purpleperson

I have a lot of distractions that I didn't have to create artificially. I got into karaoke recently, for some reason, and have all these karaoke outings set up with my boyfriend and with groups of friends. I'm also going to L.A. for a week in January (coming up very soon). I'm a teacher and have the spring semester to prepare for. I also have a reading group that I run, and so I have many meetings between now and mid-February that are going to be fun/interesting. A lot's going on, and yet I still think....AM I GOING TO GET INTO A PHD PROGRAM OR NOT??? I NEED TO KNOW. I kinda feel like I will not get into one. But I'm too lazy to start making preparations for alternatives. It's partly that I'm not terribly dissatisfied with my life. I'm in a happy relationship, I have good friends and family, I'm in a profession I enjoy and have no plans to leave and in which I make money (it's not great money but it's enough) -- teaching. Not getting into a Ph.D. program wouldn't kill me. The biggest thing I'm counting on a Ph.D. program for (outside of the experience and the program itself) is the chance to move (and to have a financial base with which to do it). I know I could try to find a job in cities of my choice, too, but that's easier said than done. I'll probably try harder once I know for sure I am not accepted to a program. I was looking the other day, and many of the jobs and opportunities I want to apply for require letters of recommendation. I don't want to start asking for those damn things all over again until I know for sure what the deal is with the Ph.D. thing.

Do any of you believe you will get into at least one or two programs? There's a tendency to exhibit a lot of modesty on this board, but surely some of you think you will get into one or two. Even if you just believe -- for whatever reason -- that you will be one of the lucky ones and not necessarily that you are "great." I'm in English, as I said before in this thread, but I for whatever reason feel like I'll get into at least one or two. I don't know. It's just part of my tendency to be optimistic about things. But I say this knowing that I might get into 0. I feel like I'll get into at least one. Also, how have your closest friends and advisors acted about your chances? I guess there are three people that have actively given input on what they thought my chances are, and it's pretty mixed. (Almost everyone else I have told that I'm applying were just like "that's cool..." Although I have three letter writers, two just stuck to writing me letters; they didn't chime in on what they thought my chances were, and I didn't ask. But the third did chime in, and she seemed pretty grim about things. She was very complimentary of me in general and said she believed I was worthy of a program; she was just very grim about the competition. She also told me that she's been advisor to many students who were eventually disappointed, so she always maintained a cautious stance about applying to PhD programs. She would look at my list of 13 schools, point to the three or four lowest ranked ones and say "maaaayyyybe there." The other person is a close friend of mine who is a sociology professor. She's a young professor, so that's how it is that I am friends with her. But anyway, she says "you're going to get into several. Mark my words." And she says it like she really means it; she's on admissions committees in her field; she knows a lot about this stuff. Yet...how can she know what I'll get into or not -- it's a different field. Plus she just has a loose idea of my GRE score and generally thinks of me as "smart." It's not enough to be so sure I'm going to get into "several." But I love that she has that kind of confidence in me. The other person is my boyfriend, who says it's really stiff competition, but he's pretty confident that at least one or two schools will accept me. He is positive I will get into at least one, but acts doubtful that 3-4 acceptances will happen. It's just weird how you just can't know. And the people in your life have such discrepant ideas about your chances. My own assessment is....1. At least one acceptance will happen. I think.

I'm telling myself not to expect to hear anything until mid-Feb. But...I hear sometimes offers come as early as late January or early February. My deal is...I just want to hear something. Even if it's rejections at first; I want answers!

I'm in English rather than Philosophy, but I applied to 13. I had planned to apply to 14 (and I was able to afford it); I just decided last minute that I didn't want to live in the area where that 14th school was. I figured it'd be better to not apply than to get accepted only there and feel like I "should" go to some place where I don't even want to live. Right or wrong, city matters to me. Strangely, though, just chopping off that one school from my list makes me feel so "vulnerable." Like...I've reduced my chances so dramatically! But realistically, I just don't want that 14th school, so....

I know it's not the most difficult process in the world. How do you know that I do not have four or five different versions of my SOP? Think I'm not capable of it just because I said it's bullshit? As a matter of fact, I have about 6 or 7 different versions of my SOP, one of which is 500 words. I just didn't necessarily use it with some even if they asked for 500 because I felt that the longer version was stronger even if I did have a 500 word one. Calling something bullshit doesn't mean one will never know how to adhere to and respect parameters set forth for them in grad school. I adhere to and respect parameters set forth for me all the time -- and have done so for years -- in school, in work, and indeed, even in grad school applications. Doesn't mean I don't allow myself to "risk" not doing so in some small ways when I think it might be acceptable. Sorry if I sound rude myself, but I think it's dumb how people constantly reply to others on here, "You'll never make it grad school if X, Y, or Z..." Sure. Right. If I get into a program (and I'm not saying I will, but if I do), I'll make it in the program, whether I think things are bullshit or not. There's no need to imply that one needs to be all cheerful and 100% "yes sir" and "yes ma'am" about everything in order to succeed. Also, to speak to what someone else said, I also choose to "risk it" because given the # of times I have asked various DGS's some variation of "Would it be okay if I go over...if it's more words than...if it's just a little more than what you all..." -- about 95% of the time, the answer was, "Don't worry about that. Just present your best self." I asked a school who asked for 5 to 10 pages for a writing sample if I could submit 18, and they said even 20 would be fine, but no more than that. In other words, they were willing to accept double and even triple what they stated. If I "irritate" someone on an adcomm, so be it. The right program won't be irritated. Also, there's a difference, in my opinion, between excess and over. I'm a teacher myself who puts guidelines on student work. When I tell my students to write a 5 page paper, and some of them ask if it can be more, I say yeah, that's fine. Even eight pages works. How is a person going to condemn someone doing MORE than they have to do? Sure, I don't want to read that eight pages, but I'm certainly not going to condemn their enthusiasm and overachieving. Eight page is over, even well over, what they need to do. But it's not excess. If I ask for five pages and they give me 10, I'm thinking excess. I think, similarly, an adcomm would likely think...they did more than they needed to and more than we wanted, but 600 words/750 words is NOT excess(ive). In the end, because I believed my 650/750 word SOPs were stronger than the 500 word one, I thought the risk of "irritating" someone was less important than the risk of turning in a weaker SOP. So, you see, I'm not lazy or unfit to cut words down, nor unable to respect parameters in a future grad program. I just chose to do what I thought would work.

Mine were each one page single-spaced.

Oh my god, i submitted 650 and 750 word SOPs for so many schools that ask for 500. I don't have time for their bullshit. In other thoughts, I got a piece of mail from U of Oregon today that for some crazy reason got me thinking "Oh my god, they were so impressed with my application (submitted two weeks or so ago) that they give me an ultra-early admittance," but then I read the correspondence that was all "We are pleased to have received your materials. This is official notification that we have, in fact, received your submission. You should be aware that you have been entered into our system as an English Ph.D. applicant for the fall of 2014. You will be offered admission if our committee finds your application suitable for our program." --- all kinds of wording that at first glance, one is thinking.....wow they admitted me, but is really just...stuff.

I'm not all that freaked out by the letter writers and deadlines either. I probably should be since this is my first round of applications, and it's all new to me. But I guess I've just looked enough around here to realize that letter writers will be late and evasive, but ultimately, they get the job done. And furthermore, the schools typically have grace periods. I've even read a post on here that said the poster received an acceptance before a third letter was even in, and that the school pretty much said, "You're in, but we need to have the third letter on record, so tell that prof to get it in..." Not saying that's likely or common, but it happens. My first deadline is December 1, and my third letter writer is still pending. With the holidays, I don't even know if he'll get my reminder or the one sent from the school. But I'm not sweating it. Even if my acceptance ends up being on the line, I really don't want to become the grad school version of a Bridezilla -- a gradschoolzilla -- who cares about nothing else but recommendation letters and acceptances. Honestly, I don't like what the whole process turns people into. People who can think of nothing other than getting people to write letters about them so that they get into grad school. Not to disparage you, though, because I do want to get in too and if things got to four days after the deadline and my letter writer hadn't submitted, I'd probably freak a bit too. But anything before the date, as long as you know they are planning to write the letter, just let them be as much as you can. I think they'll write the letter and upload it in a reasonable time. One of my letter writers responded to me yesterday, but hadn't responded to the three short emails I'd sent before the recent one. The three she didn't respond to weren't big deals. They were informational rather than asking her a question. But still, she's just not gonna acknowledge every little thing. And my other letter writer, a totally nice guy, responds to me very sparsely as well, and is only just politely curt when he does respond. (e.g. "I will." "That date is fine." "Okay." "That sounds good." "Send it to me and I"ll look at it." Never anything long. I think I have good letter writers in general, so I understand if you have ones you don't entirely trust. But don't freak out over the deadlines, because the schools are supposedly understanding of lateness on that count, since they know you have no control over it.

I last looked at my writing samples (I have two -- one going to some schools, the other going to others) about six days ago, and I won't look at them again for any reason. I'm burnt out on the whole thing. I've completed half of my intended applications and have come too far to not finish the remaining apps. But I am tired of it all. And I think, in general, that my resentment about the whole thing is a good thing, because it actually makes me feel somewhat indifferent to getting in or not. I'm gonna start planning for other things. I want to move from where I live even if I don't get into a Ph.D. program, so starting January 1st, my boyfriend and I are going to start job searching in a particular city we like. That being said, I can't say I'm "freaked out" or all that stressed right now. The work I have left...which is transcripts, some fit paragraphs (I'm not going all-out on fit paragraphs, just enough to demonstrate I know a bit about the department and that there are some things I like about it, not so far as to name people and talk about how their work meshes with mine), and final submissions. When I say I'm "tired of it all," it's not so much the remaining administrative work of submitting, but tired of the highs and lows of feeling competent one day and like a loser the next. This is my first round...never done this before. I can see MAYBE trying it again next year if I don't get in this year, but it won't be at the same intensity. I'm going all out with fourteen apps in my first attempt. In the future, I see applying to something like 4 to 6 schools.

lol...I actually told myself that I wouldn't re-look at my materials. And I didn't mean to look at them again in search of "errors" and "typos." But I had to re-look at the writing sample because I'm sending it to so many schools, and it seemed almost negligent not to keep doing periodic proofreads/content-checks until they're all submitted. But that means that any school who already got submitted was submitted without the benefit of the -- yet more -- small tweak(s). That said, I think I'm done re-looking now. Even though I have seven apps left, I'm going to just submit with the proofreads I've done up to this point. Anyway, regrets do sink in once one has submitted. In the case of Northwestern and Rutgers, I literally think, "why the fuck did I apply to you two? I want my money back. You're just going to take elite, perfect people over me." I'm having serious doubts about my prospects for admittance into any program, actually. It's not that I think I'm the worst applicant ever. I just have this feeling that, weighing my pros and cons, that I rate about a 7 or 7.5. I'll be the "good" and "pretty strong" applicant, but never the 8s and 9s -- the "great" and "very strong" applicants -- that they'll end up giving offers to. That's my honest sense of things. I might get lucky, though. Who knows. Hope everyone's doing well. I'm on brief break from applying. (About a week). My next submission will be after I get paid on 11/29.

I re-looked at my Cluster statement for Northwestern and noticed not a typo, but a sentence construction error that I would change. Fortunately, it's something that would likely be missed by them, too, unless they read it over and over again like I have. Some errors are less glaring than others, and I'm glad I didn't spell anything wrong or leave out an important word altogether. Still, it eats at you when a sentence could have been constructed better than what you had originally. I also noticed two or three tweaks I would make to the writing sample that I sent to Rutgers, Northwestern, and Ohio State. They are more writerly choices than typos or glaring errors, though. To put others at ease, I've heard that adcomms don't nitpick about things like that. Not to say that your writing sample and SOP shouldn't be 99% error-free. But in general, they are looking for strong content and overall good writing that is coherent and clearly polished. An error or two in terms of typos or writerly choice is not of concern to them. People have even said on here that they got in to schools despite spelling a key person's name incorrectly, etc. Fortunately for me, all my "reach" schools' deadlines are earliest (December 1st - December 10th or so). Because I think I'm not likely to get into them anyway, it doesn't bother me as much that I have a couple things I would change in my materials. Those same materials are being used for my later-deadline schools (the ones I feel like I have a better shot at), and things will be cleaned up that much more for those schools' submissions.

I submitted a Cluster statement and Diversity statement to Northwestern. I don't think it would hurt not to, though. It seems like everything is about the writing sample and SOP, so if those are strong, it's not going to matter if you didn't declare yourself both diverse and interested in their clusters.

Yeah, I do understand that perspective. A friend of mine who I've talked to about it also says that I shouldn't take the journal's response as an "indicator," especially given that my professor, who is himself a published scholar in the field, was impressed with the paper. He also pointed out that sometimes the editors of journals are simply very elitist and biting about what constitutes good work. (The comments about my paper were, in fact, pretty scathing. I would say even a bit beyond the pale.) My friend said that sometimes editors simply don't like what you're saying, but because they can't say that, they say the analysis is weak, your writing is bad, and your perspective is un-interesting. I'm not saying my paper is, in fact, something awesome. In giving it more thought, and comparing it to articles I have read out of that journal, my paper is, in fact, probably less sophisticated. I only submitted it because my prof told me five times in the space of an hour to do so. I took his word for it that it was worthy not just of publication, but of that journal in particular (he named it). But I can see how it is not...necessarily. That said, it's still the case that sometimes editors of journals are simply hostile to the content of a paper but take it out on the analysis, relevance, uniqueness, interestingness, etc. The reader just liking what you have to say plays a big part in how "well done" they think it is. This happens at all levels. Even when I was in T.A. training in my M.A. program and we "practiced" grading freshman composition papers in pedagogy classes, people would assess student work very differently, often ranging from B to F, and often it had to do with agreement or not with the content rather than quality of the argument/analysis. I think the reason it makes me have doubts about my Ph.D. prospects is that I'm not sure what the expectations are. Do Ph.D. programs expect applicants to be, from the get-go, ready to publish, or do they more see publication as something you'd be suited for at the end of five years, or close to the end? I've heard both in that some schools' websites say things like "many students in our program publish multiple times a year," and some others say things like "the program purports to produce scholars who at the end of their time with us can publish widely." (just making up wording, but that's the essence.) The other reason I was/am concerned is that about a month or two ago when I was on the Chronicle of Higher Education message board, an English professor, presumably on an adcomm, broke down what they tended to get as follows: "Out of ten applicants, typically one is a complete throwaway with spelling mistakes, grammar errors, and frequent incoherence in the SOP, and their writing sample will be a similar mess. The remaining nine usually have good SOPs. Typically, SOPs are almost all good. It's the writing sample that tends to separate the contenders from the rejects. The remaining nine will usually have two strong writing samples, with the other seven being literate but ultimately too elementary." That was the exact wording she used. So when this journal used that wording to describe my paper, I couldn't help but think...that's what that lady was talking about. I'm not gonna worry too much about it, though. I still place a lot of stock in my own prof's take on it. Plus, I think you're probably right that the adcomms aren't as harsh as journals. They're looking for really intelligent potential (I would think) rather than geniuses whose work rivals all the stuff already written about that particular topic.

I submitted apps to Rutgers and Northwestern in the past week and a half and pretty much think I have no shot. I would say that I wish I could take it -- and my money -- back, but truthfully, even knowing how little shot I have at both, my state of mind during this application season is such that I don't want to wonder if I might have been that anomalous person who got in without a good GRE score. Both schools are specialists in my field, and the whole "you never know" thing made me spring for their application fees. I'm kind of disgusted with myself for even thinking "you never know," though, because the odds are really, really stacked against me. Of course, I'm feeling particularly negative right now, because despite one of my advisors telling me to submit my writing sample to a certain journal (the prof thought it was good enough for publication), I heard back from that journal today, in response to my submission, that the "writing is too elementary.." (along with other criticisms that people wouldn't understand the context of unless i name the book, which I don't want to do). It just reminds me that what I think is a good sample (and even one of my professors thinks is publication-worthy) could well be viewed as "too elementary" by the admissions committee. I think this reinforces the subjectivity of it all, too, though. People should apply to as many places as they can that interest them and that fit, because one school's trash is another's treasure.

That's kind of a good attitude. But at the same time, you not getting in doesn't mean you don't have what it takes. They probably have way more people who have what it takes than they can let in. I think if it were as simple as rejection = you don't have what it takes, a lot of people could probably let it go more easily. I think I could, too. But not getting in doesn't mean you don't have what it takes, which is evidenced by people getting in the second year. Or people, in a single year, getting rejected by four schools, but into two. If they had for whatever reason only applied to those four schools who rejected them, and got rejected by all schools they applied to, they might latch onto the false idea that they don't have what it takes. That said, I also think people shouldn't cling to it too much. I'm pretty obsessed with applications and getting in (for now), but at the same time, I remember when I applied for an M.A. and didn't care whether I got in or not, and ended up getting in, I want to duplicate that "not caring" -- and truly not care. I actually think sometimes that the good thing about not getting into a Ph.D. program is...hey, then I don't have to do a Ph.D. It's a lot of goddamn work. And not to say that a Ph.D. program isn't worth it, but honestly, there's a lot I can do on my own even without being IN a Ph.D. program. It wouldn't be exactly the same (I know), but certainly I could do a good bit of what I want to do even without the formal structure.

Well, yes, I realize. But if they evaluate holistically, that means that they can potentially consider you a viable candidate even if your test scores aren't great. I was by no means saying that "holistic" means that scores don't matter.

Well, I, for instance, don't think I'm competitive at top programs, but I'm reaching for a couple anyway that at least give the facade of looking at one's package "holistically." Also, if that same place that claims to look at things holistically also happens to be known for the exact field of study I'm interested in, I assume I have some shot there. In contrast, I heard Columbia says on its website that you should just get lost if you are not in the 93rd percentile or above on the Verbal GRE -- doesn't matter what the rest of you is like. I hear the same of Berkeley. I guess, in general, I'll "reach" for a school that's # 17, but not for a school that's # 2. I'm honestly not concerned with being at a top school anyway, though. I'll be thrilled if I get into a #88 that fits what I'm interested in and is in one of my preferred cities. That being said, there are just certain schools that I intuitively feel I have no chance at. Like NYU, Columbia, Berkeley.

If you want to apply to more, I would say choose a different letter writer if you can. I think it's a bit insensitive of him to say he'll only submit four for you. These professors know -- or should know -- how students have to apply widely in order to get in. I'm applying to 14, and my letter writers are fine with it. Even if it's time consumption for them, at no point have they heaved sighs of distress or told me they'll only submit four for me.

I don't have an answer for you. Just chiming in to say that I'm applying to Loyola Chicago as well, and I have an extremely low Subject Test GRE. To brighten both of our outlooks, I have heard that some schools only require it as a form of a "barometer" -- as in, it's just seeing what you seem to know, according to a test. At the school where I did my B.A. and M.A., I remember some of the professors who were on grad admissions say things like "We just want you to take it. It's just a formality. We don't care what the score is so much." Hopefully it's just a "formality" for a lot of schools. Perhaps many of these schools that are Subject Test hold-outs just have one or two people in the department who really like the Subject Test GRE, but most of the department doesn't care about them, yet they keep it as a requirement because of the one or two people who insist on having it. Who knows!

"GRE subject test is not required but highly recommended" That's just their complete asshole way of saying you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. Anyway, I scored incredibly low on the GRE subject test. Like, ridiculously low. I'm applying to 14 schools, and six of them require it. i sent the score to all six, but I also sent a letter to each department explaining my score. Not making excuses for it, but putting forth the reason I believe I got a low score, as well as attesting to what I believe is as strong a background in literature as one could expect from someone with an M.A. I'm not that worried about the low Subject Test GRE. I think a low General Test GRE is more reason to worry than the Subject Test GRE. And while my General GRE isn't high either, it's not "embarrassingly low" like my Subject Test GRE. Anyway, I'm putting all my stuff out there. Let the chips fall where they may. Oh yeah, I'd say if they say not required but highly recommended, and you have a low score, don't send. If you have an okay to great score, send.

I'm actually in a good place now. For me, the pressure and anxiety was mostly about the GRE tests (general and subject) and my writing samples (I have two that I'm using). Now that the tests are done and the writing samples are as good as I plan to work on them to be (I wish I could keep scrutinizing and sharpening, but I have a job, a relationship, as well as the actual applications to do), I actually kind of enjoy the putting in of the applications. It's way less pressure to upload things and fill in blanks (and make minor fit paragraph changes) than to be writing a critical literary analysis. I'm applying to 14 programs (inflated from my original 12) and have 3 submitted already. I'll have the rest knocked out in the next three weeks. It'll be weird when I'm finished with all this. I'll have so much free time...

Thanks for your thoughts. As I said, my applying there or not has nothing to do with the emails. I'll keep looking into them. I may or may not apply.

I'd rather not get into details, but suffice it to say that my initial email was neutral by any normal person's standards. Certainly it wasn't dripping with ego and entitlement like what you described above (lol). I'd never speak that way, especially given that I actually expect no offers -- no way in hell am I anticipating "great" ones. Anyway, I asked a neutral question, he answered with politeness overlaying obvious snark (of the stressed-out administrator type), I replied back very politely yet also with a strong defense of myself (I'm kinda pleased with myself for being extremely polite and, at the same time, clearly standing up for myself.) He answered (as of five minutes ago) with a very polite and apologetic email that even offered to speak with me on the phone if I would like and ended with "I look forward to reading your application." I still don't know that I'll apply there, though. I'll think about it. But at this point, it has nothing to do with the emails.

Would you apply to a school whose English dept. DGS had been rude to you in an email? And when I say "rude," I mean one of those polite on the surface but still clearly annoyed/snarky emails. Suffice it to say that the DGS of a particular school was rude to me in this way over email, and because it's a school I'm only thinking of as a last-minute addition (not a part of the set of schools I've been targeting), I'm thinking...forget about it -- both 1) on principle (why would I want to apply to a school whose director of graduate studies was rude about me asking the very same question to which other schools have replied very graciously with an abundance of information?, and 2) because he'd probably remember having been annoyed by me anyway, and my application would thus be a waste. Mind you, I don't think one instance of rudeness "defines" a person. (I've been rude to people before, of course, but I don't think it defines me). Yet, when your interaction with someone is limited, like to this one email exchange, it just seems a bigger deal than usual. Before I submit this: let me say that I'm asking this question more in a conversational sense than an "I'm torn about what to do" sense. I already have schools I want to apply to. And not applying to this school (or applying to it) means very little to me. I could take it or leave it, and I hear their funding is not so great anyway. But how have the rest of you been responding to rude emails from English departments? ( I mean, either just in your mind or how has it affected your attitude about the school in general? Has it actually made you want to apply or not appy?) (I've actually only experienced this one instance of rudeness). Some other schools have been brief in replies, like "Yes, we do accept it double-spaced" (and that's it), but that's just brief, not rude. The one I'm talking about from today was rude. Also, Ohio State U being so incredibly nice to me over email has made me want to apply there, even though they're out of my league. They're a good fit for me, though, so it's not just that they're super nice (although that certainly helps).

My transcript does the same -- that is, it has some courses listed in a not very specific way. What I'm doing is also sending an "Abstract of Courses" which tells the names of all English courses I've taken and the grade I received in them. Some schools ask for that anyway. I wouldn't spend too much time on it in your SOP. However, I'd say that you can mention past course work to the extent that it has something to do with how your intellectual interests have evolved. So basically, don't just list courses you've taken (or anything close to "listing"), as if to say...look, I'm educated in literature. But if a course or two, in particular, had a major impact on you and helped form your current research interests, it makes sense to touch on them.