Pamphilia

Gah. I have mostly wiped any social mentions of myself (real name at least) from the searchable internet, but Googling my name comes up with the Facebook page of someone who shares my age and gender, so a body could reasonably assume that she is I. Only she is a biiiiiiigggg fan of drinking and a big fan of talking about it/posting many drunken pictures. And a big fan of trashy reality shows, apparently. Rats! Who is this drunken Pamphilia doppelganger?

I may be showing my own ignorance here, but I wasn't aware that Penn conducted interviews for English (but perhaps you are talking about Comp Lit or Rhet Comp?). I haven't heard mention of it before, anyway.

Hell to the yes.

Conservatism and conservatives don't necessarily "frown" on "sex and frat parties," especially in the context of college.* I went to an undergrad with a relatively conservative Southern tradition and a relatively high number of neo-con and conservative students. The university being a traditionally Southern school and all, we had a HUGE Greek community. Anecdotally, I can tell you that almost all of the extremely conservative students I knew were Greek. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of any conservatives I knew who weren't. They'd have wild frat parties and get wasted and have lots of drunken sex, etc. Frat parties don't exactly tend to be bastions of political liberalism. Let's not forget that even W was a drunken frat boy in his day! Also, this "free sex" that's so rampant on college campuses...? Are we at Berkeley in 1969? A lot of people have a lot of sex, yes, but it's not exactly Woodstock. I'm not trying to be snarky, just figure out what "free sex" means in the context of this thread. *I think we need to distinguish between political conservatism and religious conservatism. There's a big difference, despite the way things have been looking in the Republican party since the '90s.

I'm inclined to disagree with everybody who opposes the idea of professors giving negative advice. It would be lovely if they all were kind, gentle, and positive all the time, but I do not think for a moment that profs have an obligation to be nice or encouraging. That is not to say that a professor should be excused from the social obligations of basic civility, but I don't think they have a social or professional obligation to make us feel warm and snuggly. University faculty are not elementary school teachers with an obligation to cultivate their students' self-esteem. Moreover, I would much, much rather hear straight talk about my prospects than empty and useless but kind words of encouragement. My undergrad mentor is brilliant, but very scary. When I first told her that I was serious about applying to grad school, she told me that she thought I could do well, but that I wasn't top material. And she did not mince words, and she made me feel like utter crap about it. But I appreciated it--I learned about myself, my weaknesses, and it sort of slapped me back into reality and gave me perspective about my chances. I am still applying to a lot of top programs, and she gladly wrote me strong letters of recommendation. Because she was honest with me, though, I feel like I was better off when applying. I worked my ass off on my applications and had no delusions of greatness. She made me recognize that I will have to work harder than other applicants to get in, and work harder than other students once (if) I do. I'm prepared and excited to do that. I did not appreciate my undergraduate advisor very much while I was in school. I thought that she was mean, overly critical, and unnecessarily harsh. Now, I appreciate it. I am GLAD she was so tough on me. And I especially appreciate the fact that, even though she makes me feel small and inadequate sometimes (and still scares the bejesus out of me), she has been more supportive through the application process even than my touchy-feely, you-feel-good-so-I-feel-good mentors. She gave me actual support, like honest assessments of my SOP and writing sample, which was so much more valuable than "you go, girl!"-style encouragement. To the OP, I honestly can't say that I think your professor was out of line. I think she was probably being honest. I also think that you should apply to top programs despite her advice, but that you should keep her advice in mind to maintain perspective. To the poster whose professor flaked on the letters and then offered criticism about the writing sample--the letter thing sucks and infuriates me on your behalf, but I don't think it was wrong for him to give you edits on the WS after the fact. It may be tactless and frustrating, but he's still teaching and you're still learning. Personally, I am the kind of person who bawls in the face of brutal honesty, so I get why this stuff upsets people. That doesn't mean it's not worth it, however.

Uh...so? I think we can all use a little positivity.

Gah! Just got one of the "weekly status update" emails from Duke (though, smartly, they've now dropped "weekly" from the subject) and it pretty much gave me a heart attack. I also received yesterday a couple of recent articles from one of the profs at Stanford (he said he would send them to me way back in November, just to be nice I think, and they got lost in the mail until now). Seeing that big fat 9x11 enveloped from Stanford also gave me a heart attack, until I saw who the sender was. Stupid mass emails and/or professors who are fantastically nice but nonetheless make me crazy by sending things that don't have to do with my application! I'm a little high-strung these days.

I know for one that Carolina awards certain funding/fellowships based on GRE scores. It's the only program to which I applied where I was told they do that, though I'm sure a couple of the others engage in the practice as well. A faculty member told me that even though the English department doesn't really care about it, my high Quant score would help me out with funding (if the English department recommends me for admission to the Grad School, of course).

Nope. Not vacillating at all. I am freaking out way more about not getting in anywhere. Having a stable, well-paying corporate job with excellent benefits is the thing that made me realize I MUST do something else. So I left the country and wandered around the world and lived in a car for a while...and now I am applying to grad school because it is what I am designed to do. Well, I might be designed to drop everything to dance full time, but then I'd probably need to trick some rich fool into being my sugarparent, which I'd prefer to avoid. The only part of grad school that makes me a little nervous is the idea of being in ONE place for the next 5-10 years. I get itchy feet. Here's to applying for travel grants!

Champagne and a big, fat happy dance (insh'Allah)!

Ditto on both counts. Plus, the writing is often inane and overwrought. This excerpt, for example, is ludicrous: Uncertain how these credentials would be evaluated, she had applied very widely in the hope of finding some program that might tender her an honorary fellowship, and the results amply justified the wisdom of this strategy (even though it cost her parents handsomely in application and test fees), illustrating the variety of responses to the same credentials that an applicant may encounter. Johns Hopkins and Pitt rejected her outright. Wayne State and Illinois/Chicago admitted her without money. Maryland and Indiana admitted her unfunded but with the promise of a TA second year. Temple and Kentucky waitlisted her for money. Case Western and Penn State offered her TAs. But lowly Baylor offered her their top honorary fellowship of $16,000 while 59th-ranked Texas A&M weighed in with a newly founded first-year fellowship of $33,000 plus tuition--the most munificent by far of any program including the Ivies (after the first year of luxury sufficient to pay off her undergraduate indebtedness, it reverted to a more modest TA for the next four years, but left her free to pursue her options elsewhere after the MA). Moreover, when she contacted Penn State to explain her situation, the Director of Admissions there, though unable to match it, promptly offered to supplement her TA with $3,000 more in honorary money in the hope (vain, as it understandably proved) of tempting her to spurn filthy Texas lucre. Other seniors applying in '05 encountered even more various responses and options for supplements; see Section 17. So while competing offers hardly entitle an applicant to bargain arrogantly, tactfully presented they just might enable one to nudge an offer up somewhat or otherwise enhance one's appeal to a given program. Call the editor! I feel like all I really learned from this article is that apparently if you sneeze at Pitt, they'll give you an award.* *Not to knock Pitt itself...just this author's absurd representation of it.

So I guess "Option 3) You wait and re-apply to the place she gets into" is not on the table?

Before I offer my own words of wisdom regarding this topic, A Disclaimer: I was in a four-year long distance relationship with my main squeeze; we've now been living together going on three years and it's fantastic. So, I am living proof that sometimes long-distance relationships do work out. Still, whenever my friends seek out my sage advice since I've "been there," this is what I tell them: don't do it. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.* My darling dear and I were domestically long-distance, however. When I went overseas for six months, we did technically "break up." However, I never took advantage of the fact that I was single because I loved my (then ex-) booboo sooooo much, blah blah. When I returned home, it was weird for a short while, but things did work out, which was nice for me (and my boo). However, in retrospect I am REALLY glad that we were not together while I was overseas. It allowed me to feel much freer. For example, I didn't have to stop what I was doing to be like, "Ah! I have to call my lambchop before he goes to bed!" And I knew that if I wanted to, I could have taken on all of Europe. It was nice to have that option, you know? And it was also especially nice to have the option but not want to take it. That really put things in perspective and made me realize how hooked I truly was. But, since I expect you will stay together while your lady's abroad--which is great, too!--I think TerriM's advice is spot-on. * Why, you ask? Well, I will only tell you because I, too, am bored. In fact, I am trying to occupy myself while waiting for my damn babemeister3000's plane to arrive so I can go pick his ass up at the airport at freaking midnight when I have to work in the morning....grumble... Anyway, here is why I do not recommend a long-distance thing, though obviously it works out sometimes: even if people are very compatible and really love each other, more often than not, it doesn't work and only wastes time they could have been finding the next love of their lives/banging a lot of other hot people/doing anything but pining over their sweetie pies. Also, I think that distance is often used to mask problems that couples have, and/or it warps the partners' perceptions of their relationship (distance makes the heart grow fonder, you always get so psyched when you DO see each other that you end up just sitting on problems instead of working them out, yadda yadda yadda). But then, what do I know??? I don't recommend it--but hey, it worked for me! So I judge no one for taking on the immense burden of the Distance. If you can work successfully with it, that really says something. Sorry for the extremely long ramble. As I said, I am trying to kill time...

That's precisely how I feel, and I also know that those feelings are shaped from my undergrad experience. It was a good one!

Hello! Sorry to be starting the morning off with some bad news...but, I know some people are still skeptical about these numbers. I spoke to a friend who is a current Penn PhD candidate, and she confirmed that there will only be five acceptances this year. Bummer.

I mean, maybe. But I don't think being motivated by economic factors is anything to be ashamed of. We all have varying reasons for wanting to go to graduate school. Something different gives each of us that special kick in the pants. Who is anyone to judge another's motivation?

My best friend's dad is a surgeon who never graduated from high school or got a GED. He dropped out his sophomore year, somehow managed to talk his way into an Ivy League undergrad,* and eventually became a doctor. A couple of years ago, he decided that he wanted his high school degree, so he called up the old school and told them that he'd "lost" it. Because he already had an MD, they never bothered to double check his transcripts and just gave him his degree. But he never actually finished his high school credits. Sorry to deviate from the topic a bit! Just thought I'd share. That story still astounds me. * Of course, this was the early '70s. Something tells me this would NOT fly nowadays.

I'm wondering if anyone who frequents this forum has decided to apply this year because of (or partly because of) the recession. If the economy factored into your motivations to apply to grad school, could you explain why and in what ways? I'm just curious--no judgments here. Personally, because of the recession, I wish that I had NOT applied this year. Or rather, I am happy to be applying at this point in my life, I just wish the timing were better.

Me too!! Words, numbers, letters, and tones/music notes have shapes and colors. The note A440 is and always has been RED. If you play an A on the G-string of a violin, it is a burnt-orange triangle. Seven is yellow. The numbers/letters and colors thing make Sudoku and wordfinds really easy. Have you ever talked about this stuff with another synesthede? It can be really annoying if another person says that one concept is a different sense than the way you experience it. It would be like someone saying, "the sky is green" instead of "the sky is blue," or "2+2=5." Things that are just so clearly not. Haha, for me, when I read your experience of the word "emerald," I was like, "Um, NO!" But I no doubt have annoyed your or someone else's sensibilities with my experiences. I didn't learn about synesthesia until I was about 14, and when I did, I was really confused. I thought, "But doesn't everybody see/feel that?" It was very strange and more than a little unnerving to realize that not everyone else experienced the world the way I did.

Gosh, wouldn't that just be the tops? Your vision is so evocative! I teach at an academic center now, and I do loooove teaching. I teach a large range of ages, from 4 to 32, but my favorites are the older high school and college-age students (little kids are cute but boring!). I'd love to teach at the university level. But then again, what else does an English PhD do? She teaches at the high/prep school or college level...or works at Starbucks.

I didn't take your disagreement personally. I simply took objection to your misinterpretation of my words. Sorry if the caps upset you, as they were merely for emphasis. And, I apologize if it seemed like I was trying to police opinions. I was only trying to direct this discussion to the previous thread (<<) because this one is now way off its original topic, which deserves its own dedicated discussion. Definitely not telling people not to voice opinions--I believe this is a fascinating and extremely important issue.

Precisely. "Out to get you?" Thanks for quoting me, including the part in which I said, "no the GRE is not designed to keep poorer or minority students out of higher education," and interpreting "NOT DESIGNED" to mean "OUT TO GET YOU." I also purposefully did not write that an underprivileged student who does well on the GRE is an exception to the rule because I think that smacks of essentialism; I wrote that there are exceptions to trends but that, given the numbers, those trends still exist. Take a look at some stats. Also, as I said, we already had a discussion about this issue in the GRE forum area, and I think if anyone wants to reignite this discussion, it should be done on that thread.

Yes, yes, yes, yes, Coyabean. You hit the nail on the head. Another important factor to consider that parallels the "wealth" issue is parental/familial education level. I think it is also important to note that of COURSE there are always exceptions to these trends. There are plenty of underprivileged, minority students who ace standardized tests (just as so many posters have established that there are plenty of international students who have done the same). The trends still, undoubtedly, exist. No, the GRE is not designed to keep poorer or minority students out of higher education. Nonetheless, it accomplishes this end. (Don't even get me started on the prohibitive costs of the exam, besides prep: registering for the test and sending scores. I could go off on this GRE bias issue all day, but we already had another thread on this.)

Man, you all are really cool!

Thanks, I appreciate that. I hope you can figure out a good situation for your dog when you get to grad school!