ThousandsHardships

If they were both offering you funding and it was just a matter of amount, then I'd say Stanford for sure. But if you have to pay out-of-pocket, then I would not recommend choosing any unfunded program over any funded program for graduate studies. Many (if not most) programs allow PhD students to downgrade to a master's if they change their minds along the way or can't keep going with a PhD. I have personal experience with that if you're curious and know many others who've done the same.

I'll be spending a month teaching at a language immersion summer camp!! And I'm also planning to do a bit of reading in my intended field, which should be easy considering my hometown is less than an hour away from my alma mater, where I have alumni library privileges.

ENFIN ENFIN ENFIN!!! Indiana University baby!! Finally got an offer of financial support after many long months of waiting!

@linguisticsgrad I would suspect that it differs between programs, but I'm in much the same situation. I'm first waitlisted for a one-person fellowship, so I'm waiting for a particular person to decline, and I keep being told that other forms of funding hasn't been finalized and that they're trying to make me an offer I'd accept and that they're hoping to know more soon, but it's been so long and I'm having silent breakdowns several times every day because I don't have any other offers and I'd rather not wait to start my program. I've been in contact with my program as well, but my last email with them was two weeks ago. How often have you been in contact with your program with regards to funding? Would you suggest that I try contacting them again right now? I had originally planned to wait another week, but every single day is torture. At the same time, I don't want to get on their bad side because I'm too pushy or insistent. Sorry that this became more of my own sob story than a realistic answer to your question. I do think it's quite possible that people will decline close to the deadline, but I have no idea how many or what the chances are. The thing is, statistics don't matter - what applies to you does. It doesn't help at all to hear of what happened to other people in the past. We're guaranteed to keep stressing out until we get the final word from our program. I just hope we hear back soon. I hope that we both get what we're hoping for in the end!

Not in your field but lurking here anyway because I keep coming back to see when people tend to accept/reject their offers. Personally, I have one acceptance but I haven't heard about funding, nor do I have the official offer. Got the unofficial offer in January. It's been driving me bonkers. I've been waiting since forever and the only thing they've been able to do tell me is that they hope to know more soon. Sigh... Anyway, from what I've seen in the different waitlist threads, it seems like SLP programs tend to accept waitlisted students more often than students in other programs. Maybe that's because SLP programs only accept the number of students they expect to attend (I'm only guessing here) while other programs accept more students than they expect to attend. In any case, if you're on multiple waitlists, that sounds like a good start already.

He would love to have you work with him because he enjoyed having you as a student, genuinely believe you have potential, and would be thrilled to be the one to help you reach it. But the purpose of teaching isn't to constrain students; it's to guide them while they discover their own paths. If your professor is indeed a quality mentor, then he should understand that. You aren't "betraying" him by going elsewhere; you're taking his legacy elsewhere. Think of your teacher as a parent. How many parents wish with all their hearts that their kids would stay close to home and spend time with their family? But how many parents would be upset at their children for achieving great things elsewhere? As long as you express your appreciation and respect for your mentor and let him know how much he's helped you along the way, he needs to understand your decisions. Also, I highly recommend watching the episode of Sabrina the Teenage Witch called "The Four Faces of Sabrina." If you can see how ridiculous Sabrina was for trying to please others in choosing colleges, then perhaps that'll make your communication with your mentor easier. In any case, best of luck!

Tell me about it! It's been several "we hope to know more in a couple of weeks" already from my prospective school where I'm waiting on a funding offer. I'm planning to reach out again if I don't hear back by April 10th or so.

No, even if they sat in on meetings, students are by law not allowed to look at the records of other students, so they will not have participated in the decision-making process. But they did go to grad school themselves and so are aware of that process. But do maybe seek out some advice from people who have sat on other admissions committees. Most profs I've talked to say that the top mistakes people make in their applications are 1) expressing their interest using vague clichés, 2) using too many personal anecdotes and not giving enough talk about your actual research and experience. As for recommendations, many don't even realize it when they're writing poor letters. My own former adviser gave me a sample letter that he wrote for someone else to use as a guide when I had to write one for my own student. His was a very good example of a positive letter that basically regurgitates someone's resume - it added no info to the application and showed that he didn't actually know the student very well. Therefore it would be considered a poor letter. Some other examples would be ones that I've helped people translate in the past. I've seen some letters (especially for international applicants) that say that oh, this person is a team player, a great person, hardworking student, etc. Those are also poor letters - unless they can give specific examples to back up those claims. Basically, make sure that your recommenders are able to show that they know you well and believe that you will succeed based on very specific examples that show your traits as a person, as a student, as a researcher, and as a teacher. Also make sure that your recommenders' priorities match those of your intended program. I can't tell you how many times I've had a former professor in France tell me "Oh you'll get into PhD programs - your French is impeccable." I'm applying to literature PhD programs. I won't get in anywhere if all a recommender can say is that I can write with proper grammar.

No, their records are separate and they will not see if you've accepted another offer. However, please alert the schools that you do not plan to attend ASAP to help out the poor souls out there who might be waitlisted for either admissions or funding.

They are all competitive...but I know people who've gotten into as many as 5/6 schools they applied to (not in anthro though). So envious of them!! You sound like you're really well-prepared. Did you have professors look over your statements (ideally ones that have been on admissions committees in the past)? Have you tried asking about what your recommenders wrote about you? Sometimes recommenders can hurt you without even them knowing it. If their recommendation looks like it got all its information from your CV, then it could quite possibly work against you even if the comments are all glowing. Statements can also be hard to grasp - the right balance between the general and specific, etc. These are areas that really can make it or break it for a qualified candidate, much more so than the GRE.

Many students take two tries. Not many people take three tries, though, perhaps because not a lot of people have the strength of heart to give it a third try if they've already been rejected for two application seasons. Most students also apply to several different levels of programs. If you do apply for a third time, don't just aim for top programs. Apply to a few selective programs that you really like, a few decent programs with high acceptance rates, and a few lesser known programs that have faculty that meet your interests but which may not be at a top-tier school. Contact faculty beforehand to talk about research interests and get any questions and concerns answered. Getting some work experience also helps, even if it's not in a related field. Also, what's your subfield? I can imagine that getting some experience working in foreign countries (and learning another language) could be of some help if you intend to do field work in a different country.

I would only do that with a university that you're nearly sure to attend if they agree to your request. Simply shoot them an email to tell them how much you love their school and program and what a great fit you think it is. Say that you've already been accepted by two programs with full funding, that you'd love to make a decision as soon as you can, but that you'd highly prefer their program instead. I don't think you need to be clear that you're trying to negotiate. By telling them these facts, you're already giving a hint. Personally, I doubt it'll work for admissions. If they're desperate to have you, they'd have admitted you already. It might work for funding though. This is only my guess. I have no personal experience in this area, unfortunately.

I'd be more specific in your statements, if I were you. A "blend of history and sociology" sounds a bit vague and general. One successful technique that I've seen people use is to use one of your research projects as a starting point and introduce your preparation in your studies by describing your driving question, approaches, angles, discoveries, theoretical perspectives drawn upon, arguments (use a bit of jargon if needed), and how that's led you to find what you want to do for your graduate career. It will give the sense that you're more specialized without digging yourself into a corner, if that makes sense. As I said, being well-read across the board is not a hindrance to your academic career. People do value diverse interests and the ability to think outside the box. I don't think the hindrance comes from multidisciplinarity alone. Basically, I like to think of it as a wheel. The ideal PhD candidate has a fully functional wheel, with both spokes and a hub. The spokes represent the diversity of your interests and pursuits. The hub represents your focus. The spokes lend strength to the overall wheel, but they need the hub to function.

Yes, I would say the lack of cohesion in your publications looks a bit like you're unfocused for your graduate career. I don't think your three degrees will hurt you as long as you can prove your focus. Being well-rounded is a plus and it's good to elaborate on that, but not at the expense of having a research focus. If you want to go into a PhD program, you need to be able to choose something as the center. All your other interests, though they may support your goals, are in the periphery.

@GL551 I wouldn't rule out a terminal MA at this point. If you have your heart set on doing a PhD, considering applying to MA programs at different schools, including lower ranked ones. With your experience, you should get into at least one MA program that is willing to fund you. Give your GPA a chance to grow and your research a chance to focus during this MA program and apply to PhD programs with that under your belt. That said, I understand completely how you feel. I have two BAs and one BS from a top institution, and a concurrent MA and MS from another. My undergrad transcript was fairly impressive but unfocused, and my master's helped me focus but created a bunch of other problems -- not realizing what I wanted until late in the game, having a couple of below-average grades, not getting along with the department that matters for my future PhD, etc. I put my heart into this application season, did everything I possibly could, and, get this, MOST of the people I know in my field have gotten acceptances from 4/5, 5/6, 2/4, 1/1 of their programs. This wasn't supposed to be competitive, and I've won awards in this field before. I applied to ten schools, and I'm sitting at only one acceptance, and I've been waiting on funding since January and so am not sure I'd be able to go. I asked the people who rejected me after a waitlist and they told me that I was a strong candidate and have had impressive accomplishments but that I may have to do another master's to prove that I'm now on track and to get better letters of rec. It's really depressing, but it feels like the only real way to start with a clean slate in the event that I don't get funding.

Well, it sounds like you're going to be miserable at MIT and that you need to learn more about Harvard. I recommend getting in touch with the Harvard faculty and current grad students so that your decision would be more informed. Other than that, it sounds like Stanford could work if you're good at independent research. Your fiance being there is definitely a plus. I know plenty of people who would not even consider moving away from their significant other.

Honestly, I'd go for the better mentor. As someone who's been through the grad school ordeal before, I can't tell you how much a mentor can affect your studies, and how many students list a poor mentor as a reason for leaving without their degree. Regardless of your research interests, you are not going to have a good experience if your research adviser's mentorship style is not what you're looking for. I also wouldn't dismiss the doubts you have as something you'll get over, if I were you. I entered a STEM PhD program despite knowing that I tend to dread lab work. Since I've always had multidisciplinary interests, I jumped into my previous program expecting to find that passion eventually. It didn't happen, and if I could give one piece of advice to my younger self, it would be to listen to the warning signs that were there from the very beginning. You didn't doubt for nothing. Conversely, if you have a mentor that is receptive to new ideas, there's a chance that you could bring your projects closer to the area that you want to work on, even if your mentor hadn't previously explored in that direction. And his research could also help you discover potentially new areas of interest and open you up to things you hadn't previously thought to work on. I think ultimately if your adviser is willing to listen and guide, then that's more important than anything. Listen to your guts.

In 2013, I applied to two drastically different PhD programs. I was accepted as the top choice candidate for the first, and I was waitlisted for the second but didn't end up getting in. I didn't address it in my statements at all. I had to create a separate application account anyway so the applications were entirely separate. If your two programs are related to the point where there might be professors with dual appointments, then perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to be in contact with your prospective adviser ahead of time and talk over your situation. For the record, it's not unheard of, even for schools that accept only one application, to allow students to select whether or not they wish for their application to be considered for admission to a different program. If both are a good fit for your research interests, it wouldn't incite suspicion at all. In my case it probably did look suspicious because one was in a STEM field and the other in the humanities, but hey, I still got in.

@acciodoctorate Just wanted to say, I love your username! Now if we could all just accio our acceptances and funding packages that would be uh-mazing. Oh, and go early modernists!!

I'm not in psychology, but things I'd consider asking are: Would publishing be a doable goal given the timespan of my stay? Are there opportunities to present research at conferences/symposia? Would I have a chance to undertake my own project, or would I mainly be assisting with other people's projects? How did the the idea for the current projects first surface? (You'll want to refine this question so that it reflects the actual project and your own curiosity/knowledge). What you do anticipate the future direction of the lab to be? As for your last couple of questions, do you know that the lab manager actually went to grad school after working for this lab? Lab managers are all different. Some only have an undergraduate degree, some already have graduate degrees, while others are current grad students or postdocs. You can certainly ask about their experience, but don't assume anything beforehand unless you have reason to do so. If you'll be talking to the lab manager, it's perfectly logical to ask about his/her experience in the lab, what the dynamics of the interactions are between members, the PI's degree of involvement, etc.

Most research-based master's programs should have funding opportunities. I would ask Johns Hopkins if there are any funding opportunities available, and if not, reapply next year for funded programs. Don't be afraid to check with prospective programs ahead of time to see what the funding situation is like for their master's students. You can tell them that you had been accepted by Johns Hopkins this year but that the financial burden was too much, and that's why you're checking with them to make sure ahead of time. Alternatively, you can try to apply for external sources of funding. It might be too late at this point, but it might be worth considering if you reapply next year.

Yes, I would definitely ask them what you can do to improve your application. Everyone's application has different weaknesses, so there are different ways that we can strengthen our applications. Keep in contact with your potential adviser in the mean time.

Are you talking about the personal statement or statement of purpose? Those are typically different statements. The statement of purpose (SOP) would be the one that most schools require, and only some schools require a personal statement (sometimes referred to as a personal history statement). For the statement of purpose, focus on your background and experience. This isn't a place to give anecdotes or talk about personal difficulties. Treat it as a combination of a CV and cover letter. Your interests should be grounded in experience. One technique that I found super helpful was to start with a description of a research project I did. I got the idea from a friend's SOP (said friend got into 5 out of the 6 top schools she applied to). Using her approach as a guide, I briefly summarized the most memorable research project I did, explaining the topic, my approach, my discoveries (using some jargon in the process) and how this project led me to eventually find my research interests. In the next paragraphs, I then backstepped a little to talk about my general background in the discipline, specific background in my subfield, and I wrapped up my statement with a conclusion that talks about what I'm currently doing with my life as well as my career aspirations for the future. For the personal statement, you can talk a bit more about your personal experiences, but the general idea is that yes, clichés are bad. I've had to completely rewrite my personal statement about four times before my recommenders were satisfied with it. What ultimately got me on the right track was when my professor told me to treat it like a mini intellectual autobiography. Basically, don't include random things that have nothing to do with your academic trajectory. And make it flow nicely. If you have had any difficulties or questionable parts in your application, this is the place to talk about it. But don't make it a sob story or give excuses. Rather, it's better to focus on the steps that you've taken to address these issues, how these difficulties have helped you along the way, etc. I'm not sure what you mean when you say you want to incorporate a narrative structure. Do what feels most natural to you. I think it's safer to make it more traditional. Honestly, though, I've discovered that the best statement is simply one that doesn't go overboard trying to prove something or hide something. Stick to the truth and the rest will come. You don't need to describe how interested you are with elaborate adjectives, nor do you need to tell the school that you believe you're competent. Show them directly by describing your projects, experiences, and insights. Oh, and don't forget to research the schools and show them why you're a good fit (e.g. faculty whose research is in your subfield, organizations and workgroups specifically dedicated to your area). By the way, since you're talking about narrative...I should mention that I was super upset when told I'd have to overhaul my third draft of my statement. I was having such writer's block and didn't know how to start or what to say, and so I just decided, hey, why not go out on a limb and try a poetic style? Well, that lasted for about three sentences. My end result was a completely normal statement, but it helped me get over the writer's block and identify a connecting point for all the random stuff I had to say. Cool story, eh?

I'm not in history, but since I've experienced multiple graduate programs in different fields, I thought I might pitch in. Note that every school is different in terms of what they prioritize in their applicants, so ultimately, go the path that feels most comfortable to you. There is no one set way. The only advantage that a prestigious institution will get you is that the committee might examine your application in more detail. And if you came from a school that's known for being challenging, they might be more willing to overlook a below-average GPA. In other words, if you had certain weaknesses in your application, attending a prestigious school might help offset it. However, attending a less prestigious institution won't give you a disadvantage provided that your application is strong. The committee won't choose a less qualified candidate just because he or she attended a better known school. If you do get a publication, it'll pretty much put your application at the top, so it'll be great if you can get something in. I wouldn't say that it's super important though, because most students who get into grad school did not publish as an undergrad, so it's not something that you're generally expected to do. If you're interested, I would suggest contacting a professor. You'll get good guidance that way. One other thing that I highly suggest is completing an honors thesis your senior year. You can put it on your resume as a publication (even if you don't officially publish it in a journal), it'll be the most solid proof of your ability to undertake an independent research project, and the process of researching and writing your thesis will help you hone your research skills, expand your knowledge, and help you identify a more precise area of interest. As I said, completing an undergrad honors thesis would be the most solid proof of your research abilities. In terms of building a resume, if you intend to go into academia, I also suggest getting some teaching or tutoring experience. Since history is a very writing-focused field, I'd say teaching or tutoring writing could look great on your resume. Throughout my undergrad and most of my graduate career, I couldn't understand how people could bring themselves to specialize either. But all this changed during the final year of my master's program, and this is actually why I ended up switching primary fields in applying to PhD programs. How did this happen? Well, it was actually mostly through course work (and the research papers and projects they entailed) and by studying for my M.A. exam. Both of those things required me to do a lot of independent research, which helped me identify my interests. Until that year, I had always thought that specializing meant I had to give up all my other interests, but it was then that I discovered that this wasn't the case. I was still interested in a lot of stuff, but my desire to spend more time on my intended subfield thing outweighed my desire to spread out. What I'm trying to say is, your focus doesn't have to be the only thing you're interested in. It should simply interest you enough that it alone is enough to keep you grounded, satisfied, motivated, and curious. After all, if your choice makes you happy, then why does it matter how many other choices would have made you equally happy? Choosing a subfield is much like choosing the right partner. Being in a satisfying relationship doesn't mean you can't find someone else nice or attractive and be friends and spend time with that person, but if you're already in the relationship of your dreams, it won't make you sad that you can't be romantically involved with this other nice and attractive person. It's good to have diverse interests within your field. I encourage it and so will your prospective graduate programs. Being well-rounded is actually considered a plus. But there's a difference between liking to learn about something and wanting to do research in something. The latter usually materializes in the process of research itself, and that's why it's crucial to do an honors thesis or some other form of major research project (and ideally take a research-oriented course) such that you'd have a clearer idea of what you want to focus on. For any class with a research project, don't treat it as just an assignment. Take the time to do the research and use it as an opportunity to uncover that special interest.

Are you kidding me?! I didn't even apply to that program and I'm outraged at that system just reading your comment. I really hope that my prospective program (where I still haven't heard back from with regards to funding) doesn't operate like that. From what the profs I've talked to said, I'm pretty sure the funding at my prospective program doesn't just disappear when someone declines, so that's good news. But I really fear that they may have accepted more students than they expect to be able to fund, so I'm really hoping that my acceptance isn't a waitlist in disguise like you said UNC's used to be.