BunnyWantsaPhD

Unfortunately, NYU seems to be pretty strict about things. This is what they say on their website: "Please do not send a sample that exceeds the page limit with instructions to read only certain pages; applicants should instead edit the writing sample to meet the length requirement." Other places do say that you can designate certain pages to be read, so for those I think it would be fine.

I think that would be fine! Though, on a similar note, I'm wondering what people think about using a conference paper for a writing sample. I'm using a chapter from my thesis for most of the applications, but NYU's is the only one that wants it to be so short! My hesitancy is that the conference paper doesn't have a lit review/seems to be less refined since it is a beginning of a future project. I think it has a strong and unique argument, but I'm still worried about it. Also, it focuses on Victorian femininity, but I say that I want the focus of my studies to be on Victorian masculinity--so does this matter? The chapter from my thesis is on masculinity, so I'm not sure if I should try to cut it down to 10 pages--though, I can't imagine how the hell I would do that. Ugh. Help!

Thanks, guys. That makes me feel better! I think this process is just so paranoia-inducing!

So apparently for the writing sample we're supposed to submit a paper that is from a course that still has our professor's comments on it. I don't have anything that would work, so I called the office and they said that I can just submit something else--that those were just their ideal requirements. So, do you think if I submit an edited version of a chapter of my thesis that they are going to look at my sample as not fitting their guidelines? I mean, the DGS said it was fine, but I'm worried they are just going to throw it out or something. I know no one can really answer this, but I was wondering what others were doing who are applying to Iowa.

Me! I'm so over this process! I can't bring myself to look at my writing sample again. It's a chapter from my thesis, and I was already tired of working on my thesis as is, so turning it into a writing sample isn't fun. I just wish I could have someone from the admissions committee sitting by me telling me if I'm on the right path. The uncertainty is no fun.

Can you give a little more info about what you said about your upbringing? My concern is whether or not I should talk about my parents. I'm studying feminist theory, which was due in a major part to my mother being a feminist. It just seems so silly to talk about my parents though...

Thanks semicolo2013, I appreciate it. I know it's probably silly, but I'd prefer to just send my materials to people who are already in programs since then there won't be the temptation to model off of each other. No disrespect! Thanks for the offer, smellybug! it's coming your way!

Maybe it's because it's 1am where I am and I can't think anymore, but can you be a little more specific? What did you put in your personal statement--was it about classes that you took that shaped your research interests? If so, then what did you then put in the academic statement? My struggle is in separating the two... Or, did you talk about family/cultural influences that shaped your interests and in that way it's more personal; then the academic statement talked about the coursework?

Please don't paraphrase what I've said--I'd prefer to do that myself. I really should just not give you more things to respond to, but I guess I can't help myself. I don't know what chip you have on your shoulder, or why you're so bothered by the fact that some people really do find the test to be anxiety producing, but you're really starting to be a jerk. I thought that this was a place to get and give good advice, and all you seem to be doing is tearing people down. To each their own, I guess. I'm not sure what graduate program you are in or what you hope to be in in the future, but I was not implying that I was at home working on my degree by myself at my own pace--nor do I have cats or a security blanket, but thanks for that. Of course you have to complete your coursework and thesis on time, of course there's pressures (TONS of it) in grad school. What I was trying to say earlier is that pressure is usually dealt with in the comfort of my own home--meaning, when I'm writing a paper, I'm not sitting in some testing room with a clock staring at me. If writing a paper at a location of your choosing is not something that is possible where you got your degree, then I'm not sure where the hell you went to school. Now, is that paper due at a certain time period, sure. Is there pressure to get it done, sure. Does the pressure of completing a paper equate to the timed circumstances of a b.s. test that determines whether you get into graduate school? Hell no. Though I do not wish to further converse with you at all, this whole thread really makes me wonder what you are studying and what you consider professional. I mean, you're saying that I didn't become a professional in anything because I wrote papers at my own home? What kind of judgement is that? All the graduate students I know wrote their papers wherever they wanted and became professionals...I guess I won't ever be a professional till I sit around with jerks taking scantron tests all the live long day. Off to my non-existent cats, tea, lavender sachets, and security blanket.

I think I'm just agreeing that it is a real thing and does affect the taking of the test. For some people who can't overcome this, they have every right to be upset with their scores and to be upset that graduate schools even use standardized tests as a form of evaluation (after all, if our schools prepared us so well, don't our grades and accomplishments demonstrate that?). I don't think people should just "give up" and not take the test again because of their anxiety--I've actually encouraged other users on here to try again and to try not to be anxious. So, I think I've been pretty encouraging in this regard. It seems like people would benefit from others explaining how they got over their nerves, instead of people saying that the nerves aren't or shouldn't be a factor. For some people it is something they can overcome, for others they can't just simply "get over" their test anxiety as I was able to. All experiences are not the same.

I guess the issue with this thread lies in the question then--what is the difference between test anxiety and "psyching yourself out" ? I see them as pretty similar... And, just because people claim that they have test anxiety, doesn't mean that they can't overcome it. As you said, I'm proof of that. Many people don't think that they can overcome it and maybe they should work harder to see if it is possible, and maybe some people just can't. Until they overcome the anxiety, it is certainly likely that it affects their scores...

Yes, you are presented with tasks in both situations. But, when I'm presented with tasks in school, especially graduate school, I deal with them on my own at home--such as the stress of writing a final paper, or in the classroom when doing a presentation. The GRE requires you to be in a silent room, where you have to go through security to even get in and then you're being timed to complete something that will determine whether you get into a graduate school. How are the two things similar? I think you're making a bit of a stretch and not taking into consideration the major differences between the tasks. Not doing well on the GRE has no bearing on how well I will do in graduate school. I already have an MA and did really well during my program and I don't think it was similar at all to the skills it takes to do the GRE. My MA program consisted of writing research papers, reading books, etc--what does that have to do with the GRE? Handling the amount of stress and pressure that comes with graduate school is not the same as being able to handle your nerves when it comes to taking a test that can determine your entrance into graduate school. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Loric, You stated above that some schools don't even require the GRE or don't have a minimum score--what places are you applying to? Clearly we are all applying to different types of programs and schools, but all of the quality schools that I've seen require the GRE and typically have minimum scores listed (and they're pretty high scores to reach). Someone else on grad cafe asked if they should apply to schools that don't require the GRE and they were told that those schools probably aren't good schools to attend in the first place. So, in my perspective, they can make or break your application--many of the department websites will even say "you have to have ___ scores to get in." Sure, there's always wiggle room if other parts of your application are strong, but the GRE scores should be strong too at most good schools. Also, yes, some schools don't have as many tests as others--though, I would clarify that it depends on the department, not the school. The humanities typically don't have as many tests as other departments. And, as someone else stated, when they do have tests they're usually essay based, not scantron. Also, the stress that you mentioned in graduate school--I, too, experienced a similar situation when I was stressed out with my thesis and had to skip a class to work on it. That was very stressful. But, that's stress, not nerves. My nerves still got the better of me on the GRE because I felt like I was taking a test that determined my future. I bombed the test because of this. Afterwards I decided that I was going to take the test one more time and not let it bother me. I focused on not being nervous. I didn't study or prepare any more for it between the two tests. I did significantly better when I was't nervous--just like I did on the practice tests. So, yes, test anxiety is a real thing. I don't think we're talking about it in the same terms though---I think that maybe you're imagining that this is something that should be diagnosed and there's no way that soooo many people should be diagnosed with a test-taking issue. But, I don't think it needs to be that extreme (if that's even what you're implying). I just think that a lot of people know how much this test matters and they freak out. It's that simple and that common. I don't see why that's not understandable. Either way, just as semicolon said, I don't see why you have to belittle someone else's experiences just because you didn't have them.

Well, luckily, I wound up doing really well on the GRE once I got past my nerves. Also, I'm not sure what I think about your second statement on the school failing. I don't know how else they could have prepared me--I don't think that taking tests for a class prepares you to take the GRE. The GRE isn't similar to the tests that you take for a class, in my opinion. Maybe they should have GRE prep class or something, but beyond that I don't know how else they could have helped one prepare for it. GRE prep books seem to be the most helpful thing. I haven't heard many people on grad cafe tell others when they ask how to prepare for the test that they should have taken more tests in their undergraduate career or that they should review the tests that they did take--they tell them to look at the GRE prep books. I also didn't take one single test during my MA degree. So, does that mean that that school didn't prepare me either? No. Tests are not a large part of my (past or future) graduate program--yes, I'll have to an oral exam, but again, that's not similar to the GRE.

The idea that someone with a high GPA should get a high GRE score, to me, implies that they shouldn't have to study for the test. They should just take the knowledge and test-taking skills they learned in undergrad and apply them to the test. But, we know that many people--and people who do well on the GRE in particular---study for months. So clearly, they put a lot of working into learning how to beat the test. Many people who don't do well on the test haven't studied enough (as well as other factors, sure).

I've studied a lot of for the GRE and got really high practice test scores and on the actual thing I bombed it. Then I thought I would take it one more time and focus on not being nervous (I made sure I did fun/relaxing activities the night before and then the day of I acted like the test was no big deal) and I did really well just like I did on the practice tests. To say that taking a test for a class that you might be a little nervous about is the same as taking the GRE which can determine whether you get into graduate school or not, is the same thing or the same level of nerves is a bit silly. When I took the GRE in the past, I was so nervous because I thought that it determined my future--so nervous that it was like words didn't even make sense anymore and I couldn't read the questions. This last time, focusing on thinking that it didn't define me, that I could beat it, that I could get the same scores on the practice tests, really helped. So to say that anxiety shouldn't be an issue if you prepare for the test just demonstrates that you've never had test anxiety. I would just stay away from talking about things that you've never personally experienced.

Where's your data for this? From what I've seen on grad cafe people talk all the time about how they can't seem to pass the darn GRE, yet have other great qualifications. Even department websites for PhD programs say that they take other things into consideration first before GREs, showing that they know that they they might not match up with the other levels of your package (including GPA). I've never heard someone say that your GREs should reflect your GPA--I've heard more of the opposite than anything. Some people are good test takers. Others are not. Some people study for months or even a year and do really well because of this--others study and their anxiety still gets the best of them. Some people don't study at all and do great; others can't do this. There's a ton of factors to consider here. Even all of the preparation books that I've seen for the GRE state something like "The GRE is a reflection of how well you can do on the GRE. It is not a reflection of how smart you are, no matter what ETS would like you to think"

Maybe I exaggerated when I said I only took 3 tests, but what I meant was I only remember about 3 classes that had tests in them. The classes I took for the sciences portion of the degree were Astronomy where we had 1-2 tests each semester (2 semesters). And I took one math class that was an independent study that had one test at the end. My spanish classes were literature based so I had to read books, write essays, and give presentations (they were upper level--so past the test-taking stages). Oh, I did take a Psychology class that had a test or 2. The rest of my classes were in my 2 majors (English and Gender Studies) which didn't have tests. So, what, that's a total of around 6-10 tests, maybe? Either way, taking these tests in no way prepared me for the GRE. The questions on the GRE are not similar. And, it's a standardized test which causes anxiety under pressure. That's fine if people want to tear me apart for my low estimation or say that I'm back-tracking or whatever, but I think my basic point still stands--the small amount of tests that I took did not prepare me to succeed on the GRE. I got a high GPA at a big 10 institution.

Is there anyone here who is already in a program that would be able to offer advice on my SOP?

Unfortunately I think they're just unwilling to help at this point (my letter writers). I applied last year, so this is the second time they're having to send out letters. I'm pretty sure that one of the letter writers just wants to be done with me. That's not to say that she won't write a good letter, nor that she thinks I'm not a good candidate to get in, but I think she got frustrated with me during the writing of my thesis, and I think she's just over everything. So, I'm not going to remind her to help with the materials. One of the other letter writers straight up told me that she isn't as familiar with my area of research than the other letter writer (described above) so she's not sure how helpful she can be. Honestly that really makes me mad because she was my thesis chair, I took two classes with her, and she's a tenure-track professor--obviously her looking at my stuff is much better than no one looking at it. She obviously knew enough to be my thesis chair (my thesis was on gender and the Victorian period and she knew the gender stuff). She also told me that she's just overall frustrated with the application process because each department wants the letter tailored a certain way. She made it clear that she's "not annoyed with me" but, why express that frustration at all? It just makes me feel guilty when there's nothing I can do about it. My third letter writer just hasn't responded so I'm going to remind her. I'm just upset at this whole process--how do these people think they can't be helpful? You've gone through the process. You've looked at several statements before. It's obviously better than me looking at it myself. So ridiculous. I really hope that I never have to contact these people ever again and that I have a much better experience with my PhD.

So my recommendation letter writers aren't being helpful in terms of looking at my materials and offering advice. It's such an awkward situation because they're already writing me letters so it's not like I can beg them to look at my materials as well. I sent them my materials in order for them to write the letters and asked them help then and haven't received any. So, at this point I'm going to ask other professors that I had classes with but who aren't my letter writers. Is that a bad idea? How should I phrase the email (should I mention that the other people weren't able to help--I'm just afraid that they'll say something like "this is the job of your letter writers."). Grrr, this process is so frustrating.

Well, that's a really poor assumption. I think I probably took at total of 3 tests, if that, in college. And, I also had a high GPA.

No, this is not true. At some places it might be truer than others, but actually the reverse can be true too (that a masters can hinder you). For example, word on the street is that U of Wisconsin prefers that you don't have a masters (and seems to not accept you if you do?). Just make your applications the best they can be. If you're concerned, you can always ask the schools.

Eek, that's a tough one. I'm not sure if you re-take it if it will get there in time. It usually takes 2 weeks for them to score the essay portion of the GRE and then at least another 5 business days after that for them to send it--if I understand their website correctly. So, unfortunately there's probably not much you can do about it and stressing out isn't going to help. Since you already go to NYU, why not talk to the department and see what they think--maybe they'll be okay with your scores getting there late? Since you think that your other application materials are strong, and you already go to that school then maybe you'll be fine. There's really no way for anyone on here to tell you whether you are fine or not, but yeah, the truth is that those aren't great scores for such a great program. Talk to the department, relax, get your application in, and see what happens.

Right, that's what their website says, but I talked to the department and they said that that basically means "you should have these scores too." Of course they have to be diplomatic about it on their webpage. It seems to me that the schools that list the average scores put more emphasis on them. A lot of other schools say things like "we do not list average scores because we do not consider it a significant factor." Columbia basically says, "we get 600 applications a year. Most of the people who get in have these scores. Thus you should have these scores." I think it's good to be realistic--places that are in the top 10 especially, but hell, even the top 50, are competitive and number driven.