omgninjas

Unfortunately, according to the graduate FAQ, the English department doesn't allow you to defer.

Huh? I think I'm misunderstanding you, but are you saying that people in the top programs desire a more competitive job market so they can feel better about themselves?

The most terrifying thread in the history of this forum. Celebrating a recession as an easy ego booster, Libertarianism, and vaginal infections. Not even 10 posts yet, and critical levels of :shock: are being reached.

I hate to drag out this derail, but come on.. The original comment, whatever. Your response afterwards, damn.

Hey there Jackie, Here's what I would do. I would email the programs I was rejected from and ask them for feedback on my application, as blunt as possible. I would work on whatever deficiencies they pointed out until app. season rolls around again, then apply to a wider range of schools than I did the first time. I don't know where you applied this season, but I would still shoot for some of the reaches, while adding in a bunch more schools where admissions were more likely Unfortunately, the way the economy is going suggests that admissions will be just as, if not more difficult than this year, but between the stories I've read here and on other grad. admissions board, a good candidate will always eventually find a home. So in short, between the two options you listed, I don't see why you can do both. You're set on applying for the MA, not the PhD?

I am not, but I am considering entering the PhD program and visited last week if you're interested in talking about Brown in general.

*announcer voice* kfed wins flawless victory by the way, when someone points out the racism inherent in something you've said, I HAVE BLACK FRIENDS is not a good defense.

I was fortunate enough to get accepted to all of the schools I applied to, but I had pretty much ranked them before I'd started on the whole process. After all was said and done, (i.e. I'd gotten the funding info, figured out where I'd be able to visit and where I wouldn't), I cut it down to my top 4 schools, which matched up pretty well to where I had them ranked beforehand. Then, I took a closer look at the faculty and started reading some of their work. My opinion pretty much stayed the same, and now I'm down to the top two, which I'm visiting. I think in the end I'm probably going to end up at the school I've been leaning towards the entire time, but I'm glad I didn't rush my decision too much.

If you're responding to me, that's totally exaggerating my argument. I have a tough time believing that people at the most well-renowned schools don't have an easier time getting jobs, especially when I peruse the faculty lists of major departments. Whether it is because they are incredible in their own right (since such schools usually attract the top candidates) or because they sleaze their way into the networking system these schools tend to have access to, I think that saying they lack jobs neglects the fact that they lack these jobs to a lesser extent than most other programs. Finally, it's much harder to be at the head of your field at a subpar school. You're forcing me to come off as more elitist than really I am, but honestly, my point is that the articles in the OP shouldn't make applicants give up their dreams, it should make them more selective about the schools that they apply to. Getting a job now means you gotta be good. You can be good at any school, it's just easier to be good at the ones which lead your field and have peers who will push you.

I actually want to go a bit more in-depth about what I meant

In my opinion if you retitle it to PhD Humanities - Just Don't Do It Unless You Can Get Into A Great School and it is more accurate but unfortunately less sensationalist. If you go to a top 30 school and you are a good scholar, I think you should still be able to get a job. Obviously this varies by specialty and exactly WHICH school you go to, and as times get worse it may get harder and harder, but Berkeley, Harvard, Yale PhDs typically don't lack for jobs. Just my two cents.

Although I am probably going to end up picking an Ivy over UCLA (English), I would say in your case you should probably go to UCLA. It sounds like the program and school is a good fit for you, and do you really want to go through applying again? Who knows how things will go the next time around? Broadening your academic network is wise, but I don't know if Dartmouth would be great for that (don't get pissed at me, D'mouth people). Beyond being the most isolated Ivy, Dartmouth also has the smallest graduate community, especially if you exclude the B- folks and the Med students. Also, I feel as though a one year program isn't going to allow you to make a whole lot of meaningful connections with the faculty. Anyways, you're going to visit Hanover soon, so why not find out where their graduates typically end up heading after receiving their MAs? If they place well, and you're really hoping to shoot for a school at the absolute top, it might be a good decision. Otherwise, I'd go with LA.

In this light it kind of makes sense that schools might favor strong students coming out of undergrad over strong students coming out of the MA, since they might tend to be ahead of the curve. Another thing with the MA is the funding issue...some programs, not all, but some really rely on MAs as cash cows to fund their PhDs. I've spoken to two DGS' now who have kind of expressed distaste for this system and the way it influences the education of the MA only students, who are kind of shunted off to the side. This doesn't apply to all programs, of course, but there are a few which are notorious in this regard.

Michelle that's an unfortunate situation. If I were in your shoes I would strongly consider choosing against the MA and applying again next year. I don't think your age is that huge of a factor provided you've shown you can do the work, and if you can get into a UVA MA, with a bit of tweaking you can definitely get into some top-notch PhDs and get paid instead of shelling out the cash yourself. I don't presume to know anything other than what you've shared, but I feel like the job market for Humanities PhDs does not warrant wracking up $150k in debt..it makes me sick that the system allows you be in that position at all, particularly considering that getting into a PhD program is nothing compared to trying to getting an actual job.

I grew up in Syracuse and I can confirm that it is as cold as people say. Winter typically goes from about October/November to March/April. Temperatures in the negatives are not uncommon; I remember having classes canceled in high school not because of the snow, but because it was too cold (water in pipes freezing, etc). Snowfall is outrageous, as well. All of the upstate New York cities have a contest to see who receives the most snow (the golden snowball, if you're curious), and Syracuse has won the past 7 years. Honestly, if you can't drive on the snow, you will need to learn fast. The city is good with clearing the road and putting salt down, but you're going to inevitably get caught in a blizzard, which can be nerve-wracking even for those of us native to the reason. Hope this doesn't seem too harsh, but it's difficult to really exaggerate how rough Cuse can be in the winter. I'd be willing to answer any other questions, but honestly, the universities are really among the town's few redeeming qualities.

I'm considering Penn...I'd go, just so I could be a member of the crowd during these duels

wow, man.

hadunc, although I agree with most of your points, I'm not certain how that applies to people who may have overdetermined their educational goals in their statement of purpose. I'm not in a graduate program yet, but here's how I feel about your question: I don't think any program will expect you to have everything planned out. Still, the clearer your statement of purpose can explain who and where you're pulling your ideas from and how you see your unique "question" (however you might describe it at the moment, since as people have pointed out, it will inevitably change) engaging your field, the better an idea a school can get of how you fit. I feel like it's hard for a program to get excited over a student they can't "place" within their intellectual community. I have fairly off-beat, widespread interests, but I think I was able to pull them together enough to kind of see which schools suited me. I'm not sure how well I articulated this in my statement, but I've been pretty successful, so I feel as though I explained myself alright. I certainly didn't end up listing all of my fascinations, partly because the length of the statement forbade it, but mostly because i wanted to strike the balance between too narrow and too broad. It might have been the hardest part of the application, since to improve it I had to literally just sit down and think my way through my own work, but it was also the most rewarding.

Thanks for correcting my misinformation, then. Generally, I feel like no matter where you go you can't really avoid it. It's all about who you are trying to work with, and I know that's kind of facile. I just hope that you don't take that letter to to speak for all of the other programs you applied to. This is a very interesting topic as far as thinking about the direction of the field at large, and I'm interested to hear what others think.

As much as I'm resistant to an over-reliance on theory, I feel like it's often argued against in strawman form, and in a reactionary way. Like Greekdaph and Hepkath have pointed out, even if it's not up your alley, it's probably something you should be at least partially grounded in, just like even the best theorist needs to be able to conduct solid close readings. Trying to bracket off the two (or even trying to bracket off the two as stable categories) is impossible, imo. That said, you can get the relative vibe of the program if you are willing to pursue the work of a bunch of their faculty. I ended up not applying to Harvard and Yale since, as a few posters have pointed out, they seemed fairly "traditional". I think Johns Hopkins is kind of in this vein as well, although I'm not that certain. Still though, I feel like all of those schools are going to be looking for some kind theoretical engagement with the field in your writing sample.

Got into a PhD program at Brown and am strongly considering accepting. Been there once last year, going again in a few weeks. From my brief experiences so far, I think I'll really enjoy Providence. Anyone got any inside scoops on the housing market?

I am in at Michigan and was told that stipend amounts are not necessarily inflexible. I'm not really down to discuss specifics, but if you really want to go and are willing to negotiate a better offer, I don't see why you wouldn't try.

[Warning] I'm sorry this application season has been rough for you, but don't give up until it's over. None of us are immune to the doom and gloom, but with that said, I'd like to respond to a few of the things being discussed here. First, to answer your question, I'm an undergrad applying to PhD programs (all of my schools are from #5 - #20 on USNWR [sorry to be vulgar and bring rankings into the mix, but you know how it is]). I've been lucky so far with admissions, but I think I made the right decision. It's my first swing, so why not see how I do among the heavy hitters first? On the MA, I think it was the right decision to go after some top tier schools. It's hard for a first time applicant to visualize how they stack up against the competition, and I think it's better to overshoot than to aim too low. You have the opportunity to reapply every year, but typically once you're in a program, especially for the PhD, you're there. As vechrite has pointed out, the MA usually comes out of your pocket, so unless you get into a program with funding, that should probably be your last option. If you honestly feel as though your application was too weak, an MA can certainly help you shore it up, but depending on where you go, it can restrict your upward mobility, more so I think, than where you got your BA. This is just speculation on my part, of course. As far as being able to get a good PhD education anywhere, I don't necessarily agree. The quality gap between PhD programs widens quickly as you go from "best" to "worst". It's true that you can't assume that if you attend school xyz you'll be closely working with all their academic celebrities, but those superstars tend to attract more ton notch faculty, so that the rich tend to get richer and the poor stay poor. The same can be said regarding a school's resources and student body. The way that the job market is looking, I really don't feel that there are many schools outside of the top 30 or so that are worth attending for a PhD unless they have an incredible fit for your interests. You can't live off a reputation, but schools that have it tend to have it for a reason. Anyways, it seems like you have a mindset that won't allow you to be deterred. If things don't pan out this season, you'll be a crafty veteran next year. Ask some of the schools that rejected you if they would be willing to share why, and take the appropriate steps. I've read enough feel-good stories regarding repeat applicants to be confident you'll get where you want to go eventually. If an MA helps you out, great. If you can avoid spending any cash, (other than the obligatory $1k or so for the application/test taking process) even better. It's a hell of a meat grinder, but the fact that you're on this board, asking these questions suggests that you're already better equipped than most of your competition. Hope some of the schools you applied to feel the same way.

An English major? Really? edited for content: Although I would consider the two schools fairly close in terms of reputation, their strengths are very different. I don't think prestige is irrelevant, but it might be better to figure out which school is the best fit for your interests.

Just because you got into some good schools doesn't mean the GRE doesn't matter. Someone with below average GPA will probably need good GRE scores to get their application looked at, and poor scores will hurt even those who have a good overall application. I'm glad that you were able to buck the trend (although without giving out your scores your points are hard to judge) but we all know that if you have a bomb application and a 900 combined on the GRE, Harvard probably won't come calling. Also, as people have pointed out, many of the bigger programs use the GRE to make cut-offs, and I've heard that lot of schools use test scores to determine who receives fellowships. That's a HUGE deal. It's clear that plenty of schools don't take the subject test all that seriously, and obviously the quant is fairly unimportant, but I am positive that your verbal score is a significant part of your application. Don't take it like a joke.