jazzyd

For a fit paragraph, I would try to stay within the department. You don't know how open the department is to interdisciplinary work. For survival purposes most departments these days have to be, but some are more open to it than others. You are applying to English after all. You don't want someone to finish reading your SOP and think, "Well, if they like so-and-so so much, why aren't they applying to their department?". Focus instead on the people in the department you are applying to. This doesn't mean you won't ever have the opportunity to work with other people, but best not turn anyone off before you even get in the door. The exception imo would be someone with dual appointments in say, English and Comp Lit, or English and French.

Obviously, this is "at your own risk" type of advice, but I remember being advised by a professor last year to just send in my entire sample (~25p), page limit be damned. I don't believe I was told the reasoning behind this, but my guess is that by the 9th or 10th page they'll know if they've seen what they're looking for or not. Of course, the cautionary side of the tale is that I was offered a place in their master's program, not the doctoral program like intended... whether this had anything to do with me skirting the rules.... the world will never know

Nothing wrong with any of the schools listed - and I do think U of W and Boulder - are especially good choices, but I agree that you may want to throw some more high profile places in the mix. Obviously ensure that these places have faculty that you'd like to work with, but applying to a mixed range of schools is actually more realistic than limiting yourself to one tier. You can get a great education just about anywhere, but the job market is a relevant consideration even at this stage. I wouldn't know about medievalists having a more difficult time of it, but regardless it's always a good idea to consider which schools could make you a more appealing job candidate from the get-go.

II wouldn't use an article rejection as a litmus test for your writing sample. There's also a difference imo between "elementary" writing and "elementary" ideas. The former a department will be much more willing to deal with than the latter, especially in a writing sample. And schools may say that their early year students "publish widely," but where exactly are they getting published? My interpretation of the statement isn't that applicants are expected to show difference, that they're expected to explain how they can diversify the field - something it still desperately needs, even now in the year 2013. For some, it is as simple as saying that their presence in academia alone constitutes an interruption of the typical educational structure and that as a faculty member they can encourage other students from not so conventional backgrounds to pursue research if they have the aptitude for it. For others (or also) it might be about how one is going to add a unique perspective to the field or open up how we think about literature. I am reminded of an 18th century lit class I took just a couple years ago that was definitely full of canonized works (Gulliver's Travels, Robinson Crusoe, etc.), but our discussions of these novels took on a much different cast than I believe they would have 20, 10, even 5 years ago. We talked about the process of Othering in these works, what the implications were for an imperialist culture, etc. While it as an 18th century European lit course, somehow it was not the same study of dead white guys. And that's something British lit and even American lit folks need to be aware of. Just pursuing and talking about Hawthorne for Hawthorne's sake is not a reality in the field unless you do it really, really, really well. And as much as academia - particularly the humanities - likes to praise itself as critical of and separate from dominant systems of oppression, university culture is its own hierarchical structure. And there's reasons why there's still very few people of color, women (especially those of color), first generation college grads, people from impoverished backgrounds, and so on in the humanities. If I were reading personal history statements, I'd want to see that an applicant is sensitive to this lack regardless of how much of an "anomaly" their personal background is to what they want to study.

That is 100% not true. I wasn't nearly in the 99% or a even 95% on my verbal. I took the GRE twice with my verbal being much higher the second time, but I think because of NW's deadline they only got the first GRE (in which my verbal was below 80% I believe...). So do not listen to that hogwash.

Yes, but none of the schools I applied to knew that while I was applying. I wrote my honors thesis second semester senior year.

Are you talking about UVA? That was the only school on my list that required mailing materials that I recall. Saves them the printing and the ink I suppose, but a little bit of an unusual hassle in this day and age!

Just consult someone other than us (no offense to the great posters of grad cafe!) whether it be the DGS or a professor you trust in the field whatever you do. I've never heard of an ad comm going back to an applicant and asking for more writing (not to say it's never happened ever but... they're not literary agents) and by nature of the sheer volume of applications they need to go through even a brief introductory note that's not a part of the paper proper might cause annoyance, which is the last thing you want. The first few pages of whatever your sending needs to be as near perfect and awesome as you can get it.

Is there a professor or someone in the field who's read both papers who you could talk to about this dilemma? Like ComeBackZinc, I can well imagine a situation in which adcomms appreciate the two smaller papers and a situation in which they're less than satisfied. My only concern with the conference-length papers is that they might be a little... skeletal than adcomms prefer. The reason why some schools explicitly ask for one 20-25 paper is that this is the amount of time so to speak required to fully perform the kind of literary and research analysis they need to see. So really, this might come down to what those short papers look like, which is why I would really recommend getting a professor look them over and give you their thoughts. If you can shorten the longer paper and maintain the analytical depth, then you might have a winner. But talk to the DGS (at each school you're applying to) and see if there's a professor who can advise you in this and read both papers and consider your options.

There's usually an option to be considered for M.A. if not accepted into the PhD program, right? Otherwise, I think it's just sort of natural to be considered for Masters if you don't quite make the cut of PhD. I got MA offers from places I don't recall explicitly checking off an "MA + PhD" box (and I didn't mention MA in my SOP). I don't think it'd be inappropriate to mention in a SOP. If you do, I'd just be careful about phrasing. I wouldn't go with "Well, if I'm not accepted to your program, I'll take an MA offer" but more in the lines of "if further academic development is needed, I feel various components of University of X's Masters program such as A, B, and C would also make a great fit and best prepare me to continue with my aspirations, etc." whatever. Asking the DGS as champagne suggested is a good idea, though.

EditEdit (I'm getting this thread mixed up with the Subject test one! wow) Okay, I'll say that if the bolded was a hard and fast rule (aka only someone in the 90-95 percentile had a decent shot) I would not be in a PhD program right now. Nor would many people, I'd gather. As Datatape said, don't be so rankings focused that you overlook great schools, but I'll also say don't discount highly ranked programs just because your scores aren't near perfect or even near near perfect.

Obviously in a perfect world all three letter writers would be distinguished full professors who've had you in multiple classes and have read and know your thesis/WS intimately. Now, I'm will to bet for most if not all applicants this is not the case. So everyone has to make some compromises on one or all of those letter writer qualities, bearing in mind that some schools have an inclination for some types of letter writers and that you'll never really know which ones. Which one can speak most fully about your work? That might depend on the class you took with the Oxford lecturer; was it a large class with little writing until the very end? How involved was the other professor on your thesis committee? Did they just read the thesis at the end and sign off on it? Or were they closely involved at every stage of the process and integral in putting the project together? If so, you might want that person to write for you. Because even if they didn't take a class with you, they can still speak to your approach to the research process, your work ethic, etc. that sometimes even professors who have you in class can't write about. Two out of three of my letter writers were still assistant professors at the time of submitting my application (though both of them are now tenured) and I never felt like that inhibited my chances at any school I applied to. However, I'd had all of them for at least one class; one writer I'd had for 3 classes, one writer I'd had for an honors class and mentored my research paper (which later became my WS), and another I'd had for an honors class and other upper level class. So in the end I would still privilege who can write most fully to you as a student over anything, which may be someone you've had a class with or may not be. Another concern with the Oxford lecturer is that even though they're not a full professor, they're also not tenure-track (unless they and English unis just called them 'lecturers'?).

I'm not an expert, but especially if you want to go into another type of program entirely, I don't think you're looking into "transferring" so much as just starting over and applying to history programs. As for whether or not to soldier on in your current program, that's something to talk about with your advisor asap. Yes, there are many historicist literary scholars as well as many literary historians, but some programs prefer to keep a more defined line than others.

I got my BA from a large state school as well yet was accepted to several schools, including Chicago where I currently attend. Like Datatape, my cohort has a range of educational backgrounds. If you made the most out of your undergrad education then I wouldn't worry about a name. There's people who graduate Harvard and don't make the cut and people from community colleges that end up in great PhD programs (my friend in philosophy for one!)

Long time no chat, peeps. Still hanging in there?

That sounds like something you'd put in a Personal Statement more than that SOP. I don't see a problem with discussing something like that which has impacted how you've gotten to where you are, just not in a SOP.

I had fee waivers to some schools due to being part of a research program, but it applied to everyone in the program. How did you find out about it?

Well, I'm sure everyone is knee deep in classes but I've finally registered for mine! As it goes I only have class two days a week so I won't have my first class for a week and two days, but I have reading due before then and orientation activities that will keep me plenty busy I'm sure. How is everyone else doing?

The thing is, worrying about the GRE is probably the least productive thing you do if you have a score that you feel reflects your best possible performance (on this specific test). If schools cared as much about GRE scores as they did about the WS and SOP then they would have hard limits right on the admissions page - something to the tune of "Unless your score is in the XX percentile, don't even bother". And some schools do... but I'd be willing to bet the majority of Top 50 programs do not. For the schools that do, it's up to you to weigh the cost of the application with the strength and fit of the program. I just know that I spent so much time agonizing and stressing over my scores, only to speak with acquaintances who had gotten into prestigious Top 5 programs with lower scores. There's a reason why it's more difficult to find hard data on accepted grad student profiles for students in the humanities than for say law school or med school. You as an applicant are so much more than a test score and there are great programs out there that realize this.

Ah, that makes sense then. So it's a stipend in addition to a large reduction in the cost of tuition. Hopefully Rose Egypt sees that.

Yeah I don't understand the logic of that. Students are given a stipend, but there's no way the stipend would cover even a fraction of tuition costs so grad students will still have to take out easily +$100k in loans unless they have a fairly hefty fellowship already. Less than 2 weeks till registration for me and just a bit over 3 weeks till classes actually start, whew...

It does state on the site: So I would assume it's true (?) However, I would contact the program directly for further clarification. Their more prestigious fellowships might offer a waiver or partial waiver even if not indicated on the site. The only way to know would be speak with someone from the department.

Hey! You might want to check out the thread as there's a lot of ongoing discussion on parts of the application, including the SOP.

Eek! I completely forgot some people have started already. How has the first week of classes been for those who have started?

I second everything Lons said and I'll say, had I compiled my list alone I would not have applied to half the schools I applied to and would probably not be going where I'm going now. I would have applied to fewer schools, almost no prestigious programs and/or would've overlooked great programs that in my mind didn't seem strong because I was unfamiliar with the university. Sometimes I think people get hung up too much on fit. Being limited by financial resources (or family/employment etc.) is one thing. But if someone honestly cannot see themselves fitting into more than 4-5 schools,they may need to reevaluate their criteria - unless they're so set on just those schools that they would rather face total rejection in the spring than a choice of schools that maybe weren't at the top of the list (at that moment in time; visiting a school and speaking with professors there personally can change a lot). Which some people are and that's A-OK! To me, fit is less about finding a professor or professors who encompass every aspect of your research interests and more about finding a program and faculty list with enough pieces for you to pull together during graduate study. Maybe Professor X has the theoretical framework you like, but Professor X does Victorian and you're an early Americanist. Professor Y does early American, but their focus is on poetry instead of novels. However, there's also Professor Z who's an expert on the American novel. As a grad student you could possibly use Professor X's guidance on laying out your theory, Professor Y for historical/cultural research, and Professor Z for form analysis. Tbh, the above is something I've discussed with professors after receiving offers and going visits, but the initial school-choosing process was much simpler. It was basically: "Which schools will allow me to pursue research in this, this, and this from a creative perspective with a reasonable (comparatively) possibility of employment after graduation?" From there I eventually got 19 strong programs. If I didn't get into any of those programs, the plan was to apply to a similar (probably reduced) list. As it was, I got into 5. And the rest is history - a very short history of me picking Chicago and twiddling my thumbs since we still haven't started classes yet ugh.