Thanks for all the kind comments on my last post. Things are looking up. Sometimes drugs really do help.
* This post was edited to make clear distinctions between my personal experiences and personal conversations about grad school and my professional work as an academic advisor. Under no circumstances would I ever tell an advisee what they should do with their lives, or say “You should not go to grad school.” That’s not my role. — lauren
Work is busy, busy, busy and I’ve been thinking about how I could reframe my sad mindset about having lost something I love, and instead focus on new opportunities to learn that are available to me now. One interest that keeps pushing its way to the forefront is working with honors or high-achieving students.
This is new to me: I spent the last 5 years teaching in developmental programs for at-risk students, at 4-year and community schools. Most of my PhD studies the second time around focused on literacy instruction for struggling college students. I’ve spent my teaching career really interested in that trailing end of the bell curve, and believe deeply that most students are capable of success with the right support.
But now I get to work with the opposite end of the bell curve: students who were high school rock stars, or kids who just started college and are feeling that rush of “Ahh! This is what I was waiting for! This is my place! I’m really good at this!” These are my double majors, my smart asses, my “can I minor in Spanish AND do a certificate in entrepreneurship AND a double major in psych and bio? How about study abroad?” kids. These are my kids in the sense that, they are who I was as a college student.
I did well in high school, although I was by no means the smartest student in my large, suburban high school. I excelled in my AP English and Psych courses, although I fared poorly in chem and math. I went to college and just started getting As, and never really stopped. I discovered a talent for literary analysis and writing, and worked hard in classes that weren’t my strengths (including, cringe, College Algebra — but I pulled off an A, my first A in math ever, in life). I worked a PT job, played on the rugby team, and graduated summa cum laude. I was in the Honors college and thought it was an absolutely fantastic experience. All of this made me realize that I was a bit of a badass, and that’s what made me think grad school was right for me.
Now I’m talking to younger versions of myself, and I don’t know what to tell them. They’re excited about school. They love it. I love their energy and curiosity. I want them to have an amazing experience just like I did. And of course they’re already mentioning graduate school and law school. Of course, I don’t want to crush their dreams or spirits, nor is it my place to make decisions for them about what’s a right or wrong path. But I would like to encourage them to consider additional paths and alternatives to post-graduate education. I wish someone had made me aware of the many ways that high achieving people find success outside of a school setting. I’d like my students to see life after school as full of great options. Unfortunately, grad school is so much more appealing and sexy than the real world. I had a hard time believing that a day job could be as exciting or engaging as grad school, and I can imagine that my advisees will feel the same way. There’s an allure to the academy that’s hard to counterbalance with volunteering or whatever.
I had a former student-turned-personal-friend (not, not, not one of my advisees) email me a week ago: he’d gone on for an MFA and is considering a PhD in the same interdisciplinary field in which I hold my first Master’s degree. My comments to him were rather heavily not encouraging. I asked him to think about non-academic careers that he thought a PhD would prepare him for. I said, twice, that the academic job market is beyond abysmal, and that I question the value of PhDs in general and interdisciplinary degrees in particular. It was such a downer.
I speak much more frankly to personal friends than I do with my advisees. I’d like to have some suggestions for engaging and meaningful options to offer my brainy kids for them to consider alongside grad school. Seriously, quittas and post-ac-ers everywhere: what would you tell a high achieving college student to consider in addition to grad school? Especially a student strong in the humanities or social sciences (so, not going to med school)? Tell me, so I can tell them.
On the STEM front… lots of openings in web design and programming. Stay away from non-medical life sciences, the market has crashed.
Is business school still too math-y? For a social science person who can do some stats, a few years of marketing/market analysis -> business school is a strong path. I blew that possibility off in college because it sounded like selling out for 45 years of cubicle life, but there are lots of cool positions running non-profits, working at small companies, etc. Of course, those companies don’t have the resources to get the attention of college students.
The market for lawyers is pretty bad unless they’re from a top school.
Interesting — thanks, Nissi.
I know I’m not technically a quitta or post-ac, but I am a community college teacher who is doing my PhD part-time because the expectations of traditional grad school didn’t fit my life.
That said, before I was a community college teacher, I was in a post-ac position: a coordinator for a program that helps underrepresented undergrads get into grad school (specifically PhD-seekers, so no law or med school).
The main thing that I would tell those students (and that I wish, wish, wish someone had told me) is that IF you go to grad school, do NOT pay for it. If you can’t get accepted somewhere with funding, don’t go–especially if they’re going into the humanities/social sciences.
Also, just letting them know about those alternate paths is a great idea. A lot of times those things aren’t even discussed.
In the end, though, I think driven students are going to keep enrolling in grad school (at least for the foreseeable future). The best thing you can do is give them all the options and make sure they gather as little debt as possible.
I agree that more students need to think about the financial implications of grad school and do the math on debt, cost of living, family, etc.
Tell them that more school is more of what they know, that there are plenty of high-achieving, intelligent people on the outside world and that the bigger challenge at their age/stage of education would be to leave and forge a place for themselves outside academia. Then don’t be too disappointed or suprised when they won’t listen and find someone else to mentor them in this respect who is less ethical and/or has less of a realistic sense of what the job market is like. High achievers are determined people. If they set their hearts on grad school, there might not be any stopping them.
Yeah. I am not looking to say “GRAD SCHOOL IS EVIL,” and certainly in a professional capacity it would be inappropriate to be like, “here’s my horror story,” — but I want them to understand that it’s not a choice between magical grad school and a horrible life working at Target/behind a desk. I want them to actively inquire about the realities of grad school and academic life and question the true value of a PhD.
This same issue came up in Versatile PhD a few weeks ago when a member also struggled with what to tell a former student who wanted to pursue a PhD in Rhetoric at UC Berkeley. I’m not sure if you read that post, but the responses were interesting.
I’m not sure if you do this already with your advisees, but I think your situation is a great opportunity to let students know about information interviewing.
Just because they talk to one person about a career doesn’t mean that they are representative of the career as a whole. Based on what I read here, I think the issue you’re having is that you feel that you need to represent the entirety of academia for these students. But you don’t have to. You can always say that you are offering advice based on your own experience. If I were you, I’d also strongly suggest that they talk to people who enjoyed academia and stayed, but they should also talk to others who left. In other words, show them how to make an informed decision.
However, I completely understand how you feel. I mean, when someone tells me that they want to get their PhD or give me a hard time about why I left, I wish I could just turn a switch inside their heads that would make them understand and not make bad choices. Unfortunately, there’s only so much you can do. If I were in your shoes, I’d give the students as many tools as possible to make the best choice possible. It’s up to them to decide to use those tools.
At least from my experience and why I went to grad school in the first place, was that I wasn’t sure how to explore other options. I mean, I didn’t even know about information interviewing until I decided to quit academia! I really wish someone had told me about this earlier. And you’re in such a great position to do so.
Right, this is exactly what I’m saying: when I was a high-achieving undergrad, no one gave me a clear picture of what grad school was like, what it would mean in terms of employment, etc. There are many paths I could have taken that would have been valuable (and probably would have involved a single, well-chosen Master’s) and left me with a rewarding career and less debt and time wasted. I want students to explore more than just a straight road to the PhD. Informational interviewing is a good tip, although I wonder if they’d just talk to their profs
.
That’s why I’d stress that they shouldn’t just talk to those who were successful in academia, but also people who left. At least for me, the point of information interviewing is to get as many angles as possible on a career. You could even suggest that they read some of the post-academic blogs, maybe point them to a few entries that would make a strong argument for them.
I don’t know if I’d want them to somehow think they should read my blog… but yeah, something like this makes sense. And to think of non-academic ways their graduate education could be put to use.
I wouldn’t discourage people from law school completely: law school is fine if you can get into one of the top half-dozen-or-so schools and do well (average or better) there. But then you still need an alternative plan (not grad school!) if you can’t get into one of the top law schools.
Does law school really have to be a top 5 school? Most of my pre-law students are aiming for a midwestern school in the top 25 or so. Very few are shooting for Yale, e.g.
It will depend on how much they have to borrow, and how they do while they are there. The top 10% at Tier 1 law schools are still fine, and most folks at top 14 law schools are still in ok shape, but folks who are middle of the pack at a middle of the pack school aren’t looking at lucrative jobs as newly minted JDs.
Like other graduate degrees, whether or not it’s a good idea will depend pretty heavily on how much one has to borrow to fund it.
I think TW has it just about right. My impression is that there isn’t much dropoff in tuition and fees as you move down the rankings, but the percentage of students in each class who can get six-figure starting salaries drops off much more quickly. At a certain point, unless someone is paying your tuition or guaranteeing you a job, you’re gambling that you’ll be in the top 10% of your graduating class, and I suspect that point is pretty high up in the law school rankings. Maybe someone in the law school scam blog community has pulled together enough data to make a more reliable calculation, but my guess would be that you are pretty safe going to one of the top 6 or 8 schools and you are not being foolhardy going to one of the top 14 or so.
Whoa. I am taken aback. While grad school does offer arenas for nuanced conversation, debate and reflection, it is markedly no longer a means to higher socioeconomic class in the current or even recent job markets – I have studied this for years.
A PhD is NOT required for advising, and is in fact a waste of time in terms of the pay range. So, if we are talking about a masters, yes, that can be helpful for the job market, but the PhD is a whole other matter. Would I get a PhD to work adjunct with no class time choice, no health insurance and little to no teaching back up? Hell no. master, maybe. But is it the income the career centers at most Universities tell the students they will achieve with the advance degree – uh, no.
Is grad school worth it for the intellectual vigor and possible, though not always potential community? Sure. Is there a way to go for free – no. Especially not with a family. Should we be encouraging grad school as a means to higher income? I think no.
I am also concerned (and in fact, this was part of my concern in the fish bowl of grad school) that a former advisor said anything about you L to another student – wtf? That is a violation of FERPA, and pretty damn disrespectful. While you are allowed to say whatever you want, the prof is not.
Enough for now! This is a good conversation to think about. Thanks L!
I think the main think to make sure they understand is that they shouldn’t do grad school simply as a default and they don’t know what else is out there.
They’d be better off backpacking through Europe/Asia/Australia for a year on a credit card than committing to grad school without a clear understanding of the implications for their post-graduate school lives.
Maybe teach English in Asia for a year — it’s easy enough to break even doing that.
I would tell them that graduate schools love to see a year or two of “real world” experience which would inform their studies. Is that terrible? I mean, I am suggesting that not completely certain if it was true (it was in my program) but because it may motivate them to look outside the box.
I guess it would depend on their major and their career goals. If their reason for going to grad school is because they don’t know what they want to do, I think I would encourage them to seriously consider their careers and find out if graduate work is required. Or if some years of work might help them make a more considerate choice. Basically, do a cost/benefit analysis. I’m not against all forms of grad school, but at least for me, grad school without a purpose (or with a vague sense of “career in academia”) was a poor choice. I could have made a better choice in graduate program and type, and saved years of debt and time wasted, and ended up in the same job.
Adding my two cents. I would say that I did go to grad school with a VERY clear idea of what I wanted to do/achieve in mind. I went through my studies with a very clear sense of purpose, achieved a lot while I was in grad school (teaching positions, guest lectures, articles, editing and peer reviewing at top journals, and giving presentations), AND I didn’t accrue any debt while attending (I was fully funded all my grad years and won a couple of sweet fellowships). And you know? It was still a shitty decision. I did everything “right” and ended up not using the degree and having a whole bunch of identity issues. Blargh.
I think that giving students an idea of the statistics around attending graduate school/having employment is important. “You realize X number of people have this degree and can’t get employment in the field?” (that kind of thing). I also found it useful to do “imagine if” scenarios with my students who thought they wanted to be grad school bound. I know it turned A LOT of them off the idea. I would listen to their plans and reaffirm how smart/driven/awesome they were, but then I would say something like, “Well, life can look a lot different at 22 and 30, so let’s do a little ‘imagine if’ scenario….” This is when I’d just ask them a bunch of questions like ” Are you dating anyone now? Imagine if in a few years you and this person are still together. Will (s)he want to move anywhere in the country so you can find a job?” “Imagine you have a health scare and no insurance. Do you have family/a spouse who can/are willing to pay for your medical expenses?” “Imagine being 32 and then not being able to find a job and having to start back at an entry-level position?” I found this to be eye-opening for many of them.