MetaphysicalDrama

Does anyone have any experience house hunting in the NY/NJ area? I'm really excited about an acceptance I have at Fordham, but a huge goal for my wife is becoming a home owner after renting in the area for six months to a year. I've been looking at Newark, Elizabeth, and Piscataway, but I'm afraid that there isn't really property in our price range. My wife is also familiar with Texas real estate values and how much home you get for you buck, so I'm thinking the area is really going to be a tough sell for her.

I'm also in at Fordham. Have you heard about whether or not they're making any funding available for the accepted students day in a couple weeks?

Both.

Well, I didn't end up taking my subject test because I couldn't find the testing center or parking on a huge campus downtown, so I guess the first thing I would have done differently would have been to make a dry run and take that test. I'm not sure it matters that much, but it could have been a small positive on my Rutgers and NYU applications. I'm not sure what else I would have done differently. My writing sample and statement of purpose were in the works for months, really years, so I really feel like they were the biggest asset of my apps. The POI I spoke with at a university that accepted me went out of the way to pay the sample a small compliment. Because I'm married, my geographic diversity was more limited than I would have liked, so there are a couple of schools/regions that I really would have liked to have sent apps. Maybe my wife would have opened up to the location if a school made a nice offer.

One that I've had some fun with is asking POIs what dissertations they've directed stand out as uniquely fun or memorable and why. I guess it gives them a nice chance to brag about their former students, but I think it also has a lot of potential to show how they like to work and what really interests them.

Cats can survive on their own for days at a time if they have plenty of food, water, and clean litter!

Thank you for sharing that informative article. Yes, it is amazing how well-known it is among humanities majors that what a person majors in often produces a negligible difference in employment prospects and lifetime earnings. It's kind of infuriating to watch that. While nothing new, I also think that common core restrictions in ENGL 1301 is harming the major. Learning "the essay" and diagramming sentences like they do in high school doesn't exactly set up the English major as an exciting way to explore questions about the meaning of life. As much as I wish the MLA could wrestle back the control of ENGL 1301 from the Four Cs, I realize that's primarily a political problem, one also tied to proselyting about identity politics, and it will be interesting to see how fallout from the Trump election has an effect on that dynamic of humanities departments. It also kind of amazes me that attrition rates in fields like engineering and computer science versus the humanities are not more frequently circulated. I'm not trying to say that its easy to get through an English degree (it's definitely not the easiest major one can find), but there are a lot of STEM degrees that are absolutely brutal. If students are selecting a major with a concern for their professional future, then that is something they and their families ought to consider.

Anyone know if Fordham has a campus visit date and offers any funding for travel?

Hate to post twice in a row, but I just received a warm and encouraging phone call from my POI at Fordham informing me that I've accepted by the department. Of course, nothing is official until the graduate school documents come through, but I'm thrilled. Two acceptances, one visit/interview, and two (official) rejections for me so far. It really is a nice touch that some schools still call to deliver this news. My POI delivered the news with such grace, and it really is a great feeling to hear someone of such status pay even the smallest compliment about your work. I'll still add that there is nothing quite like that feeling of calming down after the entire stress volume of application season passes through every blood vessel in your body.

Perhaps I should qualify what I meant and say that professors sitting on admissions committees haven't likely experienced the rejection of their doctoral applications. It wasn't so much my intention to vilify anyone in particular as much as it was to comment on how the institutions and committees work. I guess it's also worth pointing out how undesirable this kind of committee work is. I'm sure there is some DGS out there who can't wait until proctoring comprehensive exams is in the future. While I'm sure some profs sitting on committees may very well have been rejected by their top-choice school, there has been a running joke for a long time that the campus visit days for doctoral students is a tour of the same people making a stops at Berkeley, Chicago, Columbia, and etc. That's actually a concerning state of affairs. If you believe the top-ten dogma about the tenure track job market, then think about how much control those schools have over the study of literature, philosophy, or whatever field of humanities that is feeling the effects of a shrinking job market. While a UChicago or Penn makes the decisions on doctoral apps at their institution, separating worthy projects from those which are not, they also get to send those same students to a number of universities and install those same values there. I know this gets us on to questions way too big for this forum, but at some point the systematic failures within academia need to be dealt with. I think that less than 2% of Americans hold a PhD (I imagine the number is even smaller for those in the humanities), but there aren't jobs for them? This is not a huge swath of the population. Furthermore, it looks to me that the effort has been less so about finding suitable work for PhDs and more about limiting access to the PhD. The result of that is the termination of degree programs and expert-level study of the humanities. The other can of worms this discussion opens up is adjuncting and how universities have abused that power, and that quickly leads to finance issues that are really a matter of government. Hell, one could argue that the main reason why funding is such a problem for humanities PhDs is because the cost of tuition in higher education has skyrocketed to such unbelievable heights, but I digress. I'm grateful for the work professors do on admissions committees and the throughout the university. I hope they keep doing it. I see immense value in what they do; that's why I've applied to doctoral programs to study with them.

Congrats to everyone who got good news from Rutgers this weekend. I haven't heard anything, so I'm not counting on anything. However, this one actually stings a bit. I had a great fit there.

Actually, I don't mind not hearing back from schools promptly. I'm a sucker for a glimmer of hope. Things are actually happening really quickly this cycle. Ten years ago, the idea was if you haven't heard anything by the middle of March, then you're in trouble.

The irony here is that most profs on admissions committees have not likely dealt with the frustration of rejection. Their most difficult decision was deciding between UChicago and Berkeley. I know this doesn't go for all tenured faculty, but if you believe the top-ten school dogma, then it's likely the case. Actually, I'm not at all surprised that so many of the people picked by the top schools have multiple offers from other top schools: they are all looking for the same sort of applicant. That doesn't diminish their well-deserved success, but it shows that those schools have a profile.

You’ve really had an excellent application season, so I’m sure you can enjoy the closure! You really sent out some fantastic apps and caught some big fish!

I applied to Fordham, and I’m also yet to hear anything.

If we make a Rutgers thread, then will they notify too? I bet everything is a direct response to this forum!

Got the official word from CUNY today, not surprised. I learned their Spenser guy was retiring after this year, but I applied anyway.

Are you referring to your Washington offer? I saw that one came through for you. Congratulations! I applied to Washington's philosophy PhD program years ago, but I didn't receive an offer. I wanted to give their lit program a shot this year, but my wife wasn't thrilled about the location. Yeah, not to be mean, but a 158 verbal score is quite low for humanities. I'm not happy about my 162, and I'm sure most top 30 institutions don't like it either. I agree. GRE scores are not everything, but I think they play differently at different tiers of schools. They especially have a role to play when it comes for university-wide fellowships. The subtle point I'm trying to make is that if a committee is equally interested in two or more projects, then they have an incentive to take the higher scores for "image" purposes and funding purposes. Of course, the exception to this rule is that the writing sample and research questions articulated in the SoP are uniquely brilliant, and they will fill the area need the admissions committee desires. I think part of the magic of understanding why the SoP and WS are so important is realizing that insane levels of interests in them will overcome poor GRE scores, but that's essentially a way of saying that the prof on the committee believes the school must have a student working on that sort of project. At this point, I would argue that most top 30 programs only care to accept "perfect" applications. By that I mean: a relevant, thought-provoking, and well-written sample, a fit clearly established in the SoP, LoRs from known faculty in the proposed area of specialization, and GRE scores above 160 in verbal and 150 in quant. There are exceptions to the rule, but if I had to give advice to a new applicant, then I would say don't apply if you don't have all of these elements in your application. Having said all that, I do believe the GRE is a load of crap and not at all indicative of one's ability to succeed in graduate school. It's a money pot. Furthermore, I don't think any of us realize just how many decisions in our field are based on money.

Yeah, I know I've suffered in the past from a lowsy quant score. Most schools don't say it, but they don't really want to send any scores below 160 to the dean's office. Hell, English departments probably want verbal scores well above 160. I know some schools won't offer a minimum GRE scores because they want those applications fees, and I know others won't offer a minimum because they will occasionally make an exception for a project they consider to be uniquely promising. However, it still sucks. GRE scores are not really want life in grad school is about. When will there be a Tenure-Track Record Exam? One question I have is why something that means so little in the TT hiring market means so much for grad apps, but whatever. Many schools emphasize that the SoP and WS are so important, but they aren't very open about just how much more likely they are to take a good project from someone with scores over 160 than they are from someone at our below that mark. As often as people say that fewer program will require the GRE, I'm sure it just means that not submitting scores will count against you.

I was pretty much in your exact situation. I completed an MA in philosophy, and I just couldn't come up with a compelling project for a PhD. I damn sure did apply, but I can see why there wasn't a school who cared to pick up my project. After completing my MA, I taught for an education nonprofit before becoming adjunct faculty at a number of colleges in my area. While I was adjuncting, I decided to work on an MA in literature. Honestly, it was worth it. I put together a much more compelling thesis project, and my interests changed over the time I studied in the program. For this application cycle, I have one acceptance, one expenses-paid visit/interview in about two weeks, and one rejection. I'm still waiting to hear from about five schools. While part of me thinks I would have had much more success with apps if I had started with literature, I would have to think that my two MAs and adjuncting experience will aid me on the real job market, especially at community colleges and teaching colleges. If you decide to apply to literature programs, you'll likely have to explain why you've made the transition from philosophy to literature, briefly. They don't really care about what you've achieved in philosophy. They care about your potential to study literature. Also, don't bother sending a packet of three letters from philosophy professors. You need some people in literature to speak for you. I added a supplemental fourth letter to many of my application packets just to show I didn't fuck up my philosophy MA. However, it's not really an important part of my dossier. Schools will not always accept a fourth letter, and the word of a literary scholar is more valuable than that of philosopher for a literature application. Age can hurt. Schools who have a reputation of taking people directly from undergrad will not have much interest in you if you apply when you're thirty. There are exceptions to this rule, and I don't really like that it exists because I see value in someone who sticks it out and proves she can balance researching and teaching. However, it is a reality, and it likely produced by the hiring market. Some schools want that fresh PhD for an entry-level professorship who is only about thirty. For that reason, schools will aim for a younger cohort. The flipside of that is that an older applicant with more teaching experience might actually do better on the job market, especially at teaching colleges. The rejoinder here is that someone who starts a PhD at thirty might end up ABD because of the salary sacrifice, but there are tons of ABDs anyway. Now that I think about all of this, I really wonder what's up with the job market for PhDs. We always say, "it's terrible," or, "don't bother going to anything other than a top-ten school." Well, a top-ten school might want someone from a top-ten program, but there are a lot of different colleges out there. I've heard stories about fancy PhDs from Harvard and Columbia who don't know how to handle an interview at a teaching college, asking for TAs and such. Their applications were thrown right in the trash. This just goes to show you that showing a hiring committee that you can work with a variety of students has a place somewhere. I've had profs from top-ten schools and profs from schools ranked around one-hundred on US News and World report. Some teaching colleges will have tenured jobs, and others will only offer more limited contracts. I believe in PhDs deserving full-time work, but the tenure or bust ultimatum is unsustainable.

I received an email notification from SMU to visit the campus as a "top tier" applicant. No formal offer has been made, so I'm just curious if there is any advice out there for slamming that final interview.

Accepted at UNT for literature, fully-funded. I'm 1/2 so far.

@The Wordsworthian I have a long history of grad school applications. My first cycle was 2010 in philosophy, and the only offer I got was UChicago MAPH. Over the last few years, I thought my skills would be more appreciated in literary studies, so I finished a second MA in the subject. My applications are definitely better than anything I've sent out in the past, so I'm hoping I'll finally catch a break. However, if I don't, then it's probably a stroke of good luck too. Whatever happens, I'm pretty sure this is my last stab at a PhD.

I'm interested in medieval/early modern literature. My MA thesis was on Spenser and the medieval tradition of translatio studii et imperii. Some of the books which have really caught my attention are Grafting Helen, The Poetics of Translatio Studii and Conjointure, Poetic License, Poetic Authority, and The Pain of Reformation. Ultimately, I'm interested in Spenser's grafting of the Arthuriana and his attitude toward the Arthurian myth of Tudor origins.

Rejected at Rice. Based on what I've gleaned, it looks like they didn't accept anyone focusing on medieval/early modern literature. While I would have enjoyed working with Joseph Campana, I realize that they don't have an abundance of people who work in that area. This one stings a little bit because I've been around Houston the past couple of years, and I did have a couple of introductions there which suggested things were moving in a positive direction.