next »

[daurousseau]

Pournelle is probably right. If the academic humanities is a kind of racket, which it appears to be (maybe like Amway is a sort of Ponzi racket) , it has to have more going for it than the marks' idealism. Somebody has to be successful. Lo and behold, the well-connected grads in the top unis are able to get jobs. If somebody at Penn wants a philosopher, they call a friend at Berkeley to see who's sitting around wasting time on their dissertation when hu could be teaching the Penn undergrads. If somebody at Berkeley wants a philosopher, they call their friends at Princeton or Harvard. Even back in the day when jobs were abundant, I didn't know anyone who got a job by going to a convention or reading the job postings or sending out resumes.

[doctor_torrseal]

Third, I think you guys are missing some of his point.  Academic jobs (in the humanities) are very tough to come by.  Furthermore, most starting salaries are ridiculously low.  I would guess that the average starting salary for historians is right around $47,000.  Economists and scientists probably start at almost twice that.  

No way.  I mean, about scientists having twice the starting salary of historians.  Maybe in the med school and with grants providing 2 months of summer salary. I work at a state flagship R1, where salaries are public record and the newspaper provides a searchable database, so I looked it up.  Assistant professors in history make 60-65K and in physics make 70-71K.  It is non-union so there is not a union contract flattening the scale.  You have to be a full prof in either to make over 100K.  These salaries may be higher than average since it is an R1, but the small differential is probably normal.

That said, I have two reactions to the article.  The first is that people should go to grad school if they want to go to grad school, and leave if they find they are not enjoying it, and not feel bad about leaving.  You should only go to grad school if you like it, not because you think there will be a pot of gold and a fairyland where education is not a business and everyone in the department is nice all the time at the end of the rainbow.  If you go for the pot of gold, you will be disillusioned and grow up to write articles for the CHE about "Don't go to grad school unless you want to become a prematurely-old bitter curmudgeon like me." 

If halfway through you find you don't like it, don't keep doing something you don't like.  If you can't find a permanent job as Tweed-Jacket Professor, do something else, and if your advisor writes you off as a failure, realize that this is a reflection of your advisor's blinkered world and not a reflection on you.  Keep your self-respect.

My second reaction is that the author is correct that universities are exploiting the idealism and energy of talented young people who go to grad school (and talented somewhat older people who are adjuncts and TT profs) in order to function and get prestige and keep labor costs down.  If more people said "Screw it, I am not going to go to grad school so that I can become an adjunct and help you cram down the number of permanent jobs," eventually university administrations would have to do something differently, whether it be hiring more full-time jobs, treating students and adjuncts better, or replacing us all with online animatronic bot-profs and Wikipedia.  So in that, I do think the author has a point.  Again, this is about self-respect.  Recognize that the university is a business; don't let it exploit you.

[greenman]

Well, it's the end of Friday afternoon and I feel like being a bit crotchety in response to an issue that's been raised: the issue of having children while a humanities grad student. Frankly, I've observed this at a school with top-notch funding (relatively speaking) and I could *never* advise any one to try to do it. It seems like most romantic relationships fall apart in the first year or too, so who knows what happens to parent-child relationships (obviously I'm childless). I realize that sometimes people have kids unexpectedly while in school, and in my opinion that is unfortunate for everyone involved. If an undergrad student with children came to me and asked me about going to get a Ph.D. in humanities, I would advise him not to--for financial reasons and for reasons of psychological health. I see faculty members who are clearly guilty about how little time they have for their kids, but at least they have some degree of financial security. But for grad students with kids and *seven* years of grad school ahead: it's hard to be a parent when you don't know what you're going to be doing seven years down the line, and on top of that every single grad student I've met is insecure about their position in their department, in their field, and about their future. It just seems like a terrible thing to take on if you're a parent, so I don't even consider it a viable option for anyone. Now, whether universities *should* pay "students" more and provide a family friendly environment is a separate issue (of course they should, but it ain't gonna happen until there's a strike with full participation from faculty and grad students--but that ain't gonna happen either).

[concordancia]

I don't very often tell people what they should do, unless I am being quite silly. If you have laid out the facts, made clear the consequences, you have done your job as an advisor. All you can do after that is sit back and watch the trainwreck.

[egilson]

Third, I think you guys are missing some of his point.  Academic jobs (in the humanities) are very tough to come by.  Furthermore, most starting salaries are ridiculously low.  I would guess that the average starting salary for historians is right around $47,000.  Economists and scientists probably start at almost twice that.  

I guess it really is a matter of perspective, then. After I dropped out of college at age 20, I spent the next 13 years or so working with developmentally disabled adults. I was not great at it, but I got better over time. I even could write and implement effective skill-training programs. After about 12 years, I interviewed for a position in "my field." The person I interviewed with seemed very enthusiastic, saying that she rarely saw anyone with my experience.

She then said, "We pay $4.15 an hour."

I got a "technical" degree and changed careers after that, but even with that (paid for) education the most I've ever made in my adult life was $30,000 a year, and that from working nearly 60 hours a week for a morally bankrupt firm that has since moved almost all of its operations overseas. If you all think that I'm going to be upset by having a $38,000 a year gig at some little directional college, or by having a $27,000 a year job where I get to--imagine!--teach students after my years of reading, studying and writing, then the spoon that's in your mouth (or elsewhere) is of a lot shinier metal than mine has ever been.

[scheherazade]

Well, it's the end of Friday afternoon and I feel like being a bit crotchety in response to an issue that's been raised: the issue of having children while a humanities grad student. Frankly, I've observed this at a school with top-notch funding (relatively speaking) and I could *never* advise any one to try to do it. It seems like most romantic relationships fall apart in the first year or too, so who knows what happens to parent-child relationships (obviously I'm childless). I realize that sometimes people have kids unexpectedly while in school, and in my opinion that is unfortunate for everyone involved. If an undergrad student with children came to me and asked me about going to get a Ph.D. in humanities, I would advise him not to--for financial reasons and for reasons of psychological health. I see faculty members who are clearly guilty about how little time they have for their kids, but at least they have some degree of financial security. But for grad students with kids and *seven* years of grad school ahead: it's hard to be a parent when you don't know what you're going to be doing seven years down the line, and on top of that every single grad student I've met is insecure about their position in their department, in their field, and about their future. It just seems like a terrible thing to take on if you're a parent, so I don't even consider it a viable option for anyone. Now, whether universities *should* pay "students" more and provide a family friendly environment is a separate issue (of course they should, but it ain't gonna happen until there's a strike with full participation from faculty and grad students--but that ain't gonna happen either).

Are you serious?!?

You would advise a completely qualified person not to go to grad school based only upon the fact that s/he has children?  Have you not looked around you and noticed that there are, in fact, parents who have successfully handled parenting and academia at the same time?  Because this isn't a choice that you personally approve of, you have decided to dictate your little proclamation to everyone else?

That is, quite possibly, the stupidest thing I have ever heard, as well as being incredibly discriminatory.  God help your advisees.

[sciencephd]

He's a student, so I wouldn't worry about it.

[scheherazade]

He's a student, so I wouldn't worry about it.

And hopefully will never, ever get a job advising anyone.  Ever.

[jonesey]

Many of you are assumning that these PhD students are in a top program and have full funding.

What about the (rather large) number of Humanities PhD students taking on $75K in student loans at Compass Point State University for their PhD in History/English/Art History because they "really love [subject name]"?  There's a lot of pooh-poohing these students on the CHE, but they're out there.  Those are the ones I'd advice not to attend grad school.  If you're a 21 year old with no dependants who can drop out of society for 7 years on a full stipend, go for it.  If you're a 42 year old with three kids...maybe not. 

The only reason I'm getting my doctorate is because I have full funding and I can go "part time" while still teaching to pay my bills.  I'll still have around $50K in student loans from my undergrad and masters degrees, but I got those before I learned about funding and stipends.  If I didn't have a free ride, I'd be living life with a masters degree without ever looking back. 

If you have the urge to pay $100K for grad school, become a doctor or an attorney.  At least then you'll be able to pay off your loans.

[fiona]

The columnist ("Benton") is entirely telling the truth, and I guess I shouldn't be surprised that some people are singing Kill the Messenger.

Facts are facts. There is an ever-shrinking number of jobs, and that is not going to change, no matter how much people blame "Benton" for the bad news.

What he's given is an excellent article that we can pass along to our humanities students who want to go to grad school. If they go anyway, that's their choice. But don't blame Benton, and don't let them blame him. He is telling the truth, and that takes courage.

The Fiona

[t_r_b]

What about the (rather large) number of Humanities PhD students taking on $75K in student loans at Compass Point State University for their PhD in History/English/Art History because they "really love [subject name]"?  There's a lot of pooh-poohing these students on the CHE, but they're out there.  Those are the ones I'd advice not to attend grad school. 

This depends entirely on aptitude, interests, and goals. If you aspire to a teaching-intensive career at a CC or a regional public U, the right lower-tiered program may actually be a better fit for you than a top-flight program, especially a private one. Many top programs couldn't care less about preparing you to teach, or enabling you to get teaching experience, and often such faculty see undergraduates as a necessary evil. Someone pursuing a PhD because they like teaching undergraduates would be quite out of place at many such top institutions, full-ride or no. Most CCs and regional unis are well aware of this and are therefore suspicious of applicants from top programs.

So, if your interests and goals put you in the market for a lower-tiered PhD program, how will you decide which program is right for you? Many of the basic rules for choosing any PhD program fit here as well: you want an advisor who will have your back, a niche of sympathetic faculty from which to draw a committee, and a generous funding package that includes health care. Beyond that, you should also look especially closely at the placement figures for recently minted PhDs, especially those who worked in your prospective niche: have they gotten jobs, and what sort of jobs? And perhaps most important, you should find out about the opportunities you'll have to teach your own classes, either at the PhD institution or at other schools nearby.

On this note, an anecdote: one of the job candidates we recently brought to campus (regional state u, no grad program, 4/4 load), is finishing up his PhD at a regional u in a neighboring state. Many applicants from top-10 grad programs didn't even get a phone interview. So why this guy? Interesting diss topic, lots of energy, knowledge, and enthusiasm evident in the phone interview, and substantial experience teaching his own classes to students quite similar to the students here (i.e., not very well prepared, often low-income or working their way through, many first generation, etc.) His letters addressed that experience and testified to his skill in the classroom. We know he can show up in September and start teaching, and that he can do a great job explaining a highly specialized research project to non-specialists. We don't know that about the applicants from Harvard and Cornell and Princeton with no substantive teaching experience.

Edit: having said all that, yeah, just don't go.

[drpud]

I thought the article was spot on, and it really spoke to my own personal experience as a humanities undergrad, grad-student, and Ph.D. If, at the age of 21, I had known of all the different fields I could have entered post-BA, and actually found meaningful and gainful employment before the age of 30, I certainly would not have spent 7 years getting a Ph.D. Not only do I have 20k worth of student loans from my undergrad days still to pay off, I have accumulated 60K pursuing "my dream" of a doctorate, so, gasp, I owe a jaw-dropping 80k to the Federal Government. (And yes, I am currently unemployed, have a small child, and have been forced to defer payment for at least another year while I seek employment, either in the form of a VAP or a T-T job.)

Part of the problem is based on the U.S. myth that pursuing one's dreams despite all obstacles is one of the greatest achievements in life, etc., etc. I have always done amazingly well in school and am the first person in my family to have a received a doctoral degree. My parents never had much money but were always very encouraging of my goals. I attended a top school in my field but still had to borrow tons of money to do so and teach throughout. At the time, it seemed worth it because I assumed that my salary, job prospects, and creative potential would be exponentially increased with a Ph.D. in hand. Now I know otherwise! It was no body else's fault but my own, but if I had been able to read such an honest article as this one I might have thought twice about the path that I took.

Hopefully I will be one of the fortunate 30% to find T-T academic employment, but regardless I will always wish that I had never gotten a Ph.D. It was an amazing experience to be sure, but facts are facts, and poverty is not doing my family any good . .. or my creditors.

[baka_janai]

The only reason I'm getting my doctorate...

This seems like a good opportunity to point out how strange I've always found the phrase "my doctorate/Ph.D."  Every time I hear this phrase I have this mental image of some endless field of Ph.D. trees, and for each human being on earth, somewhere in this boundless forest of degrees, is ONE with their name on it, just waiting for that person to go pick it up.

"I'm thinking about getting my Ph.D." people will say.  Some years later this usually leads to the question:  "And what are you going to do with your Ph.D.?"

[bacardiandlime]

The only reason I'm getting my doctorate...

This seems like a good opportunity to point out how strange I've always found the phrase "my doctorate/Ph.D."  Every time I hear this phrase I have this mental image of some endless field of Ph.D. trees, and for each human being on earth, somewhere in this boundless forest of degrees, is ONE with their name on it, just waiting for that person to go pick it up.

"I'm thinking about getting my Ph.D." people will say.  Some years later this usually leads to the question:  "And what are you going to do with your Ph.D.?"

That one has always struck me too: I first noticed it in the martial arts, with people saying 'when I get my black belt'.

In academia, it extends from that, with PhD students (Oxbridge types) talking about 'when I get my JRF'
[super-competitive postdoc, think 'Society of Fellows']. Oddly enough, their Fellowship didn't exist...

[greenman]

Relax, Scheherazade! I don't have any advisees and the only students I talk to are undergrads who trust me to give them a first-hand, honest perspective on grad school as I've experienced it. In a conversational setting, I would preface my perspective by saying that it's based only on my narrow personal experience (and hearsay), mostly "looking around" and seeing that the two married couples I knew when I entered  grad school in the humanities were both divorced within two years, and now one of them is in an expensive, soul-crushing child custody battle. Might they have divorced regardless of occupation? Possibly. On the bright side, I do know a "success" story, a friend who is married with a child and in his ninth year of his Ph.D and is now rethinking an academic career because he doesn't want to move to a remote location and pull his kid out of a familiar, good school--plus he's burned out with what he sees as a family-unfriendly environment at every university he's attended compared to other jobs he had (being a somewhat older and more worldly person than the average 20-something grad student in our department).

These are real examples of what grad school in the humanities is like for students with kids. On the other hand, I've heard of people with kids (particularly in the better-paid and shorter science Ph.D. programs) who get along splendidly.

Stupid, perhaps, but based on a handful of real cases on which I base my perspective. If you don't agree or have your own experience or statistics, then why not share them rather than insult people on the forum? Since you're an expert on advising people, maybe you should consider which would be more helpful to "stupid" people like me.