Targuman Rotating Header Image

HigherEd

CHE – Doctorates awarded to women by discipline

The Chronicle of Higher Education has a very interesting chart, proportion of doctorates awarded to women by discipline over the last thirty years.

All fields Education Engineering Humanities Life sciences Physical sciences Professional/ other Social sciences
1977 24.8 34.7 2.8 36.3 20.8 9.8 21.2 28.7
1987 35.3 55.1 6.5 44.4 35.2 16.5 33.2 43.4
1997 40.9 63.3 12.4 47.7 44.9 22.2 38.4 52.8
2007 45.5 67.4 20.7 49.3 51.4 28.1 50.8 58.7
Note: Figures include both U.S. citizens and noncitizens. Life sciences include agriculture and natural resources. Physical sciences include mathematics and computer and information sciences.
 

Why a PhD isn’t for everyone

For whatever reasons my post from January Why you shouldn’t go to grad school in the humanities has risen back to prominence in the last week. Please read the previous post for the comments (which was itself a comment on an article by Thomas Benton in the Chronicle) but I wanted to place one of the comments and my response here since I think it is worth continuing the conversation in a more public manner. “a” from Doxxa wrote:

While I understand your argument in terms of the economics of it.. just a thought: What is potentially lost in terms of the thinking capacity of our country, if the pool of those in the humanities shrinks further to only include those who fit your categories?:

“You are independently wealthy, and you have no need to earn a living for yourself or provide for anyone else. You come from that small class of well-connected people in academe who will be able to find a place for you somewhere. You can rely on a partner to provide all of the income and benefits needed by your household. You are earning a credential for a position that you already hold — such as a high-school teacher — and your employer is paying for it.”

Yes, it is competitive, and often based on connections and etc., but how is shrinking that pool going to assist with that problem? It may be better for that individual, but something is lost when the diversity of the pool of thought is smaller.

Thanks a. I should have clarified that, like Benton, I was referring to PhDs (not just any graduate degree). I actually do not believe that this would result in a loss of our county’s “thinking capacity.” A PhD program does not necessarily make someone a better “thinker” (although I hope it does!) but its main goal is to educate students in a very specific area of study. Just because someone is not achieving a terminal degree does not mean they are not still thinking and learning. Consider think tanks like the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Many of their members have PhD’s but certainly not all (and I think not even most). Yet they are some of the sharpest and best thought leaders in our country today.

I am certainly in favor of greater education and our secondary system in particular needs serious attention. But my point was two-fold. (1) One should only go for a PhD if they are serious about and understand the costs, both in financial expense and potential for job opportunities. (2) Do we always need PhDs? We are seeing degree inflation just as we have grade inflation. People should not get degrees just because everyone else has them. They can still be smart, thoughtful, and contributing significantly to our thinking capacity without that piece of paper.

 

Dressing for the classroom, criticizing feminist scholarship, and online education

A quick review of higher education news highlights.

As I sit with my cuppa tea this morning and read the Chronicle of Higher Ed and Inside Higher Ed a few stories caught my eye.

“I work at a college where professors wear a variety of things,” she says, “Some wear suits and ties and others wear shorts, so regardless of which class I was dressing for, I didn’t really stand out.”

That would not be true at every institution, Ms. Konheim-Kalkstein observes. “My husband is going to start teaching at West Point,” she says. “If he showed up in sneakers, I think he would have a much stronger reaction there from his students.”

  • Persistent Myths in Feminist Scholarship by Christina Hoff Sommers – This one is charged and no doubt is raising lots of comments on the interwebs. Basically Sommers, who has criticized feminist scholarship before, is pointing out that there are many “facts” put forward in the feminist canon that simply aren’t true. I paid particular attention because at a recent workshop we had here we too were told that “20 to 35 percent of women seeking medical care in emergency rooms in America are there because of domestic violence.” Not true apparently. The CDC reports that it was 0.02% in 2003 and 0.01% in 2005. That is not just statistical error. Sommers is not anti-feminist however. She simply wants to see good scholarship.

All books have mistakes, so why pick on the feminists? My complaint with feminist research is not so much that the authors make mistakes; it is that the mistakes are impervious to reasoned criticism. They do not get corrected. The authors are passionately committed to the proposition that American women are oppressed and under siege. The scholars seize and hold on for dear life to any piece of data that appears to corroborate their dire worldview. At the same time, any critic who attempts to correct the false assumptions is dismissed as a backlasher and an anti-feminist crank.

… False assertions, hyperbole, and crying wolf undermine the credibility and effectiveness of feminism. The United States, and the world, would greatly benefit from an intellectually responsible, reality-based women’s movement.

Notably, the report attributes much of the success in learning online (blended or entirely) not to technology but to time. “Studies in which learners in the online condition spent more time on task than students in the face-to-face condition found a greater benefit for online learning,” the report says.

The note above in the IHE summary pointed to something that I have been wrestling with in terms of online education. The question has come up as to whether or not an honors course could be offered online. My instinct is to say “no” but I am not so sure. One of the key elements to an honors seminar is discussion and I have often found in my online courses (I have taught Intro to Hebrew Bible online many times) that because students are required to post to the online discussion board where they have to compose a message the discussion is often more thoughtful and everyone has a chance to be heard. Still mulling on this….

Finally, the Chronicle has “What They’re Reading on College Campuses.” No real surprises here. I had thought about #2 for our college’s summer reading project: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies by Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith

 

SAT or NOT?

Our honors college does not use the SATs in selecting our students (although PSU does use it and we only select among those who have already been admitted to PSU). It is now quite the rage to move away from using SATs and the Chronicle of Higher Education has two commentary pieces this morning on the subject from faculty who recently retook the test. I am sharing this mostly because I liked the Chronice’s commentary in their summation presented in the daily email (but I am sure they are worth reading as well, a subscription is required).

COMMENTARY

CHRISTOPHER HARPER: THE SAT IS A POOR TOOL FOR MEASURING STUDENT
POTENTIAL: Do standardized tests do a decent job of assessing
students’ knowledge? An associate professor at Temple University
took both the SAT and the ACT last winter in an effort to find
out. Suffice it to say that he’s not sold.
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v55/i39/39a03001.htm?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en

ROBERT J. VANDERBEI: THE SAT IS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF
ABILITIES: A professor at Princeton University also retook the
SAT, and he emerged with a more favorable impression. (Scoring
an 800 on the math section probably didn’t hurt.)
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v55/i39/39a03001.htm#yes

From the “no” position (it is not stated, but it is implied that he took the regular exams with high school students):

I found that the tests emphasized speed and stamina over knowledge, and they failed to provide an adequate measure of what a student might actually understand.

The SAT comprised 10 sections that haphazardly whipsawed the mind from writing to reading to math. I started by writing an essay, then spent the remainder of the test zigzagging back and forth among mathematics, reading, and grammar. Just as I’d fallen into a mathematical groove, it was time to move on to the reading section. A second math section, or perhaps a grammar test, might follow a reading section. Moreover, I had about one minute to answer each question — almost no time for any form of critical analysis or contemplation. What went through my mind? Keep up the pace.

From the “yes” position (this professor only took the practice exam in his office rather than sitting for a proctored exam):

What did I learn from the experiment?

For one, the scores seemed to be a good reflection of how I stand in comparison with when I was in high school. (In other words, I think I’m much closer to Princeton students verbally than I was then.) Also, it seems correct to me that I scored lower on the reading part than on the writing part and performed best on the quantitative part. But mainly what I learned is that the SAT is a challenging, well-thought-out exam.

Of course, the test is limited in scope, as it must be given that it requires only a few hours of one’s time. It is simply impossible to measure every dimension of a secondary-school education in so short a time. For example, the math portion tests only the most elementary topics of algebra and geometry. With only 54 math questions, it simply can’t assess all levels of mastery. Given the limited scope, however, the SAT raises a well-conceived set of questions.

Prof. Vanderbei, the faculty member in favor of the test, seems more impressed with the test as a construct than as a diagnostic tool, able to predict the ability of a student. Prof. Harper, who believes the tests are deeply flawed, pointed out that in high school he scored highest on the math and only switched to English and journalism in his sophomore year. Had he stayed with the test’s assessment of himself he believes he would have been a disgruntled “number cruncher” rather than a very sucessful journalist.

 

College application essays are hard, even for college presidents

Last year the Wall Street Journal challenged ten presidents of US colleges and universities to answer one essay question (which WSJ selected) from the president’s institution’s application. This story has discusses the process and the results and includes some very good consideration about writing such essays.

The exercise showed just how challenging it is to write a college essay that stands out from the pack, yet doesn’t sound overly self-promotional or phony. Even some presidents say they grappled with the challenge and had second thoughts about the topics they chose. Several shared tips about writing a good essay: Stop trying to come up with the perfect topic, write about personally meaningful themes rather than flashy ones, and don’t force a subject to be dramatic when it isn’t.

Perhaps next year I should do the same thing with our essay questions. What do you think? You can read the full article here.