American graduate education is in disarray. Graduate study in the humanities takes too long and those who succeed face a dismal academic job market. Leonard Cassuto gives practical advice about how faculty can teach and advise students so that they are prepared for the demands of the working worlds they will join, inside and outside the academy.

An essential handbook to the unwritten and often unspoken knowledge and skills you need to succeed in grad school Some of the most important things you need to know in order to succeed in graduate school—like how to choose a good advisor, how to get funding for your work, and whether to celebrate or cry when a journal tells you to revise and resubmit an article—won’t be covered in any class. They are part of a hidden curriculum that you are just expected to know or somehow learn on your own—or else. In this comprehensive survival guide for grad school, Jessica McCrory Calarco walks you through the secret knowledge and skills that are essential for navigating every critical stage of the postgraduate experience, from deciding whether to go to grad school in the first place to finishing your degree and landing a job. An invaluable resource for every prospective and current grad student in any discipline, A Field Guide to Grad School will save you grief—and help you thrive—in school and beyond. Provides invaluable advice about how to: Choose and apply to a graduate program Stay on track in your program Publish and promote your work Get the most out of conferences Navigate the job market Balance teaching, research, service, and life

How should we assess and present information about the quality of research-doctorate programs? In recommending that the 1995 NRC rankings in Assessing the Quality of Research-Doctorate Programs: Continuity and Change be updated as soon as possible, this study presents an improved approach to doctoral program assessment which will be useful to administrators, faculty, and others with an interest in improving the education of Ph.D.s in the United States. It reviews the methodology of the 1995 NRC rankings and recommends changes, including the collection of new data about Ph.D. students, additional data about faculty, and new techniques to present data on the qualitative assessment of doctoral program reputation. It also recommends revision of the taxonomy of fields from that used in the 1995 rankings.