State university, ivy graduate school? Possible?

Graduate School
1

<p>I'm just very confused about graduate school.
Suggest if I have a relatively high GPA(3.8+) and a decent GRE score, would there be ANY chance of getting admitted into ivy league graduate schools(Yale)?
How can I make myself competitive???
I'm just very worried as my humanities concentration in state school seriously jeopardizes my future salary, and if I couldn't get into a top graduate program, a professorship would be unimaginable; worse, these few years of hardships in college would turn into a total nightmare with empty intellectual pretensions.</p>

<p>btw, I'm talking about humanity Ph.D program(comparative literature in specific). Yes, I'm desperate; I'm poor; I'm willing to be your stereotypical TA slave army reserve....</p>

2

<p>First, I direct you to the Grad School 101 thread pinned above, where you will learn, among other things, that where top programs are located depends heavily on your discipline and even your subfield of interest. </p>

<p>So talking "Ivy" when it comes to selecting graduate programs is meaningless. For example, if your focus is Native American history, few Ivies have decent programs in that area. You'd be much better off at, say, University of Oklahoma. You'd be a much more marketable candidate with an Oklahoma PhD than with a Harvard PhD. See?</p>

<p>But in looking for appropriate grad programs, you should look most closely at faculty. In other words, who would be your dissertation advisor? It is quite possible that the BEST advisor for you, given your subfield and methodological preferences, teaches at Podunk University. In that case, you'd better apply to Podunk. </p>

<p>So finally, the short answer to your question is this:
Shine at your state school. Distinguish yourself in your particular field of interest. Do independent studies with the appropriate professors. Acquire a solid background in the methodologies of your field. Learn to write really really really well.</p>

<p>Later, get great (not decent - GREAT) GRE scores. Write beautiful, finely crafted statements of purpose for each doctoral program application. Select a writing sample that reflects the finest work you've done to date. Solicit letters of rec from those professors who KNOW you'll be a wonderful doctoral student, and can provide detailed examples that illustrate why that is the case. Then you'll be a fine candidate for the MOST APPROPRIATE PhD programs for you.</p>

3

<p>Yes. It's very possible.</p>

4

<p>Professor X, can we just make that an auto-reply to any thread in this forum that asks about ivy-league schools?</p>

5

<p>If you are only considering professional and Master's programs, the strength of specializations (is the program more practice-based or theoretical-based? do they emphasize internships? does the school have your concentration?), costs (tuition, fees, etc.), geography (where do you prefer to live?) and other opportunities (dual degrees, summer programs, quality of career services) are more important.</p>

<p>You shouldn't only limit yourself to Ivy League schools for graduate school. There are plenty of other private and public schools that offer similar academics. Sometimes those schools are better than the Ivies depending on your area of specialization.</p>

6

<p>Hmmm....why Ivy? I never looked at one. Okay, I looked at one but I had other grad schools that I'd rather pick over that. Simply because the other schools had professors who closely matched my interests and the programs had greater depth and breath in my field. If you look at where the professors got their PhDs, you'd be surprised that many of them came from highly selective PUBLIC schools like Wisconsin, UCLA, Michigan, and UVA and other non-Ivy schools like NYU. Very few professors in my university's department held any Ivy degrees.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Learn to write really really really well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This can't be emphasizzed enough. That was one of the things that was consistent in my feedback after I was rejected from PhD programs (other than not having a MA).</p>

7

<p>@ RacinReaver</p>

<p>Speaking of auto-reply, does anyone think there should be a separate forum for professional-seeking Master's degrees (MSW, MPH, MUP, MPP, etc.)? The MBA has its own forum, but there might be some readers who are not interested in doctoral admissions and need advice on getting into competitive master's programs.</p>

8

<p>This question has been rehashed time and time again and Prof X's answer is pretty much the standard when it comes to explaining how admissions to Ivys work, why you CAN get admitted from a state school and why an Ivy is possibly not the right school for every single field.
Although the Ivy league has wonderful schools and many world class programs, the quality of their programs is often overstated. Getting a degree just because it is from an ivy is really only useful for international students who plan on going back to work in their country of origin and need the leverage of a world renowned degree or people planning on going into IBanking or management consultancy.</p>

9

<p>Racin Reaver,</p>

<p>That would save us all lots of time and trouble, wouldn't it? :)</p>

10

<p>Why ivy? and why Yale in particular?
Because Yale is one of the few schools in the U.S that offers GREAT comparative literature program and film studies in East Asian languages.</p>

<p>Thanks professor X and other repliers! :)</p>

11

<p>
[quote]
Getting a degree just because it is from an ivy is really only useful for international students who plan on going back to work in their country of origin and need the leverage of a world renowned degree or people planning on going into IBanking or management consultancy.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>At the risk of sounding like a broken record and stirring up more controversy, I would say that it's useful for a lot more than that. To take Professor X's example regarding Native American Studies, sure, a PhD from Oklahoma might be better than one from Harvard if you actually get a research career in that field. But what if you don't? What if you can't? </p>

<p>Basically, I've seen too many people with PhD programs, or at least started them, and are now in careers that have little to do with whatever it is that they studied. Yes, some of them are consultants or bankers, but that's hardly the only example. Others started off as researchers but were later promoted to management and hence never use their technical skills. Some embarked upon different careers entirely; for example, some became small business owners, others became IT workers. One woman that I know with a PhD in chemical engineering became the head of an NGO to save seals. Another person that I know who has a technical Phd is seriously thinking of running for political office. </p>

<p>Before anybody objects, allow me to enumerate some of the many reasons why you might not end up with a research career. </p>

<p>Many people who start PhD programs don't finish, for the simple reason that a lot of people find out that they don't really like the lifestyle of a researcher. I believe studies have shown that only about 1/2 of all entering PhD students will actually complete it, the rest usually ending up with a consolation master's (although a significant group won't even get that.) Whatever you might say about the merits of an Oklahoma PhD vs. a Harvard PhD, I think there is little dispute that Harvard *master's is clearly better than a Oklahoma master's. After all, if you end up with just a master's degree, you're highly unlikely to be pursuing a research career anyway (as after all, if you really liked doing research, then you probably wouldn't be leaving your program).</p>

<p>Even if you do finish, a lot of PhD students won't get academic placement. This seems to be *particularly true in the humanities (i.e. Native American Studies). There are quite simply too many PhD's produced in those disciplines than there are academic spaces for them such that even graduating from the top program in your field won't guarantee that you'll get placed.</p>

<p>*Many disciplines, like, again, the humanities, don't have an active private sector analog to hire them as researchers. I rather doubt that there are a lot of private firms out there that are hiring droves of researchers on Native American studies. {Engineering, natural sciences and social sciences are better in this respect.} The upshot is that not only might you not end up with an academic offer, you might not even have a private sector offer either. That is, not one in your field of interest. </p>

<p>Even if you *can get a job in your field, it might be a low-end one such that you might prefer an entirely different career. It is quite a common refrain from PhD students at schools like Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc. that while they would prefer an academic or research offer, they're not going to end up working for some low-ranked no-name school or take a low salary for just some research job at some mediocre company; if that's the best they can get, they're going to do something else with their lives (i.e. banking, consulting, venture capital, launching their own startup, etc.). That illustrates the career flexibility that these people have with their degree's name brand. A guy getting his PhD from Harvard can seriously consider McKinsey or Goldman Sachs as options. The guy from Oklahoma, not so much. </p>

<p>Even if you do graduate and do get a good research job, some people decide they don't want one anyway. People change their interests all the time. I know people who, upon finishing their PhD's, were burned out and were sick of their topics, who wanted to take a break and do something else for a few years. In many cases, that break ended up being a *permanent break. If you've been grinding away at the same research question for many years straight, you can very easily find that you're tired of it. Many people begin to think that there's much more to life than just sitting around, analyzing regressions or editing research papers or designing new experiments. You simply want to do other things.</p>

<ul>
<li>Aligned with the point above, even if you do embark on a research career, like I said, many people years later decide to switch to something else, often times to management. I know a lot of people who worked for many years as research scientists or engineers, but have been or want to be promoted to general management. Once you become a general manager, nobody is really going to care how good your specific PhD program is, because they'll have no idea. All they will see is the name of the school.</li>
</ul>

<p>I'll give you a case in point. I know a guy who got his PhD from Harvard and then became a researcher for several years until he decided he wanted to do something else. So what did he do? He leveraged the Harvard alumni network and met people through his local Harvard Club to get himself a job; now he works in a venture capital firm whose partners are largely other Harvard graduates. He wouldn't be able to do that if he had gone to some school that didn't have such a powerful alumni base. </p>

<p>It all comes down to risk aversion. I know you guys seem to think that it's irrational for somebody to turn down a stronger program for a better brand name. I actually believe the opposite - that it's entirely rational, given the uncertainty of the future. You don't know what's going to happen in the future, and you don't know what kind of career you will have, and a brand-name school will, if nothing else, at least give you a highly marketable signal. </p>

<p>For those who want to jump down my throat - and I expect that there will be many of you - I would say that the real problem is that the life of a PhD student is risky. Like I said, many people won't even finish their programs, and even of those that do, there simply are not enough good research jobs for everybody. That is to say, if every PhD student actually managed to finish and if enough research/academic jobs were available for every single new PhD, and those jobs all paid well, then people wouldn't need to be risk averse. For example, people really could rationally turn down Harvard for Oklahoma because they would know that they would have a good research job waiting for them once they finish their PhD (and their finish would be guaranteed). But that's not the world that we live in. We live in risky world. PhD programs admit plenty of students who won't graduate, there aren't enough research jobs for everybody, and many of those research jobs (especially in the humanities) don't pay well. Hence, given that risk profile, it is entirely rational for people to want to keep their options open. </p>

<p>Hence, it is the risk that is the real problem. Don't blame me for that, as I'm not responsible for the risk. I'm just telling you that it is there, I didn't create it. Don't shoot the messenger.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
For those who want to jump down my throat - and I expect that there will be many of you - I would say that the real problem is that the life of a PhD student is risky. Like I said, many people won't even finish their programs, and even of those that do, there simply are not enough good research jobs for everybody.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Bingo, sakky. I almost fell into the trap of applying to social science doctoral programs. I took a break after college graduation, and within a year my career interests changed! Over time I realized I did not want to become an academic. I am now more interested in (nonprofit) management and philanthropy. I don't need a PhD to get into this area (a flexible Master's degree in a strong program will suffice). People's career goals do change over time.</p>

<p>Grad school is very risky financially AND mentally, and if you can't see yourself as a researcher for the rest of your life, don't apply yet! Volunteer and check out other career areas. Do informational interviews with alumni and local companies & organizations. If you start to have doubts about academia, listen to your gut feeling! It might be warning you to look somewhere else.</p>

13

<p>I've just got to add that a person interested in doing a PhD in Native American studies is probably the LEAST likely person to all of a sudden get interested in banking or venture capital. </p>

<p>If this hypothetical person got her PhD from Oklahoma and couldn't find a tenure track job in academia, s/he could be well prepared to work in all sorts of capacities in Native advocacy programs, NGOs, etc. How so? </p>

<p>Well, a PhD in Native Studies at U Oklahoma would have at least one Native language (potential to work in linguistic reclamation programs), but MORE importantlly, would have developed relationships with elders at least one Native nation (potential there to teach in a tribal school, administer programs on the rez, etc.), and, depending on their area of specialization, could have developed expertise in Native law, Native treaty history, the impact of casinos, etc, and thus could have opened up possibilities of careers (consulting, etc.) in those areas. </p>

<p>Bottom line: Contacts developed at the U of Oklahoma would create all of those opportunities. Same thing for the Harvard PhD? Possible, but not so much.</p>

14

<p>sakky has brought up this point numerous times and he argues it well. I still disagree with him, however, since he seems to assume that everyone will eventually want to switch careers and get into a field where the brand power of your degree does, in fact, matter as much or more than your previous professional experience or achievements (i.e. Ibanking, Management consulting) The fact is that the number of fields where the name on your degree really matters is miniscule, especially down the road after you have gathered a fair amount of professional experience in the workforce. Sakky and others may disagree with this, but I have yet to run into any mid career profesional who either:</p>

<p>A) Wanted to switch rom some unrelated field like Native American studies to management consulting or IBanking.</p>

<p>B) Was stymied in a career move due to the fact that they hadnt graduated from a top grad program.</p>

<p>When it comes down to it, sakky's examples almost always refer to management consulting and IBanking and these are frankly bad examples and dont reflect the reality of hiring in the labor market as a whole.</p>

15

<p>Professor X clears it all.</p>

16

<p>
[quote]
I've just got to add that a person interested in doing a PhD in Native American studies is probably the LEAST likely person to all of a sudden get interested in banking or venture capital.</p>

<p>If this hypothetical person got her PhD from Oklahoma and couldn't find a tenure track job in academia, s/he could be well prepared to work in all sorts of capacities in Native advocacy programs, NGOs, etc. How so?</p>

<p>Well, a PhD in Native Studies at U Oklahoma would have at least one Native language (potential to work in linguistic reclamation programs), but MORE importantlly, would have developed relationships with elders at least one Native nation (potential there to teach in a tribal school, administer programs on the rez, etc.), and, depending on their area of specialization, could have developed expertise in Native law, Native treaty history, the impact of casinos, etc, and thus could have opened up possibilities of careers (consulting, etc.) in those areas.</p>

<p>Bottom line: Contacts developed at the U of Oklahoma would create all of those opportunities. Same thing for the Harvard PhD? Possible, but not so much.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Banking and consulting are just two potential examples (yet ones that apparently seem to generate the most controversy). What I am simply saying is that plenty of people end up finding out that they'd rather do something else, and that 'something else' can be any myriad of things. </p>

<p>Look, my point of view is simple. I have met far too many PhD students and/or graduates who are tired of what they used to study and are ready to do something else. Heck, just last Saturday night, I was talking to a couple of PhD students who have already said that they are no longer really interested in pursuing research jobs and are instead looking for other careers. One of them was half-joking that he's so bored with his dissertation that he spends most of his time working on his blog which is now apparently highly popular, in fact, so much so that he actually generates money from it (via advertising through the Google AdSense service). I then told him that his story reminded him of 2 former Stanford EE PhD students who were so bored with writing their dissertation on integrated circuit manufacturing that they spent most of their time goofing off by building a website that compiled their favorite links. We know that website as Yahoo. They never finished their dissertations, but I doubt that they care, as those 2 guys (Yang & Filo) are literally billionaires now.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Bottom line: Contacts developed at the U of Oklahoma would create all of those opportunities. Same thing for the Harvard PhD? Possible, but not so much.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
The fact is that the number of fields where the name on your degree really matters is miniscule,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I have to fundamentally disagree, although I think it's because you guys are misconstruing what I see as the real value of a top school. The pure brand name is only part of the equation. The real value is in the networking. </p>

<p>Let's be perfectly honest. Surely we've all heard of the phrase: 'It's not what you know, it's who you know'. That is why every career advice book or website tells you that the first thing you should do to find a good job is to use your network. Most good jobs are not publicly posted; rather, they can be obtained only if you know the right people. When I used to work in the private sector, I must have been asked probably every couple of weeks if I knew somebody who would be interested in some job opening, and I naturally would give names of my friends, some of whom actually got hired. But if those guys hadn't known me (or somebody else in the firm), they wouldn't have even gotten the interview. Similarly, every job I ever had after my first one out of college, I had obtained through personal contacts. Networking is probably the most effective means to get a job. </p>

<p>Hence, the real value of a name-brand degree is that it gives you access to a powerful network. Since Harvard was the example that was brought up, I will use it as an example: Harvard is arguably the most incestuous school in the country and arguably the world when it comes to alumni networking. There is a Harvard Club in practically every major city in the world, and Harvard alumni are absolutely notorious for their internal socialization. If Steve Ballmer hadn't gone to Harvard, he wouldn't have become Bill Gates's poker playing buddy in Currier House, and hence he wouldn't be the CEO of Microsoft right now.</p>

<p>
[quote]
sakky has brought up this point numerous times and he argues it well. I still disagree with him, however, since he seems to assume that everyone will eventually want to switch careers

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, no, not once have I ever said or assumed that everyone will want to switch careers. Not once. In fact, I have always said that some people never want to switch.</p>

<p>My point has always been that some people will want to switch, and that you don't know if you will be one of them. Sure, you might now want to switch, but then again, you might. You don't know. That's why it's important to reduce your risk. </p>

<p>I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you were always sure about exactly what you want (and you were also sure that you would be able to get it), then there would be no reason to be risk averse. Similarly, if you knew that you weren't going to get sick or injured, then you wouldn't need health insurance. The problem is you don't know that. You don't know what's going to happen. Hence, it is entirely rational for you to hedge your risks by pursuing a flexible degree. Just like it's rational for you to get health insurance because you don't know if you'll get sick. </p>

<p>To continue with the example of Harvard, I was talking to a couple of Harvard PhD students who said that arguably the greatest aspect of choosing Harvard as opposed to some other school is that if they find out that they don't like their research field and decide that they'd rather pursue some other career (or if they can't get the research job they want), it's quite easy for them to do so through the Harvard name brand and the alumni networking. I couldn't agree more. To them, it's like having 'career insurance'. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The fact is that the number of fields where the name on your degree really matters is miniscule,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Miniscule in the grand scheme of all schools? Sure. But hardly miniscule when you are talking about schools like Harvard. The WSJ ran a recent article that stated that something like a full third of an entire recent Harvard undergrad class took jobs in finance. Nearly half of all MIT bachelor's and master's degree recipients who went to the workforce did so in finance or consulting. </p>

<p>Sure, I agree, at a place like the University of Oklahoma, the presence of finance or consulting is probably going to be miniscule. But when you're talking about the very top tier of schools, it's a very different story.</p>

17

<p>I disagree with what Sakky is saying but of course he is entitled to his own opinion. I've yet to meet one wavering student at grad school in my undergrad or at Stanford in a phD program. When PhD programs interview applicants, they look for passion and dedication. Things that indicate the applicant will stay when things are tough. If you are unsure or wavering about a career in academia or research within your field, don't bother going for a phD, ivy or not.</p>

<p>And heres some more food for thought:</p>

<p>What happens if you are dedicated to research and a career in academia? In the long term, it is therefore better to go to UOklahoma as it may indeed net you more connections to fields you are interested in than Harvard. Thats probably why people choose to go to great but not elite schools like GT above ivies and even MIT depending on specialty. You might be better off going to harvard if you are wavering on a phD, but then again you shouldn't be going anyways if you are.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]
To continue with the example of Harvard, I was talking to a couple of Harvard PhD students who said that arguably the greatest aspect of choosing Harvard as opposed to some other school is that if they find out that they don't like their research field and decide that they'd rather pursue some other career (or if they can't get the research job they want), it's quite easy for them to do so through the Harvard name brand and the alumni networking. I couldn't agree more. To them, it's like having 'career insurance'.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Did these kids actually FINISH their PhDs and get their degree? Then they don't have the bragging rights that they went to Harvard. They'd be drop-outs. Now if they got the MA as a consolation prize, then never mind. They'd still have the bragging rights, just don't have to tell anyone that they dropped out. Just because Bill Gates went to Harvard doesn't automatically make him cool. School just wasn't cool for him.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When PhD programs interview applicants, they look for passion and dedication. Things that indicate the applicant will stay when things are tough. If you are unsure or wavering about a career in academia or research within your field, don't bother going for a phD, ivy or not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree with this statement. When one of my LOR writers showed me her letter, her last paragraph basically said this. That I could stick out when things get tough and I possessed enough passion, drive, and determination to finish the process. This specific writer challenged me MORE than anyone else about me wanting to get my PhD- I spent WEEKS trying to convince her that I wanted to go for my PhD. She would ask me all kinds of questions to measure my common sense whether I was insane or not.</p>

<p>At the end, she said, "Hey, go for it. I just wanted to make sure that you had any common sense to do this."</p>

<p>It is true that PhD programs look for truly dedicated and passionate people because those will be the ones who will finish the fastest, meaning they'll get to spend less time and resources investing in those people. It is possible for some students, once they enter, to change their field of interest but only so slightly so that they're actually not switching advisors (say from Soviet history to African history). I personally have changed my interests over the last four years but the path is still linear. As that said professor said, people don't suddenly change fields of interests, it's about making connections from one to another. So for example, while doing Native American history, you might be primarily interested in how Native Americans and British interacted. At the end, you wind up doing a dissertation on Atlantic economic trade. How would that happen?
general Native American history --> Native Americans encounter the British --> the British used Native Americans for slavery --> French, Portugese, and Spanish ways of slavery --> the connections of these trades to Africa, West Indies, and the colonies in Americas --> the dissertation topic on economic trade in the Atlantic</p>

<p>You will have one advisor but your choice of who's in the committee for your dissertation isn't finalized for a while until you pick your dissertation topic but it is important to find a well-rounded faculty in your area (in this case, colonial US and Latin America, early modern/modern British, Africa, and perhaps economics). That's also an important element of searching a good program for you- finding more people other than just your advisor to work with.</p>

<p>As much I want to say don't go to graduate school if you plan to drop out or are wavering because so many people drop out of the PhD process anyway and as sakky says, there's just NO way of knowing how your future will play out. So the best I can say is, don't apply until you're ready to go.</p>

19

<p>Sakky, would you go as far as say choosing Dartmouth PhD Physics over UIUC just in case one chooses to leave Physics? Dartmouth's physics is like <<< compared to UIUC..</p>

20

<p>Dartmouth is not Harvard as far as networking. Technical fields such as Physics may also have more positions available on graduation than say History. What of the dedicated academic who loves school and the whole process and then finds him or herself unable to find a postion several years after getting degreed ? That HYPS network then would become more important.</p>