|
Venting
Aug 27, 2009 7:19:15 GMT -5
Post by anon365 on Aug 27, 2009 7:19:15 GMT -5
Question-- A 2 - 2.5 cover letter plus a research statement ? Or does the 2.5 page cover letter include a information about your research agenda as well ?
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Venting
Aug 27, 2009 9:52:34 GMT -5
Post by anon on Aug 27, 2009 9:52:34 GMT -5
For research-focused jobs, from (successful) examples I've seen you may want discussion of your research to be as much as 2/3-3/4 of your letter (so, up to 1 1/2 out of 2 pages). An example way to approach this would be a brief statement of your interests/agenda, highlighting your published articles/writing samples (the latter preferably papers coming out of your dissertation work) at about a paragraph each, and discussing your future research plans.
For more teaching-focused jobs I've seen use of about 1/3-1/2 of the letter to highlight dissertation work and publications with a focus on how they connect with the desired areas and teaching interests/agenda, as well as to demonstrate you do have some sort of future research plans.
In comparison, my research statement is 4 pages.
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Venting
Aug 27, 2009 22:07:34 GMT -5
Post by anon on Aug 27, 2009 22:07:34 GMT -5
Re Ahhhhhh: I have found that it is very helpful to start with letters for jobs that you either don't really care about or don't think you will get. It takes all the pressure off.
After writing 2 or 3 of those, you basically have all of the pieces that will go into any cover letter out on the table. Then you can re-assemble the pieces in different ways for cover letters that you do care about.
In any case, don't spend 4 days on one letter.
|
|
anon
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Venting
Aug 30, 2009 21:42:06 GMT -5
Post by anon on Aug 30, 2009 21:42:06 GMT -5
another totally unproductive weekend.... here's to a more kickass week...
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 2, 2009 22:53:53 GMT -5
Post by ahhhh here again on Sept 2, 2009 22:53:53 GMT -5
hey last anon 10:07 pm--thanks for the advice. my first application was to a department looking for both of my areas along with an absurdly early deadline!
i find that i am spending about a day each on the other letters... i know it should be plug and play at this point but i just can't seem to bring myself to do it yet!
good luck to you all!
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 3, 2009 17:21:07 GMT -5
Post by damastes on Sept 3, 2009 17:21:07 GMT -5
To switch topics slightly, there was an article in the WSJ recently that discussed the issue of huge student loans as an impediment to the quality of life. online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574388682129316614.htmlGiven the market and things like debt, would anyone choose not to go through grad school if they could redo their choice? Unless one has a mission or rich uncle, it seems like a Ph.D. in sociology is pretty much worthless.
|
|
anony
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Venting
Sept 3, 2009 17:46:28 GMT -5
Post by anony on Sept 3, 2009 17:46:28 GMT -5
Well yeah...Ph.D. in soc is pretty worthless from a purely economic standpoint. But come one...you knew that already when you were getting into it ...
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 3, 2009 20:41:29 GMT -5
Post by Economist on Sept 3, 2009 20:41:29 GMT -5
For every $100k you borrow at 7.5%, you will pay back about $122k in debt. So you have to pay off -$222K.
Don't forget the lost income of about $40k/yr for six years. That's $240,000 that you would have been earning with your BA.
Add those two values up, & the PhD in soc does have a value: -$440,000.
We over in Economics earn $30k more per year than you do, so its worth the investment. Oh well, at least your discipline has no solutions. That's job security!
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 3, 2009 21:38:09 GMT -5
Post by ace on Sept 3, 2009 21:38:09 GMT -5
You'd have to be an idiot to take that kind of money out for a Ph.D in sociology (and to a less extent, econ.).
And, solutions? Please; econ is full of solutions, they just tend to be misguided and incorrect.
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 7:00:37 GMT -5
Post by econ admirer on Sept 4, 2009 7:00:37 GMT -5
|
|
anony
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 12:37:26 GMT -5
Post by anony on Sept 4, 2009 12:37:26 GMT -5
Yeah, what the hell? Is now really the time to be celebrating the "solutions" of neo-classical economics? Wake up!
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 13:18:27 GMT -5
Post by Economist on Sept 4, 2009 13:18:27 GMT -5
Yeah, what the hell? Is now really the time to be celebrating the "solutions" of neo-classical economics? Wake up! That's a good one. As a result of inciting the racial tension that spurred the Fair Housing Act, the collapse of the economy is pretty much caused by sociologists and other academics. They used their pet theories to pass an economically disastrous law, spurring millions of minorities to get loans they were not able to pay for. This caused the greatest recession since the Great Depression! And to think that Gary Becker has soundly proven that discrimination cannot happen in a capitalist society back in the 1950s, & there's a mountain of sound quantitative data to back this up! No neoclassical economics IS correct. It is disciplines like sociology who have nearly brought an end to the U.S. Now you get state-supported jobs teaching Marxism to students, and you wonder why normal Americans are jittery about becoming the next collapsed version of the USSR!
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 13:47:44 GMT -5
Post by economist on Sept 4, 2009 13:47:44 GMT -5
Plus, I have a really small wiener. But its blood vessels become engorged when I argue anonymously.
|
|
sup
New Member
Posts: 10
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 13:56:54 GMT -5
Post by sup on Sept 4, 2009 13:56:54 GMT -5
Troll.
|
|
|
Venting
Sept 4, 2009 13:56:55 GMT -5
Post by Economist on Sept 4, 2009 13:56:55 GMT -5
Plus, I have a really small wiener. But its blood vessels become engorged when I argue anonymously. It's funny because it's true. There's few things in this world that I find more erotic than defending neo-classical economics to sociology graduate students. What can I say, I'm special.
|
|