PhDs and Social Class

There is what I think is an interesting and important string emerging over at D. Hawhee's blog. What I like about strings like this one is not only that and when they elicit comments, but that and when the discussion spins off into other blogs and sites. (Clancy gave a nice talk about this in CCCChicago.)

So in the spirit of that kind of spinning-off, I have a few questions to throw into the convo. I'm going to use the term GTE (Golden Ticket Educated) instead of Ivy Educated to cover schools like Stanford and Berkley in addition to Ivy League schools.

=> Is the distribution of non-GTE scholar-educators into the "higher" tiers a worthwhile goal?

=> Is the distribution of GTE scholar-educators into the "lower" tiers a worthwhile goal? (I ask this because of my recent findings that many GTE scholars still have no teaching experience.)

=> What are some tactics for disrupting the ongoing circulation of GTE-amorous hiring practices if and when they are seen to be counter-productive at an institution? (Here I'm thinking of my former institution, which truly suffered from this practice.)

=> Can something transferable and tangible be said about holding a PhD in the humanities and designations of social class? Is this inextricably tied to employment in the years after getting the PhD?

=> Can it be said anymore that GTE is simply a high-status marker within the academy, particularly when it seems increasingly the case that many schools will not look at job applicants with GTE cred?

1 comment:

  1. Sounds like you might want to be talking to the folks (Irv Peckham, Ira Shor, Bill Thelin, Jen Beech, et al.) on the WCS-L list. Julie Lindquist's recent CE article also says interesting things about the kinda silly dust-up over PhDs and class position versus class background at the recent NYC 4Cs.