Search Career Advice


Browse Archives

Career Advice

Academic Career Confidential

Just Say Dough

May 6, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Forget Jim Cramer. Nobody gives financial advice like Charles Dickens’ Mr. Micawber: "Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery." Alas, like so many of us, Mr. Micawber dispenses advice rather than acting upon it. However in these economic days, if you are applying to graduate school or in graduate school, take his advice to heart. The most important “placement” decision you’ll ever make is to stay out of debt.

Cancerian to the hilt, I tend to claw my way to the bottom line. But I will never, ever forget the one month not long after I graduated when I held the rent notice in one hand and a student loan bill in the other and knew I had hit the Micawberian wall. I ache now as I picture the growing number of men and women across the country and the world who are living my comparatively insignificant experience every day, all day. So few can gulp, breathe deeply, pick up the phone, and call home for help, as I was able to do.

So how do graduate students end up in debt and why am I arguing that, among other things, such debt is a placement issue? First, as many of us know from past or present experience, exorbitant loan payments and credit card bills dictate desperate choices when you’re applying for jobs. Second, given the salaries that most tenure-track and especially contingent faculty members make, once you are employed you will be so swamped by financial hardship and its emotional corollary — terror — that it will be hard to do anything well.

The 2008 College Board “Trends in Student Aid” report posted on the Sallie Mae Web site offers at least a glimpse of how indebted you can be by the time you finish a Ph.D.

Since 2000, sixty percent of undergraduates have left school with an average student loan bill of nearly $23,000 (“Trends,” 11). In graduate school, pain in the arrears goes from bad to worse. The average student collects another $20,000 of debt (“Trends,” 2). As if those figures aren’t worrisome enough, the Nellie Mae site says that the average outstanding balance on graduate student credit cards is $8,600. For graduate students over 30 the figure swells to $12,600.

An even grimmer picture comes into focus if we look at debt in relation to disciplines. According to the recently posted Humanities Indicators Project of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the heaviest burdens lie in wait for graduates who will earn the least, even those who succeed in finding permanent positions. While noting that debt for humanities graduate students averaged $14,000, the study adds that around 23 percent of the total number of graduate students in the humanities incurred over $30,000; 14 percent owed $50,000 or more (“Humanities Indicators,” II-16).

Probably too obviously, I’m not an empiricist, much less a statistician. I generally raise an eyebrow at “averages” (especially of “full-time equivalents” versus humans), in part because I’ve read too many salary reports claiming the average faculty member makes over $100,000. (At Iowa, English professors’ salaries are “averaged” with salaries in the medical school. You see the problem.) But even though these averages tell us little about individual cases, they reveal how deeply in debt many of us are when we go on the job market. If you’re headed into a biotech or business future, maybe that kind of debt is an investment. For someone in the humanities, it’s a boondoggle. In any case, one of the many facets of graduate debt is the pressure it places on job seekers and the newly hired.

What might change if those of us who are teaching graduate students thought of graduate debt in relation to the placement process? I’m not ready to go as far as two recent provocateurs, but I think we all need to read them with a willingness to confront graduate debt rather than with the quick dismissal their orneriness and their more outrageous proposals invite. Mark C. Taylor’s recent New York Times op-ed, “End the University as We Know It,” stoked Facebook fires by shoveling accusations. American graduate programs, he writes, “produce a product for which there is no market (candidates for teaching positions that do not exist) and develop skills for which there is diminishing demand.” Returning to a frequently made charge that graduate students have become part of the assembly line in an undergraduate knowledge factory, he urges a complete restructuring of graduate education. The titles of two pieces by Thomas H. Benton (a.k.a. Professor William Pannapacker), a columnist for The Chronicle of Higher Education -- “Just Don’t Go” (parts 1 and 2) — sum up his advice to anyone considering graduate school in the humanities. Still, he offers important, frank information and a good reading list, and his advice and the books he notes deserve serious consideration.

The extreme positions these writers take offer a bracing alternative to many faculty conversations about graduate student debt. I’ve been informally surveying faculty groups at conferences and in meetings (wherever I can corner colleagues) about how they would advise undergraduates who want to apply to graduate school — specifically in relation to debt. Most discourage their own undergraduates from applying to graduate school in all but the most well-paying arenas but continue to cherish and therefore to build their/our graduate programs. We express horror at the reported size of debt, mutter guiltily about its potential effects, and then we admit students for whom we have no aid.

As faculty members we have a responsibility to insist that prospective graduate students look honestly at the available compensation, such as teaching or research assistantships, along with grant and fellowship offers. We need to help students assess how far these will or won’t go to cover the costs of graduate school as well as rent and food. Many faculty members across the country are bracing up to that responsibility right now as their programs face budget cuts, or they should be. All of us are getting a crash course in stringency, and even those fortunate enough not to be thrust into crisis mode are reviewing the situation.

It seems increasingly clear that if we on the admissions side are going to continue to admit students into our programs, we have a duty to have a frank conversation with each student about a financial plan. How can we admit students without funding unless they can show that they have independent means? We’re unused to saying “no” and fearful of being patronizing. We tend to share a distinctly American embarrassment when it comes to asking questions about money. We’ve got to get over those attitudes. How, in good conscience, can we encourage anyone except the independently wealthy to enter our programs unless our universities can provide funding? To be more direct: how can you (or I) justify purchasing anything right now if we don’t have the requisite “cash money” (that emphatically doubled southern phrase)? That includes graduate school.

On the other hand, if you are on the entering side of this equation, that is applying to graduate school, the buck finally stops (or stacks up) with YOU. Ultimately, you must confront the debt threat rather than hoping that things will vaguely “get better” once you’re ready to go on the job market. What if you’ve been admitted to several programs, and one has offered a fellowship or teaching assistantship or combination thereof? The offer includes tuition and health benefits. When I was making such decisions, I regretfully rejected offers from exciting programs that couldn’t provide enough to cover my bills.

Do the math and be honest with yourself about the answers. If the numbers square, at least you’ll be in a position to see if this is what you want to do while still living within your means. Sadly, you need to factor into your equation the drastic changes in higher education that have shifted so many teaching positions to short-term positions with low pay, no benefits, and no job security. In many disciplines, your future prospects simply will not allow you to repay debts. Until faculty, administrators, parents, state governments, and donors decide that higher education is valuable enough to justify the resources we need to build strong, resilient faculties, those are the “career” realities graduate students face.

Even if you think you can live on the funding you are offered, remember that you’ll still face additional financial challenges on a daily basis. You’ll also need to budget time as well as money. Departments are under increasing pressure to expedite students’ “time to degree.” In the past, students were told that they would get five or six years of funding, but departments’ need for instructors meant that in reality, teaching assistantships could be extended far longer. Those days are over. Anyone entering graduate school today will need to work closely with an advisor to plot a course right through completion of the dissertation. Your only hope of staying out of debt is to finish your thesis before the five or six years of funding come to an end. As soon as you finish course work, you should meet with your university’s grants staff and start applying for external grants, including dissertation fellowships. (More on this in a future column.) At the same time, you’ll need to plan for the contingency that if you do need additional time to complete your dissertation you will need to fund yourself for that year. You might have to find some kind of a job that leaves time for writing (very challenging). In all honesty, your financial plans will also need to take into account the likelihood that you will be on the job market for two or three years after you graduate. (More about this in a future column too.)

Suze Orman I’m not, but I do believe each of us has to make changes to get past the sense of entitlement that led to so many bad financial decisions in the recent past. Hoping I don’t sound like the Monty Python crew’s brilliant "Four Yorkshiremen skit" (definitely worth three minutes of levity in the midst of this unhappy conversation), I do feel grateful that as a community, my graduate school friends collectively lived very simply. Of course, we had fewer temptations, but lots of us lived without cars, TVs, and lattes. I had sometimes absurd summer jobs from camp counselor to temp anything to library clerk, but so did many of my friends. That is to say we lived on budgets very close to the bone. One crisis could still tip you over into debt, but most of us didn’t settle into a life of debt as the norm.

In other words, I organized my life around the assumption that if I was going to indulge myself in going to graduate school (that’s how I saw my choice) the price was that I had to take the budget dealt to me and try hard to live on it. Figuring out how to stretch and sometimes supplement a small income was excellent training for the two years I held a temporary position as I continued to look for a place in academe. I know that good luck kept me healthy and in one position or another; I know without the generosity of my parents in that frightening month when I was short that I could have gone bust. So mine is hardly a tale of excellent judgment or financial acuity.

The point of my statistics and stories, instead, is that unless your program offers funds sufficient to live on and you have a back up plan for emergencies, you need to think hard about your future. “Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery." Graduate school isn’t a career; at best it’s a step toward a career. If you lose your footing and slide into debt — a slippery slope too often greased by depression and anxiety -- you’ve lost your place before the placement process begins.

I would be grateful to hear of creative solutions graduate departments are finding to help students both stay out of debt and get out of debt.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Just Say Dough

  • Stop borrowing
  • Posted by Carlos on May 6, 2009 at 8:15am EDT
  • That humanities' educators would allow graduate students to assume debt loads in excess of $50,000 is just absurd. That is a lifetime financial debt-load.

    There should be MANDATORY financial counseling for ALL those involved when that figure reaches $40,000. At $75,000, there ought to be a mandatory year-off AND a co-signer.

  • Just say Dough
  • Posted by rosanne soifer , adjunct at Touro College-NYC on May 6, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • I'm a musician and teach a music business course. One of the reasons I decided to say  NO to grad school right out ( even though I got admitted after applying) was because of the  potential debt...and this was years ago. In low-pay or consistently- fluctuating pay professions ( such as the arts) going to grad school may simply a very expensive way of marking time.

  • Posted on May 6, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • I was fortunate to leave undergrad with no debt, but ran up $20k in grad school. At the time it seemed like a reasonable figure, compared to friends who were already nearly $50k in the hole. What I didn't take into account was exactly how little I would really make in my profession, and how many other competing draws on my income there would be. Now juggling a car payment, student loan payment, credit card payments and soon a mortgage, I feel like my soul has a permanent bank lien against it - and I'm not even 30 yet. I consider myself lucky to have been able to purchase a vehicle (a necessity where I live) and get a home loan, but I really really wish there had been a more comprehensive loan counseling process in place to help me understand what I was getting myself into. I'm all for personal responsibility, but the truth is most 18-20somethings don't have a firm grasp on what loans will mean to them in the long run, and how they can affect their quality of life for decades to come. Knowing what I know now, I probably would have tried harder to find a way to avoid the loans - working another job during school, going half-time as I could afford it, picking a less expensive graduate program in a less expensive city - anything!

  • Go for Free or Make other Plans / Spend only at the End
  • Posted by New PhD with a Job on May 6, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • The top programs in the humanities have stipends that cover their costs and provide for basic living expenses. These programs produce enough graduates to cover almost all tenure-track jobs. That lesson should be clear: don't go to graduate school unless it's free. (For regional schools and opportunities, keep your day job and go to school part-time.)

    But-- at the end of the process, accept the fact that interviewing, campus visits, fancy printing, nice-looking suits, and the like will run up a bill of a few thousand dollars. If this is your first major outlay, a little Keynesian moment -- debt financing to ehance future growth -- will be worth your while.

  • quite understandable
  • Posted by nohousekeeper , grad student English at UIowa on May 6, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • While $50-75,000 might seem an extraordinary amount, I admit that I have far more than that, almost none of it accrued as an undergrad. I went full-time for my MA and could not work during that time. That school did not cover tuition expenses for MA students. So, sorry folks, but you can't live in NY on $6,000, no matter where you live. And the PhD program (a Big Ten university) that I went to, while it did offer teaching opportunities, it also did not cover tuition. Added to that, when I factor in a few health problems that extended my stay in graduate school, combined with the need to teach as an adjunct to make ends meet (but also taking up precious time) and whammo, I have enough student loans that if it were in the green, I could have a house in some parts of the country. Now that I am about to graduate, I look back and honestly consider if I could have done a lot to change the amount of debt that I incurred. Perhaps a bit. I chose the school based in large part on how much they were willing to give me in terms of an award package and their placement rating of PhDs upon graduation.

    I could have lived in a cheaper apartment, but that would have largely meant living in less safe housing. I could have chosen I suppose to eat only top ramen and oatmeal, but I am sure that would have other health consequences. I could have chosen a more deadline oriented adviser, but then I would have missed out on the mentoring in my field and specialties that will no doubt help me for years to come. I could have chosen a different specialty (in my department it was well known that those who studied on one side of the pond did not get the same level of mentoring and professionalization compared to those who studied on the other), but then I would have sacrificed doing what I really love for a field that I was only moderately interested in, and so on.

    I doubt credit counseling could have helped me in the same way that having my tuition covered would have since in the first four years of my program tuition was raised close to 20% each year. I suppose while I understand the very "American" sentiment to blame the victims here (i.e., graduate students for wracking up all kinds of debt), the reality is far more complex with a lot of contributing factors. Including...PhD programs admit more students than they can pay for and more students than the profession can accomodate for positions; programs, particularly at R1 schools, gear the professionalization of their grads to the very limited opportunities available at other R1 schools, and not to SLAC or (gasp) outside of the academy; our culture is one where the Humanities must "prove" itself as a worthy disclipline, one which has relevancy in the "real" world and in the workplace; colleges and universities across the nation are increasing approaching education with a corporate mindset, "outsourcing" as much of the labor as possible to VAPs and adjunct laborers who are offered little in terms of long term stability, benefits, or a wage remotely consistent with the amount of education required for the position; wage discrepancies across the disciplines, where faculty members in the sciences will regularly begin their career where those in the Humanities will only receive sometime after tenure, creates a hierarchy of worth unreflective of again education level, merit, committment to the college and so on, the list goes on.

    I suppose too I could have married someone else not in graduate school who was working in corporate America to pay for my schooling, so I could just get an MRS, but instead I married a fellow grad student with as many loans as myself. I'll take the blame on that one.

  • it really is "just don't go"
  • Posted by phree , dr. at rather not say on May 6, 2009 at 11:45am EDT
  • When Thomas Benton's "Graduate School in the Humanities - Just don't go!" came out in the Chronicle the vitriol was harsh, mostly coming from the tenured elite who lived in another time and did not incur mortgage size debts for education. Their romanticized notions of the humanities and egoistic defense of the significance of their fields/programs is laughable for graduates who bear the brunt of this self-inflated sense of importance.

    As a an alumni of one of these institutions, I find the defense of graduate school by the tenured elite sad. They fail to realize that their own graduate students are jumping off of a financial cliff with virtually no promise of employment. In philosophy, my field, one only needs to look at the hiring reports on Leiter's blog or at the APA to realize the dismal situation for all but a lucky few. Getting a tenure track job at an R1 for those who graduate from R1s is akin to the odds of hitting the Powerball lottery. For those from "lesser" programs, realize that you will probably languish in the secondary CC or small school market where R1s and ivy league graduates will take the tenure track positions and you will be referred to as a permanent adjunct lecturer, especially if you had the misfortune of working as an adjunct in graduate school. This will also impair you in job searches as 99% of all programs say they care about teaching but make hiring decisions based on your publication/conference presentation record alone. (These are dirty little secrets that will surely be denied by those tenured elites who post after me.)

    The bottom line: a humanities education at the graduate level is only for the very wealthy who cannot afford to avoid becoming "adjunct lecturers" (a lesser breed cut off from "real" academics). If you are not independently wealthy, do not buy into the inane argument that the "good people" make it while the weak languish. It is a fantasy of your tenured professors who value their own judgement and status over reality. Benton/Pennapacker is right: "just don't go!"

  • sorry for the typo in the bottom line above....
  • Posted by dr. phree , a shameful lecturer at rather not say... on May 6, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • There is typo in the paragraph above; it should read

    The bottom line: a humanities education at the graduate level is only for the very wealthy who can afford to avoid becoming "adjunct lecturers" (a lesser breed cut off from "real" academics). blah, blah blah, Don't go!

  • Posted by Dr. K , Asst. Prof. at Big 10 Branch Campus on May 6, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • Thank you, Teresa, for this timely article: I shall share it with students I counsel about graduate school. I echo New PhD, in that I counsel students to attend graduate school for free or not at all.

    I graduated with zero debt, getting by on TAing, grants, and subsisting on dialup. However, there are hidden costs. When I selected a grad program, I turned down namier institutions who offered me less funding, or less secure funding, for a McU (with an excellent department) who could assure me of full funding. In turn, this has limited my job opportunities somewhat, as we all know that letterhead can matter come job search-time. Nevertheless, I obtained a tenure track position, in part thanks to arriving on the job market with a cv replete with teaching experience. I have done well for myself, but there is no extra money for loan payments.

    So yes. Let's remind our students that they may manage a PhD with zero loans (or only the cost of that interview suit), but let's not forget that doing so changes the placement landscape for many of them.

  • Bankruptcy Laws Need to be Reformed
  • Posted by Richard Fossey , Professor & Senior Policy Researcher at University of North Texas on May 6, 2009 at 1:30pm EDT
  • Thanks for an excellent essay. Unfortunately, many people made bad decisions and borrowed more money for graduate school than they can pay back. Under currrent bankruptcy law, student loans are almost impossible to discharge in bankruptcy; even a person's Social Security check can be garnished to help satisfy an unpaid student loan.

    Thousands of people are saddled with student debt that they can never pay back and have no recourse to bankruptcy.

    Our national government is willing to help insolvent banks, an automobile industry in ruin, and improvident insurance companies. Some humane change to thefederal bankruptcy laws must be made so that people who made bad decisions about graduate school are not forced to pay for their bad judgment for the rest of their lives.

  • Brand Names vs. Funding
  • Posted by Mark on May 6, 2009 at 2:15pm EDT
  • I switched graduate schools in pursuit of a degree in humanities. I had two schools to choose from. One school offered a full scholarship and stipend. The other, at the top of the prestige hill (but not the better department according to rankings) offered me free tuition but nothing else. Along with the acceptance letter came photocopies of articles and reports about how their graduates found jobs afterward. Might the brand name have been worth it? Or might the school that didn't care to provide me with funding really help me when it came time to find a job? One thing prospective grad students should consider is the sense they get about their department of interest. If you get the feeling that the faculty don't care, or worse, are too embroiled in disputes with colleagues in which you, a student, will be pressured to take sides -- consider whether the brand name will be worth the lack of attention and/or the ulcers you might get.

  • Why?
  • Posted by Carlos on May 6, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • " .. Some humane change to the federal bankruptcy laws must be made so that people who made bad decisions about graduate school are not forced to pay for their bad judgment for the rest of their lives."

    Excuse me -- bad enough, the public is bailing out the Harvard Law banking crowd. 

    Why should non-college folks (60% of population) have to bail out college grads? If SallieMae goes bankrupt, taxpayers will eat the loss.

    Consider the Chicago/Daiey context -- what's in it, for them? What do they get?

    Heck -- why doesn't TIAA-CREF bail them out? It has $47,000,000,000.00 in assets.

  • Whose Business is It?
  • Posted by HR Guy on May 6, 2009 at 5:15pm EDT
  • I had a number of thoughts reading this article and the other comments posted here:

    1. I don't think it's anybody's responsibility, other than the student's, to ensure that he or she has enough money for graduate school. It's the student's own business how he or she pays for graduate school and all of his or her other living expenses. These are all adults over 21 who are legally responsible for their own financial decisions. The university is not a nanny or a keeper for its graduate students.

    2. The problem of graduate student debt is largely the problem of all government-backed loan programs. We've made it far too easy for students to get loans to go to graduate school. There's a lot of incentive for lenders to give them the money because the lender always has the government safety net to protect them if the student defaults. Without the net, banks would be a lot more discerning in their risk assessments and we'd have a lot less people in over their heads. It would probably also help if student loan payments weren't deferred until after the student leaves school. If loans for grad school were no longer so easy to get, and we let the free market work, we'd have more people putting off going to grad school and getting jobs first, saving for their education, and going when they could afford to. (Side note: Grad programs in the humanities and social sciences might actually offer more programs to accomodate full-time working adults with day jobs like many of the business and education schools do). Even then, student debt is the student's business, not the grad school's.

  • gotta go!
  • Posted by debtor on May 7, 2009 at 3:00pm EDT
  • One things I haven't seen mentioned is the cost of travel to conferences. Really, they're necessary, especially if you want to meet people and add a few lines to your CV. Most grad students I know go to 1-3 each year. And even sharing rooms and beds, you might spend $6-700 per con. That's $2100/year. (MA and PhD = 7yr/$15,000) Unless you are lucky to be in a department with a sizable travel budget or can get travel grants, that money has to come from somewhere. Taking out loans isn't always because we're irresponsible.

    Don't get me started on the out-of-pocket (or on-the-card) costs associated with finding a job.

  • thanks for your comments
  • Posted by Teresa Mangum on May 8, 2009 at 5:00am EDT
  • First, thanks so much to those who have shared responses.  I hope it's clear that I'm expressing concern about and for those who find themselves in debt (having been in debt myself).  I see that debt as a problem to be solved, not an occasion for blame. My question is what do "we"--a we that includes those who want to attend graduate school, those in graduate school, the unemployed and the newly hired, departments with graduate programs, universities, funding entities--what do we do to address the complex matrix of debt that has quietly and dangerously become the norm?  "Just don't go" would be the easy answer.  I'm hoping for better solutions.

  • Posted by Philosophy Prof on May 12, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • Thank you Professor Magnum for your post. In my own department we now have the practice of not admitting students without full funding. There are very special circumstances in which we would depart from that practice, but they are rare. We just don't want to have a bunch of incoming and unfunded students who, not having been through the wringer, make the uninformed assessment that they will be the exception, even though some prorgams seem to encourage this assessment in order to fill their grad classes, and at most one unfunded student will actually be the exception.)

    One of the reasons why I would encourage students to enter the best program that offers them full funding (rather than a more highly ranked program that offers an inadequate amount of funding) is that an outstanding student with a less prestigious degree can still do very well on the job market if their writing sample and research project are terrific and if they have been proactive about making connections and contacts while in graduate school, and at the same time the issue of debt will not arise. The larger issue though is that such a student can decide not to go into academia, but to enter the non-academic labor force at 28 or so, or go to law school or some other professional skill, and have a totally different life (both professional- and personal-) as a result of their extended education. Should we really be in such a rush to enter the rat-race as soon as possible?