next »

[littleplum]

I applied to four Ph.D. programs (my first mistake apparently). I was rejected to all three of the extremely competitive full-funding programs, and accepted to a state university program that doesn't get rank on the 'top 100' universities in the field.

I'm trying to decide how to proceed -- on the one hand, the professors at the state university have much to teach me, they may take some of my credits (I have an MFA), and I may be able to get a TA position.  On the other hand, I'm concerned that it's hard enough to find work after grad school and that not attending a 'top-tier' school will rule me out as a candidate. 

Any thoughts?

[locutus]

So you applied to 3 extremely competitive programs and 1 "not even in the top 100" program? Why did you do that? There's a lot in between, why not wait a year and try again? Do you have employment for the time being? Can you do anything to improve your application?

[helpful]

What is your field? I ask this as some fields care about where you did your phd and others don't.

[littleplum]

My field of interest intersects cinema, culture and women's studies.  My main reason for selecting the schools was proximity.  I am in my late 30s and have a so family -- moving across the country may not be feasible.   In my region there are only 2 programs that offer a film-related PhD (Brown & Harvard) which accept about 1% of applicants.  The school I was accepted to would be for a PhD in English but they have a film program in the department and I would be able to specialize in film as well as eventually TA film courses.  I have an MFA but hope to gain a PhD with film specialization so that I might teach both theory and creative courses.

I would take a year to re-apply -- but honestly I'm a bit unclear as to what I could improve in my application.  I had strong recommendations, GREs (680/730), personal statement. Does it actually work to get acceptance the year after a rejection?  And if so what is the most common thing to improve?

Thanks for all your advice!

[macaroon]

My field of interest intersects cinema, culture and women's studies.  My main reason for selecting the schools was proximity.  I am in my late 30s and have a so family -- moving across the country may not be feasible. 

So, I 'm not in your field.  Take what I have to say with a grain of salt.

What do you intend to do with this PhD?  The academic job market for PhDs is a national job market.  If you can't move across the country, it's likely that the PhD will be a worthless piece of paper.

[virmundi]

When you say that you *may* be able to get a TA position, does this mean that your funding package is uncertain? Are you being offered a fellowship? Will you have to take out substantial loans to cover your costs? Are your courses going to be covered with tuition remission? These are all very important questions. If you've browsed the fora very much, you'll probably note that most of the posters here reject outright the idea of taking on any substantial debt for any sort of humanities Ph.D. as this tends to be roughly equivalent to a form of financial suicide, even if you do get a tenure track job with decent pay.

If you have not been offered a decent funding package, then I would say that the answer is relatively cut and dry -- it's almost certainly not a good idea unless there are some very unusual extenuating circumstances in your specific situation (such as being independently wealthy, for example) that would make this do-able.

In any event, the problem may not be with your application. This may have been a year in which many particularly qualified applicants applied to the same programs as you, or perhaps the funding of the programs to which you applied precluded them from making as many offers as in years past, and so on. There are only so many slots, and this may just not have been your year. It's hard to know.

In any case, best of luck to you, whatever you decide.

[littleplum]

macaroon - Point taken.  The truth is it would be much easier for me to justify moving for a job with long-term viability as opposed to short-term program with a meager stipend.

virmundi - The TA positions haven't been finalized yet, so I haven't heard what the funding package they'll offer me.  They may also let me teach adjunct since I have an MFA.  Without funding I would probably only take 2 courses per semester which would cost $6k for the year and hope I get a TA position the following year.  I'm also waiting to hear how many of my master's credits they would transfer which may be a deciding factor for me.

Right now, I'm thinking I will attend the state university in the Fall but also try to re-apply next year.  Is that crazy?

[systeme_d_]

Yes, I think that's crazy.  It is next to impossible to move from a mediocre PhD program to a better one, and you'd probably have to start all over from the beginning anyway.

Reapply in the fall to a broader spectrum of programs.  During that year, do something to improve your application (languages, publish a paper, anything).

You are going to have to be mobile both in the short term and in the long term.  That's not negotiable.

[sugaree]

macaroon - Point taken.  The truth is it would be much easier for me to justify moving for a job with long-term viability as opposed to short-term program with a meager stipend.

virmundi - The TA positions haven't been finalized yet, so I haven't heard what the funding package they'll offer me.  They may also let me teach adjunct since I have an MFA.  Without funding I would probably only take 2 courses per semester which would cost $6k for the year and hope I get a TA position the following year.  I'm also waiting to hear how many of my master's credits they would transfer which may be a deciding factor for me.

Right now, I'm thinking I will attend the state university in the Fall but also try to re-apply next year.  Is that crazy?

I would wait and re-apply next year to more programs in a wider range of rankings. If you are planning on leaving the state university program where you were already accepted why start? Especially if the funding is not yet guaranteed.

But the bigger question is what macaroon raised. You say it would be easier to justify moving for a job with "long term viability as opposed to a short-term program with a meager stipend." I am sure you have been reading the many Chronicle threads and articles about the job market in the humanities. Even if you do get accepted and fully funded at a top notch program that intersects your interests in cinema/cultural studies/women's studies, you may find yourself moving repeatedly and seeking out short term (and poorly paid) adjunct work before you are able to plant yourself firmly into a TT position somewhere, if you are ever able to get even that.

In other words, if you have a family and a life and are not able/willing/excited about moving for a grad program, you are not right now in a position to fully accept what this difficult path holds for you. Wait a year. Maybe things will change with your applications. Maybe you and your family will reach an understanding about timelines and being constantly uprooted (or having a long-distance relationship). And if you haven't yet read the many Chronicle threads and articles about this topic, I advise you do that before doing anything else.


on preview: systeme_d said it better and far more concisely than I.

[locutus]

What's your career goal here? You have an MFA already a presumably a job? The PhD would solely be just so that they will let you teach a few more classes at your current place? Am I reading that right?

If you already have a decent job and an MFA I wouldn't assume that a PhD will be an automatic upgrade or in any way worth it.

[littleplum]

sugaree -- Sigh, yes I know you are right.  Thanks for your thoughtful response.

locutus -- I am self-employed as a writer and have taught adjunct classes.  My career goal is to obtain a full-time teaching position.  From talking to people in my field, it does appear that a Ph.D (and the expertise in critical theory and publications that would presumably follow) would help.  Although sugaree is right in saying that these jobs are extremely competitive and ultimately I may not find a job even with a Ph.D....

[minorleaguer]

I want to chime what other posters have said about reapplying in the fall.  I know this is heavily field dependent, but it is hard to advise someone to enroll in a program outside of the top-100.  Heck, with a job market like this in the humanities, I'm not sure I'd even advise you to kick the tires on programs outside of the top-25.

Who is getting jobs in your field?  Pick maybe 5-10 schools that would be ideal schools where you would get a dream tenure-track job.  Are the faculty at those schools people who came out of top-10 programs or from people who went to programs between 10-100?  Are there any from outside the top-100? 

Maybe I'm wrong about this assumption, but in my field, the vast majority of tenure track professors teaching at good schools, got their PhD's from top-25 programs.

It is a buyer's market out there. 

[hegemony]

If you can get information on how well PhDs from the program you've been accepted to do in the market, that would be useful.  For instance, I teach in what might be called a lower-tier program, but all of our PhDs in my field in the past 20 years have gotten tenure-track jobs.  (That's around 20 people.)  We train our scholars with this in mind.  So you might ask: how many students have gone through that program in the past ten years?  How many are in tenure-track jobs, and where?  That might give you more information to be going on with.

In my experience, the thing that matters the most is the writing sample (I assume your applications required one?).  If that was superb, the person was 95% of the way towards acceptance; if it was weak, nothing could get them in.  My guess is that yours falls in the middle, which is why you were accepted to one program but not to the most competitive.  Remember that you are competing with dozens of applicants who have polished theirs to a high sheen -- it may be the most sterling, brilliant, perfect thing they'll ever submit, they have gone over it so many times.  So if you decide to reapply, go to work on the writing sample.  Read a number of academic articles in your field, single out the most brilliant and well-written (few articles will be both, and many will be neither), and figure out how it does what it does.  Revise and revise.  Show your sample to a couple of academics who will give you candid feedback.  Revise it again.  You might also polish the personal statement.  Every one of them will say, "I've always been interested in..."  The ideal personal statement will reveal a bit of interesting background on you ("While hitchhiking through Egypt in my 20s I befriended a group of local women and we went to the cinema, where I saw that they regarded...").  And then it will show that you have lively ideas about things that will make them excited to work with you ("I have become intrigued by the cinematography of personal space, such as  ..."). No doubt you can devise much better examples than I am.  Best of luck!  

[tenured_feminist]

How is moving across the country not feasible now but presumably feasible once you finish your degree? You must go into this enterprise contemplating a national, possibly international, search for a tenure-stream position once you finish the Ph.D.

[helpful]

How is moving across the country not feasible now but presumably feasible once you finish your degree? You must go into this enterprise contemplating a national, possibly international, search for a tenure-stream position once you finish the Ph.D.

Presumably, moving for a shorter amount of time (ie. for a phd program which usually only requires 2 years of residency then you can be anywhere to do the research and dissertation) is different from moving to a tenure track position where presumably you would stay the rest of your working life. If the OP has a spouse and family (as was indicated), I would think moving across the country for a phd program is not in the cards, whereas spouse and family would be more willing to move for a job. Sounds logical to me.