KKH sux
Soc PhD students respond to KKH
-
^^ white privilege: 84% of APs in sociology are white, while only 67% of those earning a phd in sociology are white.
Where did you get the 84% white APs number?Found it: Figure 11. It was actually 83% white of all soc faculty in 2000/2001--not just APs. So you took the percentage of white PhDs from 2017 and compared it with the total white faculty in 2000/2001. See your mistake now?
-
Or they apply to lower ranked schools.
What does applications per job offer mean?
I thought it means how many applications they send for every offer they received.
If Hispanics sent out 32 applications for every job versus Whites sending out 21 applications for each job, doesn't it mean, Hispanics have it more difficult?
It might, if you took that number in isolation and ignored the rest of the report. But that number was only for Hispanic ABDs. Meanwhile, Hispanic PhDs sent out fewer applications/offer than whites, and Hispanic PhDs have a higher tt employment rate than whites. Taking all this together, it's clear that Hispanic PhDs have an easier path to tt than white PhDs.
Too bad ASA dismantled its research operation. It would be good to have numbers more recent than 1998. -
Here are some more recent numbers:
"the proportion of doctorates … awarded to Hispanics or Latinos has grown from 5.1% to 7.0%." (between 2005 to 2015).
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17306/static/report/nsf17306.pdfIn fall 2017, about 6% of college faculty were Hispanic.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=61 -
It's not a mistake. I used the available data. These numbers are likely worse because of the 2008 recession and the residual slack associated with it. It would be illogical to think that the numbers have gotten better during a more competitive labor market.
^^ white privilege: 84% of APs in sociology are white, while only 67% of those earning a phd in sociology are white.
Where did you get the 84% white APs number?
Found it: Figure 11. It was actually 83% white of all soc faculty in 2000/2001--not just APs. So you took the percentage of white PhDs from 2017 and compared it with the total white faculty in 2000/2001. See your mistake now? -
the nsf data is for all fields, not just sociology or even social sciences. I have a book to write so I don't have time to do this, but if you have time take a look at the top 20 programs in sociology. Look at the pictures and first/last names and count how many Latinx faculty members you see. Take a few respectable, but not top program like: Penn State= 0 Latinx faculty. UNC=0 Latinx faculty. UC Davis sociology= 0 Latinx faculty. Or even programs with high large Latinx student populations like UCSD (2 Latinx faculty) or Arizona (2 Latinx faculty). That's not even looking at the top of the top.
-
the nsf data is for all fields, not just sociology or even social sciences. I have a book to write so I don't have time to do this, but if you have time take a look at the top 20 programs in sociology. Look at the pictures and first/last names and count how many Latinx faculty members you see. Take a few respectable, but not top program like: Penn State= 0 Latinx faculty. UNC=0 Latinx faculty. UC Davis sociology= 0 Latinx faculty. Or even programs with high large Latinx student populations like UCSD (2 Latinx faculty) or Arizona (2 Latinx faculty). That's not even looking at the top of the top.
Yes, more data is considered a good thing for numerate people. The cumulative data shows essentially full employment for Hispanic PhDs. It completely contradicts your discrimination hypothesis.
-
The only mistake I see is your lack of understanding on how to read tables and make conclusions about available data.
Ah, so you don't see your mistake. Someone else spell it out for her. I usually get paid to educate the ig/norant.You misrepresented total soc faculty as AP faculty, and completely failed to reason longitudinally. Try to think it through, and you'll see where you went wrong.
-
We don't have recent data for sociology faculty broken down by ranking. So we have to use available data to make the argument, but since you don't like the argument, you claim that the data is flawed because it's not recent. And, to make matters worse, you do not provide recent data showing that in sociology (!), the patterns have changed. Rather, you rely on data for all fields in academia to conclude that there is not discrimination in sociology. I'm sure your research is really high quality.
-
We don't have recent data for sociology faculty broken down by ranking. So we have to use available data to make the argument, but since you don't like the argument, you claim that the data is flawed because it's not recent. And, to make matters worse, you do not provide recent data showing that in sociology (!), the patterns have changed. Rather, you rely on data for all fields in academia to conclude that there is not discrimination in sociology. I'm sure your research is really high quality.
You really don't understand how misrepresenting total faculty percentages as AP percentages is a problem? I will spell it out for you: Total faculty percentages from 1998 includes people hired in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. That includes many cohorts where the percentage of Hispanic PhDs was far less than the 2017 percentage. You are assuming that the 2017 percentage is relevant to those earlier cohorts, but the available data shows that it has doubled since the even early 90s.
-
what has doubled since the 1990s? IF you look at the graph closely, you will see quite a bit of fluctuations for the percentage of Hispanics PhDs. In 1989 and 1990, 7.7 and 8.0 percent of all PhD recipients in sociology were Hispanics, respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the most recent years, 9.3 and 8.7 percent of all PhD recipients in soc were Hispanic. So, if you are able to read graphs (again, I feel like I have to tutor you on this), we see that you are wrong in claiming that "the percentage of Hispanics PhDs was far less than the 2017 percentage."
-
We don't have recent data for sociology faculty broken down by ranking. So we have to use available data to make the argument, but since you don't like the argument, you claim that the data is flawed because it's not recent. And, to make matters worse, you do not provide recent data showing that in sociology (!), the patterns have changed. Rather, you rely on data for all fields in academia to conclude that there is not discrimination in sociology. I'm sure your research is really high quality.
The NSF data shows that there is full employment for Hispanic PhDs in academia. Now you want us to believe that sociology is somehow more discr/iminatory than academia as a whole? Really?
-
what has doubled since the 1990s? IF you look at the graph closely, you will see quite a bit of fluctuations for the percentage of Hispanics PhDs. In 1989 and 1990, 7.7 and 8.0 percent of all PhD recipients in sociology were Hispanics, respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the most recent years, 9.3 and 8.7 percent of all PhD recipients in soc were Hispanic. So, if you are able to read graphs (again, I feel like I have to tutor you on this), we see that you are wrong in claiming that "the percentage of Hispanics PhDs was far less than the 2017 percentage."
The 2007 ASA report contradicts your numbers here. If you have data, cite it. But for now I'm going to assume that you misrepresented the ASA report yet again.
-
guys really, don't invite us not to think. POC PhDs have it so easy nowadays and it is OK. Some of them are on perfect fellowships throughout their graduate career. They have white guilty faculty backing them; so that the faculty with white guilt can feel at peace at last.
-
okay, last try. According to the ASA report (https://www.asanet.org/research-and-publications/research-sociology/trends/doctorates-awarded-sociology-race-or-ethnicity), 8.7% of PhDs were Hispanic in 2016. Are you following me? Now, we DO NOT have data for 2016 about the percentage of TT APs in Sociology, so we will use the NSF data. The NSF data shows that only 6 percent of TT APs in all fields (not just sociology) are Hispanic. Now, this is a 3% gap. Are you still following me? So, where is your evidence that I am misrepresenting the data? There is no full employment in TT AP for Hispanics.
what has doubled since the 1990s? IF you look at the graph closely, you will see quite a bit of fluctuations for the percentage of Hispanics PhDs. In 1989 and 1990, 7.7 and 8.0 percent of all PhD recipients in sociology were Hispanics, respectively. In 2015 and 2016, the most recent years, 9.3 and 8.7 percent of all PhD recipients in soc were Hispanic. So, if you are able to read graphs (again, I feel like I have to tutor you on this), we see that you are wrong in claiming that "the percentage of Hispanics PhDs was far less than the 2017 percentage."
The 2007 ASA report contradicts your numbers here. If you have data, cite it. But for now I'm going to assume that you misrepresented the ASA report yet again.