The 2012 rankings feature ratings of full-residency, low-residency, and doctoral programs in creative writing on the basis of their popularity, funding, selectivity, fellowship-placement statistics, job-placement statistics, and student-to-faculty ratios. In each of the three rankings, programs are listed in order of their popularity ranking, from most to least popular. Also included in each table are unranked categories of other important program features, such as size, duration, cost of living, foreign-language requirements, and the availability of cross-genre study.
Should I rely on these tables to choose where to apply?
No. The following
tables offer information to help you begin your research about which program is
best for you. The best programs are those that will provide you with the
experience you need to thrive as you hone your skills as a writer and refine
your craft. You are the only one who can determine the criteria that will
result in such an experience. As you research programs, you should prioritize
which features are most important to you. Are you most interested in working
with a particular writer? Do you need to apply only to a program that will give
you funding to attend? Is location a crucial factor? Do you want other
professional experience during your tenure, such as teaching, editing,
bookmaking, or publishing? These are the questions you must ask yourself as you
begin your decision-making process. For more information about how to approach
your search, turn to page 85 and read what program representatives advise.
What if the program I’m
most interested in isn’t included in these rankings?
That doesn’t mean
it’s not the right program for you. Read rankings
of the other eighty-one full-residency and thirty-nine low-residency programs.
How were the overall
rankings determined?
For the
full-residency MFA program rankings, 640 MFA applicants
were asked during the 2010–2011 application cycle where they applied for
the forthcoming academic year. For the low-residency MFA program
rankings, 230 applicants to low-residency programs were asked during the last
four application cycles where they applied. For the doctoral rankings, 145
applicants from the last four application cycles were asked to provide their
application lists. In each case, the size of the group surveyed roughly
corresponds to the size of the national applicant pool for that type of degree
program; for instance, there are six times as many annual applicants to
full-residency MFA programs as creative writing doctoral programs. In
each of the three rankings, a vote for a program equates to one appearance of
that program on an applicant’s reported application list.
Who surveyed these applicants and how?
Attorney, poet,
editor, and freelance journalist Seth Abramson conducted the surveys for the
overall rankings, and compiled all the hard data for the other rankings that
appear in each of the tables. Full-residency applicants were surveyed on one of
the highest-traffic MFA-related websites, the Creative Writing MFA Blog,
founded in August 2005 by Tom Kealey, author of The Creative Writing MFA Handbook
(Continuum, 2005). Abramson is one of seventeen designated moderators for the
discussion board at the Creative Writing MFA Blog.
Moderators have the authority to initiate new discussion threads; posting
privileges for the board are available to all visitors, but require a Google
account. Moderators may participate in blog discussions along with other
registered users. Abramson posted the question, “Where are you planning to
apply?” fifteen times from April 16, 2010, to April 15, 2011, and catalogued responses
from full-residency MFA applicants. Between April 16, 2007, and April 15,
2010, Abramson surveyed applicants to doctoral programs in creative writing by
cataloguing their posted application lists on the Speakeasy Message Forum on
the Poets & Writers website. For the 2010–2011 application cycle,
these applicants were instead polled using a Google-sponsored polling
application. Low-residency applicants were surveyed by cataloguing their posted
application lists on the Speakeasy Message Forum on the Poets & Writers
website between April 16, 2007, and April 15, 2011.
What qualifies Abramson to do this work?
Abramson has been
researching and collecting data about graduate creative writing programs from
applicants, faculty, and program directors for five years. He has established
himself as an authority on this subject. A 2001 graduate of Harvard Law School,
he is also a 2009 graduate of the Iowa Writers’ Workshop and the author of two
poetry collections. He was a contributing author to the second edition of The Creative Writing MFA Handbook
(Continuum, 2008) and is coauthor of a third edition forthcoming from
Bloomsbury in 2012. His essays on creative writing graduate programs have been
cited by the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, the New Yorker, the Economist, the Los Angeles Times, the Huffington Post, the Poetry Foundation’s website, and elsewhere.
He is the founder of the Suburban Ecstasies, a website offering the largest
online archive of MFA statistics. He regularly addresses university
audiences on the subject of graduate creative writing programs, and researches
the history and development of such programs as part of his doctoral studies in
English literature at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. All of the data
compiled by Abramson for these rankings was or is either publicly available or
publicly accessible.
Why survey applicants to
programs and not students and faculty?
Applicants have a vested interest in researching and
comparing as many programs as possible and have no special interest in favoring
one program over another, aside from their own preferences. Those applicants
who frequent the Creative Writing MFA Blog have
demonstrated something of an aptitude for online research, as the discussion
board on the MFA blog
comprises a hundreds-strong community of applicants who ask one another
questions, pool their information on programs and program faculties, and engage
in joint research projects. MFA students
and faculty at particular programs—while experts on where they attend and
teach—are less likely to have compared their programs with others as
recently as applicants have. And it’s more likely that students and faculty
have a natural affinity for their own program over others. The standard
practice in education rankings—the one used, for instance, for the
nation’s oldest annual education rankings, those published by U.S.
News & World Report since 1985—is to disallow polling of
individuals regarding institutions with which they have a present or prior
affiliation. The Poets & Writers Magazine rankings adhere to
this tradition.
What are the primary
expectations and concerns of the applicants surveyed?
Between 2009 and
2011, research regarding the applicants surveyed was conducted on both the
Creative Writing MFA Blog and the Suburban Ecstasies, including
individual polls regarding applicant demographics; these polls received many
hundreds of responses. The results of this research reveal that the four most
important values in this community of applicants are program funding, program
location, program reputation, and program faculty. The rankings that follow
reflect these values. For more information on the demographics of the surveyed
applicant group, see www.pw.org/magazine.
How is the quality of a
school’s faculty accounted for in these rankings?
These rankings
measure the quality of a program’s faculty to the extent that it was taken into
account by those surveyed when they decided where to apply. And it’s reasonable
to assume that this factor was taken into account to a substantial degree, as
faculty quality is one of the top four concerns for members of the surveyed
group. Nevertheless, applicants do report some hesitation in judging the
quality of teaching at a program on the basis of the writing aptitude of its
faculty. Those interested in researching programs primarily on the basis of
program faculty can visit our MFA database at
www.pw.org/mfa, which lists the core faculty for each program. To learn more specifics
about the teaching abilities of individual faculty members, contact the
programs to which you plan to apply and speak to the program director about how
faculty teaching is evaluated. Also, ask to speak to currently enrolled
students about their experiences. Keep in mind, programs have varying policies
regarding providing the names of current and former students to applicants.
Aside from the columns that are
self-explanatory, what do the other columns in the top-fifty and honorable-mentions full-residency tables refer to?
Poetry Rank refers
to the most popular programs applied to in poetry, Fiction Rank refers to the
most popular programs applied to in fiction, and Nonfiction Rank refers to the
most popular programs applied to in nonfiction. Total-Funding Rank refers to
the programs that offer, dollar-wise, the most valuable funding packages (1
being the most valuable). Selectivity Rank refers to how selective each program is in accepting
students into its program (1 being the most selective). Fellowship-Placement Rank refers
to how successful graduating
students from each program are in being awarded
distinguished fellowships in the creative writing field. Job-Placement
Rank refers to how successful graduating students from each program are at
being hired for full-time creative writing teaching jobs at the university
level. Student-Faculty Ratio Rank refers to the number of core faculty members
per student at each program (1 being the most faculty members per student).
What is CGSR Compliance?
CGSR stands for the Council of Graduate Schools
Resolution, a document known colloquially as “the April 15 Resolution” and more
formally as the Council of Graduate Schools Resolution Regarding Graduate
Scholars, Fellows, Trainees and Assistants. The resolution requires those
universities that are signatories to keep all funded graduate school admission
offers open through April 15 of each year. Those universities that are not
signatories and/or have violated the resolution are indicated with No.
In the PhD
rankings, what does Departmental-Reputation Rank refer to?
Data from the 2010
National Research Council doctoral rankings was used to order programs on the
basis of their English departments’ relative reputations for academic quality.
The National Research Council Quality Measure, which quantifies
individual departments’ academic quality, comprises two scores. One of these
scores is the result of a survey of individuals in the same academic field as
the department, and another is the result of a multivariable regression
analysis. For the purposes of the doctoral rankings, these two scores have been
averaged.
And what does
the column Offers MFA/MPW refer to?
This column
indicates whether a master of fine arts degree in creative writing or a master
of professional writing degree is also offered at the listed university.
Where can I
find more information about graduate programs in creative writing?
Visit our MFA database (www.pw.org/mfa), which includes program information
such as core faculty, application deadlines, and other distinguishing features,
plus contact information for each program. To share information and read insights
from other students and applicants, visit the MFA Programs topic in our
Speakeasy Message Forum (www.pw.org/speakeasy).
Comments
Caterina replied on Permalink
various selectivity indices
I didn't spend more than a few minutes finding these links, but I thought I would mention in a bit more detail: Not all measures of college or program "selectivity" equate that characteristic with acceptance rates; for example, some selectivity rankings combine SAT or GRE scores with the number of students admitted:
*****
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p226257217h46575/
*****
Yale's Dean of Undergraduate Admissions also doesn't necessarily equate the two
(http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/2009/sep/17/up-close-admissions-how-low-can-yale-go/):
*****
“'My general sense is that the number of students at the most competitive end of the spectrum for admission has changed less than the attraction or appeal of putting in an application to see what happens,' he said in a recent interview. 'That is, the application base may be swelling, but it isn’t necessarily because you have a lot more students who are at the most highly qualified end of the applicant pool.'
*****
"And so, Brenzel said, Yale’s acceptance rate may not necessarily mean heightened selectivity."
*****
Of course, the writing sample is, according to my understanding, by far the most important admission criterion for most MFA programs (some programs also place importance in a statement of purpose, but the program I attended didn't ask for such a statement). I don't know, though, how an MFA rankings system could possibly measure the overall quality of writing samples.
*****
In any case, for MFA programs, ranking "acceptance rates" rather than "selectivity" seems to me more descriptively accurate.
*****
Thanks,
C/L