Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
The Graduate Adviser

The Dissertation: Then, Now, and What Next?

We don’t need to scrap it, but we do need to look closely at its purpose

By Leonard Cassuto November 24, 2014
Careers - Dissertation Statue
Farrukh / Creative Commons

I have a confession to make: I enjoyed writing my dissertation.

I started writing it one spring when I realized that the notes I had been taking were really a rough draft. I set a schedule for myself: Between teaching obligations, I aimed to complete three pages each workday. I surprised myself how quickly my dissertation piled up at that rate, but a bigger surprise was how much fun it was. As I immersed myself in my material, ideas took flight in my head.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

I have a confession to make: I enjoyed writing my dissertation.

I started writing it one spring when I realized that the notes I had been taking were really a rough draft. I set a schedule for myself: Between teaching obligations, I aimed to complete three pages each workday. I surprised myself how quickly my dissertation piled up at that rate, but a bigger surprise was how much fun it was. As I immersed myself in my material, ideas took flight in my head.

Memories of that time returned when I read Dian Squire’s published response to an open letter I wrote to journal editors in October. In that column, I suggested that we might make a better world if editors refused to publish scholarly articles by graduate students. Students could focus on their dissertations that way and finish their degrees sooner, and hiring committees could use those same dissertations to evaluate applicants, instead of measuring their publication records. Lots of readers (including a number of journal editors) joined Squire in disagreeing with me.

My main point was that the ever-escalating demands for publication extend the apprenticeship of graduate students longer and longer. Instead of accepting or excusing the status quo, we need to look everywhere we can for ways to fix this “tragedy of the commons,” where people acting in their own honest interests wind up maintaining a system that brutalizes its least powerful participants.

Squire suggests that the problem isn’t the articles that graduate students have to write but rather the dissertation that competes with them. He calls it a “singular, extended Medieval hazing ritual.”

I’m not so sure about that. Moreover, the dissertation has more important purposes than serving as a barrier to full membership in the scholarly guild. The dissertation isn’t supposed to be just a demonstration of learning. It’s a part of graduate education, meaning that you learn by doing it. I certainly did.

Still, the dissertation is a main ingredient in the stew of problems that plague graduate education in this country right now. Squire asks for a conversation aimed at “meaningful, radical reform of the dissertation process and [the] form itself.” In fact, that conversation has been going on for awhile.

Any reform of the dissertation process starts at the intersection of two questions: What should a dissertation be? And how long should it take to write one?

Those questions are interdependent and inseparable. Most historians, for example, agree that a history dissertation should be an extended work of original—typically archival—scholarship. Given how long it takes to produce something like that, it’s understandable that historians have been slow to embrace a reduced time-to-degree (which stands at about nine years in the humanities).

The debate over how long it takes to earn a Ph.D. has some entrenched positions. “The protracted character of doctoral study burns out one’s scholarly interests,” says one academic. Another argues that “the article-length dissertation is just common sense and is long overdue.” Yet another warns that “it would be a serious error to debase the Ph.D. in the interest of reducing its time.”

ADVERTISEMENT

That back-and-forth ought to be familiar enough, but here’s the rub: Those quotations come from a book published in 1960, Graduate Education in the United States. We’ve been having the same arguments about time-to-degree for more than 60 years. While generations of us have fiddled, our graduate students remain in school for years on end.

The author of that 1960 study, Bernard Berelson, collected some of the first time-to-degree statistics, including the only numbers I’ve ever seen that measure the all-but-dissertation (A.B.D.) period. Back then, the time-to-degree rates that people were complaining about were, ahem, rather lower than what we see today. The median number of years spent “directly working on dissertation” were: 1.7 years in the physical sciences; 1.6 years in biological sciences; 1.1 in social sciences; 1.3 in humanities; 1.2 in engineering; and 0.9 in education.

The higher the Ph.D. unemployment rate, the more unconscionable it is to demand that all graduate students write the kind of dissertation best suited for research-driven academic jobs. Students need a chance to prepare themselves for the types of jobs that they are actually going to get, not just the one that graduate-school culture has deemed the ideal.

We ought to be able to step in and do something. After all, the doctoral dissertation is actually relatively new in graduate education. Introduced in the late 18th and early 19th centuries in Europe, it quickly became central—first over there and then here. The Johns Hopkins University, says the historian Roger L. Geiger in To Advance Knowledge, did more to “standardize” the Ph.D. in the United States than any other institution, not least because it awarded more of them than any other university during the formative decades of the 1870s and 1880s. Hopkins Ph.D.’s in turn became Professor Appleseeds, planting doctoral programs at public and private universities around the country. “By 1893,” writes the historian Laurence R. Veysey in his 1965 book, The Emergence of the American University, “some amount of graduate work was required to win a permanent appointment at nearly every prominent institution. At the turn of the century the Ph.D. degree was usually mandatory.”

ADVERTISEMENT

But the requirements for that degree have changed with the circumstances of the academic job market. When there were jobs for everyone, shorter theses abounded. When academic employment got more scarce, so did the quick finishers. The requirements for a doctorate have always been under construction.

Literature departments have proved more willing than historians to consider alternative dissertation formats that might take less time to complete. (However, English departments have stopped short of endorsing Louis Menand’s radically functional suggestion that one peer-reviewed article substitute for the dissertation. Menand’s suggestion is an outlier that serves the salutary purpose of exposing some of the sketchy ethics underlying the current time-to-degree.)

One possibility, advanced by the Harvard literature professor David Damrosch in 1995 and revived recently by current reformers, is to break the traditional monograph into a series of essays. The recent Report of the MLA Task Force on Doctoral Study in Modern Language and Literature offers this and other specific suggestions along those lines: An “expanded repertoire” of dissertation possibilities could include not only a suite of essays but also “Web-based projects,” translations (with apparatus), “public humanities projects,” and dissertations based in pedagogy.

Such proposals expand what is possible for graduate-student work, but they also question the traditional idea of who a graduate student is. A more flexible view of the dissertation may expand our definition of “scholar” (and “scholarship”)—but it might also lead to the position that some graduate students are not scholars at all.

ADVERTISEMENT

We have to oppose a narrow definition of “scholar.” To do otherwise would show a lack of imagination about academic work, to say nothing of a lack of concern for its future prospects. In a landmark 1990 essay, “Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate,” Ernest L. Boyer distinguished what he called the scholarship of teaching, the scholarship of integration, and the scholarship of application from the traditional scholarship of “discovery.”

Professors have operated for too long as though “discovery” were the only kind of scholarship worthy of the name. Even academics who teach heavy courseloads accept the prevailing value system that places the scholarship of discovery (and the publication it produces) at the top of the heap.

Under that value system, everyone should write the same kind of doctoral dissertation. Let’s question that assumption. We don’t need to scrap the dissertation, but we do need to look closely at its purpose. Our graduate students have been waiting—for too many years—for us to figure that out.

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
cassuto_leonard.jpg
About the Author
Leonard Cassuto
Leonard Cassuto is a professor of English at Fordham University who writes regularly for The Chronicle about graduate education. His newest book is Academic Writing as if Readers Matter, from Princeton University Press. He co-wrote, with Robert Weisbuch, The New Ph.D.: How to Build a Better Graduate Education. He welcomes comments and suggestions at cassuto@fordham.edu. Find him on X @LCassuto.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Vector illustration of large open scissors  with several workers in seats dangling by white lines
Iced Out
Duke Administrators Accused of Bypassing Shared-Governance Process in Offering Buyouts
Illustration showing money being funnelled into the top of a microscope.
'A New Era'
Higher-Ed Associations Pitch an Alternative to Trump’s Cap on Research Funding
Illustration showing classical columns of various heights, each turning into a stack of coins
Endowment funds
The Nation’s Wealthiest Small Colleges Just Won a Big Tax Exemption
WASHINGTON, DISTICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES - 2025/04/14: A Pro-Palestinian demonstrator holding a sign with Release Mahmud Khalil written on it, stands in front of the ICE building while joining in a protest. Pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally in front of the ICE building, demanding freedom for Mahmoud Khalil and all those targeted for speaking out against genocide in Palestine. Protesters demand an end to U.S. complicity and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza. (Photo by Probal Rashid/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Campus Activism
An Anonymous Group’s List of Purported Critics of Israel Helped Steer a U.S. Crackdown on Student Activists

From The Review

John T. Scopes as he stood before the judges stand and was sentenced, July 2025.
The Review | Essay
100 Years Ago, the Scopes Monkey Trial Discovered Academic Freedom
By John K. Wilson
Vector illustration of a suited man with a pair of scissors for a tie and an American flag button on his lapel.
The Review | Opinion
A Damaging Endowment Tax Crosses the Finish Line
By Phillip Levine
University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky

Upcoming Events

07-31-Turbulent-Workday_assets v2_Plain.png
Keeping Your Institution Moving Forward in Turbulent Times
Ascendium_Housing_Plain.png
What It Really Takes to Serve Students’ Basic Needs: Housing
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin