Comments on: Go to Grad School!

By: Alan Nelson

Alan Nelson — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 22:39:01 +0000

In recent years here at UC, Irvine about half of those enrolling in the PhD program have prior M.A. degrees. I don’t think our admissions policy has had any bias toward or against this background.

By: Matt Weiner

Matt Weiner — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 16:45:18 +0000

Anon 4, I teach at a school with an MA program, and last year I taught at a different school with an MA program. (Texas Tech and Wisconsin-Milwaukee, respectively.) So I'm a bit biased. But I think terminal MA programs are pretty much designed for people in your situation--helping students with talent who have inconsistent records or did not major in philosophy get into better PhD programs. As for PhD programs, you should try to find out about placement records. Not every MA program has its placement into PhDs on the web; I've noticed that Georgia State and UWM do. One factor may be that not every student has the same goals and the same expectations or funding situations; funding for MAs is much spottier than for PhDs. My opinion is not only biased but uninformed, since I've never worked on a PhD admissions committee. But the terminal MA to PhD path is not unusual. The way you describe your situation, I'd definitely consider top MA programs.

By: anon 4

anon 4 — Sun, 11 Dec 2005 14:05:55 +0000

Hey, “anon 3” — and others!

I’m applying to PhD programs now. I’m actually trying for a number of top 10 and 20 programs (as well as some other places), but, although my recommenders have said nice things about my talent, my inconsistent record as an undergraduate prevents me from being really optimistic about my chances for acceptance.

However, I see a lot of students at top programs who’ve started out at other institutions, often transferring with MA degrees. How viable is this?

By: V. Alan White

V. Alan White — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:03:55 +0000

Thank you Charles (if I may)—our department—as representative of our 13-campus mission—holds teaching to be the sine qua non for appointment and tenure, though we also expect modest research accomplishments too. And if I may give my colleagues a plug, they constitute one of the best collections of caring and high-quality instructors that one could wish to be associated with.

If it’s possible though, try to add in a sample presentation to the process—it can make a huge difference in outcome. And good luck to you as well in future hiring!

By: Charles R

Charles R — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 18:35:18 +0000

Ah, I wish our department had the time and resources to do sample teaching sessions. It is encouraging to hear, though, that there is at least one department out there strongly preferential to the teaching aspect of… well, teaching. Thanks for the answer, and I hope your search is successful!

By: V. Alan White

V. Alan White — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 08:38:54 +0000

That’s a great question and I wish I had a sage answer. Of course review available student evals and make relevant follow-up calls to supervisors and such. But in my experience you can’t beat face-to-face interviews and a sample teaching session. (I say face-to-face simply because so many institutions, including my own, are pushing at least preliminary interviews to be conducted by video-conferencing. I find those to be so artificial and forced as to be only slightly better than phone interviews.) But of all these, a sample teaching session with carefully-crafted follow-up questions that are consistent for all candidates is one of the best and most reliable markers for success. And of course make sure that you stack the committee with the strongest and most tried-and-true instructors that you have (just as you would naturally stack the committee otherwise if you were looking for excellent researchers).

By: Charles R

Charles R — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 07:05:42 +0000

White, would it be possible to describe just how teaching ability is judged by yourself or your department by looking at an application and interviewing the candidates? Our department is going through a hiring process for two positions, and they previously, in my opinion, made a poor decision with regard to the teaching ability of one of the recent hires, so I’m wondering how it is that one goes about evaluating teaching ability from the beginning to the end of the job search process.

By: V. Alan White

V. Alan White — Sun, 04 Dec 2005 06:21:28 +0000

OK, I’m sorry about the last post—in some sense—I am a proud member of the profession, and proud of what I do. Brian hosts this site for the free exhange of ideas, and it is one of the best on the net for philosophy. When the question of whether one should pursue grad school in philosophy was raised, I wanted to weigh in on a positive note, simply because I tend to be a positive sort of person. I genuinely believe that those who have a gift in the classroom should be encouraged to pursue a career in the discipline. But not everyone can fulfill this goal—and unfortunately, not everyone thus is entitled to have a chance to teach philosophy. But all this will be sifted by the colander of the needs of hiring. My department stands at the place where teaching is THE standard of hiring—and thus those who can and those who can’t teach so well form the basis of discrimination. And I know that in terms of the number of grad students who face hiring decisions, it is probably more institutions like mine than institutions like Brian’s that constitute the answer of whether they have some future in the profession. So considerations like the relative number of primo publications in so-called first-and second-tiered journals have little place in our decisions—and in fact we do not look so much for prominent publications. We look for really excellent teachers who appreciate the contributions of scholarly philosoply. Since not everyone can do this, even we 4/4 hirers are hesitant about pure scholars, even if they are demonstrably compentent teachers. That is a cautionary note. In our discipline, even “dead-end” 4/4 tenure-track positions are thus selective. Please concentrate on your teaching abilities, all things being otherwise equal if you are not a sterling researcher. It increases your chances of staying in the discipline.

By: V. Alan White

V. Alan White — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 07:23:56 +0000

First, my heartfelt tip of the hat to Justin. Beyond the caveats of the Baconian variety of idols, I’d gently remind us of the etymology of our discipline.

Second, my thanks to all who have thus far contributed to this thread. It really helps me prepare to read the 100 applications for 2 tenure-track 4/4 “dead-end” positions in my department that will preoccupy my holiday break. I sincerely hope that all those who are prepared to serve in our distinguished profession get precisely what they wish for—or not. And I guess I never really realized before now how an expression of justice can be so well served by such a mere tautology contextually prefaced by the appropriate propositional attitude.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 02 Dec 2005 06:37:49 +0000

A cautionary note: When I was first considering going to grad school I was told that one of the great things was the philosophy groupies. Don’t believe this. There are, in fact, no philosophy groupies.

On a different note, re Hawthorne, it’s not as if Syracuse was a no-name place, especially since William Alston (a former APA president), Jonathan Bennett, and Peter van Inwagin were all there, and all top people in his area, when Hawthorne was a student. This isn’t to say he’s not made an impressive career, or that he hasn’t deserved it. Only that somewhat similar stories are not that rare, he was in a program that was quite good for people w/ his interests, and so it’s not that surprising of a story.