I've been seeing this in a couple places lately, and I genuinely don't understand it. It's true there do seem to be hyper-powers in economics (MIT, Harvard, Chicago), which is probably unnecessary. We might be a little top-heavy. But aside from that observation, I don't see why people are so upset about this relatively banal point.
In my experience with people (professors and students) from top schools, middle schools, and lower schools, those from top schools are noticably sharper and more productive than the rest of us. Is anyone really surprised by this? What else would you expect to see? What else would you want to see?
Of course that's frustrating, but it's the fierce competition that keeps the science moving forward and certainly nobody is entitled to any other outcome. And if you think the competition started when you started grad school, you are going to be in for a very rude awakening. Much of the groundwork is laid earlier than that.
I made peace long ago with the fact that if I get an acadmic placement I will probably have to be mobile and I'll probably be unsatisfied with it (there are one or two exceptions with special connections to AU faculty). If I look into a public policy program I might have better luck, and there would be a lot appealing about working in a public policy department. But it basically means I'm not going to be looking into the academic labor market, although maybe I'll toss my hat in a few rings. I've made peace with that. There are plenty of other things to do, particularly in this town. Of course that's a drag. It would probably disappoint my professors to even see me write that. But that's reality.
Nobody is preventing me from writing for good journals. Hell, good journals outside of my field are publishing me! The review process is the great equalizer. Nobody is preventing me from doing excellent economics. So if I don't build the CV I want that's my own fault. Math and statistics don't work differently outside of MIT or Harvard. They work the exact same in my study in Falls Church, Virginia as they do in Cambridge, Massachusetts. So academic pedigree is no excuse for not doing good work.
And when I graduate, I'm not going to be flipping burgers (well, unless that's what's for dinner). As long as I am not flipping burgers I will have the opportunity to do economics and publish economics. And if I write better economics than the MIT or Harvard guys, it will get published. If I don't write better economics then it won't be published. Nobody embraces the MIT or Harvard guys' economics just because it came out of MIT or Harvard. I feel like I've had a pretty damn good start on my CV, given the circumstances.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I don't know about conspiracies, but I've heard many complaints about academics' attitudes towards credentials. For example, still wanting to hire a candidate with a very poor publishing record but went to Harvard over someone from a lower ranked school who is already well published. The person from Harvard or whenever "predictably" is terrible (I use scare quotes because I only have heard anecdotes, not data). This is supposedly pervasive.
ReplyDeleteThe concern is that thee is an old boys network and that they are excluded. The answer, as you say, is to do good work and publish.
ReplyDeleteFor myself, I decided to give up hope of an academic career the day I looked around a fourth year class and realized I was the second smartest student in the room. (The smartest guy in the room got a Ph.D. from a world class department in the field, could not find a position and ultimately became a computer programmer.)
It has often occurred to me that the best evidence of the stupidity of Rush and his dittoheads is that they do not realize that the inability of college faculties to organize their affairs so as to provide a reasonably priced education and opportunity for people to want to teach are the two most powerful arguments than can be made for not paying attention to such people.
DeleteIf these people where so smart, why haven't they put their own house in order?
It is amazing that we have tens if not hundreds of thousands of university professors leading lives of an Emperor with no Clothes.
Dan here seems reconciled that he will not teach. Instead of getting on the bus to go to some of the lectures he attends, he ought to consider organizing, walking in the street, and carrying a sign (I do no mean this literally). What I mean is that he ought to be paying more attention to his own business model.
There might be some old boys network. But people don't randomly get to those schools so teasing out that sort of thing seems very tough. Without some good evidence I'm inclined to not be as scandalized by this.
ReplyDeleteMath doesn't work differently at MIT, but you get to spend time with a bunch of really smart people, bounce ideas off them, etc... Or so I assume. You probably also get access to more resources (money, data etc) just by virtue of being associated with a prestigious university.
ReplyDeleteGiven the standardization of mathematics education around the globe (in what little that I can legitimately say to know of mathematics education, anyway), I have no doubt that mathematical theorems and proofs and calculations in Cambridge, Massachusetts, work no more differently than mathematical theorems and proofs and calculations in say, London, United Kingdom, or Cape Town, South Africa, or New Delhi, India, or Ankara, Turkey, or Buenos Aires, Argentina, or Melbourne, Australia, or Beijing, China.
ReplyDeleteBut there is no denying that prestigious institutions of higher education tend to have advantages: they have long-established networks that help budding scholars get connections, widespread brand recognition that helps one look good on resumes, and the funding to boot.
I agree with Daniel Kuehn that there are good reasons why prestigious universities get their reputations and get to select the best of the best of the bunch and get to produce scholars that produce high-quality or ground-breaking research.
But since people aren't angels, there is bound to be some degree of corruption and favouritism regardless of what community or institution one goes to. It's just a matter of how controlled and contained that unfairness and unjust/undeserved treatment is.
That stated though, I do think that you, Daniel Kuehn, ought to give the academic labor market a shot. As I have told you before (and I am sure that others have told you the same too), I think that you have the chance of going far and going somewhere.
It may have to involve leaving your beloved D.C. Area, though.
Given the standardization of mathematics education around the globe (in what little that I can legitimately say to know of mathematics education, anyway), I have no doubt that mathematical theorems and proofs and calculations in Cambridge, Massachusetts, work no more differently than mathematical theorems and proofs and calculations in say, London, United Kingdom, or Cape Town, South Africa, or New Delhi, India, or Ankara, Turkey, or Buenos Aires, Argentina, or Melbourne, Australia, or Beijing, China.
ReplyDeleteBut there is no denying that prestigious institutions of higher education tend to have advantages: they have long-established networks that help budding scholars get connections, widespread brand recognition that helps one look good on resumes, and the funding to boot.
I agree with Daniel Kuehn that there are good reasons why prestigious universities get their reputations and get to select the best of the best of the bunch and get to produce scholars that produce high-quality or ground-breaking research.
But since people aren't angels, there is bound to be some degree of corruption and favouritism regardless of what community or institution one goes to. It's just a matter of how controlled and contained that unfairness and unjust/undeserved treatment is.
That stated though, I do think that you, Daniel Kuehn, ought to give the academic labor market a shot. As I have told you before (and I am sure that others have told you the same too), I think that you have the chance of going far and going somewhere.
It may have to involve leaving your beloved D.C. Area, though.