CHE: Why I’m Planning to Leave My Ph.D. Program

[Mobius]

I've been on search committees at small regional universities where you get people who might have a doctorate but don't have any teaching experience (worked for a non-profit) or taught high school for 20 years. We're just reluctant to hire those folks because most can't adapt to being a professor, even if research expectations are minuscule. Also have to wonder why someone wants to work for us after teaching high school for that long. Their HS teaching salary as a Ph.D. after all those "steps" is usually a lot more than what we can offer.

[apl68]

I've been on search committees at small regional universities where you get people who might have a doctorate but don't have any teaching experience (worked for a non-profit) or taught high school for 20 years. We're just reluctant to hire those folks because most can't adapt to being a professor, even if research expectations are minuscule. Also have to wonder why someone wants to work for us after teaching high school for that long. Their HS teaching salary as a Ph.D. after all those "steps" is usually a lot more than what we can offer.

Well, my mother became burned out teaching HS and applied (at my suggestion, actually) to the SLAC where I was then a student.  She did not earn her PhD and so could not be a professor, but she became a mainstay of the foreign language department for the next 25 years.  She not only taught but accomplished a high proportion of the department's service responsibilities.  Depending on the institution, a HS teacher can work out quite well as a college instructor.

[Wahoo Redux]

Ok, say there are only 5 applicants for the job, and all of them meet the minimum ad-listed qualifications for the job.   If the job really is 'open', that presumes that the school actually needs someone to fill it, teach the classes etc that the job entails.   What would therefore then be the justification for refusing to hire any of the five, just because, well, the dept had been hoping for someone they'd like better?

You've never seen the "failed search?"  We lost a line because the department could not find someone they liked better than what they got.

I've also seen it where all 5 finals rejected the campus.

Any idea if this was due to something unforseeable, (like a lower than expected salary offer), or just poor research beforehand by candidates ("Oh, this place is two hours from any airport!!!")?

I posted about this elsewhere.  No one ever spoke to the candidates about why they did not accept an offer that I know of, but I suspect it was because the SC picked top-tier candidates for our fourth-tier school out in the cow-infested health.  It might also be that the school was a toxic hive of lunacy, resentment and defensiveness----and that may have come across.  It certainly did when my wife had her interview there.   

And yeah, our salaries were terrible out there.  I am sure the money was part of the problem.

[Wahoo Redux]

I've been on search committees at small regional universities where you get people who might have a doctorate but don't have any teaching experience (worked for a non-profit) or taught high school for 20 years. We're just reluctant to hire those folks because most can't adapt to being a professor, even if research expectations are minuscule. Also have to wonder why someone wants to work for us after teaching high school for that long. Their HS teaching salary as a Ph.D. after all those "steps" is usually a lot more than what we can offer.

Well, my mother became burned out teaching HS and applied (at my suggestion, actually) to the SLAC where I was then a student.  She did not earn her PhD and so could not be a professor, but she became a mainstay of the foreign language department for the next 25 years.  She not only taught but accomplished a high proportion of the department's service responsibilities.  Depending on the institution, a HS teacher can work out quite well as a college instructor.

We've got one of those.

Hu's great and very nice.  We think hu may be downsized in November.  Bummer.

[fizzycist]

I'd wager a majority of HS teachers can teach most lower division undergrad classes better than me. And that's like 2/3 of all teaching assignments.

[Wahoo Redux]

I'd wager a majority of HS teachers can teach most lower division undergrad classes better than me. And that's like 2/3 of all teaching assignments.

Weeeeelllll...my experience with H.S. teachers (and Ed.Ds) is pretty hit-or-miss.

As I writing center coordinator, I worked with some H.S. teachers----was not impressed.

I was in a theater group with a junior high English teacher-----and I was astounded, even for that level, with what hu did not know about English.

I've worked with a number of ed majors----some, I am sure, were going to be great in the classroom; some had flunked down from other majors and were looking for summers off.

This is not to say that all TT Ph.Ds are fabulous or even widely knowledgeable----but they did have to go through qualifying exams and a lot of course work and then write a diss. 

And then I remember my own H.S. days, lo those many years ago----I shared some space with some real dudes as well as a few who changed my life in the right sort of way.

Our department's former H.S. teacher is teaching in the ed department, which makes sense and this why hu is so good, I believe.

[Caracal]

Ok, say there are only 5 applicants for the job, and all of them meet the minimum ad-listed qualifications for the job.   If the job really is 'open', that presumes that the school actually needs someone to fill it, teach the classes etc that the job entails.   What would therefore then be the justification for refusing to hire any of the five, just because, well, the dept had been hoping for someone they'd like better?

You've never seen the "failed search?"  We lost a line because the department could not find someone they liked better than what they got.

I've also seen it where all 5 finals rejected the campus.

Any idea if this was due to something unforseeable, (like a lower than expected salary offer), or just poor research beforehand by candidates ("Oh, this place is two hours from any airport!!!")?

The situations where I've seen this is in fields that are in high-demand. I think the computer science and nursing departments have had this happen, because the university is competing against non-academic employers and other universities that are more attractive in various ways.

Other than changing the nature of the school or the job (doubling the pay, halving the teaching load), there is not much the school can do.

However, it could also be a function of the committee not making their shortlist on the right criteria. That is, they might pick the people who are on paper the most qualified--more publications, more prestigious degrees, better experience--only to find out that these people were also picked by more attractive places.

In my field (history) this is very rare--there are usually many more applicants than jobs, so even our school can hire Ivy League graduates. Location comes into play here also: we are in a large metropolitan area, so historians, English professors, etc., sometimes want to work here not for us but where we are located. For higher-demand fields, this has the opposite effect.

Where I have seen it in history is in subfields that are in demand and have high entry barriers. For example, I have seen searches for Asian or Middle Eastern history fail because they require significant language knowledge and if they are a "hot" subfield, such specialists are harder to find.

Which gets to that point about not all subfields in disciplines being the same. There's not a single humanities job market, or even a single history job market. Some fields really don't have a job crisis and people who get phds have a pretty reasonable expectation that they can get tenure track jobs. Those are often also fields where people who get phds are likely to have skills that would put them in demand outside of academia. Someone whose Mandarin (and English) is good enough to write a dissertation on early 20th century China is likely to be quite employable.

[marshwiggle]

I've been on search committees at small regional universities where you get people who might have a doctorate but don't have any teaching experience (worked for a non-profit) or taught high school for 20 years. We're just reluctant to hire those folks because most can't adapt to being a professor, even if research expectations are minuscule. Also have to wonder why someone wants to work for us after teaching high school for that long. Their HS teaching salary as a Ph.D. after all those "steps" is usually a lot more than what we can offer.

Two words- "crowd control". One of the best things about working in higher education is not having to take attendance or anything else of that nature. Students how up (or not), hand in assignments (or not), write exams (or not), and then live with the consequences. Not the instructor's problem.

[marshwiggle]

Which gets to that point about not all subfields in disciplines being the same. There's not a single humanities job market, or even a single history job market. Some fields really don't have a job crisis and people who get phds have a pretty reasonable expectation that they can get tenure track jobs. Those are often also fields where people who get phds are likely to have skills that would put them in demand outside of academia. Someone whose Mandarin (and English) is good enough to write a dissertation on early 20th century China is likely to be quite employable.

That's true about basically any advanced degree. If the only real market for advanced degrees is being an instructor for those advanced degrees, then the market is always going to be way oversupplied, unless each instructor only produces one graduate in their entire career, i.e. replacing themselves.

[Mobius]

I've been on search committees at small regional universities where you get people who might have a doctorate but don't have any teaching experience (worked for a non-profit) or taught high school for 20 years. We're just reluctant to hire those folks because most can't adapt to being a professor, even if research expectations are minuscule. Also have to wonder why someone wants to work for us after teaching high school for that long. Their HS teaching salary as a Ph.D. after all those "steps" is usually a lot more than what we can offer.

Two words- "crowd control". One of the best things about working in higher education is not having to take attendance or anything else of that nature. Students how up (or not), hand in assignments (or not), write exams (or not), and then live with the consequences. Not the instructor's problem.

The ones I've noticed have tended to be jobhoppers at the secondary level. They might still get the step needed for salary increases, but I am going to question whether someone in their fourth HS teaching job would stick around.

[jerseyjay]

Some thoughts about recent posts.

Caracal is correct about history subfields. As a PhD in US history, I am not sure I have any obvious skills for outside academia. Yes, I can write, I can assess arguments and evidence, I can talk to people, etc., etc.; but really, that is something that one would expect (though not always get) in any good liberal arts university graduate.

If I add on the fact that I am fluent in Spanish, have traveled throughout Latin America and Europe, and am familiar with Hispanic culture, I have some qualifications for jobs that require Spanish knowledge. But again, there are quite a few people with those jobs.

If I could say I read and speak Portuguese, French, and Italian, I would probably have the employment skills of a PhD in European history. There are things I could do, but there are also many people who have good European language skills. (Especially in a large metropolitan area.)

Somebody who speaks English, German, Bulgarian and Turkish, with some Arabic, Persian, and Russian--as an Ottomanist I know does--is in much better shape.

Somebody who can speak English, German, and Chinese, with some studies of Korean and Japanese--as an Asian historian I know does--is probably more likely to be able to get a non-academic job.

Also, within history it easier to move within subfields if know the language. I trained as a U.S. historian, but because I speak Spanish, have repositioned myself as a Latin Americanist as well. (I have published several articles on Latin American history, but I am not sure I would be able to teach at an R1, but I am good enough for our regional comprehensive.) The chances of my re-inventing myself as a Japanese or Chinese historian, even enough to teach at a school like mine.

In regards to high school teachers teaching university: I suppose this is somewhat field specific. We have hired several high school teachers as adjuncts. Several adjuncts of ours have become high school teachers.  And I could see somebody with high school teaching experience being a good university teacher. At my school, a large number of history majors end up being teachers, so this experience might be a plus. All that said, the person would have to be able to meet the research requirements; would need to indicate that they understand the differences between high school and university teaching; and  the person would have to explain why they are making such a career change. I think that this is a case where a good cover letter is essential.

[Hegemony]

That's true about basically any advanced degree. If the only real market for advanced degrees is being an instructor for those advanced degrees, then the market is always going to be way oversupplied, unless each instructor only produces one graduate in their entire career, i.e. replacing themselves.

Well, there are a ton of people teaching in college programs that don't offer graduate degrees. For instance, think of all the four-year colleges in the U.S. All of those instructors have to be trained by somebody.

[Caracal]

Which gets to that point about not all subfields in disciplines being the same. There's not a single humanities job market, or even a single history job market. Some fields really don't have a job crisis and people who get phds have a pretty reasonable expectation that they can get tenure track jobs. Those are often also fields where people who get phds are likely to have skills that would put them in demand outside of academia. Someone whose Mandarin (and English) is good enough to write a dissertation on early 20th century China is likely to be quite employable.

That's true about basically any advanced degree. If the only real market for advanced degrees is being an instructor for those advanced degrees, then the market is always going to be way oversupplied, unless each instructor only produces one graduate in their entire career, i.e. replacing themselves.

That would be true only if everybody who was an instructor was teaching PHD students. That isn't how it works. For example, in history there are 145 programs that grant PHDs and 1255 schools that give BAs. That's before you count 2 year schools, and places that don't give degrees in history but hire historians. On the other side, you have tenure track faculty at schools that give doctorates who don't supervise doctoral students because the school doesn't admit phd students in their area.

There is an oversupply obviously, but it's more complicated than that description.

[Ruralguy]

Even you generously said there are 10K tenure track jobs in up to 20 fields (each having 10 K) , most pf those are locked out for years unless you get peopke leaving before retirement or grow.  In some of thexe fields it would be a miracle to have 100 open jobs over all subfields in the field. Many of the niggest fields in the top 20 are producing many more docs than that. Granted,  there are post docs and such, and of course adjunctification is probably the main reason why my numbers are probably far too generuous for even some big fields. but this thought experiment, even if you dont go full Pollymer and get all of the real data, shows how some fields might be very mildly balanced and others can be out of whack.

[marshwiggle]

Which gets to that point about not all subfields in disciplines being the same. There's not a single humanities job market, or even a single history job market. Some fields really don't have a job crisis and people who get phds have a pretty reasonable expectation that they can get tenure track jobs. Those are often also fields where people who get phds are likely to have skills that would put them in demand outside of academia. Someone whose Mandarin (and English) is good enough to write a dissertation on early 20th century China is likely to be quite employable.

That's true about basically any advanced degree. If the only real market for advanced degrees is being an instructor for those advanced degrees, then the market is always going to be way oversupplied, unless each instructor only produces one graduate in their entire career, i.e. replacing themselves.

That would be true only if everybody who was an instructor was teaching PHD students. That isn't how it works. For example, in history there are 145 programs that grant PHDs and 1255 schools that give BAs. That's before you count 2 year schools, and places that don't give degrees in history but hire historians. On the other side, you have tenure track faculty at schools that give doctorates who don't supervise doctoral students because the school doesn't admit phd students in their area.

There is an oversupply obviously, but it's more complicated than that description.

Sure, but that very same math means that the vast majority of PhD recipients will never have a chance to supervise grad students. (And if some of those institutions that don't have grad programs don't have big (or any) research expectations, then it means that a lot of PhD recipients who are "successful" in getting faculty positions will have a much more restricted role than the faculty that they have been observing. Many won't be happy with that.