bluecheese

Well, 80% tuition plus 12k (a semester? really?) is good. Also, the tuition in FL tends to be on the cheap side - so, if nothing else, the second year will be affordable once you establish residency.

Austin is a top 20 program - I say go for it, especially knowing that the stipend will get larger in upcoming years. It's a great program even if the funding isn't perfect.

Masters degree funding tends to be worse than PhD funding: See the funding rankings for MFA programs - most of the schools with funding beyond the 15k range have special endowments/programs especially for creative writers. http://mfaresearchproject.wordpress.com/2011/09/18/funding/ But, yeah, for PhD programs 13k isn't very much (especially considering that you're going to have to live off of it for 5+ years). Anyway, if you're funded and not paying for your classes, at least you're getting something to live off of, and not going into much debt. I don't think going to a Master's program that pays 13k a year is the worst thing - I'd be much more hesitant to take a PhD offer at that level. A bit of perspective: before MFA funding rankings were available many students would pay 100k in tuition alone to attend highly rated programs (according to US News) like Columbia, The New School, NYU, etc. There is no way that any creative degree (that is very unlikely to lead to any kind of job) is worth 100k plus the cost of living in NYC (and I have a creative writing MFA, and I'm a huge supporter of such programs). But over 100k in debt for an essentially useless degree is just crazy.

It is totally a numbers game, especially when it comes to those top programs (but also when it comes to second tier schools) - I got into Brown, NYU, Michigan, Madison, etc. and was rejected from UC Boulder, Chicago Loyola, etc. (I was also rejected from top programs that I thought I was a better fit for me than the one's that accepted me--I assumed I stood the best chance at U of Chicago, U Penn, and Duke out of the top 20 programs I applied to, and I didn't get into any of those).

That's understandable, for sure. I would still look through everything in the top 50 (and especially the top 25 programs) to see if there are any other schools that you can make a reasonable argument for. It couldn't hurt. And good luck with your waitlists - I hope you get one of them!

Honestly, I wouldn't worry too much about the sample length stuff. I sent 18 pages to NYU and was accepted (I think they have some absurdly low page count they ask for). Also, I keep harping on this - but apply to MORE schools. You have three waitlists from awesome schools - if you'd applied slightly wider I'm SURE that you would have gotten an acceptance from a great school. Also, are you totally counting your waitlists off as rejections? It seems a bit early to do that.

I have a Brown acceptance in English, don't know about the Comp Lit program though. If anyone in comp lit got in, you should PM me!

I actually got into my top choice in the entire country, so I honestly can't complain (and I got into 9 places total) - I'm not trying to second guess. I do think it is useful to think about what might have been done better in terms of both future applicants (so they can see how things might go), and in terms of myself (I'll be applying for fellowships, grants, jobs, etc. in the upcoming years). In retrospect, like 5-10 of my applications were throw aways from the start (either because of fit, or because the funding package wasn't worth my time)--that's wasted energy that I could have put elsewhere. I don't regret it given that I got in someplace that's wonderful, but I do think it is worth reflecting on.

Yeah, sorry about that - sucks to get rejected (especially from a top choice, and especially when you think you stand a good chance of being admitted).

My research is related to personal experience, etc. so I related that - but literally with one sentence at the end of the first paragraph. I didn't start with it -- I started with my research and then touched briefly on how intersected with my personal experience. I wouldn't lean too heavy into the personal even if it is relevant to your research.

What did you do wrong this season? What do you wish you did better? What would you do different if you were going to apply again? If you didn't get in anywhere, what do you plan to change for next season? Admittedly, I had a really successful application season -- that said, I still think there are things that I would have done differently. In fact, there are quite a few things. I'm super happy with where I'm going, but I also see all of the errors, hiccups, etc. that happened along the way. I thought it might be good to talk about those for future applicants. I wouldn't have applied to interdisciplinary programs (Berkeley Rhetoric, Stanford MLT, Chicago Committee on Social Thought, Brown MCM, Ohio State Comparative Studies, etc.) - while I love these programs, I honestly think my SOP was too poetry heavy to make an argument for many of these; and the programs that are open to poetry-stuff are a bit conservative in their aesthetic preferences for my taste. These are all awesome places fo study theory and continental philosophy - so, on that level, I was very attracted to them. One of my advisors said something like, "yeah, your SOP wasn't that great of a fit for programs like those" before I'd even heard back from any of them. I did get into OSU, but a member of the english department emailed me. I wish I'd had the funding information from the "Funding Packages" document - there are literally 5 programs that I would have replaced with others. Also, I would have applied to Rutgers and Columbia; I literally didn't apply to those programs because I was being lazy on the particular days that they were due - both are stellar programs with amazing funding, I'm sure knowing the funding packages would have motivated me to push myself past my laziness in order to get those applications in. I should have taken the subject test. I didn't take it, and when I decided that I should take it because I found a couple of programs that I really wanted to apply to that required it, it was too late. I also only studied for 3 days for the GRE - my score was fine, but I wish I'd looked over the AW section a bit more. I kind of rushed my SOP and writing sample. I wrote both of these two weeks before the first application was due. I think the SOP was especially solid, but I definitely was skeptical of my writing sample given that my advisor said that my writing is usually "more dynamic" after I showed it to her. I was really worried about that before the acceptances started arriving, I wish I'd applied with a writing sample I'd sat on longer and felt more confident about -- that said, I'd been working with the texts and ideas in the sample for a while, so the theoretical stuff in the sample was well milled. The production of the essay itself was rushed, which left me feeling uneasy about it. It worked out, but I felt really uneasy about the thing I wrote until acceptances started arriving. I'm sure there's other stuff - if only we could all have perfect application seasons!

Truth. Porridge, what school did you end up picking? PM me!

I hope people take advantage of this. I might make it into some kind of ranking that takes cost of living into consideration -- if we get some of the major holes filled in. Everything worked out for me, but I definitely can see a bunch of stuff that I would have done differently if this information was as readily available.

There's a difference between a personal statement and a statement of purpose, I think. Most MFA programs I applied to required personal statements (which makes sense given that you're applying to write for 2-3 years, not to become a professional academic). A statement of purpose should be related to your research goals and how you think a particular program will help you accomplish them.

I made my decision a while ago -- headed to Brown. Congrats to everyone who got in this season! Hopefully things happen for others too as the waitlists shake out.

Yeah, only include personal stuff in your statement of purpose if it directly relates to what you hope to study.

On the MFA scale of things, LSU has some of the best funding around @ 16,500 a year for three years. Also, they have amazing poetry faculty. I think the number of applicants they receive is related to the funding, mostly. Also, given the way the national creative writing rankings work -- they're based on where people apply (and are collected via a facebook page) -- having funding tends to help. LSU is unlikely to make it to the top 10, but having an package like that puts them in the top 20 easy.

The math on the "new" GRE is harder than it was on the old GRE, if for no other reason that the fact that time actually is a factor in terms of scoring now--you have to be able to do the problems quickly in order to finish a section on time. I hadn't done math in a while (since the first semester of college after high school for a required statistics course), so getting into each question involved unloosening some rusty gears. When I took the practice tests on paper (the one's put out by ETS) I'd do substantially better that I would on a timed test; I was getting near-perfect scores. When it came to the timed test on the day of the GRE I received a 155 on the math--which, as an English student, is nothing to sneeze at... it apparently is the equivalent of a 720 on the old scoring scale. The math is harder, and there is more time pressure with the new version. That said, it is still easy math. It is worth reviewing just to make sure you remember all of the tricks of the trade (in terms of basic geometry equations, etc.). For the Verbal, you should study (at least) the most commonly occurring words and run though a practice book (like princeton review). I found it easiest to just buy a box of Kaplan flashcards for vocab--I didn't have to spend time making the cards (honestly, I found that hump hard to get over... getting the cards let me get down and dirty with learning words right out of the box). The test leans more towards reading comprehension so reviewing a book is worth doing (just so you know the little tricks that the questions can play), but being a person who reads regularly and studying a stack of commonly occurring GRE words should be more than enough. I only studied for 3 days before taking the test, but I'm glad that I studied for 3 days. Running through a box of vocab cards, being familiar with the question types, and remembering how do fractions and certain types of geometry equations definitely improved my score. ***Scores do matter in terms of fellowships, school wide numerical expectations, etc.*** Buffalo, for example, basically expects a 313 combined score--they say it is for fellowship positions on their website, but they try to accept people that they can give fellowships to (or, at least, waitlist for fellowships). Also, some schools have basic cut off scores. Your SOP and writing sample are going to matter a lot more than your GRE score, but you don't want the GRE score to be the thing that leaves your application in the slush pile.

I consider this a canonical text: http://www.yhchang.com/CUNNILINGUS_IN_NORTH_KOREA.html

I saved up over the summer, got an editing job that paid a decent sum, somehow managed to win a writing award for $700, and put a sizable chunk on a credit card that I'm almost done paying off. It's totally doable, and totally worth it--when the dust settled, I received 4 offers with stipends over 20k a year. I don't understand why I was down voted above; there are serious advantages to applying as widely as possible.

NYU is super good for history of the book stuff.

If you can afford it, you should apply to 15+. I know the standard amount is 10-12. That said, supposing you have the time fo modify the fit paragraphs and so on, applying to more programs will put you in a better position when the dust settles. Hell, supposing you have a really solid SOP (show it to faculty, etc.) you should apply to 20 if you can. All it really entails is refiguring the fit paragraphs and filling out relatively similar online forms. We're talking about 5 years of your life at the very least--and more, if you consider job prospects after the PhD.

I applied to 20+ schools and received offers from 9 including UW-Madison, Ann Arbor, Brown, and NYU - I'm glad I had the option to choose between these schools, and I was able to take the one with the best all around package for me (faculty, teaching, living, stipend, etc.) And any amount of money I spent in application fees has been more than offset by the aid package I received. Also, I wasn't actually saying that someone should apply 5 years in a row--I was simply pointing out the the difference in financial aid packages between schools can often offset the application fees several fold (just in terms of one year of funding... literally, the stipend can range from anywhere from 10k to 30k--that means it might be 20k more for ONE year... so, what's 4k in application fees?)

It can cost thousands of dollars--that said, even if you spent 4k now, it might make the difference between a 13k stipend and a 25k stipend over the next 5-6 years (not to mention job prospects after that). It's expensive, but it is seriously worth it. Even if you had to apply 5 years in a row because you didn't get in anywhere (at 4k a year... which is like 25 programs or more)--one year stipend difference between certain top schools could potentially offset that. 5 x 4,000 = 20k. I've never heard of anyone applying 5 years in a row, but what I am saying is that paying for more schools (assuming you have time to fill out all the applications) is worth the time. There are a couple of schools who have stipends in the 30k-ish range, and there are a couple of schools in the 10k-ish range in the top 50. That's around 20k difference in stipend for one year, and we're talking about 5-6 years over the duration of a program. 4k during the application season is a drop in the bucket. Work extra hours over the summer, put it on a credit card, take out a loan, whatever--it's worth it. Also, if you can't afford 4k many schools have fee waivers.