Next stop: the History and Philosophy of Science Department at the University of Pittsburgh. I was shown around by Jonah Schupbach, a grad student I’d met in Konstanz last September. Coincidentally we were both there to present a paper we co-authored with Jan, my BA supervisor. Jonah kindly showed me around at the department, introduced me to a number of other grad students and Bryan, Peter, him and me went out for lunch together and had a nice discussion about Kevin Zollman’s paper at the grad student conference this weekend.
Unlike CMU, HPS does not have people working on topics that are directly related to my research interests so far (decision / rational choice theory). John Norton and Jim Woodward might be pretty good matches, with interests in philosophy of probability, general philosophy of science and philosophy of social science (unfortunately neither of them were around when I visited). If I were to come here, I would get a very broad education in history and philosophy of science and presumably branch into new research interests (in addition, perhaps, to satisfying some of my rational choice interests at CMU). Although I’m sure this would be great fun, I tentatively view this as a pretty big disadvantage of coming to Pitt.
Which is a shame, as this place scores nearly perfectly on any other criterion I can think of. I really liked the grad students I met (nearly half of the total population) as well as the faculty I spoke to. Although the student:faculty ratio is much higher here (3:1) than at CMU (1:1), I understand that most of the faculty members are around and available most of the time.
As I mentioned in my previous entry, the academic climate here in Pittsburgh is outstanding, with interesting stuff going on all the time between Pitt HPS, Pitt Philosophy, the Center for Philosophy of Science and CMU. As Jonah put it: “if you take some initiative to mingle with the CMU and Pitt Philosophy students and faculty, it really feels like one big department”. Note to self: it would be interesting to compare the size of this combined department to for instance the size of Ann Arbor’s department.
The funding package is very generous, in the vicinity of $24,000 plus most of your conference and reading expenses. Given that Pittsburgh is one of the cheapest cities in the US this should be more than sufficient. Although I probably won’t know for certain until a few days before the April 15 deadline, in recent years they have been able to offer funding to all waitlisted students eventually.
The course load is apparently quite heavy, with students taking courses for three or four years. Unlike at CMU, “courses” that are really research time don’t seem to exist. On the other hand, the teaching load is guaranteed to be light (as opposed to CMU, where it’s somewhat heavy in principle, with lots of possibilities to make it lighter). In your first five years (apparently most people end up taking six years) you have two teaching years and three “fellowship years”, usually the first, third and fifth, in which you have no obligations other than your own courses/research.
The facilities for PhD students are excellent, with office space on the 9th floor of the Cathedral of Learning (see picture), all of which have an amazing view. There is also a nice common room where the students seem to hang out quite a lot. The grad students all feel confident of landing a good job, as excellent support from the department has enabled them to maintain a 100% placement record for years. Both students and faculty also felt confident claiming that this is the best department in the world for philosophy and history of science.
Grad students report receiving ample opportunity and money to attend conferences and even to spend significant time at other universities. For instance, Jonah spent nine months at TiLPS in Tilburg, Bryan spent a semester at the University of California, Irvine, and Katherine is spending a year in Berlin.
Students are encouraged to publish on their own (as in this case there can be no doubt about intellectual ownership), but co-authoring with faculty also happens. An important part of the requirements for the PhD at Pitt are the comprehensive papers. These are two single author papers, one on history and one on philosophy of science, that should be of publishable quality, written at the end of the second year.
The faculty seem to get along well. By the grad students’ account there are no factions or animosities either intra-faculty or between Pitt HPS, Pitt Philosophy and CMU. The grad students also seem to have a collaborative atmosphere going on, sharing their work for instance in the well-attended weekly Work in Progress talks.
That concludes my notes on Pitt HPS. Next up: UPenn.
Hi Remco Nice blog! I can't think of specific questions you should ask (that have not already been mentioned by you or your friends), but if you have any LSE-related questions you think I could help you with, let me know! Enjoy your trip :)Susanne
BeantwoordenVerwijderen