade, and we're only now seeing just how troubling these cuts have been for state economies, as well as for innovations in STEM/health fields. Case in point: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/10/midwestern-public-research-universities-funding/542889/ 

Many disciplines such as political science and sociology are actively publishing on this, but I haven't seen as many scholars who have brought in the historical angle. My hope is with more research and attention to these issues we can reverse the troubling trends of state budget cuts that threaten all academic disciplines.

Additionally, an asset I bring would be my ability to help bridge the academic/administrative gap. As more and more universities move towards operating more like businesses (due to said budget cuts), individuals who can navigate both worlds become key figures to any department. 

I know that I wouldn't' be a traditional applicant, but I'm hoping that this may still be appealing to departments....?

I work for a consultancy that has universities and colleges for clients. MOO, if an institution of higher learning is going to act like a business, it's going to engage a consultancy to provide the services you're describing.

Even multiple engagements will be a more attractive option than paying than the salary of a FTE-- even one who is dual-hatted and can fulfill the obligations of a professorship and stay current in the relevant domain of knowledge (an unlikely occurrence--the private sector and the Ivory Tower have drastically different ways of approaching work and solving problems).

The driving factor here is perception.

• The expense of an in-house SME is a greater than the value of what a SME can bring to the table day after day (debatable).
• The expertise of a consultancy will be greater and more up to date than an in-house SME's (accurate).
• The experiences of a consultancy will be more greater and more applicable to a given problem than an in-house SMEs (debatable).
• An in-house SME's findings and recommendations will be perceived as biased (accurate).
  • This POV is especially relevant if the engagement has broader policy implications and/or requires interaction with external stakeholders (very accurate).
• A consultancy has the time and the bandwidth to perform engagements that committees do not (accurate).
• A consultancy can better take the heat for unpopular choices (accurate).

Another factor to consider is the POV of your peers. Even if you're capable of wearing two hats and have great ideas, tenured colleagues who don't like you have at least twice as many opportunities to fuck with you just because they can. (And they will.)

 

[TMP]

I am currently in my 6th year in the program.  Let me tell you straight from the horse mouth the reality of PhD program, which is bit of a cult itself:

I have seen students who make minimum or no effort to attend departmental seminars and academic talks.  I have seen students spend far more time on their own courses when they are able to teach as instructor of record rather than their dissertations.  I have seen students attempt to adjunct or  tutor on the side. 

What happens to those students? 

They drop out or prolong their stay in the program because (A) the faculty already notice that the suffering quality of their work and thereby don't put much investment in those students, leading the students to feel more lost, leading to deciding to leave or/and (B) Students can't put enough work into their dissertations that they simply keep hitting the "snooze button" until their committees put their foot down and tell those student sto stick to a strict writing schedule to finish.  Students decide that it's just all too much and then leave.

If your primary concern is "staying relevant" in the student affairs or/and financial, then the PhD is not for you that this moment. You are truly expected to be 100% devoted to your coursework, exams and dissertation in order  to attain the grace of the faculty you work with.  Professors recognize when a graduate student's work is not up to par.  They'll help a little to make sure that  you're okay but if you don't improve, they will leave you to your own devices no matter how nice they are as people.  The professors are very, very busy people and can only devote so much time to graduate students.

No matter what, the PhD will always be there and you can decide when it is a good time to jump in the deep end.

[AP]

On 10/31/2017 at 3:09 PM, NYCStudent said:

Hey AP - thanks for your response. I'm trying to schedule a call with someone in the department to see if this would be an option, as I can't seem to find any definitive information. The website does link to on-campus job opportunities as additional sources of funding, so I'm hoping it could actually be an option. Ideally, I'd like to be a FT student with a TA/RA position, as well as work 20 hours per week in student affairs (that way I'm still getting stable benefits and income). I know many grad students work in external positions, so it seems unfair that I would be disqualified from funding if my side job was at the university. 

 

 

On 10/31/2017 at 4:50 PM, NYCStudent said:

Dang....MPLS is no NYC in terms of rent, but still, surviving on $20k is damn near impossible. As much as I would love to pursue a FT degree, there is no way I could make that work without a side job... 

I believe many grad classes are at night, so hopefully that would make it easier to balance everything. I imagine a full course load is 3-4 courses, correct?

 

I came back to grad school when I turned 30. I was working in the 'real work' so trust me, I know what it feels like to be in my mid-30s and still make $20ish/year. I agree with much of what has been said. You need to be realistic and honest with yourself. I'm not saying you are not, I'm saying your priorities do not match the reality of a PhD program in history and you might want to examine a little further before making the decision of going back to school and going to that school. 

Questions that might help you are:

• Why do you need a PhD?
• Why do you want a PhD?
• It's clear that location and money are important to you. If you had to give up one of them, what would it be? 
• What aspects of your life style can you do away with?
• What other schools have you considered? (have you?)

So that we are clear: A PhD on its own is a full time job. By full time I mean full time. Sure, many students have employment on campus or some tutoring off campus. NO ONE has a 'real job', with benefits, as you want. (This is why we are fighting for unions!). You have a lot of time to do your research and make an informed decision. Inform yourself. Investing 5+ years of your life for a 20k should be an informed decision. 

[NYCStudent]

Hi everyone, just wanted to give folks an update. I spoke with the graduate admissions advisor who basically said that it wouldn't be ideal for me to work part-time in student affairs....but it wouldn't be an absolute deal-breaker if I did. She said that if I were admitted and if I did have this part-time job, there may be some sort of arrangement I could work out (again, no guarantees, but it wasn't a no!). She seemed very understanding about the situation, as the stipend is $18K and that is hard to make work even in a less expensive area like MPLS. Again, I'm going to tread into the "seeing the world as I want to see it, not as it is territory" here, but I would think (there that phrase is again!) that departments would rather have me doing a more relevant side job (student affairs) than working in the service industry or retail to make ends meet. I can't imagine I will be the only one doing a side hustle to supplement the $18K stipend. 

So, moral of the story: it never hurts to ask. Graduate programs have to be feeling more pressure on this issue as the PhD markets continue to deteriorate. 

Edited November 16, 2017 by NYCStudent

[Sigaba]

1 hour ago, NYCStudent said:

Hi everyone, just wanted to give folks an update. I spoke with the graduate admissions advisor who basically said that it wouldn't be ideal for me to work part-time in student affairs....but it wouldn't be an absolute deal-breaker if I did. She said that if I were admitted and if I did have this part-time job, there may be some sort of arrangement I could work out (again, no guarantees, but it wasn't a no!). She seemed very understanding about the situation, as the stipend is $18K and that is hard to make work even in a less expensive area like MPLS. Again, I'm going to tread into the "seeing the world as I want to see it, not as it is territory" here, but I would think (there that phrase is again!) that departments would rather have me doing a more relevant side job (student affairs) than working in the service industry or retail to make ends meet. I can't imagine I will be the only one doing a side hustle to supplement the $18K stipend. 

So, moral of the story: it never hurts to ask. Graduate programs have to be feeling more pressure on this issue as the PhD markets continue to deteriorate. 

Congratulations. Be careful. Make sure that this job isn't a "hustle" in the eyes of any professor who has power over you.

Also understand that approving a course of action and approval aren't always the same thing. It's very unlikely that a professor is going to pull you aside and tell you what she or others in the department really think of student affairs.

(To put it bluntly, the existence of this forum and other virtual communities speaks volumes of what a critical mass of history professors ultimately think about students.)