It's only been a few days since the last mailbag, but as we near 1,000 comments, it seems like a good time for a fresh one.
Congratulations to those who've heard good news from programs, and best wishes to everyone still waiting. Remember, it's still very early.
1,074 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 801 – 1000 of 1074 Newer› Newest»I'm including myself in that last bit, not trying to do the 'Mommy' collective plural. Sorry.
Missed a call from an Ann Arbor phone number this morning.
Of course, I have an Ann Arbor number as well, so it was clearly just another wrong number call.
But still, it was enough to make my heart palpitate.
@Laura T
I know nothing about Stony Brook Southampton other than what is on the website, but they did look interesting! Did you see who all was on the visiting writers list? Seemed impressive. The location concerns me, though; doesn't seem like much going on housing and employment-wise in the Hamptons, according to craigslist at least.
The downside to where all I've applied is that my hard-to-get-in schools (Brown, NYU, Bama) are going to respond nearly a month before I'll hear from any of my "safeties" ... ouch! I don't think I can handle it if I get 20 rejections...
@ Arna, if what you say is correct--and that applicants are in pursuit of a particular acceptance for this particular degree--then I am in near-complete agreement with you.
However, I think many of us ARE all about the work and the possiblity of being able to focus on our writing and grow at a faster rate because of a program. We will continue regardless of whether we do an MFA or not. The degree is not the goal but rather the improvement and nurturing of our art. For me, yes, the temporary focus is on getting into a progam because I've applied to do this wonderful thing, and I truly hope I get accepted at one of my schools. But my reason for appyling in the first place was to get better at what I most love and need to do. Write.
There's a great article from the LA Times by Dani Shapiro about trying to be a writer that addresses a lot of what we're talking about:
http://www.latimes.com/features/books/newsletter/la-ca-endurability7-2010feb07,0,5302903.story
Some quotes:
"I have taught in MFA programs for many years now, and I begin my first class of each semester by looking around the workshop table at my students' eager faces and then telling them they are pursuing a degree that will entitle them to nothing. I don't do this to be sadistic or because I want to be an unpopular professor; I tell them this because it's the truth. They are embarking on a life in which apprenticeship doesn't mean a cushy summer internship in an air-conditioned office but rather a solitary, poverty-inducing, soul-scorching voyage whose destination is unknown and unknowable.
If they were enrolled in medical school, in all likelihood they would wind up doctors. If in law school, better than even odds, they'd become lawyers. But writing school guarantees them little other than debt."
"The emphasis is on publishing, not on creating. On being a writer, not on writing itself. The publishing industry -- always the nerdy distant cousin of the rest of media -- has the same blockbuster-or-bust mentality of television networks and movie studios. There now exist only two possibilities: immediate and large-scale success, or none at all."
"Perhaps there is a clue to be found near the end of Solotaroff's essay: "Writing itself, if not misunderstood and abused, becomes a way of empowering the writing self. It converts anger and disappointment into deliberate and durable aggression, the writer's main source of energy. It converts sorrow and self-pity into empathy, the writer's main means of relating to otherness. Similarly, his wounded innocence turns into irony, his silliness into wit, his guilt into judgment, his oddness into originality, his perverseness into his stinger.""
@ Happy,
A huge congratulations, and a smaller, very good-natured 'I told you so.'
=)
Arna,
I added another paragraph--still tinkering with it.
S.
Arna, very interesting stuff. I agree with you to an extent. I just think we have to recognise what you describe for what it is. As long as the number of MFA programs grows and the number of applicants continues to outpace it (ie. for the foreseeable future), it's natural for the former to be appear to be fetishized, especially in forums such as this one. There's a lot of desire at play. And, yes, it can appear we're fetishizing coveted acceptances to the same degree. But I think a lot of this is merely due to cumulative nerves and well-intended excitement. I think it can too easily be mistaken for wide-eyed silliness. Someone really would have to be very naive to believe that the mere act of getting into X program is going to be transformative. I simply don't think anyone here is that naive.
At this particular point in the proceedings, the idea of getting into X program is quite undeniably lovely to me. Possibly to a silly extent. Anything that will give me more time to dedicate to reading & writing in a (hopefully) supportive is a Great Thing. I just think the program or the acceptance as 'the object of dedication' is a temporary fever. It's affecting some of us right now simply because it's such a bloody lovely thought. Once you scrape away the surface excitement, we know what's what. We know where the agency lies and who has to do the work.
Ps. i linked to that LA Times article earlier - elicited some good comments - check it out above!
Pps. I think Shapiro underestimates the intelligence & seriousness of people interested in pursuing MFA's in a way which, at this point, just makes me roll my eyes. Much of the rest of the article (about the publishing industry, and about the struggle with oneself to write) is good.
@Eli, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Nicely phrased.
Waiting to hear from (fiction):
-Columbia University
-The New School
-Hunter
-Brooklyn College
P.S. Arna, I agree with much of what Shapiro says, but I'm afraid it doesn't change the fact that she's out of touch with her students -- one reason we don't use MFA faculty anymore to rank MFA programs. She writes that an MFA degree "guarantees [her students] debt," which flies in the face of the conventional wisdom splattered across every online MFA community for nearly a decade now: DON'T GO INTO ANY DEBT FOR AN MFA. When I read a writer saying that (as Shapiro does not, but as others do) the MFA is a "scam" because it "promises" a career to students when in fact it only takes their money, I get riled -- this is not only patronizing to applicants (and unfair to programs) but so critically out-of-touch that putting such an opinion in the public sphere seems to me an act of gall. Applicants are, in fact, urged to reject any unfunded offer of admission, just as, for decades, doctoral candidates have been urged to reject unfunded offers for their terminal degrees. And programs promise nothing but workshops, time to write, perpetual access to a student-artist community, and occasional access to faculty. Period. This canard that applicants think an MFA will "get them published" or "get them a job" puts a baby bib around every applicant's neck and treats them as if they were literally born yesterday. It's disgusting; it's an abomination. MFA applicants are among the most educated class of graduate-school applicants in America -- it wasn't always true, but it is now. And magazines and newspapers should spend less time asking MFA faculties about a subject they couldn't possibly know less about -- their students -- and start asking the students themselves (and maybe occasionally a poet, not just aspiring novelists? That too would be nice) to discuss what the MFA did, does, and will mean to them.
Be well,
S.
@Eli Sorry for the double post. These mailbags are getting so big I missed it. My bad.
@Farrah, thank you. And I forgot to say, from way back, that I can live with being outed!
@ Eli :)
@Arna, no worries, dude, this forum moves quickly. You can only get involved in so much. I enjoy your posts a lot though.
Hi all-- Just thought I'd mention that George Mason is having several open houses in late March for admitted students and anyone else interested in the program. Details and a link for RSVP's are up on the program's website.
Also, I am happy to answer any questions anyone has about getting an MFA at George Mason. My email is on my profile.
thanks, jennifer. do you have any idea when they expect to start notifying applicants, or has it already begun?
@ Ian,
Yes, the visiting writers did seem impressive! And the writing conference in the summer looked like a pretty big deal. The location concerns me, too, though. The image I have of the Hamptons is a place for wealthy Manhattanites' vacation homes. Sounds beautiful, but I'm wondering if there is anywhere around there where I could afford to live. I noticed on the website that Stony Brook has a Manhattan track, but I don't know if you can do the whole program there or only take a few classes.
@beedeecee -- Sorry, I don't have any info on when the program will start notifying applicants. If I knew I'd let you know!
@ Seth -- Loved the essay. My question is not so much critical as sincere: you make the connection between the current MFA system of "patronage" and the G.I. Bill, citing government funding, but I'm curious to know the extent to which MFA funding can be considered by the government. In that: is there a specific bill or provision that some of these programs are benefitting from that others are not, or do you simply mean that public universities, funded largely by the government, happen to have some of the best funding for MFA students, and therefore by proxy, MFA funding is, in some sense, government funding?
I'm particularly curious about how the whole MFA funding machine works. Where does the money come from? I have heard or perhaps just assumed that much of the money comes from private donations; is that correct?
I understand that some programs are funded better than others, but I don't understand why that is the case. Why is there absolutely zero funding in NYC?
I'm not necessarily advocating that you include this information in your essay. I would just like to know.
@jennifer: ah, that's ok. it's just another exercise in patience ... which is wearing quite thin, as i'm sure you remember from this time last year. ;)
Does anyone know what the status is for Wyoming? I know Happy got in for poetry (mad congrats!!), and that they've contacted their non-fictions, but what about fiction? I've been refreshing this blog like crazy and haven't seen any new info...
Does anyone know what the status is for Wyoming? I know Happy got in for poetry (mad congrats!!), and that they've contacted their non-fictions, but what about fiction? I've been refreshing this blog like crazy and haven't seen any new info...
I think a couple reasons why NYC programs have little to no funding include:
1) NYC programs already have a huge, local applicant pool to choose from, so funding as an incentive to lure applicants becomes less of an issue. There are plenty of talented writers in New York that are capable/willing to pay tuition.
2) The class size of NYC programs are HUGE compared to the fully-funded programs of the midwest and the south. NYU does have several fellowships and does provide some financial assistance to incoming students but with such a large class size, the funding becomes marginal. Could NYU lower the class size and fully fund a small number of students? Probably. But again, this brings us back to the first point and less students means less money (which probably would affect the number/quality of faculty - maybe?)
My two cents, and I have no idea if these ideas are correct. What do you think Seth?
@rose
I've been wondering too and it's driving me crazy. Seth said they'd notify at the end of the week and there's nada.
One the upside one of my stories is gonna be included in Dzanc Books' Best of the Web 2010. I'm trying to focus on the positive stuff and quit stressing so much.
Seth said that Wyoming planned to START notifying fiction at the end of the week, but who knows? We haven't heard anything here, which means either it hasn't happened yet or it happened and nobody told us. I'm preferring to hope for the best, but what can I do? If they just notified Happy about poetry last night, it sound like they are a little behind schedule. All I know is that contemplating this isn't going to get me into the school... too bad. :)
Oh, Brandi, congrats! What's the piece?
Hi,
1) Regarding public funding for the arts. Yes, I'm definitely suggesting a causal chain here: Public education is largely possible because of public monies, and public universities have been the primary engine for--and represent the primary area of growth in--fully-funded MFA programs. Public universities in the Top 50 are 50% more likely than their private counterparts to be fully funded, and (as we can all understand would be the case) almost all of the worst-funded MFA programs in the United States are private schools: not so much because of an innate disinclination to fund students, but because of a combination of a) the fact that private tuition is much more than public tuition, so fully funding a private-school MFA student is nigh impossible unless the program is infinitesimal in size, and b) the fact that private schools carry a relative prestige (relative to objective measures of quality) that is greater than comparable public schools, and therefore they find it less difficult to draw paying customers (as it were). But several other points must be made. First, some will argue that, after all, any graduate school at a public university receives some public monies, so couldn't (say) University of Virginia's law school be said to have public financing? Of course there are two game-changing differences (among many smaller ones): most professional schools don't fund their students, and among non-professional schools (like MFAs; and here we are able to distinguish between doctoral and MFA programs) MFA graduates are perhaps the least able to claim their "education" has a financial benefit to the nation. Consider that the highest stipends for actually-funded programs--generally academic doctorates, as opposed to law, business, or medical degrees--are in the sciences. The government is essentially investing R&D money into future inventions that will spur the economy; moreover, it is funding academic work requiring substantial expertise (in professors) and material resources. In contrast, the MFA is a studio degree with no professional quotient and zero monetary value for society. Monies given to MFA poets and writers can rightly be seen as gifts to the arts; while it's true that students are often asked to teach a class or two for their money, when the rest of the nation is working 50 to 70 hours weeks it is hardly "work" to allow a young poet or writer (who doesn't even have a terminal degree!) to spend two or three hours a week teaching undergraduates.
{cont.}
2) The NYC and West Coast programs have long made the claim, to prospective fiction applicants, that they are worth the money because one can't and won't have any meaningful contact with agents if one goes anywhere else for the MFA. That's right: The old rankings were governed largely by the unwillingness or inability of agents to consider work from writers living in the 90% of the country that is not New York City, San Francisco, or Los Angeles (because there are 200% more fiction applicants than poetry applicants, MFA rankings were traditionally heavily skewed toward assessment of programs' fiction offerings; for this reason, fiction-dominant programs like University of California at Irvine and Columbia University have dropped in the rankings, in large part because poets are now also consulted on their views of programs). The theory is--and you'll still hear it among some young, aspiring novelists--you can't network unless you're in New York City or California, and the MFA is about networking. Which is nonsense, of course. Go to Columbia and meet with an agent and they'll tell you what they tell everyone else: Contact me when you have a full manuscript. And no, they won't remember your name. Ultimately strong work wins out, whether it's mailed to an agent from Texas or Wisconsin or Brooklyn. And as for poets, they've never seen much value in spending money on an MFA--they know there's no "prestige" there worth the cost, and no professional doors are being opened unless and until one has substantial publications (which almost no MFA students, in any genre, do). But yes, in addition to this there are (were) other reasons for New York and California's now dead-as-a-doornail dominance of the MFA scene: 1) the historical association of these locations with the nation's most vibrant writing communities; 2) the desirability of these locations, as places to live, among those 21 to 35 (the wheelhouse for MFA admissions committees); 3) the organically-grown applicant pool already present in these locations, for whom moving and relocation costs (and the bewilderment of a new locale) are non-issues; 4) the tendency of well-known writers to snobbishly refuse to live anywhere in the interior of the country, and the commensurate tendency (now, thankfully, over) of applicants to choose programs almost entirely based on the number of "names" on faculty; 5) the promotion, in the New York and West Coast media, of programs in their backyards over programs in places they drink martinis over as they fly past them in first-class cabins; and so on.
Let me say this baldly (and I mean to provoke discussion and even argument here): I believe unfunded MFA programs should die. Immediately. I believe they should die because I believe those admitted to them should refuse to attend. Immediately. I think every MFA applicant, for their own sake and no one else's, should sign a public pledge that they will refuse to patronize any program that will not fund them, and (if I had my druthers) that they will refuse to even apply to any program that does not fully fund at least 33% of its admittees. When I see young poets and writers heading off to unfunded programs I am saddened: their degrees will be worth little in the future because their prospective programs will soon be (and already are) dropping from the rankings like flies; their classmates will be of a lower grade than any well-funded program; their graduate school debt will take them years (if not decades) to pay off; they will become disillusioned artists once they realize they have been used by enormous institutions as (by default) a profit-making scheme; in convincing themselves (wrongfully) that it is better to go to an unfunded MFA now than a funded one later, they will be implicitly buying into the MFA as an end-point (an "achievement") not a starting-point for a life as an artist.
{cont.}
I'm serious: Were it not too presumptuous, and I realize it is, I would ask everyone here to voluntarily pledge to themselves and to one another that they will not betray themselves--and the future of graduate study in creative writing--by patronizing unfunded MFA programs.
Be well,
Seth
@Laura T
I've been looking for graduate housing for married couples, and the pickings are slim to none for most schools. I'm not sure of what it'll be like there, either, beyond what google and craigslist can tell me. Here's opening the university housing office can provide some guidance!
They've been emailing me about the MFA Manhattan. It looks like it is designed for busy city professionals... more like a Low-Res-type program with just a few workshops/classes in the city and maybe some summers or weekends at the Southampton campus.
Seth, I’m attending a program unfunded and it was the right decision for me. Although I—like you—am against going into debt for an MFA, I am paying cash for mine and I do not and will not regret it. I spent many years practicing law and saving my money so that I could spend a few years writing without working. When it came time to do just that—give up my career for a while to focus on writing fiction—I applied to MFA programs. I decided that if I got into the program that is basically up the street from me, I would attend whether I got funding or not. And I got in. I pay in-state tuition, which is very affordable given how much money I managed to save while I was practicing. I’m working in a community of writers I would not have had without the program and the attention I’ve received from faculty has helped me to improve my writing at least 100 percent. Working alone just would not have been the same, so I’m grateful for the opportunity I have, even though I have to pay for it.
Rosanna: Yes, I live in Columbia, too. I didn't apply to S.Carolina because, bluntly, I hate this city. It's a dying capitol whos heyday passed in the early 90's. It's ghettofied in the worst way possible, and, frankly, is an overpopulated suburban dump. That's my take on this city. Also, I'm not a fan of the poets at SC. Not only their styles, but their methods seem too remote for me to want to work with.
@Seth: Hey, you got me. I only applied to Ole Miss, though. But that makes me 100% pledged, right? On the manifesto, sounds great. All I might suggest is that you make that rising energy a little less tight. It reads like a revolutionary manifesto, definitely, but isn't part of your point that this shouldn't be revolutionary? It's very emotional, and I suppose I'm just nervous for you, putting it out there. Luck.
@little poet + Rosanna: That's why I didn't apply to USC, even though I'm just over on Hilton Head. I don't want to move to another place where I have to drive all the time, and feel so insulated by sprawl... not a Columbia, SC fan. :)
Hi Jennifer,
But that's exactly it -- you've done nothing at all "wrong" or inadvisable, even by the stringent "standards" I'm proposing as wise (albeit 100% voluntary, of course!). You made a sound financial decision -- you are not going into debt. While I still believe the things I said about the marketability of unfunded MFA degrees going forward, and the quality of cohorts at such programs (which are still strong, but are also rapidly declining in quality), there are many other reasons why someone with a clear-eyed understanding of her finances -- as you have -- could quite reasonably make the decision to attend such a program: culture; family; weather; medical needs; population diversity; a particular professor (assuming one knows enough about him/her to be near-certain of gaining a mentor); and so on. I don't think we're in any disagreement. Had I been a private attorney rather than a public defender, and had a surplus of funds rather than a $100,000+ deficit at the time I applied to MFA programs and left the law, I might well have considered a New York City program -- not for the prestige, but because I like cold weather, my family is nearby, I like many of the faculties in New York City, I am intrigued by the poetry scene there (even if much less so than the folks who already live there seem to be), and I've never lived in a major metropolis. So it goes.
Be well,
Seth
Eli,
Agreed about mid 19th century publishing models sucking. That didn't necessarily shock me. It's that this very widely read philosopher started out with what now would be an insignificant readership.
Hi Kati-Jane,
That's a very fair point. Then again, I do think this is a cultural revolution, and I do think its detractors (much more so in poetry than fiction) are extremely powerful and extremely vocal, and I do know -- from personal experience -- that the cost of not understanding all these elements of the MFA revolution are very, very high: young poets and writers who give up on their dreams; young poets and writers who don't give up on their dreams but also don't understand that taking on $100,000 of debt will destroy them financially for decades; and in the worst cases -- again more common for poets than novelists -- would-be literary geniuses who instead turn to addiction or suicide because, after all, America is (and always has been) an extremely difficult place to be a committed artist. The forces of those who want us all to stand apart as artists are much stronger and more seductive -- because they wield a most romantic narrative -- than are the voices of those who urge us to stand together in dynamic, non-hierarchical communities. Part of what I'm trying to do is change the narrative, and that takes both emotion and, I think, a small dose of poetry.
Best,
Seth
Seth,
What if the threat of a huge financial debt because of attending an underfunded MFA program doesn't scare you from choosing to attend an underfunded MFA program?
I might be mistaken, but it seems that a part of your thesis rests on a significant fear or avoidance of amassing debt. Am I wrong to believe that perhaps not everyone places debt avoidance at the forefront of their life decisions?
"I believe unfunded MFA programs should die. Immediately." I got a good chuckle out of that Seth. Count me in as someone who didn't apply to any unfunded programs and thus won't be accepting any unfunded offers (of course the current number of offers=0, so that decision might be made for me, so to speak).
I'm curious about who may argue with you on this point. Is there any good argument to be made for going into debt for an MFA?
@Seth, lots of food for thought in your manifesto. I have to print it out to really read & think about it.
For me, if I want an MFA I will have to pay for it. I literally can't afford to pack my life up to traipse off across the country to study. I've spent too much time accumulating the baggage of family, house, pets, roots, to do that. I can't quit my job to go full time (presuming of course that I'll get in) because even the fully-funded programs don't provide enough to pay my annual expenses.
Your suggestion not to go unless you get funding works for those who are pretty much going in their 20s, who haven't been around long enough to acquire the debts some of us have ... emotional as well as financial. It doesn't work for me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I've also had a poet with whom I worked say don't bother even applying because the MFA isn't worth anything at all unless you plan to teach at the college level. Her advice really put me off, but in the end I chose to disregard it as well because this is what I really want to do.
So I'll take out more student loans, and I'll keep working at the school I'm in now until I have five years in and can apply for some loan forgiveness because it's a high needs school where I teach special education students.
And I'll keep subscribing to small press journals and sending out my poetry, and maybe someday I'll be able to get a full time college position instead of just teaching 102 as an adjunct ... or work in a public school where I'll make a little more because I'll have the extra degree ...
I WANT to do this, and if I have to pay for it, so be it.
As to those of you who get a free ride, good for you. In 25 years, you may not be writing any longer. At some point, you'll have to find a full time job, maybe you'll have a family, and suddenly changing diapers and cooking dinner will take over your life and you won't make the time to write. That's happened to a lot of the people I went to college with, and to grad school the first time around. Google their names ... if they're in academia they are publishing scholarly works, not creative. And if they're not in academia, they're not writing any more.
As for me, I am still here writing. Although I haven't had luck finding a publisher for my first full-length manuscript, I HAVE one, along with more than a double handful of publications.
I am not going to let ANYONE tell me not to bother with an MFA, not to pay for an MFA. If I get in, I will go no matter how I have to pay for it. And if I don't, I'll apply again next year. And maybe I'll apply to a low-res program too. And someday, my work will be published in Kenyon Review and Ploughshares, because I will keep writing, and keep getting better, even if it takes until I am 70 or 80 or 90. There is time. The women in my life live a long time.
Himbokal,
It may not be a 'good' argument but the argument to go into to debt for an MFA is if one does not feel threatened by debt (and a lot of it).
Consider your pledge signed. For your reasons and my own.
Jason,
But there's the rub: the old argument for paying for an MFA is that it is worth it -- because you get to go to a prestigious program, like Columbia. But what happens when that $100,000 buys you a program with below-average selectivity, average prestige, a weak cohort, and no special advantage in publishing or job-hunting? MFA rankings that take into account funding are a virtuous circle -- they will bring down unfunded MFA programs not because I will it, but because by their very nature they will, over time, make the old arguments for paying for an unmarketable, non-professional degree obsolete.
Be well,
S.
@ jason j.
that's a good point, but you have to consider the economic state of this country, and definitely the future economic state, and realize that any major debt you incur could stay with you for life...if that doesn't bother you, then do it up mang.
@ seth
i couldn't agree more with the need for full funding for most or all students...when we consider law for example (and no offense), we have to consider how many lawyers are out there in sheer numbers, e.g. not working or doing much work...so the idea that certain professions are "worth" more than others in the real world is, i think, an outdated concept, but a concept that continues to stick around nonetheless and hinders the field of art, among others.
for me, no $$= no dice
Jason J,
I'd wager the vast majority of people would prefer not to amass any debt. I'd also wager the vast majority of people (life circumstances aside) would rather go to a fully-funded MFA even if they could pay full-price without going into debt. Trust me, there's nothing romantic about being a starving artist. Going to a fully-funded program not only makes sense artistically but is also the financially responsible decision in the long run. Not having any debt, being able to keep your savings (or even add onto it a little), can only help your writing via not having to stress out so much over paying back loans or working a ridiculous job just to pay rent right after graduating.
MJ,
Any advice I give -- or have ever given -- is intended as archetypal; that is, it is not difficult for one to imagine a person or persons for whom such advice is simply impossible. All things being equal, it is not merely the right advice but the only right advice. Years of studying MFA programs confirms this. But all things are not always equal, as you so eloquently and passionately observed -- and in such circumstances, yes, conventional wisdom ought be damned. Best of luck to you,
Be well,
Seth
LAS,
No offense taken.
--S.
gnarly
Seth,
Yes. I think I understand your point now not so much as cautioning against debt but that that same debt isn't even worth what it is purportedly to be worth. So for MFA applicants it is not an issue of debt v no debt (with an emphasis on cost) but of value v little value (emphasis on experience in program).
From your evidence I think it's clear that even the possibility of going into debt for a highly prestigious program is not possible. Indeed, going into debt for a perceived prestigious degree is a poor investment of one's finances and energy.
Seth,
I'm in agreement with you about funding. I originally set out to apply to only fully funded programs, but ended up with UNCW, Kansas, Texas State, Montana, and UNLV all on my list. I don't plan to attend if I will need to go into debt, though in real life it will be more difficult to turn down an offer than I am letting on.
Also, I have two specific questions if you have the time. Your funding ranking lists Kansas as 75%+ funded, but on their website it seems that they accept 8 MFA students and then have 6-8 funding offers for both MFA AND PhD students in the English department. It doesn't say how many PHDs they admit, though. Wouldn't this mean that less than 75% of MFA students are funded? Also, AWP lists Montana's tuition as "$0" - does this mean all students, even those without funding, receive tuition remission? Or is this information inaccurate?
Thanks.
Seth,
Yes, a revolution is happening out there in the world of creative writing and MFA programs -- but it is YOU who's documenting it, quantifying it, and publicizing it. Your rankings, your research, your time and energy are pushing this 'MFA Revolution' quicker and further in the right direction.
You rock, Seth. For real. I loved your manifesto. I also loved what you had to say about the Dani Shapiro article. You were so completely, exactly right.
THANK YOU, Seth :)
LAS, WT,
Oh don't confuse my questions with my personal choices. I was just trying to give a little voice to those who perhaps might not care about debt. I don't romanticize the starving artist ideal, at all. I am going to get paid for my art - at some point haha.
I think that my questions are aimed at separating the possible titles of Seth's essay; the wrong title would be "Going Into Debt For An MFA Is Bad For Your Future", and a more correct title would be "Unfunded MFA Programs Are Not Worth It - Financially and Artistically". I'm a making any sense? I need to eat some food.
Ugh.. that should read 'am i making sense?' haha. Oh man.
MJ, I could have written your post. I also am not in the position to move--I have family and commitments, and frankly, at my age, things feel different. I'm also applying to only one program--it's nearby, has an incredible faculty, and only funds a few (I don't think Seth has published their percentage, unfortunately.) i don't know what i'll do if I get in and don't get funding, as I'm really not in the position to take on debt (don't want to be paying off student loans with social security, LOL). So, Seth, I do appreciate your comments to MJ, and I do trust that choosing different paths doesn't mean some people have second class educations.
@Jason J-
Possibly, although one could make (sort of) the same argument about taking out a mortgage they can barely afford (I really want the house and I'm not afraid of being evicted/foreclosed) or say, driving drunk (I really want to get to get home and I'm not afraid of getting a DUI). These are definitely arguments. I just don't think they are necessarily, as you note, "good" arguments.
@MommyJ- more power to you. That was a compelling argument.
@ashley brooke
not to be a linkwhore but here's the story:
http://keyholemagazine.com/brandi-wells/fifteen-unrelated-stories
But, a bit of an aside, similar to what MommyJ had to say: No matter how cheaply one lives, a $12,000/year stipend doesn't pay the bills for those of us who aren't straight out of college, those of us with kids or mortgages or debt.
(I don't have a mortgage or debt, but I'm just saying. I barely barely survive on my bookstore manager salary, which is in the low- to mid-20s annually.)
I will either move in with my parents in order to be able to live off the stipend, or I will live with my partner. But even with funding, I couldn't do an MFA on my own, without the help and support of family/girlfriend.
Jason,
Yes, you have it exactly right -- based on current data for funding and popularity, presently the highest-ranked (and thus, for those inclined to think this way) "most prestigious" less-than-33%-funded program is New York University (#19), which has dropped 11 spots (a 7.7% national drop) in just twelve months (from #8), and looks certain to fall further by the end of any 2010 voting. The next program in this category is Brooklyn College (#26), which is likewise in New York City and has likewise dropped 11 spots (7.7%) in the past year. After that, you have to go down to Maryland (#37) and several schools tied for #40 (Oregon State, The New School, Portland State) to find programs that poorly funded. Given that there are 143 full-residency MFA programs in the U.S., a program must be ranked 35th or higher to even be in the top twenty-five percent of programs. The number of programs meeting that criteria that fully fund fewer than 33% of their admittees is two, and one (Brooklyn) is holding on for dear life. How can one justify substantial debt to attend a program not even in the top 25% in its field? Among colleges and universities, this would be like attending a school not ranked in the top 250 -- if we assumed, for a moment, that it was absolutely unheard of (or viewed poorly, at least) to go into debt for one's undergraduate years. Consider: If and when all 143 programs release their selectivity data, Columbia (which now ranks 46th in selectivity) would almost certainly rank -- wait for it -- around 80th. $100,000 for the 80th best cohort to spend two years studying with? I don't see it, in a world where there are only 143 full-residency cohorts to begin with.
Best,
Seth
Brandi, you absolutely are allowed to link. Congrats on your accomplishment and I enjoyed the stories.
Hi Ashley,
Unfortunately that data for Montana is, like so much of the data on the AWP website, completely and entirely wrong. Montana is not fully-funded, I'm afraid.
As to Kansas, it's important to know that there are some years in which Kansas accepts no one into their Ph.D. program, and I believe their maximum is 2, and their average is 1, so the numbers were calculated this way:
7 average funded spots / 8 average MFA spots + 1 average Ph.D. spot = 7 average funding packages per 9 average incoming MFA/Ph.D. students = 77.7% funding
Hope that makes sense.
S.
Seth,
For someone so concerned about the financial situation of writers, you charge an awful lot in your consulting business to read samples (something like $350) for aspiring applicants. I find it hard to believe that any critique is worth that kind of hourly rate. Aren't you, in some ways, guilty of the same profit-oriented exploitation of moneyless and desperate writers?
This isn't meant as an insult, but I think a fair comment on what appears to me to be a hypocritical stance.
@Lauren
Agreed for the "kids/debt" angle, but otherwise $12,000 is quite livable if you just downsize your lifestyle and live frugally. This, of course, assumes you can find good housing for a reasonable rate (which, in most small college towns, is possible with effort.) Plenty of things you may think are essential are not -- cable/television, new clothes, eating out, magazine subscriptions, etc. Learn to make do with what you have. Live simpler. Obviously if you've already given yourself debt that is something you have to deal with, and children, obviously, but for the average individual a $12,000 a stipend is reasonable. My poor fiancée was putting herself through her undergrad -- without loans or parental support -- on less than that.
Thanks Seth! I knew Montana wasn't fully funded, but I was hoping they might have a situation like Notre Dame's. Thanks for clearing things up for me.
Speaking of Notre Dame, is there any current info on this program? How many applicants were there and was there a drop in applications from last year? Is the tuition waver with a small chance of getting a TA-ship still the case?
@Ian,
Agreed, $12,000/year is doable if you are frugal. I already live without Cable TV/Internet, I get all of my clothes from clearance racks or from Goodwill, I never ever dine out, etc., etc.
Although -- consider this -- books, academic fees, etc. might total more than $1,000/year -- 1/12th of our total income. Yikes. Also, many schools fund at more like the $6,000/year level, which truly is not possible, no matter how frugal a person is.
I decided to apply to one largely unfunded program (UCF - who, by the way rejected me :) ), but mostly because of proximity, etc... I do respect the program though, and would have gone there for sure had I got in and not had any better options. BUT, I would only have gone there had they found me funding.
I also did apply to Notre Dame, and would very much consider going there even if I only received a tuition remission. I figure I can find a job that pays as much as a stipend.
So, I will sort of sign that pledge. I did apply to some "poorly funded" schools (the rest are all fully funded or 75%). But, I still wouldn't decide to matriculate anywhere unless it made financial sense to me. I agree with you, why spend money on a degree that will not pay for itself in the end? I don't want to be upset the entire time thinking about the debt or lack of money. I don't want to sacrifice other things later on in my life because I wanted a degree that I ended up regretting because it cost me so much. I mean, I had to take out $5000 in loans for undergrad and even paying that off pisses me off now!
But, I will tell you what else pisses me off, Columbia. I can't believe what they charged the good people on this blog just to apply to their school, I can't believe they charge late fees (seriously?), I can't believe they make good people pay tens of thousands of dollars for a degree that doesn't always pay for itself. I may be bold in making this statement, but it feels to me like they only want rich, Ivy League people to go to their school and I highly, highly resent that. It makes me want to puke!
So, rock on Seth. I agree almost 100%. I respect your need to protect people from regret later on and your contempt for programs that are charging instead of providing for their students. I will say too, that if every school was like Columbia, I would NEVER apply to ANY program.
My last coupe of years in grad school I just got my books from the library. No one else seemed to use it!
Chris,
Thank you for that question. The reason Chris Leslie-Hynan and I decided to set up the lowest-cost, shortest-turnaround, least-transportation-intensive one-on-one reading service in American literary history is that many, many writers are interested in spending between $80 and $335 now in order to substantially decrease their chances of spending more than $100,000 later. And I was happy -- personally thrilled -- to set up a non-viable commercial enterprise described by our attorney as "a labor of love or nothing" in order to help them do that. A law school friend called me a few days back to celebrate his recent raise: he makes around $300,000 a year now. We have the same number of years as members of the Bar and I could be doing the work he does now if I wanted to. My current salary as a doctoral student is $8,000, and I made well under $5,000 last year writing hundreds of pages of critical commentary on the writing samples and proposed application lists of dozens of younger writers. Our satisfaction rate was one shy of 100% (and that one unsatisfied customer I personally decided not to charge a dime) and we serve poets and writers from all across the country and even the world -- almost none of whom could afford to travel to New York City or San Francisco (more or less the only places where something like this is available in real-time), and certainly none of whom failed to see the difference between paying $500 to Sackett Street to sit in a large group of aspiring writers 1x/week for eight weeks and spending around half that to get one-on-one, intensive, time-sensitive attention from a collective of published Iowa Writers' Workshop graduates. And despite all that -- Do I sound ashamed to you? -- I nevertheless decided to reduce my role in this thing going forward (as will shortly be clear) merely to better avoid any hurt feelings amongst those whose ill-formed opinions I actually have zero respect for anyway. You can call this former public defender with $100,000+ of law school debt many things, but greedy or hypocritical will never be one of them, no.
S.
I have to jump to the defense of Seth's consulting business (ALC). I used it. Over a dozen pages of top quality critique from an eminently qualified individual. Worth 350 dollars? Who knows. Did it require 350 dollars worth of a very insightful person's time to create? Absolutely.
I paid $75 to the University of Minnesota to have them read my manuscript, and I'll get little more in return than a simple yes or no.
Seth is not making much money from ALC, I can promise you that, and when you compare it to how much time he spends helping us out for free (and how much time he has spent doing the same for the last few years) I think accusing him of anything malicious is absolutely idiotic.
We're in the middle of a conversation about paying tens of thousands of dollars to attend programs in the spirit of improving our art, and you complain about $350 for a direct, one-on-one, in-depth analysis of your entire manuscript?
Nobody can be pro-MFA and anti-Seth at the same time. It doesn't add up.
almost every one of us will have to work in addition to going to school...i have a wife and a child so even the top schools aren't enough to cover everything...which is no big deal, really...i don't expect them to...i tried to look at locations that have community colleges nearby or in the town so i could possibly, hopefully, adjunct some classes to enhance the stipend...i've been teaching between 6 and 7 classes a semester for a few years now, and doing my own work, and it's not all that rough...if not, i guess i'll hope there's a chili's in town and wait some tables...there's never a need to starve yourself...the tuition waivers and a few grand is an awesome deal, a deal most students never see, so i'll be happy to get anything to go to school...
just trying to stay positive, fo sho not tryin to rag on anyone!!
I am aware that I will probably get skewered for this, but this is how I feel.
The assumption that AWP's statistics are completely wrong seems a little precarious to me. Did I miss something here? Was there a scandal? Was this proven true? If so, why are they still published? I have turned to his statistical analysis for advice a few times, I even posted on TSE. But I'm a little put off by this cult notion that anything Seth Abramson/Father Time(?!) does not endorse makes it entirely wrong or dishonest/skewed. What does that say about the rest of the industry?
It may be idealistic of me but I do not and will not confine myself to a box because of money or lack there of. If I'm in love with a program that I believe will bring me the most benefit and it is funded-Thank ya, Jesus! However, if it isn't, but I'm dying to go, that doesn't make me stupid, or wrong. Maybe a little naive but maybe the debt is worth 2 years at your dream school with your favorite faculty. Maybe they'll be in debt and come back whining to this blog and try to scare prospective MFAers into making the same mistake they did. Or just maybe it'll work out for them in the end.
That being said, yes, yes Columbia's tuition is appalling.
I currently attend Portland State, and while it can be agreed that the department funding is utterly lousy, there are several ways to find money. The most ambitious students do seem to find funding, either through GAships offered in other departments, or various school-wide scholarships. I'm not saying it's ideal, but if someone loves a specific city/program, it is possible that secondary funding options exist there.
Okay, jeez, not to add to a plethora of (my own) postscripts, but for anyone curious: The one "unsatisfied customer" complained not about the work, which was (by all accounts) flawless, but that her consultation arrived in her in-box 72 hours late. This was about two months before application deadlines. --S.
Good on you for not charging her anyway, Seth. It wisely leaves you above the fray.
The only reason I even question whether it's worth $350 dollars is that would depend on how significant a sacrifice that sum is to the individual and on how difficult it would be for them to find a similar quality analysis of their work elsewhere. If you can afford it and you need it, it's definitely worth the $350.
In my case I had just moved cities and hadn't had time to really cultivate a support network of writers in my new town yet. Seth's service provided me with a good set of suggestions for improvement at a time when I hadn't yet found other ways to get that. I was one of those very satisfied customers he mentioned, so much so that I made it a point to register my satisfaction to Chris, Seth and the person who reviewed my portfolio at that time.
hell, if you applied to more than 5 or 6 schools, you paid more than 350 dollars for them to read your manuscript and for all or one, you don't get a damn thing in return, so if you don't like the cost, don't do it...i assume seth has to eat too, and 8 grand ain't shit to live on...
especially in madison where the housing market is no joke!
4MV,
I apologize -- that's a fair criticism, I slagged off on AWP without explaining that there's years of research behind my claim. I ought to have provided links. If you go to TSE and go to the bottom of the sidebar there, you'll see (for instance) that I exposed the AWP database of programs -- which AWP purported was complete -- as missing a minimum of 132 programs. It was in the context of this revelation that AWP admitted to me directly -- albeit, I'll say, graciously -- that their data has not been updated in a very long time, and some of it (their view)/much of it (my own) is inaccurate.
S.
Not AT ALL trying to get off topic on Seth's manifesto, which I loved, but I was just wondering about some people's favorite (and perhaps less known) anthologies. I ran across a great series, the Longman Anthology of World Literature, which has been rocking my world recently. Links below are to the BN pages, which show tables of contents.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Longman-Anthology-of-World-Literature/David-Damrosch/e/9780321202383/?itm=6&USRI=longman+anthology+of+world+literature
AND
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Longman-Anthology-of-World-Literature/e/9780321202376/?itm=7&USRI=longman+anthology+of+world+literature
Seth-Thank you for explaining, I will look into it.
On a completely separate note, I actually agree with Dreux on the whole consulting controversy. There are a handful of MFA graduates who charge for consulting and it does help. Why is that so wrong? Because he's advertising to a market?
If you applied to Wyoming and are a poet... what are you thinking now? Is is fair to say that the acceptances went out? I figure since there are about 3 spots, and we've heard from one, it's fair to say the other two aren't members of the blog community, but they have been notified... any thoughts?
Seth,
Raw nerves, here, clearly. Your personal debt/sacrifice aside, it seems to me a high price. Though I've no doubt people are willing to pay. Regardless, I appreciate the work and data compiled on this and your affiliate sites.
Chris,
Yes, raw nerves, no question.
S.
If I don't receive significant funding then I am not going. I decided that a long time ago. I've still got undergrad debt. I did make the choice to apply largely to programs that exist in affordable cities, which, for me, made sense.
If I am fortunate enough to receive an offer or two I will be sitting down with a calculator, trying to anticipate the financial realities. If the money isn't there then I will skip it and instead become more proactive about creating a non-academic writing community for myself and prodding myself along with occasional workshops. But that's just me, obviously.
I really appreciate the exchange here. And thank you, Seth for sharing your research/thoughts. Incidentally, does anyone know if anyone at Iowa's NWP receives full funding? Their website says they try to fund as many students as possible with half-time funding, but I have never been clear on whether there are any fully funded spots. And the NWP often does not get mentioned on the blogs in regard to funding. Anyone?
Dreaux, thanks for commenting on the ALC; I've been meaning to ask if anyone had used it. I was curious to hear what everyone thought of it, but I noticed that the ALC blog went down the same time Seth's blog did. I don't think $350 is a lot to have someone look over (isn't it like 20pp max) of poetry and give a complete critique of it, especially since you could spend way more than that on a "real" workshop and only get workshop time and no one-on-one time with the workshop leader. And especially when you're dealing with someone with Seth's competence, I'd say it's worth it. $350 is a give chunk of cash, but it's about the value.
Kati-Jane, my favorite anthology is Staying Alive, a poetry collection from Bloodaxe Books. it's got older poems and a lot of more recent stuff; a lot of people I had never heard of and bought their collections after reading.
wow. pardon typos.
Little Poet,
I sent in 40 pages of fiction. As I recall that was a 10 page overage, and I paid a total of 400 to have it reviewed (350 for the first 30, $5/page overage fee).
@ Seth: BTW, my point was in no way meant to suggest that you get rid of the emotion... I was just wondering if the pacing might be intriguingly accentuated if you paused a couple of times along the way to say, in a neutral tone, "XYZ is what you used to hear as the common wisdom on MFA programs, based on such-and-such logic" and then launch right back into the emotional arc of your original manifesto... Again, I spend too much time, perhaps, around my father (a lawyer) and knowing you are also a lawyer, I wondered if you might not be able to bring some of the waning and waxing energy of a passionate legal argument to your amazing manifesto. Again, just a suggestion. :)
It's not hypocritical to come down on poorly funded MFA programs while charging $350 for a manuscript review. $100,000 is not exactly $350. Besides, they are two mutually exclusive entities. I personally did not use the service, but it was more for financial reasons than anything else. $350 is a lot of money for me, and I went the free way, asking for friends, colleagues and online workshoppers to comment on my stories. Maybe it was a bad idea, but I made the choice as a consumer to do what I thought was best for me. What's best for me might not be best for someone else. I don't get the hullabaloo here. If you don't like it, don't use it.
It's not like the business is unethical either. In fact, it appears to be more ethical than most places I support. Shit, I'm pretty sure my shirt was made from some teenager who worked a fifteen hour shift and hasn't slept in five days. Go complain about that instead!
Sorry, I'm pretty sure there were a ton of logical fallacies with that argument that Mr. Abramson will catch and shake his head at. I just wanted to express how I "felt" ;)
And 4Mai, I didn't mean to say that anyone applying to Columbia is stupid or wrong, I'm sorry if that's how that came off. I'm just mad that a school with the ability to fund students doesn't. And they take unfunded to the next level. It's them, not you :)
Pardon my French:
Fuck Columbia. The entire school, not just the MFA. I live in NY and most people I meet from Columbia really suck. Not only that, it has the clear reputation of being the Ivy that accepts the rich and famous regardless of their level of academic accomplishment.
I think you'd be hard pressed to come up with a school that is more homogeneous and attended by more obnoxious snobs than Columbia.
But a special fuck you is reserved for their MFA program.
i will not proclaim to know much of anything about columbia, don't know anyone who attended, only that it costs a fair amount to go there...that being said, they have never HAD to offer money to people...because they've never been called on it, because of name value alone people will go, why would they change it? because it's the nice thing to do? maybe their rankings will continue to drop over time, but i think those who can afford (and those who can't) to go there will continue to do so b/c of the prestige factor...for them, if it ain't broke, why fix it? things might change, or might not, but i suppose they won't do anything about this until the numbers involved in the program hit a bigtime low, but i doubt this occurs...
Oh, Dreux, all that H8 can't be good for your blood pressure.
second that. I pulled a mental middle finger in thir direction when I first saw a $100 app. fee.
I did the same to Syracuse who charges $75 for app. fee. At least they're funded.
Kaybay-I'm sorry that you took my comment personally, it definitely wasn't directed at you. Just in general.
I guess threw Columbia in there because I was agreeing with you and everyone else on the funding situation. I have specific animosity for this school because it was my number 1 choice and in so many ways still is, but I know that if I get into Columbia and, well, ANY WHERE ELSE, I'm going with any where else. It's tuition just screams, exclusivity to me, and not in the "we want smart and driven students" way. Sensibility be damned, you're paying, what, 50-60 grand? There are people in this world who don't make that much in a year. Not too mention that I heard that their MFA program has a very homogenous culture.
In many ways, I'm with Seth's idea, but I'm not. Hell, I think unfunded grad school in general should die, period. But I believe I was reacting to the black/white stance that everyone is taking. I think there is some gray area to toy with.
Or maybe I'm flakey.
I never ever considered Columbia for so many reasons, but when I heard about the app fee, the late fees, and the stupid, weird requirements from other applicants, I did kind of say "fuck you" and flip the mental bird. You know, to myself of course, but I was insulted and I didn't even pay the money. It's like a celebrity charging money for an autograph. Like, I'm going to pay some schlub for their signature. I don't know, totally incomparable, but same feeling, lol...
kaybay, love the analogy of the celeb autograph!
LA Swede - Fuck you! :P
4Mai - I hear ya, I'm definitely a "gray thinker" most of the time. I have to agree though, the program screams snob. Fuck yeah. Sorry, I threw that last f* yeah just for the fun of it.
And LA, I hope you know I'm kidding, hehe
it's kool and the gang baby!
Ok, not to defend Columbia, butttt : Running a school in NYC is expensive. Much more expensive than running a school in some little town in the middle of nowhere. Everything costs more. This doesn't just apply to the applicant, but to the school as well. The $100 application fee is set by the graduate school, not the MFA program. It is in line with the fees of other NYC schools. They're not just greedily eating up your money and then refusing to fund. I have to remind myself that MFA applicants (including myself) are not often experts in economics.
well, i'm sure Columbia isn't hurting for money...i assume they make around 20,000 just from mfa applicants alone, nevermind other disciplines...i don't have the exact figures here in front of me...but that's a fair amount...and ole miss, who funds students (although they prolly fit in that "middle of nowhere" description), only charges, what, 25 bucks?
Ashley, I have to respectfully disagree in that Columbia has a ton of money in their English department (out of my ass here, but isn't it one of the richest programs in the country?) I'm not saying that they're going to the Bahamas with the money, but I do wonder why the other private schools can offer funding. I mean, Notre Dame's may not be ideal, but it's a lot better! Look at Cornell and Brown. I guess what I'm saying, I highly doubt that they don't have the resources. I don't know why they're not funding their students, but they definitely, definitely can, the expense of NYC aside.
Also, one great thing about a free market is that consumers decide what's best for them and businesses suffer for not meeting those needs. I see Columbia as a victim of their bad business practices. They should fail for that. Little old Alabama and UT Austin should be rewarded for their good business practices. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me whether it's expensive in NYC, that's just kind of how the snow blows, sucks for Columbia. ha ha.
How's that for a little MFA economics?? :P
God, I'm emoticon crazy tonight!
I don't know. The lowest application fee I paid was $35, with most between $50-$75. I'm not just talking about the costs of somebody looking over applications. The operations of a school include everything from faculty (who at Columbia surely make a pretty penny) to building operations costs to office staffing and all the way around again.
Can you imagine the amount of money Columbia brings in through their patrons and foundation accounts? They've probably got reserves bigger than some small countries. It's a complete cash cow.
check this:
Encyclopedia > Columbia University
Columbia University in the City of New York
Motto: In lumine Tuo videbimus lumen (Latin)
Motto in English: In Thy light shall we see light (a paraphrase of Psalms 36:9)
Established: 1754
Type: Private
Endowment: US $7.15 Billion[1]
do you see that endowment...hello!!!
@Brandi
Big congrats on Dzanc's! That is really cool.
Also, Cornell and Brown admit 8 and 14 per year respectively. Columbia accepts NINETY. There is no contest here. Can you imagine how much it would cost to fully fund 90 people per YEAR? There can't be that many undergraduate courses in comp or that much money for. Columbia DOES offer some funding and scholarships for some students, but unless they starts accepting only 10% of the people that it is now taking... There is no way they can fund the entire class like you've suggested.
so stop taking 90...easy fix...they would be right up there with brown and cornell regarding desire to attend by us po' folk if they only took a few...
That's just the thing--they're making a choice. They could continue take 90 and fund a negligible amount and take in that many thousands of dollars to add to their reserves--or they could make a commitment to fund a more select group of writers. But, in the words of the great Bobby Brown, it's their prerogative.
but they won't do that because 70 out of that 90 are paying the school millions to attend...adding to that 7.15 billion...suckers...
just kidding...to all columbia applicants, i hope you get in if it's where you want to go...power to you...and a shitload of debt
So why should every single MFA program strive for the exact same thing? A large class causes problems but also has some huge benefits.
Yes, but imagine if they limited their numbers and accepted 8-10. Everyone and their mother's hairdresser would apply there. Except for Dreux, because he thinks Columbia should go fuck itself, but a lot of people would. I don't think I would either, but I don't want to live in NYC, too big... anyway, they would go waaaay up in the rankings and they would graduate better writers (I know that's a controversial statement, but I think the more selective they are, the better the results will be). I don't see why they need to have 90 people in their program, except to steal... er, take, their money. They need a paradigm shift!
i meant that 70 out of 90 (probably a lowball number) are taking out incredible loans to pay millions...all 90 are paying millions...
I hate to say this, but the way they are currently operating is not working. Apps are down and continuing to decline. So, they need to change something. Looks to me like it's either the program size or the amount of people they fund. Maybe cut the 90 number in half? Provide more tuition remission? Fully fund some and not others? Iowa is a large program with good funding. It works for them.
Good discussion by the way :)
Columbia will never decrease the size of their incoming class -- because they'd have to let a lot of faculty and staff go to do so, and they're not going to do that so long as it's only the students who are suffering from (indirectly) their continued presence. Columbia's MFA is a lumbering, shambling mass of inequity, a baby-crib for the rich, that will die a long and ugly death over the next twenty-five years. But yes, for what it's worth, if Iowa can admit and fully fund 50 students each year -- with an endowment way under 1 billion -- Columbia, with its 7.15 billion endowment, could find a goddamn way to fund 90 students. Columbia is an enormous ninety-foot middle finger in the middle of the national MFA landscape. Nobody does so little for students with so much (money).
Other than that I have no opinion.
S.
@Seth
I am constantly amazed by your dedication, astute observation, and intelligence. Even your posts on this niche blog are ridiculously articulate and helpful.
While reading your manifesto, I applauded. Personally, I cannot find any fault whatsoever in your sentiments. I say, “Right on, Seth.”
But if one were to play devil’s advocate, I think there are a couple of arguments worth thinking about. I’m providing these arguments not to debate, and certainly not to criticize, but merely to express some opposing viewpoints that cannot be easily dismissed. I’m not even saying these are my views, but rather, these are arguments I could foresee people expressing or feeling.
The artist should starve: The artist does not need to starve for the sake of their art. I think you clearly shattered that myth, but the artist needs to starve if they are not producing anything worthy of monetary value. Most non-artists do not like their jobs, but they do get paid. Some get paid extremely well. These people are sacrificing their “wants” for their “needs.” Many artists, if not all artists, are sacrificing their “needs” for their “wants.” If that is their decision, then good, but they must face the consequences. While other people buy houses and SUVs and hate their cubicle enclaves, the artist rents a mouse hole, drives a shit car, and cherishes their dream. We, as artists, should not view fully funded MFA programs as societal imperatives, but rather, we should view them as charities for the arts. Without knowing the monetary value of student teachers for a university, how much of a student/artist’s tuition and funding is derived from public funding? How many taxpayers, most of whom dislike their jobs, should have to pay for someone else’s dream? If the artist suffers without funding, then the artist must find a way to make money from their art or live a life without it. At the very least, that person should not complain about the lack of fully funded handouts.
Continued in next post:
Cont’d
2. The MFA as a credential: It is, of course, true that the MFA means nothing to the “real” world, but does the MFA increase a person’s chances of earning a living as an artist? Meaning, does an MFA from Iowa increases a writer’s chance of landing a book deal or becoming a teacher? Let’s presume that an MFA from Iowa does increase a writer’s chance of landing a book deal from .0001% to .001%. Can we then assume that the MFA from Iowa has significant meaning as a credential? If so, perhaps the MFA degree is not to blame for the uncertainty, but rather the flood of MFA programs and graduates. Maybe most MFA grads aren’t good enough for a book deal. Maybe they don’t have a good enough idea or have the dedication to work as a writer. Thus, perhaps the reason why the MFA is not a “real” credential is because too many people are able to get them. If there were only one MFA program in the world called Writer University, and every year they accepted 20 writers, and once a person finished from Writer University they were 100% guaranteed a life of writing or teaching for money, would that not be better than the current system in some ways? Everyone would have one shot at getting into an MFA program, thousands would apply, and Writer University would only accept 20 of them. If you don’t get in, do something else with your life or write on your own. That seems harsh and unpopular, but isn’t the world of publishing and tenured professorships equally harsh if not harsher? Would that not be a good lesson to learn for newbie writers? Shouldn’t some people know the odds beforehand and not waste two to four years of their lives earning a degree they will never use regardless of funding? In other words, we want more fully funded programs because it’s awful to see “not-so-good” writers accrue debt for a dead dream. If that same “not-so-good” writer has the dedication to do it on their own, they are the type of person with the moxie and resiliency to succeed as writers. The “not-so-good” writer would tell Writer University to go fuck itself and continue writing and perhaps succeed well beyond Writer University’s graduates. So instead of more fully funded programs, maybe we need more tough love. Perhaps there are too many people who are encouraged with the current system. Perhaps they need to learn this tough lesson: It is not enough to want to be a writer, you must want to write. The person who wants to write has what it takes, while the person who merely identifies with the role of a writer does not. Thus, perhaps a better manifesto would be, “Don’t Write Unless You Enjoy It, Otherwise You Might Kill Yourself.”
It’s not that I fully agree with these opposing viewpoints, but I do think there’s something there to think about. I agree with Seth that the current MFA system or the perception of the MFA system has some problems, but I’m not positive that the solution is to increase the number of fully funded programs. The only beneficial thing I know for sure is having people like Seth inform MFA applicants of the travails and uncertainties of the degree.
I was under the impression that Columbia accepted 90 students BECAUSE their applications were down. Not too mention that I'm sure a lot of people in return turn down their offer because of the tuition. So hell, maybe they're technically accepting 95 or 115?
Not too mention that 90 is up from the 60 acceptances from 1-2 years ago.
AB, but you figure the money they make on MFA Creative writing apps alone at $100 plus the what, $33k a year tuition per 90 admitted students, we're talking well into a million bucks just right there with CW students. Then compound that with the plethora of other undergrad and grad programs there? I don't think there's any other way description for that besides cash cow.
Also, just because a city may be podunk, or in a small cheap town doesn't cut that much into the expenses. All things considered, something else you brought up is worth further discussion. Columbia may arguably have a great staff, which obviously makes a killing, but again, this is Columbia's prerogative and they may deem it necessary to pay exorbitant amounts of money to professors, but that's their deal.
This is al kind of cyclical because at the end of the day it's clear that as far as Columbia is concerned they are trying to attract a certain sect of society. That's the whole argument behind even trying to go to Columbia. I don't know why anyone would look at a list of so many fully, not to mention at least HALF-fully funded MFA programs and even think twice about Columbia. Especially when IOWA, the number one MFA choice is now fully funded. There's just clearly that Ivy pomp that they don't want to give up. So fuck em.
Accepting 8-10 people into a program in New York City isn't a very good idea as far as I'm concerned.
The program at Iowa is half the size and is able to be fully funded because of the prestige that the program has. Just because it works for Iowa does not mean it will work for another school; there are too many extraneous factors.
If things get really bad for Columbia, sure, they'll get in there and change some things... But I don't see the number of people in NYC who want to write with money to burn or willing to take on debt disappearing just yet.
@4mai,
no offense, but can you PLEASE write the word "to" correctly? It's getting a bit ridiculous :P
Funding 90 students at a university like Columbia is not that big a deal. Harvard had announced plans to make undergraduate education essentially free for anyone that gets in...until the recent recession (and corresponding reduction in endowment) changed the university's plans.
Anyway, I generally consider any manifesto to be a bit polemic, and that can be useful in generating discussion, argument, possibly change. To that end, I think Seth's piece is very useful. Personally, I am not as extreme in my belief (that unfunded MFA programs are worthless or pernicious) but do agree that for most people and institutions it makes sense to organize the programs around funded spots.
The difference between MFA (and many arts or purely academic) versus professional programs is one of expected value of future income. While it is possible (though very rare) to make a lot of money as a literary writer, the average expected income is very low, and I think Seth is absolutely right that this may create a great burden for many prospective students. In my opinion, younger students in particular might not fully realize the implications of leaving graduate school with an additional $60K in debt (that needs to be repaid out of post-tax income) and making only $20K+/yr or whatever.
Anyway, long story short, I've applied to mostly fully-funded programs but also some programs such as Columbia. For the latter category, I intend to attend only if they offer me funding. In fact, I wrote in my personal statement that my goal is to finance the degree through some combination of fellowship and assistantship just so that it was clear.
Anyway, I can see why people would chose non-funded programs for a whole host of reasons. And wish everyone the best of luck in getting in and the best of experiences in whatever programs they chose!
Cheers!
I'm asking this question to anyone who knows, but what kind of quality is coming out of Columbia? I get the feeling that this is a haven for trust fund babies who want to feel creative for two years and act like they're something special. Are there a lot of talented writers coming out of their program recently?
@ Poet-Sorry.
PS: I disagree with the Ivy pomp characterization (for the record, I have no affiliation with Columbia) and believe it is simply a matter of characterization. Most ivy league schools are not really cash cows, operating at a budget in excess of their aggregate collections for tuition and housing each year, the supplemental amount funded by interest from the endowment. At least that is my understanding. Obviously, it may vary from year to year and school to school.
the little poet who could said,
If you think that brining in 1 million in tuition makes them a cash cow, I'm not sure you know how much it costs to pay faculty, staff, operating and building costs, because it is a hell of a lot more than that. By suggesting that they cut their faculty, you're pretty much tearing down what makes Columbia Columbia. Everybody is proposing some really big changes here without anything to back it up. I mean, it's like we're kids trying to help money and daddy pay over the morgage. I mean, all of this is a hell of a lot more complicated than we are making it sound.
A couple of points:
As one of my old profs told me, TAs, teaching 1-2 classes a semester are cheap labor for universities, and often teaching the comp classes. The classes the profs don't want to teach, unless they're rhetoric profs.
MFAs are also expected by colleges if you want to teach. At 4 year colleges you also need an extensive publishing record or, preferably, a book (or two!). From my experience in talking to CW profs, many of whom graduated from IWW, Iowa seems to the only place you can get an academic job without a long publication history.
That's the point, AB: it doesn't JUST work for Iowa; it works for how many MFAs? LOADS of them. NYC may be expensive to live in, but there are some with high funding that are in just as expensive places (I'm thinking of Irvine for one). Sure, there are extraneous factors, and location MAY play a small role in these things, and NO, I'm not an economist. But it says something very negative of some place that charges you for late documents, and if I recall it's not just a small fee, when almost everyone else will take them regardless, when you make a killing off of applications alone, which, as Tom notes in his book, is funds which are meant to be for paying for the process itself. I can guarantee you it doesn't cost them 100$ an app to process that shit.
Why is there any sympathy for Columbia? Honestly, why?
I think they need that many faculty for the amount of students they have. Sooooo, easy fix here, cut the numbers and cut the faculty. Fund the students. Fund the students. Fund the students.
No, there are not loads of MFA programs that are able to fund 100 students at a time. Iowa is the only one that I am aware of.
I think a better question is: Why does anyone have it in for Columbia? Are they the only school that doesn't fund? Why does everyone have some personal vendetta against this school? Just don't apply.
AB, I was using that as an example of one of the exponents to their profit. Obviously it takes more than that. This is because if you group the english dept. together (which you can since the faculty teach (at least most of them) not just MFA but grad. classes as well, and some maybe even some undergrad), then you can bet your ass their salaries are coming from the tuition of undergrads and grads, not JUST mfa students. It was just one of the MANY ways they milk people.
@ Kaybay
Off the top of my head: Karen Russell went to Columbia.
@ Ashley
Good points about the operating budget of a college. I went to a college that had an endowment of a little over a billion for a student body of 1,400 or so. Financial aid was a priority for the school - almost everyone received some form of aid. Columbia has a much larger endowment but it's also a much, much larger school and has many other considerations to think about before coming to the wants and needs of a creative writing program. But with that said, I think Columbia can do more than what it's already doing - which isn't much. At this point, you can't really compare Columbia to the other ivy league schools financially (or even morally). I know for a fact that Columbia has admitted students that barely graduated high school and I know for a fact that almost every other ivy does a better job of funding its undergraduate and graduate students. Other ivy league institutions have publicly stated that they are interested in bridging the socio-economic divides of their student populations, but it seems like Columbia is just propagating elitism.
Also,
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I remember reading somewhere that the reason funding was even more complicated at Columbia was because students couldn't teach due to the fact that the program wasn't really part of the English dept. Is this old info?
I was saying loads of schools fund, indluding ones in expensive cities; therefore, logically, you cannot use location as an argument for cost and say that it would hurt them to cut admissions.
Did you see that endowment amount? I almost shit a brick!
Well Ashley,
I can admit that I am unhappy with Columbia for selfish reasons. I actually want to go there! Despite all of my previous comments, I would still attend if given the chance. And there goes 100 grand, just like that. It's this weird feeling of staring down the barrel of a shotgun.
I already mentioned my reasons to not like Columbia (and I don't mean that in a snarky way, I just don't want to type it out again). I do agree with you that if you don't like it, don't apply. I did not apply, by the way. But, the fact that their applications are down suggests a weakness. It's like a grocery store losing customers because they charge $5 for a tomato while the competition charges $.50. The loss is reflective of a weakness. If the expensive store wants to compete, they'll need to lower prices, if not, they'll go out of business. I wonder how long Columbia will last. Maybe there's enough wealth to sustain it and maybe they're perfectly happy with doing things the way they are doing them, but I agree with Seth, they are like one big middle finger in the MFA world.
Kaybay, the world is full of wealthy high school slackers. I'm sure Columbia will still be around for years to come : - )
i think the big question is why one would want to go there...with all the issues, people still say, "well, it's columbia" like that is supposed to make some difference when you're broke for life...if we can only throw out a few major writers who went there, how great of a job are they doing? the workshops must be a fucking nightmare...
WT, that's part of what I was trying to say about the elitist "agenda." By doing this, and not just for MFAs but all admittees, they keep the people coming who they want; the rich and dumb or just plain dumb.
AB, it's not juat Columbia that gets a hammering, but it seems to be the easiest target, since it's tuition is surely the highest of all MFA programs that aren't funded. It's a archetype of what you shouldn't want from an MFA. To be $100k in debt after 2 years...
Unless the .5 tomatoes are at Walmart and covered in whatever that greasy glaze is they put over produce.
PS, can this argument please happen next year, too? I love historical debate.
i'm totally digging that my profane use of ellipses is creeping into several posts...
Little poet - can you please use "its" properly? :P
Sorry, I had to say it!!!
DAMMIT kaybay I knew someone would catch me right after I called grammar on someone!
Little poet, I got nothing against you, but I had to burn you for what you said to 4Mai, I just had to, haha
LOL :)
I'm going to revise my last comment. There are plenty of hardworking and deserving people at Columbia too. I really have more of a problem with the institution itself vs. the majority of the people there (my undergrad was actually associated with Columbia for several professional programs) but it's the entitled, spoiled brats who simply got in b/c daddy donated $XXX that ruins the image for everyone. Columbia really needs to think about people. In a recession, colleges and universities with money can turn the tables on their public image dramatically. Many private liberal arts colleges are getting record #s of applications because they provide better funding than many public institutions (yeah, I know this is a diff. game than grad programs but still . . . )
i'm liking kaybay more and more...where did you apply again?
i got:
boise st.
brown
cornell
columbia (just kidding)
michigan
mississippi
notre dame
the 'cuse
wisconsin
it was deserved. i would've done the same.
I would love to have a representative of Columbia comment within the next 10-20 posts.
MFA CW Death Match!!!
congrats gancho!
like everyone here I am spending way too much time reading this blog! it was all sparked my an email from UCSD... I was rejected... Until their email i wasn't even worrying about anything!
Hehehe. Nice, KB. None of the typos bother me. I just imagine you all furiously typing your responses, passionate and trying to beat the next swarm of comments. No need for explanation. ;-)
Unknown number phone call in the middle of TJ Maxx today. Dropped everything in my arms and tore through my purse for nothing. That telemarketer got a really excited "Hello?!" and a subsequent insulting hang-up. This is not bringing out the best in me.
I've only ever seen a couple people who have been to columbia or attended comment blatantly, but then a again, we can be a hostile bunch when we get our blood pressure up.
LA - I applied to:
Florida
Florida State
Central Florida (poop on them)
Vanderbilt
Greensboro
McNeese State
Alabama
Cornell
Syracuse
Iowa
Notre Dame
Btw, I've been meaning to ask you, you mentioned ending last year on a wicked diatribe. What did you say??? I'm so nosy.
@ kaybay-- the problem with the grocery store analogy is the idea of quality. I'd go to a grocery store charging $5 for a tomato if it would be delicious and I was worried the $0.50 would be rotten. If Columbia proved its quality was extraordinary in comparison with every other program (which is what they're claiming, essentially) then their expectation-- people will pay to come-- is not far from the mark. However, as many have pointed out, a degree from Columbia does not make publication or a job in the field certain. So, they'll rest on their laurels or pick a new slogan... I don't see them biting the dust as soon as everyone else, it seems.
PS- Didn't apply. Though I have two cousins (not wealthy) who attended for undergrad. I need funding, myself.
Damn it, I'm a writer, not an editor!
No really, I don't mind being corrected on grammar. As Courtney mentioned, I am one of those people who types up a blog post with half a mind. Technical writing is something I have to work on and hope to work on if I am admitted anywhere. Sure, Poet could have been more tactful. My moniker in the same sentence as "ridiculous" did set off a stream of fireworks that I care not to relive, but a mistake is a mistake is a mistake. All I can do is note it and do better next time.
Riccardo - I was rejected from UCF last week, so I feel your pain, brother! Keep hoping for the best!
Courtney,
Make a list of all the people you can be an a-hole (i.e. archenemies, people you don't really care about, noisy neighbors Or people that will forgive you after an outburst). Trust me, there is nothing more therapeutic than unloading mountains of shit on other people.
Alternatively, collect things you don't really care about and have a baseball bat nearby.
Gena, you're right, it was a weak analogy. I do wonder though, whether the quality of instruction at Columbia is better than, say Cornell. If everyone came out of Columbia with a book deal and wrote like Hemingway, maybe the extra expense would be worth it. But honestly, I think the Columbia is like paying $5 for the same tomato.
4mai,
sorry; I DID say IT was ridiculous, though--the grammar, of course, and not YOU, personally.
It comes with having worked with college freshmen writing papers for three years. I swear texting is destroying America's ability to write.
That and Bill O'Reilly.
i love you guys.
I have this strange feeling that Bill O'Reilly loves Columbia University, lol.
kb
i can't recall word for word, but, after congrats for all who got in, i blew up in an insanely profane rant about the schools, my writing, the selection process, i don't know, anything i could think of to blow up at...it was silly, but fuck it, i was superpissed, so i did it...i also swore to never get on here again 'cause of all the hope brought on before the crushing weight of reality...but i am a liar, what can i say? it was an ugly scene, and with possibly receiving 8 reject letters this time around as opposed to 6, i wouldn't do it again;)
i love everyone too much for that!!
was wondering too, any fellow smokers on here...i know i've seen talk from the quitters (!!), but anyone hanging on to the habit b/c cigarettes are cool?!?
The little poet,
Grammar is dead : - ) Take a look at an issue of the New Yorker and have a red pen ready. It seems like folks are a lot more casual about missing commas, ambiguous pronouns, and incomplete sentences than they were back in the day.
LAswede: cigarrettes are the shit.
Just kidding, but I smoke when I'm at work. Only 2 or 3 a day max. Apparently it's little enough because my fiance says she never smells it on me, but I do wear a uniform at work that she never is near me when I'm wearing.
I used to smoke cloves until that new law came out; interesting because you can order them cheaper straight from Djarum that you could buy them here before. Been too lazy to drop enough money in one go for a carton. Then I would have to embrace the fact that I will smoke all of it eventually
LASwede,
I used to be a regular smoker but after repeated attempts at quitting completely, I've reached a comprise - only when the need is truly great. In other words, I'll easily go through a pack when I'm stressed, pissed or wanting to really strike up a conversation with a cute smoker outside of a bar/restaurant/club/gallery etc.
B & H is my poison - yeah, I smoke old lady cigs.
WT,
grammar is not dead dammit! So depressing...
I just want to mention, in regards to Seth's "death to non-fully funded programs" opinion, that those of us in CNF would be in serious trouble if that were to happen. There are so few fully funded programs that offer the genre, you can probably count them on one hand. So, that pushes an applicant like me to apply to some not fully but at least partially funded programs.
However, I personally would not go to any of the unfunded California or New York programs despite their good CNF reputations because I'm not willing to go with no funding. I do realize I may have to put some of my own money out, but I also wouldn't go more than $20,000 in debt for it (if that). Personally, my undergrad loans aren't too bad, so it wouldn't be a huge deal to take on a little more debt.
Anyway, as it has been said, there will always be people in the position to go to less than fully funded (and even not at all funded) programs, but I do agree that in an ideal world they all would be and that their lack of funding will eventually push them way down in the rankings. But the few of us in CNF are really limited in our options of fully funded programs...at least until more of them start picking up the genre.
20 comments away from 1k again; amazing
Poet (ha, your name keeps getting short and shorter. Next time I'm calling you "P") - grammar is definitely not being taught with as much fervor as it should. And if you think it's bad with freshmen, try teaching high school. The little buggers can't even spell! One of my students asked me the other day what "intellectual" meant. Damn it, child! I chugged the damn dictionary at his ass.
My teachers focused far too much on "feeling" and "emotion" and "self-esteem" than teaching skills. I know very little about grammar and most of what I know is self-taught from reading. Just the trend of education. It's sad, kids need to learn skills so that when they can think for themselves, they have the proper foundation to do so. Otherwise, they're just full of shit, and most people my age and under are just that.
GRAMMAR IS DEAD AND BLOGS KILLED IT!
I actually purchased 'Grammar For Dummies' back during the summer. I was astounded at how confused I became around the capitalization chapter. Wow...
I'm going to go drink now.
kaybay, you're right, and it's depressing as hell. This is why I abhor teaching degrees; I think it forces teachers to spend wreckless hours learning bullshit "skills" than learning what they are actually going to teach. At my college, you always knew the Eng. ed. majors because they were the dumbasses of the class who spent the last ed. class period learning how to use some new teaching technology, when they could have bee learning about Shakespeare. It make me want to punch a wall when a kid would tell me "my high school teacher just said put the comma where it sounds right." Those lazy lazy bastards.
damn my own grammar errors. from here on out; no more proofing my blog comments.
...including the improper use of semicolons...
@Kaybay,
I remember arguing with my AP English teacher because she didn't think "steveadore" was a real word. She told me to get the dictionary and look it up. It wasn't there. I told her that her dictionary sucked and used my lunch break to prove her wrong. The next day, she broke the high stool she was sitting on (it actually broke). The room was silent except for me.
Here’s my take on getting an MFA in creative writing:
While an MFA does not guarantee a job (many degrees in the humanities do not--including phDs in this market), I can't see it hurting anyone's job prospects! Goodness!
I do know of people with MFAs that landed four-year college teaching jobs after getting their MFAs. Of course, they had published books, but even so, I can't believe that an additional degree is such a bad thing.
And yes, people do sometimes teach at prep schools with MFAs or even land editorial jobs or work for publishing companies! I refuse to believe that the degree has zero value in terms of landing a job. Yes, limited value for some people, but not zero. Come on! I mean think about it logically, if two people are applying for a job in a college administration (just for example) and they’re both qualified applicants with similar work histories, but one has an MFA and one just has BA, I refuse to believe that the MFA candidate will not have a slight edge, all else being equal.
While we can all agree that the main reason to get an MFA is to have time to write and to be part of a workshop environment, I don’t think it’s such a radical decision as long as you’re not accumulating debt or neglecting your starving children.
I’m not banking on this degree giving me a job, but I’m certainly not going to go in with the attitude that I’m somehow doomed to a life of poverty by entering one of these programs (I am, of course, hoping for full funding) or assuming that there is absolutely no value of such a degree in terms of getting a job in the future if for nothing more than networking purposes.
Others might call me foolish, but here’s the way I look at it:
--I’ll be doing something I’m passionate about.
--I’ll the time to pursue my passion (how many people can say this?)
--I’ll learn from writers and scholars.
--I’ll be part of a wonderful community somewhere.
--I’ll be relocating somewhere new, which is always exciting.
--And it’s only 2-3 years (I’m in my early 20s), which is not say that I’m glib about it at all, but to suggest that there are always possibilities if this adventure does not lead me to a career. It’s becoming increasingly common for people to have multiple graduate degrees today anyways.
Seth, you are the undisputed tech-enabled demi-god of the MFA-o-sphere, but what's this crap about New York media elites dumping their martinis on the poor midwest from our first class cabins? Were you having a Sarah Palin fantasy as you were typing? Sorry buddy, much respect, much much respect, but still I must thee call.
i absolutely do not want to bash anyone on here who teaches at the high school level or lower, but any degree that has the attachment of education on it isn't worth shit (as in english education as opposed to just english)...i can say this because i have one...70 percent of the degree specific classes one takes deal with classroom management, not the actual subject...as i've stated before, i teach at a community college right now, and the general abilities of these kids are abysmal...i have also taught at grambling state u. and the university of louisiana at monroe and the students at each of these schools were just as bad...of course, i'm sure it starts at the bottom, 1st grade and such, and doesn't get any better...that and the fact that the only book in most of these kids' homes is the bible...i'm all for mythology but come on...
Oh my God, I just had this exact conversation with an English teacher at my school. Teaching degrees are about "learning styles" and "graphic organizers" and which hand gestures students should use to indicate they need to use the GDamned bathroom. They're about utilizing technology and bell ringers and how to use worksheets effectively. What about the content? The teacher I work with was sure that this is some conspiracy to dumb down the masses so they're easier to manipulate. I could go on about this forever, but what it boils down to for me is that we have to raise our *intellectual* standards. Period. I don't care what parents and education PhD's say. That means emphasizing content over "procedure."
Has anybody who applied to UCSD not heard anything yet? My friend was just rejected and on the acceptance tracker blog, somebody said they got in.
Do you all notice that NO ONE wants to teach high school, that everyone (me included) wants to teach at the college level? That's because you teach content to college students. You baby sit high schoolers.
WT - Karma :)
Aaaand there was more to that comment, but it seems to have disapeared. My computer is haunted.
kaybay, i'm glad someone agrees with me. It's more depressing because I don't have an education degree, and thus, thanks to the fucking NCLB program, I basically can't get a job teaching high school in the state of SC, even though my ACTUAL qualifications experience wise I guarantee are over most of the high school teachers in this state. I would much rather make less than what I do now (I would make way less) and be doing something I love and trying to help at least a little.
Le Tigre,
I agree with much of what you say. The MFA is really what you make of it (as with any degree). Do all philosophy majors work at Wal-Mart? No. Why? Because people acquire skills and experience in many ways both inside and outside the classroom that are often "hidden" from employers and the general public. It's up to the individual to emphasize what isn't readily apparent. For writers, the payoff may not materialize as a book right after graduation or even after many years (or ever), but that doesn't mean there wasn't anything gained that can be applied to work, life and creative pursuits. As Seth pointed out, for some, an MFA is a way of figuring out if you really want to be a writer, if you have what it takes to continue on the path. And if you do continue, a program might help you discover what kind of writer you'd really like to become. And those things are definitely valuable.
Kaybay,
Metal chair
not that I would "love" to teach HS; i would rather do college; just saying.
this is just to say-
-I am the one-thousanth comment!
Ok, I joked that this blog was becoming OK! Magazine a few days ago, but it's seriously out of control today. I feel like I am reading the comments on a celebrity blog. There is a lot of negativity on here: putting down schools, putting down the youth of the USA, putting down teaching/teachers, putting down all of Seth's work, putting down republicans, putting down each other... What the hell is going on? Am I overreacting because I'm still hella sick and have been sitting around for 3 days doing nothing? Or is there some serious BS flying all over the place?
I love you all, I just don't like the recent vibe.
you're overreacting!!
is it talking shit when you are telling the truth?
P - I understand. This is why education needs to change. It has nothing to do with giving teachers more money or giving schools more money or training teachers more. It has to do with quality. If high schools retained quality teachers like you who were (hate to say this) allowed to fail their students for poor performance, our entire society would benefit. And by quality teachers, I mean teachers with knowledge, passion, and elocution.
Honestly, what it boils down to is a lack of respect for our *children*, as strange as it sounds. We think they are incapable of performing at a high level, so we treat them like morons. Our children are better than that. I believe it! Can I get an amen!
WT - ouch!
Ashley,
Rainbows . . . Unicorns . . . Unicorns Sliding Down Rainbows . . . Gnome Dance Fest . . . Care Bear STARE!
Okay, that should lighten up the vibe a little.
LAswede,
Opinions do not equal truth and there is no reason to be malicious.
Thanks, WanderingTree. You're the best!
...and the NCLB problem that was mentioned has got to be considered one of, if not number one, the main issues...when the passing of standardized tests results in federal funds, we have a slight problem...when individual states get to SET that standard themselves, we have a gargantuan roadblock to education b/c the easiest solution to get more money is too obvious to even state here.
opinions my ass...if you do not teach at the high school or college level, you don't have a clue about what you are talking about...if you do, pull your head out of the sand...every teacher on this board has the same complaint...i would assume there to be some grain of truth involved
Post a Comment