gwarner13

I'm just trying to think through sleepyoldman's Google example, which seemed to invoke the idea of raw intelligence in an interesting (and confusing) way to me. Perhaps I misunderstood. Regardless, while I think there are very few of us who would deny that luck certainly plays a role in this process, it seems like, of late, there's been a tendency on the boards to over-emphasize it. I still maintain that working your ass off to polish your SoP/WS is the use of your time most likely to result in success, though it by no means guarantees it.

"Let's look at what you've said: First, you said that you worked really hard on your WS, polishing and polishing, implying that you thought it was particuarly good, and at least suggesting that it was better than other applicants', and that it was on this basis, its goodness, its being superior, that you believe you were accepted." So many thing to say, so little time. First off, I'd take issue with the claim that faculty "interest" in one's SoP/WS is somehow distinct from its quality. Secondly, the above quote takes Jazzy's claim completely out of context. She was originally talking about where one's energy is best concentrated during the application process, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong here, Jazzy) implying that the time and energy one could spend worrying about prestige of LOR writers, GPA, and the ever-elusive "fit" is better spent revising the s*** out of one's writing sample and SoP (thus: "My biggest piece of advice: Worry about what's in your control, don't waste mental energy on what you cannot"). This was a direct response to your assertion that a prestigious LOR was the "single most helpful" component in an application. That's not the same thing as saying that the amount of effort she spent on her written materials translated into an "objectively superior" product which was then largely responsible for her stellar record last year. Jazzy's clearly not comfortable making that claim, although as someone who by all accounts spent considerably less time on their writing sample than she did, was waitlisted at (and now very happily attends) one of the schools where she was admitted, and had nowhere near her success rate last year, I am. I'm also intrigued--but a little confused--by your earlier discussion of "sheer intelligence." Maybe Jazzy (who had a much higher success rate, though I wound up having several great options) is "smarter" (however the hell we're defining that term) than me, maybe she's not, maybe we're equal. I honestly couldn't care less. It in no way threatens me to think that someone who spent more time on their writing sample than I did would probably have an "objectively superior" product. It has nothing to do with ability or intelligence, and everything to do with the fact that writing gets better with revision and time. That's just me, though. Lastly, I guess I'm struggling with the takeaway from your post. If you're right, and methodology/text selection/any other indicators of faculty "interest" as you define it are more important than "quality," to what aspects of the application would YOU suggest devoting the most attention? (Oh, and and the top tier accepts many, MANY of the same students. One of the prospectives I spoke with at our open house last week had three top 10 offers in addition to ours.)

Except more so this: Doctoral Program, or: How I Learned to Love the Booze

You beat me to this!

That would be a friend of mine (she doesn't come around the forums much). I don't think she knows anything about their admission process/status, though. In my experience, that kind of information isn't usually included in the acceptance/waitlist email or phone call. They migggggght mention the size of the admitted class, but that's about it in terms of information that would be useful to people around here.

I'm suggesting that, perhaps, your conception (and, I'll repeat, articulation) of "fit" might be flawed in some way. I'd argue that being rejected from 14-15 schools (if we're operating off of the same hypothetical), all of which you believed were a good fit, would suggest that to be a real possibility. If that's the case, doubling your schools is simply doubling the problem, throwing good money after bad & etc.

If you apply to 15 schools that you believe to be "good fits," and are subsequently rejected across the board, that might indicate either that there is *some* sort of weakness in your application you are not seeing (NOT that you are a bad candidate, unworthy of a spot, etc. etc-- just so we're clear about what I am and am not saying), OR that you are interpreting/defining fit incorrectly and/or are failing to articulate it persuasively. Unless you address those issues, doubling the number of apps isn't going to solve the problem. Of course, there's the other (likely) option: you were a strong applicant and a good fit, but 300 people applied for 10 spaces, and someone else's writing sample was a bit more interesting/someone else's undergrad advisor has connections/someone else mentioned a member of the adcomm's favorite theorist in their SoP. Fit is important, but there's no way to get around the numbers. There is a certain degree of arbitrariness to this process that we all want desperately to eradicate, but can't. Hang in there guys. I remember how much February sucked, but it's so early yet.

I got to experience the full range of the emotional roller coaster that is the grad school admissions process, as I was accepted, rejected, AND waitlisted last year. (As it turns out, I would up getting admitted off of both waitlists.) The overwhelming majority of Ph.D. programs notify in February, though some will stretch it out through March. In my experience, no good comes of an automated "check your status on the website" email; acceptances are usually personalized emails or phone calls. There are, I'm sure, exceptions to this rule. I heard about one of my waitlists the first week in February-- the day after the first round of acceptances went out. The other informed me around March 1. The national deadline for decisions is April 15th, so most schools who keep a waitlist will try to let you know your status before then (in case you have other offers), though I've heard of some people getting waitlist conversions later in April or even May (these are usually people who don't have any other offers, obviously). While rejections are largely not personalized, all of mine were kind, and I did not at all get the sense that they took some sort of perverse joy in it (I know you were exaggerating). The fact of the matter is that there are truly far more qualified candidates than there are spaces, and adcoms seems acutely aware of that and sensitive to the fact that many of us spend a great deal of time, effort, and money preparing these apps. Hope that helps!

(Full disclosure: I'd never borrow the kind of money private unfunded MA programs like Chicago, NYU, etc. require. Ever. Under any circumstances.) That said, I would respectfully but vehemently disagree with this claim: "And don't kid yourself that a funded MA necessarily brings you any closer to your endgame." In this job market, earning a PhD with as little debt as possible should be everyone's end game.

I found no fewer than 3 typos in my SoP after the fact. In a curious twist of fate, I wound up with as many acceptances. Don't sweat it.

Datatape, I need you to know that I just spent 15 minutes digging up my login info (haven't been on here since I applied last season) for the sole purpose of telling you that this absolutely made my day.

I have officially declined my UT offer-- hope one of you gets good news soon! I know all too well the misery of the waiting game.

Thanks, everyone! It's been a crazy 24 hrs, as I found out this afternoon I was accepted to UCSB off the waitlist as well (will be declining). I have also formally declined my UT Austin offer, as well as an M.A. offer from UConn (both fully funded). Hope this helps out a fellow waitlister soon!

Holy smokes, guys-- I just got the good word from UCLA! Can't believe it! I'll be turning down an offer from UT Austin tonight. Hope that helps someone (I'm looking at you, ErnestPWorrell)! Keep your heads up!

I'm in the exact same boat! So kind of them to be in touch, but sheesh-- it's nervewracking!