“I did a low-residency program because I didn’t want to give up my job, and I chose a school that was far away so I would be exposed to different perspectives (I live in the Midwest, and I chose a program in the Pacific Northwest). Two things I wish I would have known before making that choice: Many of the students were from the region, so in many ways I was the one with a different perspective, and I was a bit of a minority (although this was also a benefit as a learning experience). Also, because of this strong regional contingent, a lot of local opportunities were generated during the time that I was in the program, including teaching assistantships and mid-term get-togethers that I just couldn’t participate in. I felt like I missed out on the full experience of the program due to geography, especially in regard to teaching and forming connections that would help in that area.”
Source: Lesley Weiss, quoted in “Should You Go Back to School? Four Writers Share Their Graduate-School Experiences and Help You Decide Whether or Not to Pursue an Advanced Writing Degree,” Writermag.com (free, but site registration is required to access the full article).
Brava, Lesley Weiss.
I can’t tell you how tired I am of people claiming that location should not be among the considerations when prospective students are applying to and choosing among or between low-residency MFA programs. I tried to counter that faulty notion myself when I devoted several paragraphs to “Geography” as a factor for prospective low-res students to consider when I was asked to contribute to The Creative Writing MFA Handbook.
Like Ms. Weiss, I opted for low-res in part because I did not want to move away from my job/life/connections where I was living (in my case, the Northeast) and I chose a program that was “far away” (in my case, in Charlotte, N.C.) because I thought it would be interesting to gain perspectives on a part of the country that was new to me.
And in some ways, that strategy worked. (more…)