tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232811637669592992.post5173569815841187827..comments2024-03-28T03:17:53.945-04:00Comments on In the Service of Clio: Blog CXXXVII (137): Tell Me How this Ends?Nick Sarantakeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08071764464888181459noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232811637669592992.post-65564937547077721732013-02-06T19:43:26.713-05:002013-02-06T19:43:26.713-05:00I am diffident about offering advice from the acad...I am diffident about offering advice from the academic history world outside North America, but having also lived and worked in the US and knowing the scene there fairly well, I'll risk offending. I think one of the real problems with US graduate school is the length of time it take to get the PhD and the amount of money necessarily invested therein. The lock-step MAPhD process has been abandoned to a large extent eslewhere in the Anglosphere (especially here in Australia), which requires management issues of a different sort but at least means that if you want to take a doctorate in a field like history (and in an equally bad academic job market) for your own reasons (as one of my students says, 'I'm not doing this for the CV') then it isn't going to terminally affect the rest of your life with massive student debt, delayed family life etc etc. This is only a very small part of a very big problem, but perhaps, in the spirit of Nick's post, there rethink about the PhD needs to acquire a number of aspects beyond the 'job/no job' perpsective? In short, *why* do you have to undertake an MA in order to do a PhD when the MA is overwhelmmingly structured to develop you as a teacher in a tertiary environment that many/most will never actually inhabit?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232811637669592992.post-80435589341497852382013-02-06T14:07:39.889-05:002013-02-06T14:07:39.889-05:00You're right about one thing - the change is n...You're right about one thing - the change is not going to come of any academic association. It's the same thing here in Canada. We have a professional association - the CHA - who does absolutely nothing to self-regulate or improve the profession as a whole. The focus entirely reflects the status quo of tenured faculty, and even then it's only about research. The adjunctification of higher ed, the non-existent job market for grads, the non-utility of research outside the tenure track -- all of these things are never spoken of. Going to the annual conference is like taking a time machine back to the 1950s so antiquated is the thinking.<br /><br />I think the best thing that could happen is #1. Governments should stop subsidizing with public money programs that cannot justify their existence. Tough love needs to come from the outside because universities and depts have clearly demonstarted their inability to act as responsible stewards on their own.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-232811637669592992.post-45865564528512642922013-02-05T21:24:05.050-05:002013-02-05T21:24:05.050-05:00Hi Nick,
Perhaps the most constructive approach is...Hi Nick,<br />Perhaps the most constructive approach is to slowly but surely work to change attitudes. I used to be apoplectic that departments were admitting large numbers of students... but as one of those students, I was uneasy with my unease. Now I think I know why: having a PhD in history (or similar) isn't a prelude to an academic career. It can be, but it usually isn't, and there's no reason it should be seen that way. I see this simple shift in attitude as having potentially profound implications. Doing a PhD would be recognized for what it is: a personally enriching experience, unique as it is frustrating, and one that is part of a fulfilling life, whatever else that life includes. <br />What do you think?<br />Cheers,<br />JenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com