champagne

Well, poop.

You will not be denied access to a PhD program or finishing your PhD if you are a scholar that works hard and has the talent to continue to produce meaningful work. If you base your selection on fit and not on prestige, you will get a great preparation to be a literary scholar. The programs that "require"--I put this in quotes because I feel their stated scores are more guidelines--GRE scores to be in that range end up missing out on great scholars that would fit well in their program because the higher-ups at these institutions want to see the best statistics possible coming in each year. That's how they maintain prestige. This is almost anathema to the pursuit of research within the humanities, but that's what happens when higher education handcuffs itself to standardized tests. It's been proven time and time again that standardized tests are a terrible indicator of how well one will do in education and life; however, the ones holding the pocket books at these institutions only care about scores. Don't let "prestige", rankings, and statistics deter you from your ultimate goal, if this is truly your ultimate goal. TL;DR: Do your best, and FUCK ETS.

For the hyper-competitive schools, I would venture to say almost nil. If one of your recommenders is a particularly distinguished alumnus/a (i.e. highly publicized and known on a national level), then that might sway the committee some since graduates like that help programs gain notoriety, but I don't see much effect beyond that. That's just my opinion, so I'd be glad to defer to someone with more personal experience.

For the good of the order, PBR and Bourbon don't work well either.

WARNING: Anecdotal coming up. It sounds like you know your stuff at least in the cocktail party sense that should allow to well on the types of questions the GRE Subject asks. I noticed that when I took it, even though I was afraid of losing a quarter of a point on a missed answer, being more cavalier about my inferences allowed me to do much better when I was taking practice tests. Even if you aren't sure an answer is wrong, you can usually logically determine at least one incorrect answer from the five listed based on temporal or linguistic clues. Being humanities folks, I think we tend to overthink things on standardized tests, and that can be a killer on the Literature GRE when being a good guesser is absolutely essential. Of course, I did pretty shite as well on my test, so all of my advice might be moot.

Southern lit, masculinity and the performance of masculinity in different spheres. Of course, things can change. She insinuated that regardless of interest, there were professors there that she thought I would get along with handsomely. I guess that means grumpy professors, specifically ones with beards, as that seems to be the type I have been drawn to the most in my academic career thus far.

A professor I talked to said that he, although he did admit that he was an anomaly, liked to look at the math scores in tie-breaking situations just because they might give another mirror into how you react in controlled environments. If there are two outstanding candidates, they will most likely have great verbal scores, an excellent WS, a well-thought-out SOP, and tremendous recs. The professors have to come back to the fact that these students will be in three hour seminars with them for multiple years. He wanted the person that would react well to adversity and uncomfortable material (i.e. the quantitative section of the GRE). I'm sure this very much an exception rather than the rule, but I just thought it was really interesting. As interesting as that might be for the study of the inversion of socially-constructed gender roles during coitus, I doubt anybody wants to see me in a corset and high-heel boots.

As far as the issue of living in the south goes, I wouldn't worry about that much, especially with Vanderbilt. There was a discussion on this last year, I believe, and while we receive constant reminders of the severe lag in our social atmosphere (racist sorority recruitment at the University of Alabama, riots at the University of Mississippi), the media makes these sentiments appear to be much more prevalent than they actually are. You're more likely to encounter a liberal, progressive, Allie, women's rights activist on Vanderbilt's (and other prestigious southern research institutions') campus than you are a second amendment redneck that doesn't have the first clue how Reagan's economical policies have led to a much harder life for him. I've lived in the south my entire life, and I love it in a very complicated way. The proliferation of knowledge and the study of why the south is the way it is is one of my main reasons for going to graduate school. It's okay to do that here. There are a few feathers that could stand to be ruffled. I said this in the last thread that this came up, but it bears repeating: We wear shoes most of the time, and we use the restroom indoors. I promise!

You're taking the correct course of action. The professor has to know that her unavailability will lead to students tracking her down at inopportune times. And it would be a huge red flag to have that on your academic record without having it explained at least in your SOP. Of course, it could be seen as a great fortune to have that misstep explained in a recommendation by the professor that lead the class. You have to track this professor down.

Many departments are hamstrung by their graduate schools when it comes to school-wide fellowships. You could give have the best writing sample out of the entire applicant pool and have the most well-constructed SOP showing your absolute fit within the department, but graduate schools as a whole want their departments to maintain the "prestige" of the institution research fellowships by disallowing anyone below a certain level standardized test score to qualify for the program. You should be fine for TA/funding positions that are available as part of your acceptance, but you might miss out on the larger, more lucrative university-wide fellowships.

Hi! This is pretty auspicious as a former professor recently recommended I look into Penn State. She didn't really mention why except that she seemed to think that I would love some of the professors there and really congeal with their personalities. I know that doesn't help much. This could be too personal, but which professors have you enjoyed the most and why?

Damn. There's not really much to say to make you feel better about that. Feels hug?

I just wanted to add in that I've talked to several professors (with and without adcomm experience), and their basic usage for the GRE is as a secondary (or tertiary, even) metric if there are less-than-catastrophic problems in the more important parts of the application (WS, SOP, LORs). Now, the larger an application pool (i.e. "more prestigious"), the harder it's going to be for them to separate applicants on an individual basis, therefore, GRE scores will inherently be given more scrutiny. It's just a reality with the numbers that they have. If you feel confident that your SOP and WS are your best work and that your LOR's are beneficial and comprehensive, then there should be nothing to worry about with GRE scores as long as they aren't lower than 50th percentile or something abysmal. I also think that several programs listing >90th percentile as their requirement is akin to companies posting positions that require 3-5 years of work experience. It's more of a tactic to ward off applications that will waste their time than an actual hard-line rule. I feel confident that none of y'all's applications will waste their time, so I wouldn't be frightened by those published parameters.

I love this. This is great advice for all of us struggling with something that's hard for anybody: writing about yourself. It probably seems a little obvious, but the only way to combat writer's block is to write. Part of the daunting nature of SOP's is the minute length we are given. Completely disregarding that length at the outset could provide great fruit and insight for ourselves and circumvent that inability to write about ourselves.

I witnessed it from all three. Obviously, there are (large) sectors of all three camps that despise the rankings, but I've seen professors, students, and, of course, administration/communication offices discuss them in open forums. Since public relations inherently entails some sort of outward push of publication of this sort of thing, there will be a wider audience to catch that source of the message; however, I've personally interacted with students and faculty that go to the rankings through whatever outlet is available to them. It's an epidemic.

I find it funny that the uselessness of the USNWR rankings is largely prevalent throughout all of academia, yet when they come out EVERY SINGLE YEAR there is a huge scramble to find your program's name on the list, publish it in the most expedient way possible, and explain why your school is in the position it's in. I hate the rankings as much as anybody, but there will never be a revolution against them until the leaders and members of the specific institutions stop the ludicrous farce of virally perpetuating them throughout the internet as soon as they are published year after year.

Louisiana State, IIRC.

Obviously, this can have adverse side-effects, but I've found throughout my entire life that having a general "not-give-a-fuck" attitude about standardized tests has served me pretty well. I would give at least 3.2 more fucks about the rest of my application, but standardized tests feast on people that psych themselves out while taking them. Worrying about the score you're going to make isn't going to improve the score you're going to make. Trust in your ability to think with agility and speed. Trust in the preparation you've done beforehand. Que sera sera and all that.

If it's the General test, do not sweat it. The verbal section (the only one that matters much for English graduate programs) is kind of a joke as well as the AW section. Just stay calm and maintain good time, and you should be fine.

Thanks for the advice, folks! I don't really like to reveal a whole lot of personal information over the internet, but I can say that I currently work in higher academics on the administrative side (Boo! Hiss!). My adviser brought up the point that I can still obtain the Ph.D. and come back to what I do now in the likely event that there are no jobs available, especially considering the diversification I would bring to such a realm with my experience on both sides of the higher education process. Take that for what it is, but my professor and I both came to the "fuck it" solution regarding my lack of anything to lose (other than my pride, I've all ready saved the money) by applying and seeing what happens. I still have yet to get an MA, FWIW. I've seen people exemplify the MA as a toe-wetting experience for some people in my shoes.

I'm not usually one to yell and vent into the vast maelstrom that is the interwebs, however y'all are a supportive group of web-based personae. Here goes: I've been having lots of second thoughts about applying for graduate school. I originally thought that it might be because I've enjoyed my job so much the first year through, and I found myself thinking that I could do it maybe for the rest of my life if not for the near future. I had a great year, and the work I do is incredibly rewarding. It's a tremendous buzz, and apparently I'm really good at it. I had discussions with my co-workers, and they were very supportive of it. I then had a long, frank discussion with one of my favorite professors. He brought up the point that I might possibly be scared of the inevitable rejection that comes with applying to graduate school in the humanities. I looked inside myself and found this to be a huge part of it. I didn't get rejected from any undergraduate schools I applied to, I had a prodigious and successful undergraduate career (Magna Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa, all that jazz...), I've never been turned down in a job interview, and I've found tremendous success in my first year as a professional. There is none of this in applying to literature graduate programs: Let's demystify a little bit of the process. You will be rejected. With that said, I'm feeling more confused than ever, and I definitely don't want to wait another year to apply. I feel like not applying is letting my 45-year-old self down. Literature and writing and research and teaching is such a part of who I am, but all that I've heard from advisers is the "If you can do absolutely anything else, do it" mantra. Now I have something else I can do, but I don't know if it's something that will sustain me the way I know graduate school would. TL;DR: I'm more confused than ever, and I haven't even started applying. What say you, GradCafe?

This probably won't apply for all, but one of professors has told me to largely disregard it. Obviously, this has sensible parameters (i.e. don't turn in a 6 page close-reading assignment from an undergraduate class, don't turn in a 50 page assignment from a graduate class), but I don't think adcomms will be overly perturbed if you turn in an 18-page work while their website states a 20-page requirement. If you present a coherent, interesting, and original argument within less-than-the-page requirement, then more power to you. Of course, I'm applying to both MA and Ph.D. programs, so this might not apply to everyone. Also, said professor is about as lax as one can be and still be a prolific researcher. It's just my two cents, but I've explicitly been told not to worry too much about it.

I haven't, but I can't imagine why that would be an issue. If the professor is respected enough to have achieved emeritus status (I suppose you could think about their present relevancy), then they probably hold enough sway within your department to write letters of recommendation that will serve a positive purpose. Also, the most important part of an LOR is to have it personally reflective of your academic work and how that professor has seen you. If the professor taught you in a class that you succeeded in and they have personal anecdotes that pertain to that effect, then I see no reason why their LOR would be seen as inferior in your application.

Welcome, PageAndStage! Lycidas answered your query in the best way, but I just wanted to welcome you to this grand adventure of applying to graduate school.

Let's just agree not to talk about that...