As discussed in the comments at a previous post, I have been looking at department-specific placement rates. "Placement rate" is the number of reported placements*** divided by the number of graduates. I looked at reported placements between 2011 and 2014 and graduates between 2009 and 2013. I do not have data on many departments that reported placements in this time frame**, but of those 94 departments for which I do have data, 32 appear to have placement rates higher than 50% for tenure-track jobs and 51 appear to have placement rates higher than 50% for a combination of tenure-track, postdoctoral, VAP, and instructor jobs (both sets are listed below).****

Update: I have removed the following departments from both lists because I do not have updated graduation data from them: University of Chicago, University of Pennsylvania, and Yale University. These departments may well have placement rates as high as these others, but the graduation data I have from them comes from the 2012 APA Graduate Guide, since they did not complete the 2013 APA Graduate Guide. If the department chairs respond to my email of June 10th with updated information, I will update their status.

Departments with 50% or higher placement rates for tenure-track jobs, in alphabetical order:

Australian National University
Baylor University
Boston University
Columbia University
Dalhousie University
Fordham University
Harvard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
New York University
Northwestern University
Princeton University
Rutgers University
Saint Louis University
Stanford University*
Syracuse University
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Irvine (LPS)
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, San Diego
University of Cincinnati
University of Connecticut
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
University of Notre Dame
University of Oregon
University of Pittsburgh
University of Pittsburgh (HPS)
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
University of Texas, Austin
University of Western Australia
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Vanderbilt University

Departments with 50% or higher placement rates for all jobs (all reported tenure-track, postdoctoral, VAP, and instructor placements combined), in alphabetical order:

Australian National University
Baylor University
Boston University
Brown University
Columbia University
Dalhousie University
Duke University
Fordham University
Georgetown University
Harvard University
Indiana University, Bloomington
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
New York University
Northwestern University
The Ohio State University
Princeton University
Rice University
Rutgers University
Saint Louis University
Stanford University*
University of Arizona
University of British Columbia
University of California, Berkeley
University of California, Davis
University of California, Irvine (LPS)
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Riverside
University of California, San Diego
University of Cincinnati
University of Connecticut, Storrs
University of Maryland
University of Memphis
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
University of Notre Dame
University of Oregon
University of Pittsburgh
University of Pittsburgh, HPS
University of Sheffield
University of Southern California
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
University of Texas, Austin
University of Toronto
University of Virginia
University of Washington
University of Western Australia
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Vanderbilt University
Washington University, St Louis
York University (Canada)

As I have mentioned in other posts, the data I am using will be made available in another post soon.

*These departments have incomplete data for the years between 2009 and 2013, but both have communicated that they aim to provide a complete set of data soon.

**Update: These are the departments for which I do not yet have data on yearly graduates, in alphabetical order. (Note that I emailed most of these departments to obtain this information on June 9th and 10th.): 

Birckbeck, University of London
Durham University
King’s College, London
London School of Economics
Marquette University
McGill University
State University of New York, Buffalo
Trinity College, Dublin
University College London
University of Adelaide
University of Auckland
University of Cambridge
University of Chicago (CHSS)
University of Edinburgh
University of Kentucky
University of Leeds
University of Melbourne
University of New Mexico
University of Oxford
University of St Andrews
University of Sydney
University of Tasmania
University of Warwick
University of Western Ontario
Victoria University of Wellington
Wayne State University

***Update: Note that I looked only at placements reported at ProPhilosophy  (2011-2012 and 2012-2013) and PhilAppointments (2013-2014)

****Update: Note that the placement rates reported here are for candidates both with and without reported priors, which differs from the "new graduates" method provided in the previous post. As noted in a comment below, for these 94 departments, the overall placement rate using this method is around 42%, whereas the overall tenure-track placement rate using this method is around 29%.

Posted in ,

31 responses to “Job Placement 2011-2014: Departments with Relatively High Placement Rates (Updated 9/17/2014)”

  1. Peter Distelzweig Avatar
    Peter Distelzweig

    Is the University of Pittsburgh percentage calculated by aggregating the Pitt HPS and Philosophy departments? Or…?

    Like

  2. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Good question. I attempted to keep these separate. Anyone who specified HPS was grouped under HPS (the same goes for Irvine’s LPS and Chicago’s CHSS).

    Like

  3. Peter Distelzweig Avatar
    Peter Distelzweig

    Thanks! Also, am I right to believe that you used the same technique reported in your post on overall placement rate for determining number of graduates for each department?

    Like

  4. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Not quite. I amended the above post to reflect as much. I looked here at all placed candidates, not just those without reported priors. Perhaps it would also help to know that the overall placement rate (including candidates with and without priors) for just those departments for which I have data on yearly graduates is around 41%, whereas the overall tenure-track placement rate (including candidates with and without priors) for these departments is around 29%. Further, the average number of (reported) placed candidates between 2011 and 2014 is 7.3 for these departments, whereas it is 2.7 for the departments for which I do not have data, which also helps to explain the discrepancy between the above numbers and the numbers I reported in the other post. It may well be that those departments for which I do not have data on yearly graduates do not normally report placements in the venues I looked at. In that case, we might be more optimistic about overall placement rate, but only when considered in the sense described (i.e. only when including candidates with and without priors).

    Like

  5. Peter Distelzweig Avatar
    Peter Distelzweig

    Good to know. I actually meant to be asking how you determine the number of graduates, not the number of placed candidates. In the post on overall placement rate to get the number of graduates you used some extrapolation of averages for departments, etc. Did you do that here?

    Like

  6. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    No. I used the data reported in the 2013 APA Graduate Guide (which I also used for most of the departments reported in the previous post). Departments in the United States and Canada reported in that guide the number of graduates each year between 2009 and 2013. For each department, I took an average of the number of graduates per year between 2009 and 2013 and compared that average to the average yearly placements by these departments between 2011 and 2014. Take, for instance, UCLA (the department with the highest placement rates, according to these calculations): UCLA had 5.4 yearly graduates, according to the 2013 guide, and 17 placed TT candidates and 22 overall placed candidates between 2011 and 2014, for an average of 5.7 placed TT candidates per year and 7.3 placed candidates per year. These numbers likely exceed the yearly graduates because they include candidates with prior positions. There are a few exceptions (noted in the post): some departments did not report data in the 2013 guide, but did report data in the 2012 guide (*) and some departments did not report complete data in the 2013 guide (**). In some cases I obtained complete data by emailing the department chairs. In the previous post I used the average of these to estimate the graduates from the 30-something departments for which I do not have data on yearly graduates. I did not do any such thing here because some of these departments are much larger than average (Oxford) whereas others are much smaller (Irvine LPS).

    Like

  7. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Another example: Dalhousie is on these lists in part because of their very small number of yearly graduates (0.6). They only have 1 placed tenure-track candidate in this 3-year period, but only 1-2 students likely graduated in this time frame.

    Like

  8. Graduate Student Avatar
    Graduate Student

    I’m at a 50% or higher school on that list, and I seriously doubt we’re actually earning that status.

    Like

  9. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Here are some ways these findings can go wrong: 1) departments fail to report accurate graduation data, 2) the placed candidates graduated earlier than 2011, 3) data management issues resulted in miscategorized placements.
    On 1, I checked the data reported in the 2013 guide against the NRC data between 2002 and 2006. Most departments reported higher numbers of graduates than in that period of time, but for those who reported fewer graduates, the difference was only substantial in one case. In that case, the department has higher than 50% placement regardless of whether I use the 2013 guide or the NRC data. Of course, I only checked departments that had NRC data (i.e. departments in the United States).
    On 2, this is a problem, but should be a problem for all departments. With more years of data, this will be less of a problem, since at a certain point these are not likely to be junior hires.
    On 3, these just do happen. Just today I found a candidate that was miscategorized as being from one department rather than another. I try to stay on top of this, but I am definitely not perfect. When I release the Excel spreadsheet, hopefully some of you will feel comfortable reporting any errors you find.
    With all of that said, I am happy to provide the placement records that I have for an individual department, so long as I haven’t released the spreadsheet. Just send me an email or request it here.

    Like

  10. Derek Bowman Avatar

    I share the anonymous Grad Student’s concern. To be clear, this isn’t a criticism of you or your methods. I think what you’re doing is incredibly valuable, and as you say, over time these measures will become more reliable.
    But I do think it would be a mistake for people (especially, e.g. potential graduate students) to put much weight on the present numbers.

    Like

  11. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Good point, Derek. I will remove the names of those departments for whom I only have data from 2008-2012 until I get updated numbers from them.

    Like

  12. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    I want to add that while I agree that it would be a mistake for anyone to put too much weight on the present numbers, I also think that it would be a mistake to ignore comparative data on placement.
    Take the fact that Fordham, SLU, Vanderbilt, and Oregon show up in the top 20 or so on this list–these departments are not ranked in the PGR, and Fordham, SLU, and Oregon aren’t even considered. These departments have been specifically mentioned in the past as having been overlooked due to the PGR’s over-emphasis on analytic philosophy (e.g. http://americanphilosophy.blogspot.com/2007/01/what-makes-good-philosophy-department.html). Similarly, Johns Hopkins is toward the bottom of the PGR but comes out on top here. So these departments do not seem to be among the best in terms of faculty reputation (according to at least one group of experts), but do seem to be among the best in terms of some combination of 1) educating their graduate students, 2) preparing their graduate students for the job market, and 3) placing their graduate students. Clearly the reputation of one’s faculty does not necessarily correspond with any of these, and it is important for students to realize how far apart these can come.
    Conversely, some top rated departments, according to the PGR, seem to be doing relatively poorly on placement, according to these measures. Two such cases are CUNY and Arizona, each ranked 15 worldwide according to the PGR. These departments seem to have TT placement rates lower than institutions such as Emory and Baylor, neither of which are listed in the PGR. These departments probably fall short some on placement due to the large number of students they accept, which no doubt helps them to balance low undergraduate tuition with low teaching loads for research faculty. But students accepted into these programs should be aware of these types of issues.
    Without comparative data on placement, these flags might not be raised for prospective students, which is why I think it is important for students to look at such data. But it would be even better if departments could be forthright with their data to make these decisions easier on students. And hopefully having an accurate set of data will help us all to better understand how it is that those departments that do well with placement are serving their graduate students so well, so that we can all do better.

    Like

  13. Daniel Nolan Avatar
    Daniel Nolan

    I see that the Australian National University is neither listed in the placement list, nor in the list of departments for which you do not yet have data. We have a very high placement rate (though I don’t know how well it has been “reported” to the websites used as sources), so I if it’s not on the list I suspect there’s a serious problem with the method used.

    Like

  14. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Thank you for pointing this out. I should have double-checked the list. I actually failed to copy the first three departments on that (no data) list. I have added them now. I will look again to make sure no other (primarily english-speaking) department is left off.
    Update: I found information on ANU’s graduation rate at its website, and I have thus added it to both lists.

    Like

  15. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    And, FYI, for ANU I have 8 TT placements and 4 postdoctoral, etc. placements, with one duplicate candidate, for a total of 11 placed candidates. If you have more complete data on placement during these three years, feel free to send it to me by email or add it to PhilAppointments.

    Like

  16. Michel X. Avatar
    Michel X.

    FWIW, UniversitΓ© de MontrΓ©al is a francophone institution, not “primarily English-speaking”. Dunno if that makes a difference for you, though.

    Like

  17. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    It does. I was just thinking about Montreal when I went back through the list. My aim in leaving off institutions that are not primarily english-speaking was to respect the fact that these institutions are not likely placing in english-speaking jobs and/or reporting in these venues. I will remove Montreal for now. If you think that this is a false characterization in the case of Montreal, do let me know.

    Like

  18. Canadian Grad Student Avatar
    Canadian Grad Student

    One way to get data on who has graduated from a program is to look into library records for submitted dissertations (sort by department). I have done this in the past. It takes some work, but it is rather useful when a department won’t release information in a timely manner.

    Like

  19. Peter Distelzweig Avatar
    Peter Distelzweig

    Perhaps I am not understanding? Using the technique you describe here for Pitt HPS, I get an average of 1.8 graduates per year from the 2013 APA Graduate Guide and an average of 1.3333 placements from the two years of ProPhilosophy and one year of PhilAppointments, for an average placement rate of 74% (TT or other), but Pitt HPS doesn’t appear on any of your lists. Did I make a mistake?
    (I’m using my own PhD granting department as an example to try to understand these numbers (and because I care about how that department is represented, of course)).
    (A slightly different concern: PhilAppointments doesn’t distinguish in its postings between Pitt HPS and Pitt Philosophy. My calculation of 74% overall placement leaves out the 4 Pitt HPS placements listed there but not flagged as HPS. In addition, the ProPhilosophy list for 11-12 and 12-13 are not complete for Pitt HPS.)

    Like

  20. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    I also have 1.8 graduates per year, but I had only two candidates listed as HPS: Bryan Roberts (postdoc and TT) and Thomas Cunningham (TT). I looked at ProPhilosophy and PhilAppointments again and found Catherine Stinson (postdoc) had been miscategorized in my data as Pittsburgh, rather than Pittsburgh (HPS). That would put it up to three placed candidates over a three-year period, for a placement rate over 50%. I will fix the above!

    Like

  21. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Good idea. I did try this with some departments, but was unable to retrieve the relevant information due to the way the libraries in question categorized data. (The searches yielded thousands of theses from all sorts of universities that could not be filtered by university and department). But I will keep this in mind.

    Like

  22. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Also, could you send me an email with a link to the complete placement information, if you have it?

    Like

  23. Peter Distelzweig Avatar
    Peter Distelzweig

    Oops. I see Pitt HPS now appears in the second list. Sorry, if you made that change before I submitted the previous comment and I missed it! πŸ™‚

    Like

  24. Michel X. Avatar
    Michel X.

    To be honest, I have no idea. As with all four universities in MontrΓ©al, work can be submitted in English, and although classes at U de M are in French, students can easily take classes at the other universities. According to their website, 5 PhD students have defended English-language dissertations since (including) 2011. But I have no idea about the extent to which their students seek out employment in the English-speaking world. I’d be surprised if they didn’t, but unfortunately I have nothing more to offer!

    Like

  25. Derek Bowman Avatar

    I think we’re basically in agreement on this. The mistake would be to think that getting your degree in a department with a “relatively high placement rate” is a safe bet. Especially given that the absolute numbers are, in most cases, so low, it would behoove potential students to try to find out the particular stories behind these numbers. But I agree that the numbers can be helpful in raising those questions, and that, in the aggregate they support the kind of inferences you highlight (e.g. that faculty prestige itself isn’t a reliable proxy for job placement).
    In fact, I think the language of ‘relativity high,’ while accurate in the comparative sense which you intend, may misleadingly suggest that these departments are doing moderately well in absolute terms. But the fact that 50% placement in any full-time academic job counts as ‘relatively high’ already shows what a sorry state the profession as a whole is in.

    Like

  26. Derek Bowman Avatar

    Actually, I would raise one issue with your later remarks:
    “And hopefully having an accurate set of data will help us all to better understand how it is that those departments that do well with placement are serving their graduate students so well, so that we can all do better.”
    While I think it is good for any given department to use comparative placement data in this way, the only way “we can all do better” is to increase the number of jobs and/or decrease the number of job candidates.

    Like

  27. Steven French Avatar
    Steven French

    Dear Carolyn,
    With regard to your note that many UK institutions have not provided data even though you emailed them two weeks ago, please note that many of us over on this side of the pond are only just now emerging from or may still be immersed in the examinations and degree classification season (here at Leeds we just had our exam and classification boards this week). So, we’re all frantically busy, academic colleagues and administrators alike (and yes I know this is a pgr issue but at this time of year its pretty much all hands to the pumps!). Plus UK institutions are typically not as thorough as their US (and other) counterparts in retaining and updating such data (although some are getting better at it)
    cheers,
    Steven

    Like

  28. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    Good point. As I told a few people who sent me emails to this effect, I will happily update this page if and when I receive new data. I will also likely run an updated post in July. I apologize if the note seemed overly brusque. I do realize that I am asking for extra work.

    Like

  29. Noelle McAfee Avatar

    Emory does not participate in the PGR. (It is an open question whether this is the choice of the PGR or of the Emory department.) Are you only including programs listed in the PGR for comparison sake? I am nearly positive that our placement rate for TT jobs, especially of late, is higher than 50%. I will see if I can get you some numbers. Thanks for your work on this.

    Like

  30. Carolyn Dicey Jennings Avatar

    I haven’t updated this post in a while. From the data I have, Emory has 5 TT placements in the last three years, 4 from 2013-2014 and 1 from 2012-2013. I may be missing earlier data. I am definitely not leaving out departments because they are not in the PGR. Send me an email if you have placement data that I may have missed.

    Like

  31. Grad Student at Dal Avatar
    Grad Student at Dal

    I’m a graduate student at Dalhousie and can confirm:
    2 students graduated in 2014, 1 started a TT position this fall.
    1 student graduated in 2012, no TT job.
    3 students graduated in 2011, 2 received TT jobs.
    So 3/6.
    http://www.dal.ca/faculty/arts/philosophy/alumni-friends/phd-graduates-profiles.html

    Like

Leave a reply to Daniel Nolan Cancel reply