Jason Kuznicki has what might be fairly pitched as the counterpoint to Michelle Dion’s posts with advice to prospective graduate students—that is, if somehow you came away with the impression that Michelle’s advice was rosy (which, um, it wasn’t):

Should I go to graduate school for history?

My short answer: No.

My long answer: No, and here’s why…

While things are not quite as bleak as Jason describes in political science land (for starters, I have—at least, as of August 15—a full-time job in academia that pays a living wage, with a non-negligible chance of continued employment beyond the coming academic year, which decidedly would not be the case had I gotten a PhD in history from Ole Miss), this paragraph is not far off the mark regardless:

This is the real reason why you should not go to graduate school in history: Your twenties are the most important decade of your life when it comes to defining your career. No matter how long you live, people will always ask about these formative years. Replying that you spent them getting a PhD in history marks you as uniquely unqualified for anything in particular. You will forever be more “interesting” than you are “employable.”

Glenn Reynolds, in responding to the Kevin Barrett kerfuffle, writes in part:

More importantly, they need to realize that people pay good money to send students to Wisconsin because it’s “branded” as a place that provides quality education from quality professors. When you respond to criticism by basically disclaiming any responsibility for what’s taught in classrooms, you also destroy the brand. Why send students to Wisconsin if that’s the case? Where’s the quality control? What does it mean to be an elite institution if you let any bozo teach whatever he/she wants in any course?

Without some reason to think that Wisconsin is better than other schools why go there?

The broader question left unasked is why any student paying to attend an “elite” institution should be taught by an adjunct in the first place. It’s not that big a leap, after all, from “why is this course being taught by a kook?” to “why is this course being taught by someone whose pay is less than my tuition bill?”

Quality control is always an issue (particularly in the academy, which is generally much more risk-averse in both hiring and firing than private industry), but at adjunct salaries the mentally stable underemployed PhD may be more likely to take the alternative job at the drive-through at Mickey D’s than the slightly-kooky adherent to nutbar conspiracy theories who needs an audience for his sermons.

Greg Weeks considers the problem of matching your research up with a journal for publication. Alas, the lawprof approach of shotgunning the paper to 17 journals and taking the best acceptance (if any) is precluded by journal submission rules in most other fields—not that there aren’t a few people who try (and usually fail) to get away with sending stuff to more than one journal at the same time.

The Mississippi state college board put 37 degree programs at state universities on probation last Wednesday, including all three master’s programs in political science in the state and the sole PhD program:

“We’re giving them three years to get back on track,” said Bill Smith, the state’s acting commissioner of academic and student affairs. “We’re not out to just shut them down.”

The state College Board on Wednesday placed 37 programs on probation, and eliminated two, that were not graduating enough students.

Every university in the state except Mississippi University for Women had programs on the list.

Smith said the board adopted standards several years ago mandating a certain number of graduates over six years: 30 for bachelor’s, 18 for master’s and nine for doctoral programs. ...

Smith said elimination is not automatic for programs that do not up their number of graduates.

Some, he said, such as Delta State’s political science program, are key to undergraduate programs and cannot be eliminated.

Others, he said, are vital to Mississippi, no matter how few graduates they produce.

The graduate counts they present might even be a little on the generous side (my count is 5 or 6 PhDs, although I may be missing an IR person or two), but I’ll trust IHL‘s accounting over my vague recollections in this instance.