Spring Data Science Fellowship Opportunity

M.A.s and Ph.D.s who are about to graduate and interested in Data Science should look into this program from The Data Incubator!

~

Program: The Data Incubator is an intensive 8 week fellowship that prepares masters students, PhDs, and postdocs in STEM and social science fields seeking industry careers as data scientists. The program is free for Fellows and supported by sponsorships from hundreds of employers across multiple industries. In response to the overwhelming interest in our earlier sessions, we will be holding another fellowship.

Who Should Apply: Anyone who has already obtained a masters or PhD degree or who is within one year of graduating with a masters or PhD is welcome to apply. Applications from international students are welcome. Everyone else is encouraged to sign-up for a future session.

Locations: In addition to the below in-person locations, we will have a remote online session:

  • New York City
  • San Francisco Bay Area
  • Seattle
  • Boston
  • Washington, DC.

Dates: All sections will be from 2017-03-27 to 2017-05-19.

~

Apply here!

~

Data Science in 30 minutes: Learn how to build a data-science project in our upcoming free Data Science in 30-minutes webcast. Signup soon as space is limited.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Orthodox Christian Studies Center NEH Dissertation Completion Fellowship Opportunity

Advanced PhD students who will be in the final year of dissertation working in 17-18, look into this fellowship from a Fordham Center!
~
Deadline: February 1, 2017
~

The Orthodox Christian Studies Center of Fordham University invites applications for its first Orthodox Christian Studies NEH Dissertation Completion Fellowship, for the 2017-2018 academic year (September 1, 2017-August 31, 2018). The Center actively desires the most compelling, exciting, and rigorous academic projects to join its efforts in fostering Orthodox Christian Studies as a field of scholarly inquiry in its own right. The Orthodox Christian Studies NEH Dissertation Completion Fellowship, supported by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, is intended to enable an advanced PhD student to devote full-time work to the final year of dissertation research and writing. The Fellow must be prepared to complete her or his dissertation within the period of the Fellowship.

~

Applications are welcomed for projects in any methodological discipline of the humanities (e.g., art history, history, philosophy, or theology), or for projects emphasizing an interdisciplinary approach including but not limited to those of gender studies, postcolonial studies, or postmodern studies as well as other contemporary theoretical methods of inquiry. Proposals are encouraged for projects of any chronological period or geographical region so long as the primary subject of investigation relates to a critical examination of some aspect of the history, thought, or culture of Orthodox Christian Studies broadly conceived.

The recipient of the Fellowship will receive a stipend of $30,000 (which includes the costs incurred for the residency requirement) and will be expected to be absolved of any service or teaching responsibilities at his or her home institution. The Fellow will not be required to reside full-time in New York City, but she or he will be required to spend two weeks in residence in New York City over the course of the Fellowship year, with one week in the fall and one week in the spring. When in residency, the Fellow will be expected to participate in occasional Center activities and will be offered the opportunity to deliver a public lecture related to his or her research. The recipient of the Fellowship, by policy of Fordham University, must provide proof of health insurance. If health insurance is needed, the Fellow may buy in to the Fordham University health plan at a discounted rate.

During the Fellowship year, the Fellow will have access to all of the resources of Fordham University. Through existing relationships with other New York City institutions, the Fellow will be able to take advantage of neighboring universities (Columbia University, New York University, and others), seminaries (St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, Union Theological Seminary, and General Theological Seminary), and the many cultural institutions that New York City offers.

Application Requirements

The following five (5) required items must be collated together, in the following sequence, as one (1) PDF file and saved as: 2017_NEH_DCF_APPLICANTLASTNAME_APPLICANTFIRSTNAME and submitted electronically as an attachment via email to fellowships_orthodoxy.edu.

  • Personal Statement (500 words or less) addressing the dissertation’s contribution to the field of Orthodox Christian Studies broadly conceived as well as to the specific field of the applicant’s specialization; including a proposal of how the Fellowship year will be conducted in terms of research and writing.
  • Timeline (1 page) outlining expected completion of dissertation writing during Fellowship year.
  • Sample Completed Chapter of Dissertation
  • Curriculum vitae
  • Verification Statement from the dissertation mentor assessing the status of the dissertation research and providing an honest appraisal of the probability of dissertation completion during the Fellowship year.

In addition, three (3) letters of recommendation, one of which must be from the dissertation mentor, should be emailed separately by the recommenders directly to fellowships_orthodoxy@fordham.edu. Emails from recommenders should include applicant’s name in the email subject header. All recommendation letters must be received for an application to be considered complete. *Note: directions for submission of letters of recommendation are amended from first issuance of the call.

Application language: English. *If dissertation is in a language other than English, the Sample Completed Chapter of Dissertation submitted must be translated into English.

~

Deadline for applications received: February 1, 2017. Notification of award: by March 15, 2017.

~

The Orthodox Christian Studies NEH Dissertation Completion Fellowship is funded with support from a grant awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities. Any views, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the Orthodox Christian Studies NEH Dissertation Completion Fellowship program do not necessarily represent those of the National Endowment for the Humanities. For more information about the Orthodox Christian Studies Center at Fordham University, please see www.fordham.edu/orthodoxy.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

UN Internship Opportunity

All current GSAS student look at this opportunity from the UN.

Deadline: ASAP  |  Start Date: January 2017

~

The UN DPI- NGO Relations section is looking for interns for their office starting in January for 6 months full-time. The internship process at the UN requires that a student must be in his/her senior year of undergraduate studies or in a Master’s programme or above.

This dept at the UN is specifically looking for someone who has strong writing, research and computer skills. They will consider specifically Fordham students for this opportunity- Fordham candidates will be forwarded to UN directly for consideration.

If you want to be considered for this opportunity, please send an email to: impactinitiativefordham@gmail.com as soon as possible and include your cover letter saying why you are qualified and resume.

For more info about Fordham/UN:
http://www.fordham.edu/info/21334/programs_and_events/5158/united_nations

Leave a Comment

Filed under Fellowships and Grants, Graduate Students, New York/Fordham Area, Professional Development

The Faulty Memory of Nostalgia

The December holiday season is steeped in nostalgia, whether we’re singing about sleigh bells ringing and roasting chestnuts over an open fire or reflecting back on past years as we look ahead to a new one. We constantly reminisce about a past that probably did not happen quite as we remember it. This fond, if flawed, recollection of the past is a constant presence in academia, from looking back at the good old days (remember when all Ph.D. graduates could get professorial jobs?) to invoking academic tradition to discourage innovation (the dissertation has always looked like this; why change it?).

This inaccurate recollection of the past of academia and how it can hinder the transition to a new model of doctoral education were two of the main topics under discussion at the most recent meeting of the “‘Living Humanities’ PhD for the 21st Century” project. Entitled “Revitalize Learning Outcomes,” this meeting featured guest speaker Sidonie Smith, Mary Fair Croushore Professor of the Humanities at the University of Michigan and the author of Manifesto for the Humanities: Transforming Doctoral Education in Good Enough Times (available open-access from University of Michigan Press).

There are many exciting developments happening in higher education in this digital age. In her presentation, Smith discussed the use of new media for scholarly communication, shifting knowledge structures that focus as much on collaboration as on individual research, and a distributed university that has graduate students working not only with one or two faculty members at their own institutions, but also faculty and fellow students at institutions around the world.

But alongside these steps towards a more digital, collaborative model for higher education, there is also resistance to change. Smith explained how these changes could be misunderstood by faculty members, who sometimes perceive projects that use this new model as a Ph.D. “lite,” as opposed to a Ph.D. based on the more traditional formats they are accustomed to – a single student writing a proto-monograph with the assistance of a select committee of faculty members. With their students’ best interests in mind, some faculty advisers fear that making changes to the doctoral degree or dissertation can harm candidates’ prospects on the academic job market, rendering them less able to compete with their peers. Addressing these concerns, Smith is very direct – if we stick to the twentieth-century model of graduate education, we are actually disadvantaging our students, as these normative standards do not assure academic excellence.

Not only are these so-called normative standards not a guarantee for excellence, but they have also not always been the norm for doctoral education. As I said, nostalgia can give a flawed perspective of the past that does not match the historical reality. For instance, one professor from English highlighted that the current gold standard for the dissertation in the field, a four-chapter proto-monograph, was not always the only option. Going back to the 1960s and 70s, he noted the accepted alternatives of the critical edition of a neglected text or the three-chapter dissertation. If dissertation structures have changed before, can they not do so again? In the same vein, another professor noted that our concept of the academic tradition is not as fixed as we would like to believe, but instead is made up of many subtle, continuous changes over time.

With so many avenues available for doctoral students and faculty in the humanities to create innovative projects and take research beyond the boundaries of the university, we need to take a hard look at the traditions that we cling to. So as we immerse ourselves in the holiday season and prepare to face 2017, let’s try to set aside our nostalgia about the academia of yesteryear.

To read more about the “Revitalize Learning Outcomes” planning theme, see its description on the website for “The ‘Living Humanities’ Ph.D. for the 21st Century.” If you want to learn more about the meeting itself, read the full discussion in the official minutes. For the reading material for this meeting, see Sidonie Smith’s Manifesto for the Humanities: Transforming Doctoral Education in Good Enough Times.   If you want to learn more about the meeting itself, read the full discussion in the official minutes.

Leave a Comment

Filed under "Living Humanities" Ph.D., Faculty, Higher Ed, NEH

What We Talk About When We Talk About Mentoring

The following post is a response/reflection to the Third Meeting of NEH Project on The Living Humanities PhD in the 21st Century, “Ensure Access and Inclusion.” For an overview of the meeting see the minutes here or read through our overview posts here and here

~

As we reexamine the reality and the possibilities associated with the Humanities Ph.D., the relationship between mentor and mentee should be central to our considerations.

While it is generally accepted that mentoring is integral to the experience of graduate students, greater clarity about the purpose – or purposes – of mentoring is needed.

  • Why is this relationship integral to the students, not just academically, but professionally and personally?
  • What do we hope to accomplish as a result of mentoring?
  • What are successful mentoring outcomes?

This seems obvious in the sense that institutionally successful mentoring culminates in the awarding of a degree. It is likely that many mentees share this perspective. But perhaps it is important to reexamine the various aspects of the student experience a successful mentor may affect. As we look at the humanities today it becomes obvious that the awarding a degree is not automatically equating to a tenure-track job, or even a satisfactory academic experience. A mentor is largely a guiding force toward the Ph.D., but a successful relationship and a lauded mentor often engage farther.

On November 15th, the “The ‘Living Humanities’ Ph.D. for the 21st Century” group tackled the theme of “access and inclusion”— a theme that we cannot untangle from the issue of mentoring, especially considering retention and completion rates. If we look to diversify higher education at the doctoral level, it must also be our goal to strengthen existing mentoring processes and, if necessary, modify them to support our changing community and academic landscape. To do this, we need to examine the roles that mentors ideally fill.

If other outcomes beyond basic matriculation might also be considered components of successful mentoring, what should they be?  Below is a potential list of mentoring components and associated outcomes:

  • Academic– the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s advancement toward completion of the degree.
  • Disciplinary– the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s increasing expertise in a specific discipline as evidenced by advancement through the curriculum as well as participation in discipline-specific events (conferences, conclaves, and webinars).
  • Social– the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s increasing social integration as evidenced by participation in “extra-curricular” events and the development of a social network. As studies show students in graduate programs feel they lack “community” this aspect seems extremely vital.
  • Professional– the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s progress in the development of a professional network as evidenced by attendance at recruiting events, a completed CV and the development of a professional network. Professional mentoring and support should not be limited to academic careers, and a successful mentor, if not able to advise on alternative professional outcomes should be able to advise the student where to find them.
  • Ethical – the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s growing sense of the ethical implications of holding an advanced degree as evidenced by measures specific to a given discipline.
  • Cultural– the mentoring relationship will support the mentee’s understanding of the complex nature (values, practices, norms) of academia and of a particular discipline. This last outcome seems central, especially given the exclusionary history of the development of these cultural norms and practices. Outcome measures seem more elusive.

If we look at this list, it becomes increasingly clear that the mentor serves as a touch point for most aspects of the student experience and that without responsible mentorship students will flounder even more in the uncertain landscape of Higher Ed. We need to better understand how departments (and who in them) are filling these roles. So, how can we as an academic community and institution evaluate and access mentorship across disciplines?

Perhaps the development of a rubric might serve to help broaden how mentoring is evaluated and how a successful mentoring relationship at GSAS is not limited to achieving the degree. This is helpful for the purposes of reporting – it may behoove us to have many dimensions along which mentors and mentees can experience success. A rubric might help with the development of training protocols for mentors, evaluating the effectiveness of mentoring and providing clear expectations for mentees.

  • Steven D’Agustino, Ph.D., Director of Online Learning, Fordham University
  • Dewis Shallcross, Director of Student Development, GSAS ‘14

Leave a Comment

Filed under "Living Humanities" Ph.D., Higher Ed, NEH

Helping Students to Navigate through Graduate School: Let’s Talk About Mentorship

This is post two on the “Ensure Access and Inclusion” theme- see part one here!

~

Entering graduate school can be a bewildering experience. As well as struggling with the demands of coursework and the expectations of professors, students must also learn the norms of their new environment. For some, this process is a necessary component of preparing for a doctoral degree. For others, it feels needlessly punitive and even like a form of hazing.

The question of how to welcome new students into the community of the graduate school and into individual departments was a central component of the meeting on Access and Inclusion, especially for the group focusing on student retention and support. The discussion in this group centered on one possibility for helping students acclimatize to the department – mentorships between students and faculty members. A productive mentorship can open a window into departmental culture and practices for students, as well as fostering the passion for the subject that prompted them to enter graduate school in the first place. Ideally, faculty mentors could not only provide valuable resources to their mentees and increase their confidence, but also develop a relationship with them that is goes beyond the requirements for the degree.

These ideal mentorships can be an asset for a department, but they depend on one key element: the mentor him or herself.

While many graduate students develop beneficial mentorships with faculty members, some are less lucky. Different faculty members can have different expectations and rules for their relationships with students, which may be implicit, and students can also feel apprehensive approaching their mentors with their own expectations and issues. Stories of less-than-ideal relationships between faculty and students often circulate within departments, and students are subtly discouraged from pursuing relationships that could prove problematic.

Departments can help students create fruitful mentorships by encouraging them to develop relationships with several faculty members to evaluate them as possible mentors, but why should the burden of developing a mentorship fall entirely on the student? Drawing on their own experiences as current and former graduate students, meeting participants agreed that approaching faculty members can be a daunting task, especially for students who don’t feel they fit into the culture of the department.

Instead, why not ask students what they expect from a mentorship, and provide guidelines for both mentees and mentors that draw on? Departments might also consider building other forms of mentorship that could help bring students into their community. For instance, students may feel more confident sharing their problems with peers who are further along in their studies. Departments can also introduce students to their culture and expectations through a foundation class, such as the Graduate Proseminar in Fordham’s Philosophy department.

Mentorships can help students become happier and more confident members of the graduate school community. To reap these benefits, however, we have to consider the burden that we place on students to create strong relationships with mentors as well as the hidden expectations on both sides that can undermine these relationships.

~

To read more about the “Access and Inclusion” planning theme (including a recommended reading list), see its description on the website for “The ‘Living Humanities’ Ph.D. for the 21st Century.” If you want to learn more about the meeting itself, read the full discussion in the official minutes.

  • Samantha Sabalis, Graduate Assistant, NEH/GSAS Grant, The “Living Humanities” Ph.D. for the 21st Century

Leave a Comment

Filed under "Living Humanities" Ph.D., Eva Badowska, GSAS Dean, Higher Ed, NEH

Opening the Gates: Ensuring Access and Inclusion During the Admission Process

On Tuesday, November 15th, “The ‘Living Humanities’ Ph.D. for the 21st Century” held its second meeting, focusing on the planning theme of “Ensure Access and Inclusion.” For this meeting, the group was split into two parts, which will be addressed in two different blog posts (see part two here). In this post, I focus on the first group’s discussion on admissions, considering how GSAS programs in the humanities can attract and admit under-represented groups during the admissions process. A subsequent post will focus on the second group’s discussion on retention, mentoring, and student support for under-represented groups once they are attending the GSAS programs in the humanities.

~

So what are these “under-represented groups” at Fordham? This term includes but is not limited to prospective and current students who are members of racial and ethnic minority communities, members of faiths other than Christianity, members of LGBTQ communities, and/or members of economically and academically disadvantaged communities. Meeting participants considered how these groups are not mutually exclusive and how diversity goes beyond racial differences, often including hidden identifiers that students may not be comfortable revealing.

And how can humanities programs in the GSAS attract members from these under-represented groups? The discussion focused on three elements: advertising the programs to create a more diverse applicant pool, rethinking how we evaluate applications to potentially create a more diverse student body, and above all considering the application process from the applicant’s point of view. Group members suggested advertising Fordham’s programs to promising applicants from under-represented groups by working more intensely with institutions in the neighborhoods around our campuses in the Bronx and Manhattan and using faculty contacts to forge links with institutions catering primarily to communities not well-represented at Fordham, such as historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs).

As well as reaching out to these communities, group members considered factors that could discourage promising students from applying to graduate school, such as the many costs that prospective students face and the uncertain payoff of a Ph.D. degree in the current academic job market. Applying for a Ph.D. is an expensive proposition, including hefty fees to prepare for and take the GRE test, but even after students are accepted they must reach further into their pockets to pay for moving expenses and the deposit on a new home. To address initial expenses, the group suggested forgiving GRE fees for admitted students and providing advance funding for the transition to start graduate school.

Mitigating these costs still leaves the price of the degree itself. The cost of attending a Ph.D. program must be balanced with the rewards at its conclusion – if students do not want traditional academic jobs or feel that the market is too competitive, they see no point to even applying. To address these perceptions of limited or lackluster job prospects, the group proposed showcasing a wider range of career paths for Ph.D. graduates on the university website that could appeal to a broader group of applicants.

~

But encouraging promising students to apply is only half the battle; they must also be admitted into Fordham’s programs. The group confronted current markers of privilege in evaluating graduate applications and how to acknowledge them. For instance, they noted that committees rely heavily on the GRE General test as a marker for student potential, but higher scores on this test have been linked with higher socio-economic status. As GRE scores are used for university ratings, the group found it impractical to get rid of the test entirely. Instead, they suggested training admissions committees about its limitations as a marker of academic potential to encourage them to take a more holistic view of each student’s application. The group then considered looking at applications without any clues to the applicant’s identity. One innovative suggestion focused on a technique called Blind Hiring, pioneered in Silicon Valley, which strips all identity markers from application materials and has resulted in more diverse and talented hires.

~

To read more about this planning theme (including a recommended reading list), see its description on the website for “The ‘Living Humanities’ Ph.D. for the 21st Century.”

  • Samantha Sabalis, Graduate Assistant, NEH/GSAS Grant, The “Living Humanities” Ph.D. for the 21st Century

Leave a Comment

Filed under "Living Humanities" Ph.D., Community, Graduate Students, GSAS Dean, Higher Ed, NEH

Humanities Institute Fellowship Opportunity

Current Ph.D.s or recent post-docs look into this fellowship from our partner, The New York Botanical Garden.

Deadline: January 13, 2017

~

The Humanities Institute—a research division within the LuEsther T. Mertz Library at the New York Botanical Garden, supported by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation—engages an intellectual community of students, fellows, and visiting scholars, whose research focuses on areas of inquiry connecting natural history to the human experience. The Institute creates a forum for stimulating new thinking on subjects that reconnect the sciences and humanities.

The Humanities Institute is pleased to offer a full-time, residential Andrew W. Mellon Fellowship for 2017 for current Ph.D. students or recent post-doctoral researchers. Candidates are invited to submit a proposal for independent research in the environmental humanities. The application deadline is January 13, 2017.

~

Application and instructions can be found here.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Fellowships and Grants, Graduate Students, New York/Fordham Area, Off-Campus Housing

“Words Matter” Graduate Conference Call for Proposals!

Words Matter: Politics, Rhetoric, and Social Justice
Indiana University Bloomington
March 24-25, 2017

Submission Deadline: December 16, 2016
iugradconference@gmail.com 

~

Indiana University Bloomington is issuing a Call for Proposals for scholarly and creative submissions for the 15th Annual Interdisciplinary Graduate Student Conference entitled “Words Matter: Politics, Rhetoric, and Social Justice.”

Hosted by the English Department, this conference aims to interrogate politics, rhetoric, and social justice in moments of national and international upheaval. They aim to address these terms individually, but also their entanglements across historical moments and geographical locations.

~

What are the modern and pre-modern histories of these terms? How do literary and visual texts engage questions of politics, rhetoric, and social justice? What are the physical and material manifestations of these concepts? How do genre, discipline, and methodology impact the representation and study of these topics? What roles do both written and spoken words have in politics? Who/what has a voice and who/what is silenced socially and politically? How is rhetoric informed by politics, and what are the implications of their entanglements? What do we mean by “social justice” and how has this term been shaped historically? How do digital and virtual cultures intersect with social justice, and how have those cultures changed our perceptions of political movement and rhetorical engagement?

They invite submissions from all disciplines addressing, but not limited to, the following topics:

  • Black Lives Matter, critical race studies, (anti-)colonial and postcolonial literature;
  • materialisms, phenomenology, object oriented ontology;
  • testimony, witnessing, civic duty;
  • anatomy, bodies of texts (corpora), the blazoned body;
  • language(s), translations, textuality, signification, vernacular/discourse studies;
  • advertising, memes, slander, mudslinging, rumors, gossip, virality, trolling, verbal abuse;
  • articulations of remembrance, monuments, postmemory han, therapy writing, memoirs, trauma study;
  • tattoos, body art, graffiti, banners;
  • protest literature, pamphlets, broadsides, community activism, grassroots politics;
  • reproductive rights, gender and sexuality studies;
  • legality, legislation, legal personhood, “the letter of the law,” sovereignty;
  • writing as activism, digital activism, Twitter, journalism, letter-writing campaigns, epistolary cultures;
  • communication studies, composition studies, pedagogy;
  • lyrics, music/sound studies, poetry;
  • global citizens, peace studies, area studies, nationhood;
  • vocality, muteness, silence, censorship, animal advocacy, post-humanism;
  • storytelling, myths, typology, “a people’s history;”
  • close/distant readings, scales of reading, big data, text mining;
  • structuralism, poetics, aesthetics, formalism, figurative language;
  • sacred words, religion, naming

They invite proposals for individual scholarly papers, creative works, and panels organized by topic. Please submit (both as an attachment and in the body of the email) an abstract of no more than 250 words along with the following personal details: name, institutional affiliation, degree level, email, and phone number.

Email submissions to iugradconference@gmail.com.

~

This conference is generously supported by the IU Bloomington Department of English, Department of Anthropology, Department of African American and African Diaspora Studies, and Cultural Studies Program.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Conference, Events, Graduate Students, Networking

Message to the GSAS Community

Dear Members of the GSAS Community,

Now that we begin to grapple with the significance of today’s historic election results, it is vital for us to reaffirm our purpose as a community of scholars, teachers, and students. This morning, as we woke to deep divisions and yet-to-be-fathomed realignments, I recalled the words of the GSAS mission: “Guided by its Catholic and Jesuit traditions, we aspire to prepare students for teaching and leadership in a global society, by welcoming learners from diverse religious, economic, and cultural backgrounds into full participation in a scholarly endeavor.” We should be proud to belong to a community that defines itself in these diverse and inclusive terms in the service of knowledge, wisdom, and the common good.

Today I am asking all of us—professors, students, and administrators–to rededicate ourselves to the university and to our academic community because it remains a vital embodiment of that hope that only education can offer to the poor, the marginalized, the fearful, the oppressed, and the disenfranchised. Never has the power of education in creating spaces of choice, hope, and possibility been clearer. I am grateful for the depth of commitment you bring to the work of research, reading, experimentation, analysis, and teaching–to all those minute daily motions of academic freedom that end up expanding the funds of knowledge and shrinking the domains of prejudice.

Eva Badowska,
Dean, GSAS

Leave a Comment

Filed under Community, Eva Badowska, Graduate Students, GSAS Dean, GSAS Students, Higher Ed, New York/Fordham Area