My in box has recently been besieged by a flood of articles decrying the death of graduate education in the humanities. As a literature student at a state university, I'm told my future career prospects are apparently not good, according to a number of prominent academics.
For instance, Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, wrote in the January/February 2010 issue of Academe that "the only thing the Ph.D. now reliably confers is the potential for lifetime poverty and underemployment." Apparently, though my program is excellent, I will be among the snookered, vagabond English adjunct scholars milling around the countryside, doomed to a life of the vicissitudes of enrollment and discretionary spending. Or, more likely, I will pursue my second career choice: swamp hermit. I will scream my Lacanian analyses at unsuspecting families hiking through my territory. There will be some dignity in my bog.
Or consider how, in an interview this past January on National Public Radio, Louis Menand, the writer and Harvard professor of English, talked about his new book, The Marketplace of Ideas: Reform and Resistance in the American University (Norton). He asserted that the nine-year national average for completion of the Ph.D. is "an astonishingly long apprenticeship in a profession that really shouldn't require that much training," when more lucrative fields like law and medicine take significantly less time in school. Wildly reductive assertions that we can cut the time in graduate school neglect the fact that we spend enormous time developing syllabi to reflect the changing needs of students we help teach; that many of us have to supplement our incomes; that we mentor students and colleagues, all the while working on our own scholarship.
Then there is William Pannapacker (writing under the pen name "Thomas H. Benton"), in an essay titled "Graduate School in the Humanities: Just Don't Go" (The Chronicle, Careers, January 30, 2009). Benton wrote that "humanities Ph.D.'s, without relevant experience or technical skills, generally compete at a moderate disadvantage against undergraduates, and at a serious disadvantage against people with professional degrees." The argument that the skills of a Ph.D. are generally nontransferable to alternative workplaces, and its related condemnation of academic specialization, is flawed in two ways. The first—and the most troubling, coming as it does from highly educated individuals—is that knowledge labeled "nontransferable" necessarily casts doubt on the value of that knowledge. The second is the fact that we graduate students are still advised by our mentors to specialize. They did so under different conditions, while most of us don't have a prayer of getting today's jobs, which are often for generalists who can teach a wide range of subjects.
Benton goes on to criticize both professors who offer such encouragement to their would-be graduate students, and graduate students themselves for their "angry and incoherent" responses to his critique. While I understand that he and his ilk may be trying to help, I'm still confused about how they mean to do so—particularly with regard to those of us who did not benefit from their wisdom before embarking on our grad-school enterprise—since they largely fail to offer any meaningful solutions, or the ones they do are cavalier (for example, calls for graduate unions that garner little commitment from tenured faculty members).
Such pundits need to do what we TA's tell our composition students to do: Offer potential solutions for the problem at hand. Writing the same meandering, pointless first draft of an argument does not constitute a valid contribution to the work of finding solutions. While our profession regularly excoriates the news media for overblown rhetoric, we seem to be better at articles that induce panic about our prospects than about, for example, jobs outside academe for which we might be suited. Just because we may not all get jobs at research institutions doesn't mean we can't contribute, and make a reasonable income to boot.
It is true that there are drawbacks to certain careers commonly proposed for Ph.D.'s. Certainly, being an adjunct is not appealing. Most adjuncts still hover somewhere around the poverty line. So do graduate students. Yet who among us could strike? There are thousands of would-be students and other adjuncts, equally disadvantaged, who would flood in to fill our recently vacated positions. We could shout "Scabs!" until our throats were hoarse, but plenty of people would fill in, thinking, "Thank God I'm not working at Barnes & Noble anymore."
Teaching in public-school systems seems like a logical alternative, but that would require an extra degree for many of us. Why are certificates in education studies not more widely promoted as a tool of professionalization and a marker of preparedness? We are offered certificates in women's studies, English as a Second Language teaching, and a host of other programs, so that would seem to be a relatively easy way to credential our graduates for careers outside academe.
A cynical answer would be that such an offering would dry up the available pool of adjuncts at economically disadvantaged universities, not that (as Benton suggests) we poor graduate students in the humanities are misguided to pursue a Ph.D. Obviously universities also want some of their students to get tenure-track jobs at institutions that will reflect well on the departments whence they sprang. But what is it about jobs outside academe that supposedly reflects poorly on a department? Is it elitism? Is it the need to justify the continued drive toward unreasonable specialization? Is it that we're not attempting to create teacher-scholars but an entirely different monster—say, a beast of burden or a chronically distraught failure?
Why not discuss options for work at nonprofit groups, which would be happy to have access to a motivated, educated work force? That might not solve the poverty problem, but it would certainly give former grad students the chance to move up to a good position over time. But of course, working at nonprofits carries with it the same stigma as teaching in public schools. Actual nonprofit work is undertaken by a relatively limited number of people who have a professed political investment in it. And most of our efforts in grad school veer toward a particular, different kind of professionalization.
The English Graduate Organization at my university has been more mature than our betters in some respects. In an effort to help in the academic profession, the EGO has run workshops on publishing, conferencing, and applying for both academic and nonacademic jobs. The group has offered helpful advice, including appropriate attire for the job market and how to write a grant—all of which has been invaluable. I should note that the workshops have included participation by tenured professors, who have happily given as much advice as they could.
Rather than abusing the already abused graduate-student population, perhaps more professors could write articles that say: "Yeah, you're all screwed in terms of work for a research institution, but there are these other things out there that are great options. Your degree is not useless, and you are doing valuable work." (Even if many of them don't believe that.)
We, the humanities graduate students of the United States of America, do not want your pity, or your smug, self-congratulatory admonishments of our choices. What we want is your help formulating a path that will lead us into careers where we can be useful, not exploited.
Comments
1. joseangel - April 05, 2010 at 08:18 am
I think that most faculty really do care about their students, their futures, and that they ultimately gain employment. But it is not pity as much as it is a caveat, a precaution of "I Told you So."
2. velvis - April 05, 2010 at 09:38 am
This is the second article I've read this morning talking about my future prospects of continued just above poverty line living and attempting to crush my hopes of a real academic job.
Where is this great shortage of teachers/professors? I've been hearing about it for decades it seems. Yet no one can get a job.
Perhaps the time has come to stop scarificing our new PhDs to the Academe Volcano Gods and start with the old ones, (they don't seem to be doing much anyway).
3. peter7872 - April 05, 2010 at 09:50 am
I know the author doesn't want another degree, but for those with PhDs out there in the humanities looking for work, please do consider librarianship as a profession and earning the Master of Library and Information Science. You can make great and needed contributions in this field.
4. 11252628 - April 05, 2010 at 09:56 am
When I was a doctoral student back in the 1980's (in biology), I was told often by my mentors that the effort to obtain a PhD was not worth the future payoff. In retrospect, they may have been testing me. Nevertheless, I knew that I was right where I wanted to be, doing exactly what I wanted to do. Guess what? I have had (and continue to have) a wonderful and rewarding career. The point is... You decide (and keep refining your decision, based upon your experiences and what you can glean from them), and keep your eyes open to the possiblities as they open up before you.
5. tonycontento - April 05, 2010 at 09:59 am
Ms. Polak--
I think that the jobs ARE indeed out there for doctoral candidates in the Humanities, but those individuals must be willing to "ply their trade" in new venues. This might mean a move to the Midwest (some small town, an hour from anything resembling the term "urban") or it might mean a job over seas (Hong Kong/Chinnese and the Middle Eastern institutions post jobs regularly here). There is also a growing demand for online-instructors, which will almost always end up being adjunct positions in the beginning. And let's not forget the growing number of for-profit univeristies. If you want an academic job, they are out there, but there are other options for everyone, especially people trained in the Humanities.
As far as tenure goes, if I limit myself to tenure-track only positions, I will find half as many possibilities. So, my search for a job has taken me all over the academic world, and into other parts of the public (federal jobs) and private sectors. The key to landing the position that you want is getting training and specific certifications and networking. Don't listen to the folks poo-pooing the new batch of Ph.D.s, and telling them to look elsewhere. Yes, the job market is tight, but that's the fact everywhere. Go after what you want (even if that means tenure-track only positions) and your ambition will land you a job.
6. trendisnotdestiny - April 05, 2010 at 10:01 am
not exploited; well its too late! Lets be honest with people...
Lets not pretend that there are all these great opportunities out there during one of the largest economic depressions in over 70 years... Let's not pretend its going to be all OK if there are ancillary jobs that are stopgaps...
Let's not pretend that corporations are moving to change our profession to resemble them. Let's not pretend that many knew that this day would come and have done nothing.... True its not always necessary to squash hope... cultivating this is truly important....
But it is even more important to provide unpleasant awareness than informal platitudes...
7. iris411 - April 05, 2010 at 10:02 am
I guess it 's just the reality of life. Most of the human beings are working hard and doing their best and still struggling on the edge of survival. I really don't see why academia should be any different. Those who do well are just abnormalities. Just because one is smart and works hard do not automatically gurantees a job, not to mention a life-long protected job.
Besides, since when getting a tenured job become the sole purpose of a Ph.D.? What about self-improvement? What about the pursuit for excellency?
8. johntoradze - April 05, 2010 at 11:45 am
"What we want is your help formulating a path that will lead us into careers where we can be useful, not exploited."
Ok. If you are sincere, then take some economics and marketing classes and really pay attention. I can't give one here, but you could learn things like - All paid employment is mutual exploitation. That means it is up to you to figure out how to do something that is ok with you to get enough money in return to continue doing it.
You could also open up your horizons and realize that there is a big world of possibilities. You can be an author of popular books. You can go to work in marketing and/or sales. You could also learn how your english department works - it is an economic entity that follows the same laws of economics everything else does.
9. roaringlibrarian - April 05, 2010 at 12:38 pm
to peter7872's comment:
the librarianship profession will also be heading towards the same direction if doctorate students decide to also pursue an MLIS degree --- the job market in libraries are just as bad as the ones in academia. but doctorate students need to really consider creative and alternative career paths. Consider working for research institutions, thinktanks, government agencies and ngos. utilize and transfer those academia skills for something more useful and practice. As I am writing this, I am also thinking of librarianship being a possible alternative approach in gaining more valuable skills (but not necessarily becoming a librarian -- since there's way too many jobless librarians searching for jobs to begin with ...)
10. laura012345 - April 05, 2010 at 01:03 pm
The library profession is already there. Many recent graduates have already taken the steps to go back to school for either school librarianship (which has more required training) or another field.
The ALA has been telling the public that there is going to be a librarian shortage for... the past 10 years. There's not one now, and there won't be one in the near future.
11. hobbit - April 05, 2010 at 02:49 pm
Much as I wish it were true, #1, most graduates from my department never work in their fields, despite impressive resumes. Their searches included the broadest scope imaginable - public, private, online, corporations, non-profit enterprises, the works. Yes, they eventually got jobs of some sort, but nothing that required much above a bachelor's degree. In many cases, the PhD is actually a liability ("oh, we'd really like to hire you, but we know you won't stay..."). It's also very hard for unaffiliated people to publish and do research. Thus, a year or two out of grad school means that the chances of being part of the profession, let alone the academy, drop dramatically.
If grad students were told this information upfront, it would be one thing, but many are plied with misleading and seriously outdated information that eventually lead to financially disastrous consequences. If this were not the case, why would technical/vocational colleges and institutes be seeing such an increase in applications for entrance into tech programs from PhDs?
12. 22228715 - April 05, 2010 at 03:22 pm
Well... I can certainly understand your wish for your faculty to have answers to your career path questions. I think each of us wishes for someone who could tell us what the job market will be 5-10 years from now, which of our skills will serve us best and gain us the most compensation and job satisfaction, and what will be reasonable sacrifices to make to capture (or get close to) our dreams. That, however, is probably not how it works. If you find that amazing mentor who can do all of that, be very skeptical until you find out whether it's for real. In the meantime... know that the rest of us are mostly guessing too.
Good luck.
13. fcshofstra - April 05, 2010 at 04:59 pm
Some of us do try to offer practical advice on getting jobs for humanities Ph.D.s - sometimes the Chronicle even publishes it (see http://chronicle.com/article/Switching-Sides-Part-2/46468/ ). I personally still am not seeing many Ph.D.s trying to cross over into the type of work I can offer them. I think the efforts to offer practical advice are somewhat hampered by the overwhelming (and I fear false) belief of most Ph.D. students that they will be the special ones who win the job lottery and get tenure-track jobs.
14. pearlmiller - April 05, 2010 at 07:10 pm
Yes please let's stop perpetuating the idea that librarianship will be the savior of academics looking for work. I hear this advice frequently. There will be no mass retirement of librarians any sooner than there will be of professors. Like laura012345 said - the American Library Association promised new graduate students a 'graying of the profession' when I began my program in 2002 and it is yet to happen. Furthermore, positions in academic libraries (where, I presume, many would-be professors would like to end up) are not proliferating. All this and the fact that being a librarian, while linked to other academic work, is vastly different that being a professor.
I'm a librarian considering going back for a PhD in rhet/comp and like the author, am overwhelmed with all the advice not to. If the outlook is so dismal that it seems like no one should enroll in a humanities program, then who should bother trying? Surely *someone* has to be available for the (ever-shrinking pool of)jobs that do open up?
15. marka - April 05, 2010 at 07:18 pm
The thrust of the many articles detailing the reduced job prospects in academe are more or less about Truth in Admissions/Recruiting/Retention. Just as we have Truth In Lending laws in the financial sector, so should we have Truth in Admissions protocols in academe. And given the continued influx of students into grad school, notwithstanding the paucity of positions motivate some to employ increased emphasis - scare tactics, if you will -- because students are not taking heed in enough numbers to demonstrate that most actually 'get it.' Just like TiL disclosures now required in ALL BOLD CAPS -- and even then, many folks don't read it or get it ...
So, practically speaking, it may be important to many to know the actual price-tag of graduate school, including loans, and the realistic prospects of paying back said loans, whether they want to pay heed or not. Part of that should be that an advanced degree is not some kind of talismanic key to advanced placement in the work world. In fact, for many, it will simply appear that you are 'overqualified' -- in which case, actually pursuing advances degrees is counterproductive and self-defeating. There is more reality than most want to admit to the level of 'education' and 'certification' some of our barristas, nannies & taxi drivers have. You can then decide whether $100,000.00 or more in loans are worth pursuing your degree. If you are from a wealthy family, maybe you can finance education without worrying too much about a payback schedule, but most probably need to think about this more than they do now -- graduate school can seem like an escape from these 'other world' responsibilities, and the longer you are in school, the longer you can defer payback, but how long can you sustain this?
As noted elsewhere, there are many kinds of opportunities, if one is willing to move & relocate, but you have to work @ finding them. The skills you demonstrate or attain thru graduate school may indeed be 'transferable,' and some enlightened employers may see it that way, but having been in the working world for 3 decades, that is a long shot. You'd have to be willing to start out at or near the bottom of the pecking order, and win your stripes up the ranks, and in that case, you are probably 'overqualified' ... No value judgment here ... just the facts of job life -- which is 'unfair,' just like the rest of life. Unfair, and maybe cruel, but very real.
And finally, taking 9 years for a PhD may, or may not, compare to a JD or MD, but don't kid yourself that the JDs & MDs aren't working just as hard, if not harder, than PhD candidates. And for now, JDs are also looking at the prospect of not having a 'job' available, but at least they can hang out their own shingles and ply their trade on their own. MDs go thru many years of post-grad work (internships, fellowships, residences, etc.), altho' in many states one can hang up one's shingle after a single internship year. So, JDs & MDs graduate in 3-5 years from school (and internship), and can then ply their trade on their own. They, too, often mentor others, publish in professional trade journals, present at continuing education classes, and smooze @ cocktail parties ... But at least there is some kind of market for those services, where individual entrepreneurs can operate ... harder to find & exploit 'independent researcher/academic' niche.
16. larryc - April 05, 2010 at 07:32 pm
"Such pundits need to do what we TA's tell our composition students to do: Offer potential solutions for the problem at hand."
They are offering you advice, and good advice: Don't go to graduate school in the humanities. You just aren't listening.
17. dhume - April 05, 2010 at 08:40 pm
@ larryc:
Such Pannapackerist "advice" has the advantage of simplicity, but it shows no concern whatsoever with the future. Whatever problems there are with the way graduate education and the humanities job market work now (and there are a lot) it's worth reminding ourselves of why it's important to study the humanities and why we therefore need people to teach those subjects. I'm not going to make a lengthy defense of the humanities here, but I do want to emphasise that we humanists are not going to improve our situation by denigrating our own work. We need to make arguments about the importance of our disciplines, why they should continue to form a central part of the university curriculum, and, yes, why states should finance them. We need to stop denouncing our own profession as a vampiric beast that all sane people should run (not walk!) away from, towards the refuge of business school or an HVAC-repair apprenticeship. Instead, we need to figure out how we're going to save as much as we can of what's good about the current system, reform what's bad, and do everything in our power to make sure that every teacher in the humanities--from grad students to adjuncts to junior faculty--can enjoy dignified working conditions with a living wage, benefits, and reasonable job security.
18. blowback - April 05, 2010 at 11:35 pm
I would direct Ms.Polak's attention and the rest of you to comments #184 & #185 made to Benton's "Big Lie About the Life of the Mind." And also to Comment #4 in Benton's "A Very Special Marketplace." I can only say that Ms. Polak has little idea of what awaits her. As to whether there are alternative careers open to Ph.D's in the humanities. The short answer is no. It is not a question of the qualifications or the welcome interest that Ph.D's in the humanities would have for non-academic work. The reality is that no HR Office and no one outside of the University has any interest in giving any Ph.D in the humanities any opportunity. By the time Ph.D's earn their degree they are off the career track for most entry level positions. In addition, universities refuse to consider Ph.D's for the many staff positions that do not require Ph.D's in academic affairs and other support services at the university. In fact, many of the staff positions that require no teaching and no research pay much more money than adjunct positions. Often in these debates there is an claim made about some vague sense that there are positions out there for the well educated. These are often made by tenured professors or othe university professionals who have not been on the job market for so long that what they have to contribute to this discussion is less than worthless. How many of you have actually researched the way HR offices work? How many of you have actually picked up a textbook or a journal in the discipline of Human Resources? How many of you have attempted to research whatever scholarship exists to how people get hired? How many of you have examined how other nations address their well educated graduate students? We are once again faced with the unexamined notion that higher education is an means to escape from one's limited opportunities. One need only acquire further education and that somehow through some magical thinking we will all graduate to some position created for us. It may not be an academic position but our education and hard work should at least matter for something. However, we soon learn that it matters for nothing. The critique rendered in so many of these discussions concerning higher education and the humanities and graduate school education in general fails time and time again to begin where the discussion needs to begin: the failure of market capitalism to provide any meaningful role to the countless ranks of unemployed and underemployed Ph.D's among us. Higher Education can only function as a rendering of the forces that drive American market capitalism: greed, self-interest, a winner take all philosophy. In the face of such forces what can any person hope for? There is no hope because those who most profit from the status quo will not give up their power and privilege unless these are taken from them. And who will take it from them? One reason these same debates keep arising again and again in publications like this one is that we cannot bring ourselves to admit to the larger failure at work here: Higher Education has become part of the larger trap created by the contradictions of a society that refuses to admit to its contradictions and false hopes. To Ms. Polak and to many of those who find themselves and will find themselves in this trap know this: there is no hope in higher education and no hope out of it. Many lives will and have been ruined, many lives will and have been wasted. And the universities and the students we have taught that we have given to so much as graduate students and as adjuncts will care very little for our plight.
19. mainiac - April 06, 2010 at 10:34 am
"To Ms. Polak and to many of those who find themselves and will find themselves in this trap know this: there is no hope in higher education and no hope out of it."
blowback we are in hell!
20. carolineroberts - April 06, 2010 at 01:09 pm
Re: Blowback: "As to whether there are alternative careers open to Ph.D's in the humanities. The short answer is no."
The short answer is "no" as of right now. The author is suggesting creating alternatives instead of sitting around griping. The idea of a certificate to teach other grades is an admirable one, and it could be done by partnering with education departments, and I'm glad someone offered up a concrete suggestion.
21. john_drake - April 06, 2010 at 04:41 pm
The critics of William Pannapacker's columns would do well to talk with people who have been in the profession for a time. Fifteen years ago, possibly even ten, criticizing the very worth of doctoral programs in the humanities and the corresponding lack of jobs would've been career suicide on many campuses. One of the reasons that Ms. Polak and others can have this debate is because Pannapacker dared to start the discussion.
22. inverse_agonist - April 06, 2010 at 04:51 pm
It's quaint that people are talking about the future as if it's going to involve anything other than universal famine, misery, and warfare. Peak oil, climate change, and water depletion are coming to a head at the same time, and any one of those things on its own is enough to decimate food production.
It might have escaped general notice, but at this very moment we're in a mass extinction event at least as bad as the one that ended the dinosaurs. The idea that we're going to carry on in the midst of all this and continue to argue about Lacan is ludicrous.
We're animals that vastly overshot our environment's carrying capacity, so we're facing an inevitable population reduction. Food doesn't come from the store. It comes from the ground, and the ground is parched and depleted of nutrients.
Also, anybody that thinks we'll find a technological solution to these problems is uninformed, fooling themselves, or ascribing magical powers to Our Leaders That Will Take Care of Us.
Anybody that thinks these will be our children's problems is ignoring the news and forgetting that our parents said the same thing.
23. shom02 - April 06, 2010 at 05:49 pm
Offering a secondary-school teaching credential to PhD students is an amazing idea. Thanks for one of the best, most concrete suggestions I've heard in all the ruckus about the lack of academic jobs.
I wonder if we could (if we stopped yelling "the sky is falling!" for a moment) think of other interesting partnerships. For example, my field, philosophy, might help prepare students to work with families making ethically fraught medical decisions, and if "philosophy is a preparation for death" then we ought to make great death doulas. Why not have doula training available as an option for students?
Of course, part of the problem is that many academics are loath to move into a profession that is perceived as lower-status, while others aren't interested in praxis, especially the messy emotional variety. Since teaching is often both, there's no wonder it is so undervalued....
24. 11161452 - April 06, 2010 at 06:33 pm
From blowback:
"As to whether there are alternative careers open to Ph.D's in the humanities. The short answer is no. It is not a question of the qualifications or the welcome interest that Ph.D's in the humanities would have for non-academic work. The reality is that no HR Office and no one outside of the University has any interest in giving any Ph.D in the humanities any opportunity. By the time Ph.D's earn their degree they are off the career track for most entry level positions. In addition, universities refuse to consider Ph.D's for the many staff positions that do not require Ph.D's in academic affairs and other support services at the university."
***
To blowback:
I'm curious as to how you formulated these views--personal job-hunting experience? Or are you in the HR office looking at it from the hiring end? I, by the way, have found what you say to be true, having little success in my search for an academic staff position following 12 years of college teaching.
25. blowback - April 07, 2010 at 12:10 am
We do little good by pretending that the plight of Ph.D's in the Humanities can somwhow be addressed by having them become high school teachers or librarians. Those of us who have worked as adjuncts for some time do not do so because we are too uninformed to do anything else. I and countless others have already invested much time attempting to investigate the alternatives suggested above.
1. There is no shortage of schools of education or of certified public school teachers. Any one who has searched the listings for public school positions would know this. And the need for high school teachers is much less than in the lower grades. The demand for Teach for America, for example, is mostly for special education in these lower grades and they do not need Ph.D's in the Humanities or even want them for these positions. According to one Education Workshop run by the Dept. of Education in NYC, it was stated that 60% of certified teachers will never teach.
2. Advanced Certificate Programs for those who already hold a masters degree in a content area but who need the education courses needed for certification have existed for many years at most Graduate Schools of Education. You need to be certified if you even wish to look for a position. No public school will even consider hiring you without one. In addition, none of your prior teaching experience will matter for them because it was not at the grade level. In addition, even if you earn you certification Ph.D's will face the fact that according to most union contracts you advanced degree will mean that you will have to be paid more. Hence the public school has even less reason to hire you when they can hire a new education graduate for much less.And do not think that there are that many positions in non-public high schools that need to be filled with Ph.D's.
3. What makes you think that all those newly certified teachers who are graduating from schools of education year after year will welcome Ph.D's trying to take their jobs.
4. For example, the Bard/Early College H.S is a case in point. When it first opened it was staffed by retired CUNY Professors. However, as soon as the unions and Dept. of Education took greater control Ph.D's have been reduced to a mere token presence. The jobs have gone to the usual winners in the partronage game. The insiders are not going to let these prized positions just go to Ph.D's outsiders.
5. The recent report in The New York Times that some schools will allow 11 graders to attend community college is not being done as reported for educational reasons. Why have to pay the inflated salaries of union public school teachers when you can now have adjnuct professors at community colleges do it for much less money.
6. With regard to jobs for Librarians. I suggest you actually take a look at the bleak outlook. Library positions at universities are academic positions and as we all know library positions at public and college libraries are always the first to be cut. And do not be fooled into taking at face value the notion that there will be many librarians who are going to retire and they will all need to be replaced. Was this not what the MLA was telling us in the 1990's. Tell me how did that work out for us?
7. Any one who has gone to open houses for other professions or graduate programs will know that the professors and directors of these programs lie and engage in the same misrepresentations that have been noted by many in this publication. During one recent open house for a Graduate School in Education not one professor or graduate student representative noted the most obvious fact that there is a hiring freeze in the NYC public schools. If you did not know this you would think that the best thing you could do with your time and money was to enter the teaching profession!
8. And this is but the short of a much longer struggle of trying to find work after earning a Ph.D in the Humanities. Those of you who have walked this hard road as I have know the reality that I am outlining here and those of you who have not will learn it soon enough. Some of you may have some luck and escape but many will not.
26. jffoster - April 07, 2010 at 07:43 am
Candidate Polak,
Dr. Pannapacker (aka Thomas H Benton) has brought you a message from, if not of, Hope. And a positive solution.
DON'T GO!
In your case it's too late for that but you have the decision of whether to throw good money / time after bad. I don't know whether you were "misled" in your department or not -- I suspect not. But in my department on the same Campus in the Social Sciences I was telling students and prospective students back in the early nineties that tenured faculty retirements were NOT going to be replaced 1:1 by younger versions of themselves. It didn't take a great sage to figure out that demography, medicaid, and the general social polity of the United States and the several States were going to render academic employment and public higher education somewhat different.
27. trendisnotdestiny - April 07, 2010 at 12:43 pm
It is amazing to me that #22 provides a larger macro discussion of what is happening in the smallness of academic world (btw one thatis private and we pay to view); and it is ignored....
So busy not listening, waiting to speak more and more about points of no earthly concern but to those surrendered to myopia of me vs. you academic capitalism....
Thanks #22, your sense of what is to come; when its spot on! Don't forget the Gold & Silver Bubble when currencies collapse...
28. sophox - April 07, 2010 at 04:13 pm
If there were viable solutions for grad students facing the abyss, I'm sure the admins would be happy to trot them out.
There are not. Not really. Enough to salvage the lives of a few well-connected students who were blessed with spunk and good looks. But not enough to solve a significant chunk of the problem.
We are past that, Ms. Polak. You're stuck.
Now is the time to warn high school seniors and undergraduates away from choices that most will regret.
It is wonderful to suggest that certification bodies (and their corresponding unions) create tidy paths to secondary licensure.
But if a student does not arrive on your doorstep already well-informed about life as a HS English teacher, you would be cruel indeed to suggest that a student pursue such a course. You better go into that one too with your eyes wide open, or despair will surely follow. It may follow anyway.
29. carolineroberts - April 08, 2010 at 09:50 am
"But if a student does not arrive on your doorstep already well-informed about life as a HS English teacher, you would be cruel indeed to suggest that a student pursue such a course."
Why would that be cruel? It would be cruel indeed if your program didn't have a certificate program to back it up, but if there were such a certificate program, at least the student is aware of the option. And English grad students don't have to become HS teachers if academia doesn't work out. There are other options--writing, editing, information architecture, etc. An HS certification is one idea of many.
30. alleyoxenfree - April 08, 2010 at 01:14 pm
Concrete solutions:
Take your Ph.D. off your CV! Your BA and/or your MA will suffice and generally do not put off HR people.
Convert your CV to a resume, and start calling it one.
Start taking part-time jobs that aren't waitressing, so that you have a resume with skills in addition to the intellectual. Look for jobs that lead somewhere new - at a nonprofit. Or in a hot field - at a hospital or scientific think tank that needs grant writers and managers. Volunteer to write grants for a local charity and establish a track record of having worked with budgets.
Look at much of the good advice on other blogs and in the Chronicle fora about beginning to build a non-teaching resume and store of skills.
To academia, yes, there need to be certificate programs or other internships to bring Ph.Ds into staff positions. The addition of specific degrees for advising, for instance, has not led to better advising (according to recent studies) and arguably ignores the greatest pool of people who know how to navigate universities - experienced graduate students. Ditto for coordinating programs, recruiting, and a host of other activities at the university.
31. 22250655 - April 08, 2010 at 06:00 pm
I still think that humanities Ph.D.s can do well in librarianship. There are jobs at academic libraries, particularly at universities, and the doctorate provides evidence that one knows the research process. However, one needs to be willing to develop a service mentality, a commitment to access to knowledge, a willingness to instruct on a very basic level, and above all humility towards other librarians and support staff. I would like to see more librarians at my institution who hold the doctorate, but few apply. Some of these lack skills to work in the close environment of the academic library. The more computer skills one has, the better.
32. carter1 - April 08, 2010 at 08:52 pm
As a humanities grad student, reading doomsday threads in the Chronicle about the lack of jobs for PhDs has become a sort of guilty pleasure for me. I was given the same doomsday talk by my undergrad profs, but still, I decided to enroll. I read the doomsday posts and articles and editorials, but still, I decided to enroll. With few financial responsibilities and a fellowship that pays a whole heckuva lot more than the jobs I was able to find out of undergrad, it feels like a pretty good deal, even considering the risks involved. I fully agree that prospective grad students should seek out and receive a realistic picture of what pitfalls may lie ahead. I am a little surprised though that so many people in these fora feel that they were somehow lied to or misled, or that grad students enter programs with their eyes closed. Is the bad-news reality of academia really so surprising to anyone? I don't think I've run into a humanities grad student yet who thinks finding a job (in the acadame or otherwise) is a sure bet. But, still, here we are. Like surly teens, we insist on doing our own thing, making our own mistakes. And like teendom, some will come out alright, and some will not. I think most grad students are aware of their risky behavior and are, for whatever reason, willing to find out for themselves what the consequences will be. There are worse things to experiment with.
33. dly115 - April 09, 2010 at 04:02 am
<Comment removed by moderator>
34. resource - April 09, 2010 at 11:15 am
I entered academia in my 40's after a working class life. Not in humanities but educational psychology with technical emphasis (statistics, assessment). I was 47 when I completed my Ph.D. I immediately found a job at a nursing school teaching stats and research methods. I left that job to take a position as Director of Assessment at a small college, and parlayed that into a Vice President position. I have managage to publish and present, if not at the tenure track level. During all this time I have taught adjunct or parttime at for profit and publicly fundedin institutions. I am constantly in the job market, even though I have a job -- I am always on the look out for work. I always have a portfolio of 6-8 institutions for which I teach.
The secret? Always be on the lookout for work, always say yes -- to any work for which you are arguably qualified. Dont hold back for that good fit job, or that academically rewarding job. Hustle. If you are not smug, do not have a sense of entitlement to a tenure track job, if you are willing, available, and present, you will likely work.
35. ashcroft00 - April 10, 2010 at 08:47 pm
Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis observed that "sunlight is the best disinfectant." Through his recent columns, Dr. William Pannapacker has taken Brandeis' message and applied it to the racket otherwise known as graduate education. Pannapacker's intention is to not to "abuse the already-abused graduate student population" as Polak suggests, but rather to expose the institutions that resist reducing the number of admitted students, despite their full awareness of the highly limited
opportunities available in academe.
As Pannapacker notes, "Graduate school may be about the 'disinterested pursuit of learning' for some privileged people. But for most of us, graduate school in the humanities is about the implicit promise of the life of a middle-class professional, about being respected, about not hating your job and wasting your life. That dream is long gone in academe for almost everyone entering it now." I would argue that Pannpacker's observations apply in similar measure to programs outside of the Humanities.
So much of his insight translates to legal education in America as well. As someone who elected to pursue a law degree several years ago, I can assure you that it was an equally masochistic
and self-effacing decision. Law schools, to a far greater degree than graduate Humanities' programs, have done a horrific job of policing their numbers and as a society we find ourselves with too many law schools, churning out too many lawyers, most of whom are saddled with too much student loan debt.
Dr. Pannapacker has articulated truths that some graduate students, like Polak, may not want to hear. I suspect that some of these students will change their minds once they have graduated and the student loan payments start coming due. Where will they turn when the employment opportunities within academe fail to materialize? Pannapacker is a realist who effectively argues that colleges and universities must be made to engage in truth in advertising. For those contemplating graduate school, Pannapacker provides an unobstructed view of the long, hard road that lay ahead of them and the limited, uncertain "opportunities" that will most likely have dried up by the time they graduate.
For that he is to be commended.
36. zatavu - April 12, 2010 at 03:35 am
I have had my Ph.D. in the Humanities since 2004. I am writing this from my full time job as a hotel night auditor. And I teach 5 classes at 2 colleges as an adjunct. And I still make less money than my wife, who is a Kindergarten teacher. I have applied from coast to coast, and everyplace in between -- and overseas. Six years later, still nothing. Who has helped me? Nobody. What can I do outside of academia? I have no idea -- nobody has ever told me. Nonprofits? I've been told, "Your qualfications are impressive, but we don't know what to do with you." I was told in the same week that I have too much and too little philosophy. I was told by an English dept. chair that I was overqualified for the English position they had, which required a Ph.D. I have faced little more than absurdity upon absurdity. What, then, am I to do? This student has said what needs to be said. We need help, not platitudes and "I told you so" -- especially when nobody actually told me anything!