Advising students on grad school?

[Parasaurolophus]

I think too many professors err on the side of "just don't go" without actually giving the student something concrete to hold on to. The model of just trying to discourage everyone, and then the students who had too much confidence or ignorance to be discouraged are the ones who attend grad school, is a bad model.

I think that having them do a bit of research beforehand--including counting up all the jobs they could have applied to in the last couple years--is a much better approach.

For my part, I don't try to actively discourage anyone. I leave that decision in their hands. Instead, I give them very frank assessments of the state of things. I talk about what academic life is like, I tell them about my colleagues who didn't finish, I talk about my colleagues who finished but didn't find work, I talk about how competitive admissions are and I compare that to how much more competitive the job market is, etc. When they come to me with a list of schools they plan to apply to, I tell them about the sexual predators in those departments (to my knowledge). I point them to the job market/in the profession blogs, and ask them to start reading up. But I don't just tell them about the lowlights. I give them the highlights, too.

To my mind, the point is to give them an honest assessment of what this path forward looks like and let them decide for themselves. I shouldn't be deciding for anyone, because look at where my choices took me. If they decide to apply to grad school anyway, then I guide them into what I think the absolute best path for their chosen area of specialization would be, to the best of my ability. All I can do is give them the best possible shot at it, if that's what they want. But I make it clear to them that this is the first step where most will founder, and that's OK. If they're going to do it, they should do it properly, and not accept just any old PhD position, hoping it might work out.

[apl68]

If the students in question are considering the field of history, I've got a rejected dissertation you can show them.  A couple hundred pages of text, hundreds of sources and citations, primary and secondary, from multiple centuries and two languages, and rather well-written, as my readers who rejected it said themselves.  But rejected nonetheless. 

Call attention to the fact that this thing took years of work, multiple drafts, and heaps of notes--and then tell the aspiring grad student "You're going to have to do a lot better than this just to earn the degree.  And THEN you have to face that bad job market we've been talking about!"

[jerseyjay]

I have to say that I still do not understand the polly vs Caracal feud. Nor, to be quite honest, do I care enough to take the time to go through their past posts to be able to make an informed judgement.

That said, in terms of advising my students who want to do graduate study in my field, history: I do not tell people not to do something, unless it is outright self-destructive (like drunk driving). I usually tell them about my own story (spending 13 years after earning the doctorate looking for full-time work, much of that adjuncting), and also point out that grad school itself is often unenjoyable ("reading"  1,000 pages a week, not having any money, watching your peers in other professions start families, buy homes, etc., conflicts with spouses who are not in grad school, or the two-body problem if your spouse is in grad school) regardless of whether one gets a job.

I tell them that there will always be a need for historians, just as there will always be a need for blacksmiths, opera singers, and poets, but there is tough competition and that it is not fair and many people who could do really well do not, for reasons beyond their control. I do tell them not to go somewhere that does not offer them a stipend. And I tell them to keep other options open--and to regularly visit the dentist if they do go to grad school.

Finally, I tell them that if they go, and decide they don't want to continue after a year or two, it is not the end of the world. If after all that they still decide they want to go, I offer to write them a letter and work with with them to get into a good school. And I tell them good luck and to keep in touch.

[Caracal]

I have to say that I still do not understand the polly vs Caracal feud.

There's not really any understanding it. If I write something Poly disagrees with, they announce that I lack the standing to comment on anything because I'm an adjunct or because I'm married to someone with a job that pays more than mine or because I don't read IHE enough. It is boring and tiresome. I probably should just totally ignore her, but I find it a little hard when I respond to a question and the response is a bullet point list of my supposed past transgressions on this forum.

[apl68]

That said, in terms of advising my students who want to do graduate study in my field, history: I do not tell people not to do something, unless it is outright self-destructive (like drunk driving). I usually tell them about my own story (spending 13 years after earning the doctorate looking for full-time work, much of that adjuncting), and also point out that grad school itself is often unenjoyable ("reading"  1,000 pages a week, not having any money, watching your peers in other professions start families, buy homes, etc., conflicts with spouses who are not in grad school, or the two-body problem if your spouse is in grad school) regardless of whether one gets a job.

I tell them that there will always be a need for historians, just as there will always be a need for blacksmiths, opera singers, and poets, but there is tough competition and that it is not fair and many people who could do really well do not, for reasons beyond their control. I do tell them not to go somewhere that does not offer them a stipend. And I tell them to keep other options open--and to regularly visit the dentist if they do go to grad school.

Finally, I tell them that if they go, and decide they don't want to continue after a year or two, it is not the end of the world. If after all that they still decide they want to go, I offer to write them a letter and work with with them to get into a good school. And I tell them good luck and to keep in touch.

That all sounds about right.  Especially the dead-on description of grad school!  Wish my undergrad profs had given me a talk like that.  But they had been working in SLAC-land, outside the mainstream of the profession, and didn't realize how dire things were.  They had also read the Bowen Report and accepted it in good faith.

[tiva]

I give them some simple facts: in my field (history), over 50% of all tenure-track jobs are filled by applicants from just 8 universities.

Apply only to those 8 programs, and only go if you are fully funded.

If you can't get full funding at one of those 8 programs, it's extremely unlikely you'll get a faculty TT job later. If you do get full funding at a top university, and if you're passionate about researching a specific topic, then go for it.

[spork]

I give them some simple facts: in my field (history), over 50% of all tenure-track jobs are filled by applicants from just 8 universities.

Apply only to those 8 programs, and only go if you are fully funded.

If you can't get full funding at one of those 8 programs, it's extremely unlikely you'll get a faculty TT job later. If you do get full funding at a top university, and if you're passionate about researching a specific topic, then go for it.

And I suspect that there are other fields with a similar, or narrower, spread. I wish I had saved it, can't find it now, but a few years ago there was an article in my disciplinary association's top journal that documented the same phenomenon using degree completion and placement data. N was a few hundred. 

[Wahoo Redux]

I routinely get frustrated

Oh yes, we know this very well. 

And since this is a really small community with a limited number of posters, I think everyone here knows your positions on the issues.

So relax.  You've been doing much better lately.  Keep posting those links. ;)

[financeguy]

Has there been a search at the institution in the time that they have been an undergraduate? You don't have to say "you can't do it." You just need to say it's important to know how competitive things are today rather than when those on faculty went to school. For example, we had a search for XYZ that drew 300 applications. Of these, x% were from the very top institutions, y% already had at least one book, z% already have a very good national or international reputation. We cut 200 automatically, browsed 100, read some in a bit more detail to interview 12 people, of which three were brought to campus. One was offered the role and took it at a rate that you may or may not be able to see (if public) which is obviously less competitive than almost anything else they could have chosen to do. Are you willing to bear this level of competition and do what it takes to achieve a similar outcome? Then when someone starts telling you the "shortcuts" they plan to take (I don't want to go to that institution since it's cold...I just want to teach rather than research) you can point out that those are not options that exist in the world.

We had two searches at my graduate program in one year. Many field superstars came to visit. One slot that was informally reserved for a particular minority was still competitive. The nature of these searches led many students to reconsider their professional aspirations. We incidentally needed to learn C/C++ at a decent level somewhat related to our field and many just decided to use that tool on the market instead.

I do regardless of how politically incorrect everyone should be aware of the diversity landscape. You don't have to state your opinion on if this is good or bad, but if a white male or non-URM says they want to go, you should definitely point out real world examples of how searches have gone when encouraged to hire someone else. Heck, they can look at many of the fellowships available at programs their considering and see they are not going to get the left handed trans woman of color endowed fellowship or three of the others on available. These circumstances are what they are and should not be ignored. Have them go to higheredjobs.com and just type the word diversity into the search area and see how many jobs it is something simply "embraced" vs a requirement. (One recently referred to a post doc to "improve the diversity of the academy.) This shouldn't be a shock to someone later on.

[kaysixteen]

One oughtn't complain much that those college profs, slac or otherwise, read and believed the Bowen Report back in the day.  Many if not most of us our age went back to grad school in the early 90s-era believing exactly this narrative, esp since it was also being reinforced by our own profs.  As to the difference between a slac prof's perspective and, say, an R1's, yes, that is true, of course, but it is also true that, back in the day, it was still possible for one to go for a PhD  in order to seek a slac-style career (at my beloved dear alma mater, the best slac in the world, for instance, most of my 80s-era professors were, simply put, not serious researchers, some really not researchers/ publishers at all, and these were usually tenured, sometimes full profs with endowed chairs).  It really was a different world-- almost none of these people would, for instance, be hired by d.a.m. today.  But that would not really be bad, as most (though admittedly not all) of them were decent teachers, some excellent, and all committed to the distinctive mentality and ethos of elite slacs.  The change in d.a.m.'s hiring and promotion policies is just that, a change, and it has doubtless created a different type of professoriate there, especially in the humanities (there was more research in natural science being done in the 80s, for instance).  This really is an attempt to ape R1 notions, and for humanities in an elite slac, this ain't really a good thing.  Anyone, for instance, who has ever been to grad school knows full well that the overwhelming majority of college profs are just not great teachers AND research scholars both, and whenever one encounters that rara avis prof who is such, well we can recognize hu when we see hu.  But that this is the new reality is indeed what it is, so undergrads thinking of going to grad school looking at a professorial career, they need to know this, like it or not.

BTW, what is a URM?

[Ruralguy]

Under represented minority =rum

[eigen]

I feel like this is as good of a thread as any to remind us all of the rules, and share some of my thoughts about them.

As a reminder, the rules (and discussion) can be found here, in a carry over from the discussion on the previous fora.

1. Don't personally attack or harass other users. You know what crosses this line, don't do it.
2. Do not feed the trolls. Let them carry on with little fanfare.
3. Don't carry baggage from one thread to another. Sure, you may have a disagreement with another user in a different thread, but carrying that on into each new thread either of you start is not productive.
4. Don't be a vigilante. If someone is doing something wrong, report them and move on.
5. No spam. You know what this is.
6. No advertising. Whether it's your newest paper, newest book, a new EduTech website or something else- the place to advertise it is not here.
7. Do not "out" other users. Do not threaten to "out" other users.
8. Use standard spelling, punctuation and paragraphs on your posts.

In particular, I've bolded the two that most often seem to derail and bring down threads. I'm sure we can all call out a handful of two-person baggage fests that have existed over the fora's history. Lets try not to continue repeating them. Similarly, if you feel like someone is derailing a thread by piling on baggage... You exacerbate that when you decided to make more posts discussing it.

It is no one's "job" to act as a "warning system" for another poster. Other people can also read their past posts. And to be honest, most of us here have. It's not that large of a community. Not only that, but people change over time.

The biggest thing I've learned from this community over the years is that all of us think our knowledge is far broader than it is. As a poster on the old fora used to say, most of us have small "n" values in terms of the number of different types of institutions we've worked at, of the number of individual places we've worked, as well as the types of jobs we've had there. Similarly, fields can be shockingly different in norms. I certainly appreciate discussions more when rather than arguing over what the "right" answer is to how things are done, everyone has space to share what has happened in their experiences, and everyone might get to learn about the way somewhere else does something.

[Ruralguy]

Sorry...meant to say urm, not num.

[Caracal]

In particular, I've bolded the two that most often seem to derail and bring down threads. I'm sure we can all call out a handful of two-person baggage fests that have existed over the fora's history. Lets try not to continue repeating them. Similarly, if you feel like someone is derailing a thread by piling on baggage... You exacerbate that when you decided to make more posts discussing it.

Fair point. I'll work on not reacting.

[tiva]

And I suspect that there are other fields with a similar, or narrower, spread. I wish I had saved it, can't find it now, but a few years ago there was an article in my disciplinary association's top journal that documented the same phenomenon using degree completion and placement data. N was a few hundred.

Here's the peer-reviewed article on this research: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/1/e1400005

Abstract:
The faculty job market plays a fundamental role in shaping research priorities, educational outcomes, and career trajectories among scientists and institutions. However, a quantitative understanding of faculty hiring as a system is lacking. Using a simple technique to extract the institutional prestige ranking that best explains an observed faculty hiring network—who hires whose graduates as faculty—we present and analyze comprehensive placement data on nearly 19,000 regular faculty in three disparate disciplines. Across disciplines, we find that faculty hiring follows a common and steeply hierarchical structure that reflects profound social inequality. Furthermore, doctoral prestige alone better predicts ultimate placement than a U.S. News & World Report rank, women generally place worse than men, and increased institutional prestige leads to increased faculty production, better faculty placement, and a more influential position within the discipline. These results advance our ability to quantify the influence of prestige in academia and shed new light on the academic system.

Here's an overview from Slate:
https://slate.com/human-interest/2015/02/university-hiring-if-you-didn-t-get-your-ph-d-at-an-elite-university-good-luck-finding-an-academic-job.html