what the fuck am i getting myself into with this grad school stuff

I dropped out of grad school, and really the bitterness for me was when I was enrolled, not afterward. I can't imagine trying to be a smart guy all day now. Also, just paid off the last of my loans yay!

Hey, I've mastered the 5 secrets of grad school success! awesome!

So is it completely unrealistic to just look at grad school as a different sort of job? Do you really have to try to be a smart guy all day?

At my work, I have to prove to one guy that I'm "smart (enough)". When you teach a class you have to prove to 30-50 people that you are smart. When you publish, you have to prove to perhaps thousands of people that you are smart.

some people are really good at compartmentalizing, but in general it takes over your brain to the extent that there is no room for anything else for several years. i'm pretty sure i used to be an interesting person, but i can't remember the last time i read a book for pleasure. and year, the standards of smartness are high and ongoing.

interesting biographical note: i have dropped out of grad school twice and i'm still only 27. i am going to finish it this time though.

I think that proving you're smart when publishing is different than trying to be the "smart guy all day," though...I read that as "trying to broadcast the impression of being smart at all times," rather than actually doing smart work. Maybe that's a bad distinction though. (xpost)

My mathematical graduate edumacation taught me that 30 > 1.

I just try to keep reminding myself that I am constantly multiplying and dividing myself by 1.

No 1 to divide imo

Seeming smart when teaching is a lot different than seeming smart when writing for publication. In fact, when I teach it's more about being a good performer than it is like seeming smart, because I have to keep 50 college students interested in what I'm doing right then. Whereas when I write, it's not for right now. I don't have to be "on" in the same way.

I love what I do enough so that it's a pleasure to get to work on my stuff every day. I imagine this is what it's like for artists.

A powerful state lawmaker believes Georgia’s university system must not be too bad off financially if it can afford to employ experts in oral sex, male prostitution and “queer theory.”
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/metro/stories/2009/02/02/sex_experts_legislature.html

“I’m personally outraged that our taxpayer money is supporting professors, that this is what they’re offering as their services,” Hill said.

Haha. I remember my best friend at uni getting into womens' studies. She's now a professor. Her area of expertise was oral sex. I was like, 'What do you really want honey? To publish papers or to find an Australian male who knows how to lick the pan? Good luck!'. She left for England. Personally, I think she should've left for France.

this is a fairly accurate portrait of what goes down

http://oregonreview.blogspot.com/2009/01/michael-oakeshott-and-educational.html

and worth reading for anyone seriously considering getting involved in this charade. money quote: "students distracted by huge debt loads and excessive expectations of paid work while enrolled cannot be expect[ed] to focus on learning."

that sounds right but then let's organize to get states to pick up more of the burden of paying for universities, by taxes. At my big state institution we keep raising tuition as our (very conservative) state legislature keeps lowering taxes. What this means is that we raise sales and property taxes to pay for secondary ed, and raise tuition to pay for universities. I guess on one level it makes sense for the students to pay their own way (which is how my legislators and their base see it), but then these people tend to be skeptical of higher education's worth.

in my state there is solid evidence that each dollar invested in the university system yields a dollar and then some back, eventually. the problem is that eventuality is not immediate enough to make political hay out of. plus it's a very hard sell to someone who never got to go to college (still more than half the country at this point), and maybe whose kids can't either, that s/he should pay state and federal taxes so that someone else's kids can. quite rightfully the not-so-well-off most liable to manipulative arguments that college is wasteful and even anti-american might envy those born into a more privileged class whose university tuition (and all the unquantifiable preparation for higher ed) is a birthright. tapping into resentment regarding what's commonly represented in popular culture as a fairly leisurely undergrad lifestyle can't be that hard for conservative politicians who (hypocritically) present themselves as anti-intellectual, anti-elite populists. figuring out how to convince my putative envious skeptics that supporting the public colleges is still in their best longterm interest$ could very well be a game changer

grad school - american equivalent of a uk masters degree?

yeah, I saw U Arizona's bitter letter today announcing their big cuts, and reporting how much more than a dollar each dollar they're given yields. This is a good start. My own view, not very popular amongst my colleagues, is that we academics need to do a much better jobs of arguing for our importance. One way of doing that is to argue our *financial* importance. I'm pretty confident that will work out, though to include the humanities on board you'll need to be delicate. And I don't want to concede the Marxist point that the only value that matters is financial. But for the sake of argument right now, I'd rather we grant that and make the best case we can. One reason I'm willing to grant that is that I don't think that we in the humanities have a good ready-made non-financial argument for our value that will convince your "putative envious skeptics". Just saying "it makes you a better person" doesn't cut it in the US, and it doesn't pay to whine about that. I'm optimistic we can find such a case, but it will take real work, and will probably take people who didn't grow up pampered or who don't associate with common people today (unfortunately, many academics fail this).

re. grad school: when I use this term, it means education after bachelor's degree work, for instance work toward a master's or doctoral degree (UK, US, etc.).

my own embittered point of view is that people who grew up pampered are disproportionately represented in the academic industry's power precincts (as everywhere else) and a pet hobbyhorse of theirs is to perpetuate an aristocratic disregard of financial matters, both because they can and also if they were interested in practical money issues, they'd have gone to law school or business school or just straight into high finance. i think that getting these chairs and deans and academic all-stars to think practically enough to deal effectively with the harsh realities of the market would result in removing one of the chief professional privileges of their calling that distinguishes it from law and business and hence would be no easy feat

I think it depends on what you count as pampered. I was thinking by that, rich. But I could see someone thinking pampered anyone raised in a median income family, who didn't have to worry about homelessness or having enough to eat. I don't know a lot of rich people in academia; I know some, but fewer than I know among my college peers. But I don't know anyone who grew up poor. My parents didn't go to college, and in my generational cohort that puts me in the least privileged segment.

As to financial status now: everyone I know thinks about their practical money issues. What other practical money issues should they think about? Job prospects for grad students? Sure, I agree. But I'm not sure that's what you're getting at.

in my state there is solid evidence that each dollar invested in the university system yields a dollar and then some back, eventually.

Empirical evidence suggests this is true, however I believe people have a distorted opinion of what portions of the university system is financial valuable—unfortunately for some on this message boards, it’s not the humanities, or even a majority of graduate programs. Hell, most universities don’t even offer a worthwhile multiplier.

By most estimates the greatest multiplier is at the bottom—community colleges. Hilariously, economists and policy wonks have known this to be the case for nearly twenty years but little (or, nothing) has been done to get every able American into a community college program. One reason is the stigma attached, the other, and most common is cost.

It’s strange to think that our parent’s generation went to college on the GI or Pell. Today the Pell does not cover tuition for even the poorest student at a moderately priced community college. Reform is approaching however, The American Opportunity Tax Credit proposed by Obama, would in most instances make a community college free for all students willing to provide community service post-graduation and I honestly believe, if that tax credit sees passage, the multiplier spurred will be far more significant than anything in the stimulus bill (aside from credit transfers, obviously).

allen, that's really interesting and i hope that happens. euler, i meant to broadly paint the people in charge, who set agendas, as hailing from the pampered classes, by which i mean at least that their parents paid for their undergrad and grad tuition and housing or could have if necessary, thereby sheltering them from the dismal experience of dead end part time jobs even while borrowing tragic sums of cash. i'm not basing that on any empirical evidence, mind you, just my own experience

I am really enjoying myself here, at the moment, coming back to school and coming to CMU seems to have been the best decision I have made. The danger now is that I drift over into an EPP Phd (Engineering and public policy) and never leave.

REALLY not into grad school right now.

Like, screaming pissed off furious at it.

my own embittered point of view is that people who grew up pampered are disproportionately represented in the academic industry's power precincts (as everywhere else) and a pet hobbyhorse of theirs is to perpetuate an aristocratic disregard of financial matters, both because they can and also if they were interested in practical money issues,

― kamerad, Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:57 AM (18 hours ago) Bookmark

Truth! They also tend to be very boring and socially competitive.

You guys I got into a grad school today! Still waiting to hear back from some others, so not sure if I'll go to that one, but it's exciting. I have options. Options to move halfway across the country to the middle of nowhere and do obscure exciting archaeology stuff. :D

Hey, congrats!

congratulations! my resentful bitching notwithstanding, it can be quite an amazing experience

Congratulations.

Congratulations, Maria!

yeah, congratulations! Have fun!

Way to go Maria! Welcome to the beginning of a few years of posting on the "what the fuck am I getting myself into this grad school stuff" thread. :)

Got into my graduate program of first choice this morning! Woo!

woo.

That's awesome Mordy!

Which program was it? Do you have to move to a new city?

NYU Performance Studies. And no moving! Same city I'm currently in :)

You're going to be surfing out this gnarly recession wave while chumps like me try to find jobs!

grad school - american equivalent of a uk masters degree?

― fucks capacitor (a-bomb), Tuesday, February 10, 2009 2:05 AM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

not biting

The way looking for an internship is going I am feeling like signing up to do a second masters or a phd looks like a good plan.

I always have it in my mind that Ed was going to be one of those scrappy scientists at NJIT, but I don't think you ever ended up there, did you, Ed?

No I am at CMU, passed over transport planning for Engineering and Technology Innovation managment and I'm now looking to see if a Masters in Energy or a Phd in Engineering and Public Policy might be a good next step.

Ed, maybe N3lli3 could help with internship leads, as she is SCIENCE person also policy wonk?

Good call, let me send over some details. (I have already applied to work for Dr Chu)

!!! Well, at any rate, I think she could get to him in under 5 phone calls!

How are you funding all this, Ed?

If it's possible to do a Phd in the US without going massively into debt I'd definitely consider it. The worst part of this recession for me is feeling trapped in current job against a deadline of being booted in the next 12 months or so.

it would depend on what the phd is in. dissertation fellowships in the humanities are drying up due to the recession. also phd programs are long, boring commitments; i really don't think it's a good idea to enroll in one just to escape the economy.

Masters I am paying for. Phd would be paid for if I could get on it, they only offer places if they can fund them. And don't worry, I wouldn't be enrolling to escape the economy, I would be enrolling because I would get to do an interesting and substantive piece of research into something I care about.

Me too, there's plenty in the public policy area that I'd be interested in and that's potentially worthwhile.

Steven Chu is a solid bro to physicists everywhere.