Sury

I reapplied and was admitted to 2 schools for Fall 2013 that I had been rejected from in the Fall 2011 cycle.  I think as long as you strengthen your application significantly, it makes sense to reapply if those schools are a good fit. But you should seek out opinions about why you were rejected to make sure you aren't wasting your money by applying again.  If you weren't a good fit in terms of your POIs research interests, it may not make sense to apply again.  If it was because you didn't have enough experience, but you will in a year, then reapply.

No, everyone feels this way. Sometimes, you'll think over your app, and feel supremely confident. And minutes later, you could be freaking out. It's done! Time to wait and see.

I would advise against this approach. Even if this is not your intent, it could be interpreted as if you are negatively disposed toward research, and view it primarily as a pathway to financial independence. Neither of these are likely to sit well with people who have dedicated their lives to research which often does not pay well. If you feel that you must say something about your grades, I would stick with something along the lines of it taking some time to adjust to university and find your true passion in research.

I'm no expert in what these people want, but that sounds a little angsty to me. Please don't take that the wrong way; I see where you're coming from. But you might want to play it a little safer with an admissions committee by avoiding making personal associations between research and family dysfunction.

For the most part, the admissions committees in graduate school are composed of academics, professors, and the like. These are people who are busy with their own research, own teaching (sometimes, usually), and own interests unlike undergrad where admissions are handled by people whose primary purpose is to do....admissions.

Even though it is a part of their job, these are people who do not want to spend all day reading SOPs, but rather spend that time discussing the strengths and weaknesses of applicants. it is because of that that SOPs are often asked to be on the shorter side. Then again, there are students out there who feel that writing 500 words is torture. I got lucky, I suppose, in that the schools I am applying to have no required, or suggested, length except for one, which was capped at 500 words "or less". I too felt that was not enough, so I supplemented my SOP for that program with an addendum.

While it is okay to go over the word count by a handful of words, one of the biggest mistakes applicants make in their SOPs is not following directions. I would tread lightly with any deviation from their instructions. A page can be reduced to a paragraph then further reduced to a sentence; all while saying the same thing.

Is there anyone else out there that feels adrift in regards to Berkeley's famous "personal history statement" (or any other university's incantation thereof)? Perhaps one of you may be interested in a little reciprocal feedback situation?

Or perhaps there's a voyeur among us who's just interested in knowing others' so-called "personal history"?

In short, is there anyone willing to provide feedback on my aforementioned statement? Even after reading a number of examples, plus having read the prompt somewhere on the order of 1034989 times, I'm stlll not sure I'm doing this right. I've got really thick skin, so I want to be sure to provide as solid a statement as possible (as, I'm sure, do you all). I'm applying for comp lit, but I believe they all (particularly the humanities) use the same prompt.

Pretty please! I'll be so eternally grateful, and I'll provide the most thorough feedback to any sent to me as I can.

-a

I'd be extremely cautious about using anything to do with your childhood in the SoP. The general consensus is this is not usually of any interest to the admissions committee. There may be exceptions of course, but from what you've written it sounds as though your first paragraph is really a generic story about how you got interested in the broad field - and that is almost certainly not required.

Without having seen the actual text, my gut feeling would be to cut the first paragraph and start right with the particular topic you want to explore in your PhD. Explain what got you interested in that in particular. The more specific you can be the better.

I also need mine to be reviewed - BUT I do not want to post it here. Can I email it to someone else here? That would be greatly appreciated...

I wouldn't add anything about your GRE scores or GPA, but I would give more info about your research background and explain your research interests so it's clear how he/she fits as an advisor. And I don't know if I would admit up front that the only thing you know about them is from the faculty profile. Whether it's true or not, let them think you are familiar with their publications/work. You don't need to reference them specifically, but more like, "I'm familiar with your work on blah blah blah (published) and your current research on blah blah blah (from faculty page)." Your template is good, but it kind of sounds like you're holding your own background info hostage, and you need to give them more on what you hope to work on and your experience (maybe work experience in your field) to "hook" them.

I'm in the same boat and would be happy to provide feedback/exchange personal statements! Feel free to pm me with your "personal history"

I looked up all my professors CV's (they're usually online) and copied the sections I liked the best for the formatting and section headers. Also the wording seemed to differ between each one, so I kind of "grazed" from about 4 different CV's when it came to how I worded things. You'll see from multiple examples which styles you think work best for you.


Good luck!

I like this site: http://depts.washington.edu/mchprog/docs/AcademicJobs.pdf
It provides a sample resume, but more importantly goes through formatting and section breakdowns to avoid silly mistakes or common issues that disrupt clarity or flow.

Like Fuzzy mentioned above, it does depend on the type of program your interested in & where your work experience lies. For instance, if you want to work in a lab and your work experience is as a cashier, well the school really won't care. But, if you're interested in working with kids and worked at a summer camp - well, that will definitely matter. So, in general, keep the resume tailored for the experience.

My suggestion, if your academia bound:

1. Education
2. Research
3. Presentations/Papers
4. Leadership Roles - especially in academia /Jobs/etc
5. Awards/Grants

If you're going to graduate school to enter back into a direct job afterwards (and not heavy research oriented):
1. Education
2. RELEVANT work experience only
3. Research
4. Leadership Roles
5. Awards/Grants

Both templates have the exact same information. But arrange the information that matters more to them closer to the top of the resume. Also, in general keep out any fluff information that just seems like you wanted to fill in the page more.