The "Education" Thread

[viewerfromnihil]

Electricity, indoor plumbing, air conditioner, cable or satellite TV, refrigeration, etc. I don't think you appreciate how poor the poor were in the 1950s/60s.

Sure I do, and I'm quite well aware of the role New Deal programs like the TVA played in changing that. However, as the UN report from last year showed, these public/private services aren't always available to people in our country, and those living in blighted urban areas hardly live under better circumstances.

 

[Dak]

Let us assume, for a moment, that you are accurate in saying that living standards haven't improved (I disagree but that's a long discussion, and may be beside the point): Why would that mean that we would see declines in reading performance rather than no improvement there either?

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Because if they're relatively poorer, then there are relatively less dollars flowing into local school district coffers. And if they're poor, parents are less likely to have attended college and thus also less likely to encourage their children's education or at least play an active role in it.

 

[Dak]

Because if they're relatively poorer, then there are relatively less dollars flowing into local school district coffers. And if they're poor, parents are less likely to have attended college and thus also less likely to encourage their children's education or at least play an active role in it.

That would be the same case as before. And, far less persons went to college in the 50s and 60s than in the last two decades.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

That would be the same case as before. And, far less persons went to college in the 50s and 60s than in the last two decades.

And how's the working out for the rural and urban poor? The GI Bill at the very least gave a cross class boost in higher education, albeit one which benefited primarily whites.

 

[Dak]

And how's the working out for the rural and urban poor? The GI Bill at the very least gave a cross class boost in higher education, albeit one which benefited primarily whites.

That's a non sequitur. Why would reading outcomes past 2nd grade worsen for 50% of school children between 1960 and 2011? If it's "inequality" you've yet to identify a mechanism for inequality to worsen reading outcomes.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

The joys of filling out graduate applications. I've gotten most of the dirty repetitive work done. UMass Amherst threw me a curve ball though. Of course demographic questions are always asked, and it's basically become standard to ask gender identity, which I'm fine with. Less fine, however, is sexual orientation, i.e., "select all that apply: Asexual, Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Pansexual, Questioning, Queer, Same-Gender Loving, Straight." I know grad school can be a pretty sexual place, but I really don't need my professors knowing what I'm fucking.

 

[Einherjar86]

It looks like I'll be teaching a rhetoric course for BU next semester, which I've never done before.

I originally was awarded a duty-free fellowship, which would have been great. But given the state of the market, I opted to teach this course, since it was offered directly to me. The English department offered to top off the adjunct rate to my full fellowship amount for my last semester, so at least I don't have to worry about a pay cut. I plan on defending in January, so I also won't have to worry about dissertation revisions next semester.

Other grad students have started off as adjuncts in the Rhetoric Division, and over time they've been awarded full-time lectureships. So it's nice to have that in my back pocket. It will also be nice to have a rhetoric course on my CV, since at least three of the positions I'm applying for are rhet/comp positions.

Also, teaching for Rhetoric long-term means possibly traveling to (and teaching in) London in the fall semester. Which would be very cool.

 

[rms]

UMass Amherst

how is their grad program? I was accepted to UNH and UMass Lowell before i went to boulder but heard they were horrible academic colleges

 

[viewerfromnihil]

how is their grad program? I was accepted to UNH and UMass Lowell before i went to boulder but heard they were horrible academic colleges

In general, UMass Amherst is a pretty decent middle of the road university, and their grad department seems much the same. I'm not sure about UNH or UMass Lowell. Grads are usually funded, albeit not much. They've also got some pretty good Europeanists, which is of course a condition for me. I can't speak much to how it is in terms of historians of non-Europe/North America areas or African-American History. It's just a safe pick, tbh. I got accepted there a couple of years ago with funding and my CV and transcripts have since gotten much better. I should probably add one more safe school, but I don't want to give ETS any more money. My problem is is that even though on paper I've got a shot at getting into the top places, there's still quite a lottery with it and the reality only so many Europeanists get brought in per year. Georgetown, for example, only takes two per year, and that's split between modern and early modern.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I can't wait to be finished with this application process. I've been going a little over the top, emailing not only potential advisers, but also grad directors with program specific questions, which really is more about me putting my name in their heads and avoiding a stock sounding email as well as asking about committee preferences on SoP points of emphases, and emails to 3-5 other professors per university who work in related fields, of which introduce myself/research interests and explain why I find their research interesting based on their web bios. Fortunately, that's all done. SoP should be less painful, as I've already got a sexy introduction I can recycle written for a fellowship last year. The replies I've gotten from faculty thus far has given me plenty to mine for university specific portions of the SoP, so now it's just the waiting game for the rest of the replies to come in and for the information to be separated and consolidated. More difficult has been corralling potential advisers with whom I haven't already met in person for Skype interviews. Initial contact, with one exception, has already been made and received positively though, so that's the important part. With that one exception, I've emailed him three times and even called his desk phone during office hours. I have successfully made contact with the grad director there, so I'm debating asking him to maybe reach out to this guy and forward him my email, but I'm hesitant. @Einherjar86 What are your thoughts? It's not like I'm going to die by throwing away $150 in application fees, but, with a 4% admittance rate, I at least want to know if the guy is taking students. It's also quite off-putting because he's literally the guy in my field, and almost every potential adviser I've reached out to thus far has also recommended I try my chances at working with him.

Also received unfortunate news from a different program this morning. Turns out Hopkins just changed their sabbatical policy and it just so happens the adviser I met with in August is eligible this next year, so he won't be accepting students when I apply. It's doubly disappointing because they just hired a really good new Chair for the German Department I was hoping to work with as well. Plus, I'm losing a little bit of home field advantage that I was hoping I would have there.

Now the debate is whether or not to replace it. I'm already applying to eight other places anyways, including a couple of safe picks, but I'm nervous about losing one of my top picks. The problem is, there is nowhere within my geographical preference, being the BosWash corridor. The problem here is German history went out of fashion with the fall of the Berlin Wall, so even places like Princeton or Yale are weak on that point, and I don't want to apply to places literally for name only. Boston University is a prime example of my debacle here. They've got two Germanists, one who studies the GDR and thus isn't ideal, and another who is a legend and well accomplished in my field, but he completed his PhD in the early 1970s and, because PhDs take a while to complete, there is a certain risk there. UC Berkeley has everything going for it, but my reasoning for not remaining in Germany and studying here is that I want to be within a reasonable distance to family, and Berkeley doesn't check that box. Plus, a quick look-over of their funding package doesn't seem to correspond with the cost of living well. UCLA is the same and has the same problems. Emory is another alternative, but I don't know if I want to live in hot-ass Atlanta and am skeptical of whether or not I want to go to the south at all. I made an exception to this for Nashville because of the strength of the program and city amenities. I might just have to speak with some people at these places and make up my mind then.

 

[Einherjar86]

I don't envy you any of that.

For starters, let me just say that it sounds like you're going above and beyond for this process, which is awesome. It says something about your commitment and academic concerns, but also your confidence as a scholar. All I'll add here is that, at a certain point, there's nothing more you can do. It's frustrating, but eventually the ball's in their court. It sounds like you've done nearly all (if not all) you can.

As for the professor who's not returning your emails, this is a tough one. I typically say that if you've emailed a faculty member and they don't respond in 48 hours, sending them another email is fine. If that one goes unanswered, the best thing to do may actually be to reach out to a department administrator. It can occasionally be the case that a professor's spam filter sends messages into the spam folder for who-knows-what reason. You say you've established contact with the grad director; it probably couldn't hurt to mention you've tried touching base with the other faculty member, and would love to speak with him if possible.

Although this is difficult to gauge, one thing to consider is also how much establishing contact outweighs the possible (albeit probably unlikely) chance of annoying the professor you're trying to reach. For safety's sake, I definitely wouldn't email him again, just in case he has noticed your emails but simply hasn't had time to reply. I also wouldn't call his office phone. In my experience--at best, faculty simply ignore their office phones; at worst, they grumble and complain about getting calls. It's a good idea to try and make yourself stand out from the piles of names they have to sift through, but you don't want to stand out for the wrong reasons. I think your best bet would be to mention your interest in his work to the grad director or another administrator, and that you've tried to get in touch with him. It could be that your messages aren't getting through, he's swamped, not teaching for the semester (or out of the office for some other reason), or that he's just particularly bad at responding to emails (in which case you don't want to get on his nerves). I think going through some other party is your best bet.

Can I ask why Johns Hopkins is fully out of the running? You're applying to PhDs, correct? The professor you want to work with may be going on sabbatical the year you apply, but what's to preventing him from working with you after he comes back? Most doctoral candidates don't really start their dissertation projects during the first year anyway, since they have to take classes full-time--unless your package will be different, since you already have a master's...? Sorry, a lot of questions.

 

[Blurry_Dreams]

Dallas Public Schools Doing So Well They Draw Astonishment | Dallas Observer

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I don't envy you any of that.

For starters, let me just say that it sounds like you're going above and beyond for this process, which is awesome. It says something about your commitment and academic concerns, but also your confidence as a scholar. All I'll add here is that, at a certain point, there's nothing more you can do. It's frustrating, but eventually the ball's in their court. It sounds like you've done nearly all (if not all) you can.

As for the professor who's not returning your emails, this is a tough one. I typically say that if you've emailed a faculty member and they don't respond in 48 hours, sending them another email is fine. If that one goes unanswered, the best thing to do may actually be to reach out to a department administrator. It can occasionally be the case that a professor's spam filter sends messages into the spam folder for who-knows-what reason. You say you've established contact with the grad director; it probably couldn't hurt to mention you've tried touching base with the other faculty member, and would love to speak with him if possible.

Although this is difficult to gauge, one thing to consider is also how much establishing contact outweighs the possible (albeit probably unlikely) chance of annoying the professor you're trying to reach. For safety's sake, I definitely wouldn't email him again, just in case he has noticed your emails but simply hasn't had time to reply. I also wouldn't call his office phone. In my experience--at best, faculty simply ignore their office phones; at worst, they grumble and complain about getting calls. It's a good idea to try and make yourself stand out from the piles of names they have to sift through, but you don't want to stand out for the wrong reasons. I think your best bet would be to mention your interest in his work to the grad director or another administrator, and that you've tried to get in touch with him. It could be that your messages aren't getting through, he's swamped, not teaching for the semester (or out of the office for some other reason), or that he's just particularly bad at responding to emails (in which case you don't want to get on his nerves). I think going through some other party is your best bet.

Can I ask why Johns Hopkins is fully out of the running? You're applying to PhDs, correct? The professor you want to work with may be going on sabbatical the year you apply, but what's to preventing him from working with you after he comes back? Most doctoral candidates don't really start their dissertation projects during the first year anyway, since they have to take classes full-time--unless your package will be different, since you already have a master's...? Sorry, a lot of questions.

Yes, that was precisely my one concern: that I might bug him with the emails. I should say though that the three I've sent haven't been one after another. My first was near the end of July (which I wasn't exactly expecting an answer to), the second two weeks ago, and a third last week via my Syracuse email in case the spam filter had prevented him from seeing it. My only slight hesitation with the grad director is that I don't want for him to feel like I'm going over his head. He's a named chair in the history department as well as a full professor of the philosophy and German departments and he's prolific, so I'm sure he's just busy as hell. I'll just contact the grad director with a nice message and ask for him to reach out for me. For what it's worth, I'm having difficulty reaching the people at all of the big wig places for Skype calls who have already expressed an interest in working with me, although I'm not too concerned about them getting back to me at some point. My contact at Chicago asked me to wait until mid-November to contact her to Skype, which isn't ideal, but I'm assuming it's related to the quarter curriculum they use.

The problem with Hopkins has to do with the way a lot of history grad programs work. They simply don't bring students on if the professor in their field isn't accepting students that year. History is rather tribal with its specializations. If there were more than one Germanist or perhaps a French historian who did something related to my area of research, it would maybe be possible to swing. Hopkins also puts a lot of emphasis on its first year research seminar papers, and I don't think they would see it as being doable without an adviser. I may have one thing: I received a reply from the Chair of the German department today after sending her an email over the weekend before the sabbatical news broke, and she liked my topic enough to ask me to consider applying to the German department to work directly with her. But I don't want a PhD in German 1) because while I love theory in informing methodology and approach, as well as analyzing it in historical context, I don't like theory in itself, and it's critical to language studies 2) funding is almost always better in history, in this case two years teaching/three years fellowship with paid research v. four years teaching/one year fellowship 3) jobs and 4) I'm not that big into literature. That last one is big, of course. Oh and my French would have to be near fluency instead of just highly proficient. Maaaaaybe I could reach out to the professor who was going to be my adviser to see if something could be done where I work with her for the first year. I don't see it happening though considering the turn-down rate there. I've always spent half of my time on the university playing footsy with other departments though, so it wouldn't be out of place on my part.

The funny part about this for me now is I just had a nice Skype interview with a professor from one of my safe schools, and he told me to apply to places more for the strength of the program and less for whether or not there was somebody there who was an expert in my field. It doesn't really help me much here, but it does make me feel better about Columbia and Chicago--although he had some rather comical things to say about both of them in particular. He also mentioned that Vanderbilt has been winning people over with exorbitant stipends, which I have mixed-feelings about. It seems a little shady to try and coax students away from the more elite schools by throwing forty grand a year at them.

 

[Dak]

I'm split between admiring and being perplexed by those who enjoy a discipline to the degree required to obtain a PhD in these more opaque fields. The longer I'm exposed to the warren of academia's progression and bureaucracy, the more sure I am that I want no part of it. I simply don't care deeply enough about one single discipline, particularly to put up with the BS.

Edit: And don't knock money. Academics generally can't recoup lost earnings.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Literally just finished my candidacy defense. Final-fuckin-ly. Brain's fried but I've still got lab work tonight.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

I'm split between admiring and being perplexed by those who enjoy a discipline to the degree required to obtain a PhD in these more opaque fields. The longer I'm exposed to the warren of academia's progression and bureaucracy, the more sure I am that I want no part of it. I simply don't care deeply enough about one single discipline, particularly to put up with the BS.

Edit: And don't knock money. Academics generally can't recoup lost earnings.

Agreed, tbh. It's part of the reason why I like history. There's quite a lot of flexibility in it in terms of topics and approaches, so I could, for instance complete my dissertation on my current project, publish my first book out of it to get tenure, and then get a stick up my ass and go back to my old interest in music history or maybe economic history. But yeah, career-wise, I'm not 100% sold on it, although I did find myself becoming rather comfortable with the life-style my first year at SU. As much interest as I have on a career outside of academia, a job-offer at a tier one research institution would be very tempting--two courses per semester, good salary, sabbatical every five or so years. Zimmerman gave me a rather hilarious observation when I met him over the summer: academia is like a cult, and the longer you're in it, the harder it is to get out.

Yeah yeah, well in Vanderbilt's case, it definitely doesn't hurt that they've got arguably the richest collection of Germanists in the country. Many might not even have one; they've got four, including three rock stars.

Literally just finished my candidacy defense. Final-fuckin-ly. Brain's fried but I've still got lab work tonight.

Congrats!

 

[Einherjar86]

The problem with Hopkins has to do with the way a lot of history grad programs work. They simply don't bring students on if the professor in their field isn't accepting students that year. History is rather tribal with its specializations.

So, you begin working with the professor in your field right away? Interesting. In English programs, you typically don't start specialized work until your third year or so (depending on your rate of progress). The first two years are spent fulfilling historical requirements (from Chaucer to 20thc). I guess in history you've already filled those requirements! Most PhD candidates in English don't begin their directed research until after they pass their oral exams.

In fact, a lot of English grad students end up focusing on something different than they specified in their applications. For example, when I applied I wanted to study variations of the historical novel after World War II. Now my dissertation is a study of literature and science in the mid-twentieth century, specifically looking at late modernist writing and the rising influence of cybernetic theory. I never even mentioned my current dissertation advisor in my original application!

It sounds like you've got the rest figured out. Also, I didn't realize how far apart those emails were; I'm sure you're fine. But yes, mentioning something to grad director sounds like the right way to go. I don't think he'll feel like you're going over his head. Faculty know that every student has someone they want to work with.

Yeah yeah, well in Vanderbilt's case, it definitely doesn't hurt that they've got arguably the richest collection of Germanists in the country. Many might not even have one; they've got four, including three rock stars.

Not gonna lie, this sounds like a goldmine.

I realize you spoke to a professor who encouraged applying based on prestige, but you can theoretically find a prestigious program that has little to offer in your specified area. There can be good reasons for going to a less-than-stellar program if it features reputable specialists in your field (an example in English would be a school like Tufts, which isn't a highly reputable program but has some heavy-hitters in the department). And in this case, Vanderbilt offers not only specialists, but also money?? Yeah, I'd have to think twice before passing on that.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

So, you begin working with the professor in your field right away? Interesting. In English programs, you typically don't start specialized work until your third year or so (depending on your rate of progress). The first two years are spent fulfilling historical requirements (from Chaucer to 20thc). I guess in history you've already filled those requirements! Most PhD candidates in English don't begin their directed research until after they pass their oral exams.

In fact, a lot of English grad students end up focusing on something different than they specified in their applications. For example, when I applied I wanted to study variations of the historical novel after World War II. Now my dissertation is a study of literature and science in the mid-twentieth century, specifically looking at late modernist writing and the rising influence of cybernetic theory. I never even mentioned my current dissertation advisor in my original application!

It sounds like you've got the rest figured out. Also, I didn't realize how far apart those emails were; I'm sure you're fine. But yes, mentioning something to grad director sounds like the right way to go. I don't think he'll feel like you're going over his head. Faculty know that every student has someone they want to work with.

It depends on the program, but in a lot of places, yes, specifically for the first year paper, which is supposed to run 35-50 pages and start pushing students toward a workable dissertation topic--this is of course in addition to the three other graduate courses per semester at the big money places, and two per semester in addition to TAing for the smaller programs. Some programs follow this up with a second year paper as well. The core courses usually consist of two of these and concern historiography (both works of historiography and the works that reshaped historical perspectives) and methodology/philosophy. The rest are seminars of varying topics for which students are free to choose, and some programs let their grads enroll in courses from other departments for credit, something of which I've always taken advantage. The actual directed research, however, does also come after oral exams.

History is much the same. It's not uncommon for students to come in without having settled on something, and some programs prefer students who come in with an open mind, and switching advisers certainly isn't unheard of. I'll probably spend most of the words on my topic itself in my SoP on methodology and approach for that reason, in addition of course to the fact that I plan to focus on Weimar era Germany. Plus, it saves me from accidentally sounding like an idiot discussing a dissertation that isn't actually written and may or may not be viable--I'd apply to programs in Europe if I wanted to that. For the rest of it, I plan to stick to explaining why that program in particular, i.e., instructors inside and out of the department, student body and culture, location, future opportunities, etc. The only big question is whether to recycle the sexy introduction I wrote for a grant last year. It didn't work then, but German academics don't really dig that sort of thing; my SoP for my first round of grad applications a few years ago opened with an eye-catcher on David Icke and reptilians, and I got into most of the places I applied to then, so who knows.

There is a very slight chance my topic could change because of a little nugget I uncovered, but I'm not sure a longue durée transnational history on the effect of German monarchical/corporatist economic thought on politics is really what I want to dive into for a dissertation. Plus, such a thing could be a liability if I want to get into diplomacy--I wouldn't want to blow my deep state cover

Not gonna lie, this sounds like a goldmine.

I realize you spoke to a professor who encouraged applying based on prestige, but you can theoretically find a prestigious program that has little to offer in your specified area. There can be good reasons for going to a less-than-stellar program if it features reputable specialists in your field (an example in English would be a school like Tufts, which isn't a highly reputable program but has some heavy-hitters in the department). And in this case, Vanderbilt offers not only specialists, but also money?? Yeah, I'd have to think twice before passing on that.

I have to admit, Vanderbilt has everything going for it--professors, lots of Germanist grads, good funding, a city where I could easily find people to play music with--and I feel really good about my chances there, versus, say, Harvard, where it'll come down more to chance and the moods of the people on the committee in particular moments. My only hesitation is the fact that basically every professor with whom I discuss it kind of shits on it, and I'd imagine the money plays a role.

We'll see what happens in February and March. Hopefully I'll be faced with a dilemma.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Sent off all of my grad apps a few weeks ago. I ended up taking the GRE a second time. I didn't want to because I've already thrown about $500 at ETS over the last few years and I really hate contributing to the racket further. Plus, I figured that perfect grad transcripts and two years of studying in my country of research would place my 158 Verbal in a charitable light. A potential adviser from one of the schools I'm applying to asked me to though because they apparently become valuable bargaining chips in graduate committee discussions. With his asking, it wasn't really possible for me not to do so. It worked out perfectly, as I bumped my score to a 165. So, it makes it all the more likely I'll be able to get into most of the places I've applied. Exciting stuff. My bank account hurts.

Beyond the formalities, I've made contact and had pleasant discussions with all of my potential advisers, one excepted. I still applied to this one because of the name, despite being totally snubbed by the professor (after reaching out to the grad director, this prof replied to me via the grad director, saying I was free to apply if I thought the program was the next logical step in my academic career--I get I'm a nobody, but a little decorum from somebody I'll have to work with for six years would be nice), so I'm hoping I'll make it into the other places so I can turn it down.