The Melodrama Ahead
February 25, 2009 by jmtz
Horrid pessimism threatens the liberal arts as much as any economic downturn. Profs no longer scare potential applicants away with tales of sweat, poverty, and misery. Instead, they prophecy the demise of a certain “American Dream,” one involving humanist ambitions: “The truth is, chances of acceptance in your field are slim, 5% to be exact.” Gone are the days when hard work, good test scores, and incisive scholarship opened doors to the humanities. We are seeing the revival of a still older tradition, one in which a liberal arts education proves a luxury.
“In Tough Times, the Humanities Must Justify Their Worth.”
Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)
Where is the 5% quotation from?
Agh! P. has the laptop so I don’t have access to my quotation or the link. If memories serves me correctly, I read that quotation on a Live Journal applicant board.
Regardless of its source, the context was definitely literature. As I recall, only 5% (2-3) of the approx. 35 applicants for a certain T10 Modern American Literature program were accepted in 2008. One applicant’s advising professor tracked the previous year’s statistics and encouraged the applicant to pursue a less competitive field, later defined as 18c. British literature or Library Science, where chances of acceptance were higher. (Works a bit differently than history, I suspect.)
In lieu of opportunities (and ethical standards), shrewd students even toyed with the idea of entering programs under the guise of 18c. British literature, only to pop a surprise in their second year and switch to their sincere area of interest.
Thanks. I was interested in the context of the quotation more than the footnote itself, so your answer satisfies my curiosity.
I think that the basic pattern holds for history as for literature: some fields are supercompetitive, and others have far fewer applicants. There are usually two catches, though, to prevent people from going into less well-known fields. First, the competitive fields usually have more positions and more faculty support, so you’re not necessarily better off by switching to a less well-known field. Second, the less well-known fields usually are much harder to be qualified for, because you need languages (Chinese, anyone?) and maybe travel experience.
I thought you might be interested in reading Stan Katz’s reply to the New York Times article you linked to:
http://chronicle.com/review/brainstorm/katz/lets-not-cry-for-the-humanities-yet
Some think it’s a conspiracy:
http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/01/2009013001c.htm
From my understanding, there’s been a chronic surplus of humanities PhDs on the market. Why would universities continue accepting applicants whom they cannot hope to place? Why would people apply in the first place?
Jeff, I suspect that your questions are rhetorical rather than inquisitive, but I’ll still bite.
Liberal arts education/scholarship admittedly defies measurement. Its mechanism cannot be reduced to the clean supply-and-demand model other fields employ, because the liberal arts subsist on nostalgia, romanticism, Western tradition, etc.
My pessimistic answer to your first question is money. Graduate students pay enormous amounts of tuition and/or provide cheap labor as “faculty slaves.” The more schools can delegate classroom teaching, research, and administrative duties to the graduate students, the more time their faculty and staff can devote to publishing, networking, prestige-building enterprises, etc. The more prestige a school earns, the more students apply…you get the picture. If you know otherwise, please share!
As to your second question: many students enter the gates ignorant of the competitive and grueling work required for a “lottery” chance at success. Most (myself included) have a disproportionate view of their capabilities or the opportunities ahead. I was suprised that these articles failed to discuss the many ABDs (all-but-dissertation students) out there.
Once two years of classroom learning ends (the fun part), independent research and writing must begin until that dissertation is completed, defended, and approved. The thought can overwhelm students barely in full command of their sea legs. From what I can tell, ABDs fall into two different categories:
(A) “I found something better.” In the best scenarios, they are allured into another field, employment opportunity, etc. They move or travel or marry. They find that they don’t need the prestige of a doctorate to find contentment with their life choices.
(B) “I am disillusioned or displaced.” What the doctoral degree appeared to be (on the way in) was quite different than what it truly was. Adding to their misery, they are not who they thought they were (there are a lot bigger fish in this pond). They fail to adapt, persevere, or reinvent because of conviction, choice, or inability.
Those who prepare to finish the degree awaken to the reality that attaining a doctorate places them only one step closer to the scholarly zenith of which they dream. In reality, that piece of paper represents little more than a passport to the academic world. Now, they must begin the TT battle…
http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/01/2009011501c.htm
For a field whose mechanism cannot be reduced to the clean supply-and-demand model, your explanation–particularly on the supply side–is persuasive.
Speaking of the popular theory of education “lottery,” Higher Ed just posted a Chad Aldeman article, entitled “The Admissions Lottery.”
http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/03/24/aldeman