University of Southern California Masters in Professional Writing

Reviewer's Name:

Lyle Skains

Review Date

March 19, 2009

Year of Graduation:

2005

Review Title:

No program anywhere is perfect; you get what you put into it.

Full Review of the Program:

First, I'd note that I attended under previous administration. From what I can see as a very distant overseas alumnus, the department is changing for the better. But of course I can only speak to my experience, so here it is:

PROS:

-Interdisciplinary
I loved being able to study many different writing forms. It definitely made me a better fiction writer, and has allowed me to be VERY employable as a technical writer and a teacher in higher education.

-Some great teachers
Some of the best are the ones you never hear about, who don't have big names, who haven't won Emmys.

-Community
From the Student Reading Series, outings, and joint projects to the alumni network, this program really fosters a sense of writing community. We help one another out.

-Prestige
Let's face it, when people see the program on your CV, it looks good.

-Funding
I was offered a TA - for not much work, my fees were waived, and I would receive a sufficient salary to live in the area as a student.

Contrast that with many other programs (i.e., the PhD program I'm in now!) with NO funding offered whatsoever, and that's a pretty big PRO.


Okay, now for the CONS:

-Supervision
I found little to none. No continuity, no opportunity to work on my thesis in any taught class. This made it really difficult.

-Some instructors with no business in a classroom
A few are there because they have big names. And that's it. Some were so out of touch, they were teaching from 50s texts (bad, bad, bad for technical writing, which is so electronic now). Some showed signs of dementia - not remembering students in their class from week to week, or ongoing projects. Some were abusive.

-Lack of Critical Element
The goal of the MFA is creative work, period. That's great if you just want to be a better writer. But some of us are interested in academic elements of writing as well, and we all know that the ability to break writing down, to analyze and understand why it works or doesn't work, makes us better writers.

There was no formal critical element required when I attended, and I believe it's a glaring hole. I'm studying in the UK now, where it's a requirement, and it's teaching me a great deal. I think having the option to take critical courses or include a critical dissertation (perhaps for some sort of honors degree?) would really be useful.

Advice to Prospective Students:

This is graduate school. No one is going to hold your hand. No one is going to force-feed you your education they way they do in undergrad.

You have to get the education yourself.

First, seek out the teachers who have a good reputation as TEACHERS, not big-shot celebrity names. Talk to previous students. Talk to other instructors.

Second, develop a strategy for working on your thesis. Most of the classes don't allow you to work on it for classwork (don't get me started). Find a good instructor EARLY, see if you can do an independent study with them. It's what I did, and was the most helpful time of my degree.

Third, get involved. Go to the Readings. Attend play openings and film screenings. Writing is a lonely business, but it's still a business, and to succeed in that arena you need a network.

Fourth, if you don't like something, don't just bitch about it. Come up with a strategy to fix it, and if you need help, ask for it. Whining goes nowhere. And if nothing ever gets fixed, and you think it's a waste of money (and it's a LOT of money), LEAVE! Find somewhere that works for you.

Fifth, get outside your comfort zone. Take advantage of the interdisciplinary nature of the program. I took technical writing because I thought I should, not because I wanted to. Two years later I was making $70k a year, a big office, and plenty of free time and freedom to write fiction - even at work. We don't have to starve to write.