Sigaba

Color me paranoid and grumpy, but there's something about your multiple requests that strikes me as odd. If this is a research project, how are you going to document your findings? How are you going to determine the effectiveness of the tools that other people use? If this is a research project in fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree, should you not be building your own tools? Also, given the fact that there are several existing threads on this BB that address directly your questions, the fact that you have started multiple new threads does not, IMO, speak well of your commitment to your own project. (But I'm not bitter.)

In addition to the excellent guidance in the previous posts, you might also consider the utility of identifying one or more of the most significant historiographical debates in your areas of interest. Get your hands on a monograph, journal article, or dissertation that has advanced the debate and then "reverse engineer" the primary sources. Determine if your reading of the primary sources agrees or disagrees with the prevailing interpretations. If you pursue this option, please limit your objective to "getting your feet wet." Do not jump into the deep end -- you'll be blindfolded, bound, and thrown in when you get to graduate school. HTH.

An additional advantage of asking sooner rather than latter is that a professor may decide to use the extra time to do some mentoring.

Correlation is not causation. Unless you have been debriefed on why you (or someone else) did or did not get into a program, or been privy to behind the scenes conversations on that and similar topics, it is merely an assumption that the disclosure advanced an applicant's candidacy. In my view, the point Eigen is making--and that you are missing--is that within a program there are doors behind doors behind curtains behind mirrors. As a very accomplished undergraduate with unlimited potential, you have been allowed to see what is behind some of those doors. Once you get into a program, you'll be shown through others. After you pass various way points and as you grow as an academic and as a person, you will get ever closer the innermost doors. (If you're especially "lucky," you may be shown where the bodies are buried. You may even be handed a shovel, a leaking foul smelling burlap sack that is bursting at the seams, and instructions on where to dig.) As more doors are opened for you, you may realize that you need to reexamine and reinterpret what you learned earlier in your journey, especially as an undergraduate.. Examples include, the importance of subtlety, the efficacy of staying within the specifications of a task, the utility of a well-turned phrase, the value of not saying something that need not be said, the ways a department can--and will--deal with graduate students and colleagues who are determined to have "chips on their shoulders," the extent to which academics will go to bat for graduate students they respect, and the deafening silence that surrounds grad students who have fallen out of favor. With respect and at risk of belaboring a point, I think you are misjudging the utility of your experiences as an undergraduate against those of graduate students in the pipeline. In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with this dynamic--you're a very intelligent person who is highly motivated with a bright future. (FWIW, I would be highly disappointed in you--given your field of study and your current institution--if you didn't have such a swagger.) However, you and other members of this BB, in particular those who are going to study history, might well serve your own interests by considering the possibility that there are huge differences between being an undergraduate applying to grad school and being a person who has experienced the highs, lows, ups, downs, ins, and outs of graduate school. As an example, I would direct your attention to a thread in this BB's history forum. In it, a graduate student is being told by his department that he has alienated a critical mass of his professors and that it is time for him to leave << In that thread (like in this one) there is a noticeable difference between the responses offered by graduate students who are in the pipeline and those in the process of getting into it. Are these differences the result of "far fetched" thinking on the part of graduate students or do they reflect insights gained through hard earned experiences?

IMO, if this letter writer is a professor in your intended field of study, you have already received guidance on what you should do. Insofar as you pursuing a M.A. with a comprehensive exam option, please reconsider the advantages of pursuing the thesis option. IMO, writing a thesis will give you greater flexibility if you decide to return to graduate school and to pursue a Ph.D. It will also provide you a greater opportunity to become a SME, to develop your writing skills, and to know the SMEs in your field. Also, depending upon your program and the dynamics of your department, you may be taken more seriously if your professors and your classmates know you've got a lot of skin in the game.

With respect, I believe you are missing the point. The central question of this thread is what are the best way for an applicant to include tactfully a fact of debatable relevance in a SOP. Those of us who believe that the fact is not relevant are saying that there is no tactful way to accomplish the task and that the risks outweigh the rewards. In regards to a comment on a SoP pointing out that an applicant "completed a prize-winning master's thesis and graduated at the top of my class," in my opinion, such a comment is a misuse of space for a historian's SoP. In my view, the SoP is less about what you've accomplished--a topic that should be covered by one's transcript and LoRs--and more about what you've learned, how well you can think, how well you can write, and how one's expertise puts one a step or two ahead of other applicants. In so far as a "so what" attitude towards going over a word limit, each applicant must decide if playing outside the lines are worth the risk. In my experience, there are professors who will cut students slack on a case by case basis, those who will hold the line on standards, and those who will use any excuse to cut down their work load.

I respectfully disagree with maeisenb. Applicants should demonstrate that they can perform tasks excellently within the required specifications. They should not take risks that can earn a FTFSI designation.

I-- I'm tracking what you're saying. But please do consider the following. If the statement "I have a commitment to learning and scholarship at the highest levels: while working full time, I completed a prize-winning master's thesis and graduated at the top of my class" is accurate, and the applicant writing that statement had to do even more work towards the end, there would be the potential for the most devastating question of all: If a student is this accomplished, then why did his/her department decide not to provide meaningful financial support? This question points directly to the personality of the applicant. That is, an applicant, although brilliant, motivated, and committed, may not "play well with others" and may have managed to alienate too many people in a very short period of time. Is it reasonable to conclude that, given such a possibility, an admissions committee might decide to bypass a risky candidate in favor of a clear "true believer"?

DJ! Do not psych yourself out on this issue. Take a step back, relax for a moment, and then revisit your conversations with the guy and READ BETWEEN THE LINES. By my reading of your initial post, the professor is sending you a strong signal that you're probably going to get into his program. Yes, you should follow up, but give him some space and do not follow up in a way that you're going to give him an opportunity to change his view. More generally, I strongly believe that many members of this BB are unduly freaking themselves out over the application process. Yes, the process is stressful. Yes, there are more unknowns than knowns. Yes, the GRE can be a meat grinder. Yes, writing SoPs can be an excruciating exercise. Yes, it can often boil down to chance. Yes, you are all competing against other applicants who may be better fits for a program. Yes, there are probably other applicants "out there" who are 'ten feet tall' and know it, and will have their pick of schools. All that aside, I beseech all of you to draw more confidence from what you've accomplished thus far in your academic careers. Understand the fact that the reputation of a graduate program is largely made by its students. Consider the possibility that--even if you don't get into your first choice --you will get in to a good program, that you will find ways to finance your education, that you will have wonderful opportunities to build life long friendships, and that you will get to pursue knowledge for its own sake. (And from there, all of you--as well as those who are ten feet tall--will find yourselves chew toys of professors, befuddled by what you read, endlessly stressed out about qualifying exams, and beside yourselves with grief as you write your dissertations. ) HTH.

Moreover, if one teases things out, the fact may actually raise skeptical questions about an applicant's character, personality, and commitment to the field of study.

I agree with Eigen and Runonsentence: the work should be mentioned only if was relevant to the applicant's field of study. It might, if the tone of the disclosure suggests that the applicant has a chip on his or her shoulder. For example:

Goldielocks-- Thanks for the clarification. I have two solutions in mind. Before you begin either, I recommend that you work from copies of your original source files. Also, as far as I know, both solutions require Adobe Acrobat Professional, which you may be able to purchase at a deeply discounted price but may be worth the money even if you cannot.) Easier Step 1. You can convert the JPGs to PDFs and then use the OCR function of Adobe Acrobat to scan each document for words. (This function will be under the "document" button.) Once the scan is completed, you'll want to save the PDF (maybe with a different file name). Please note that the JPG will need to be above a certain dpi for this function to work and if the JPGs are very large, the scanning process can take time. If the citation is not already part of the image or if the OCR doesn't recognize the citation, you can put that information into the PDF's metadata. File --->Document Properties--->Description Tab. Alternately, you could click the "additional metadata" button on the Description Tab. Step 2.Once you've scanned your PDFs, you can put them into folders in a way that makes sense to you. (It is about to not make a difference.) Download and install a search engine of your choice on your computer. (Ideally, Google Desktop Search, if you can find a copy, else Copernic Desktop Search, available here.) Enable the search engine to scan and to index the files on your computer. Make sure to point the engine specifically at the directory containing your files. Make sure the engine is enabled to index content. From this point forward, you should be able to find almost every file on your computer provided you use the right search string. As an example, on my HDD, I have a directory titled <<RESEARCH>>. It is 24.2 GB in size, contains 36,323ish files in about 700 folders. With the right five words, I can find what I'm looking for most of the time. Slightly more difficult alternative for Step One [*]If you own a copy of Adobe CreativeSuite, use Adobe Bridge to batch process copies of all of the JPEGs into PDFs and then perform the OCR scans of the PDFs. [*]This method can save you a lot of time if you have robust JPEGs and you want to create them as a batch of uniform PDFs with the same DPI. [*]Keep in mind that this type of batch processing might place a heavy burden on your hardware. A REMINDER [*]Even if these techniques quickly become routine/old hat to you, please please please do not neglect the importance of "version control." [*]At the very least, please consider the utility of having three folders. [*]One for source files [*]A second for source files converted to PDFs [*]A third for PDFs that have been scanned. [*]Also, consider the utility of archiving what ever search engine software you download. [*]As an example, while writing this post, I found out that Google Desktop Search is no longer available from Google because of the shift towards "cloud" computing. [*]As I've got GDS archived in a folder, I have a solution that works for me and I won't have to worry about a new learning curve when something with more bells and whistles becomes available. [*]And, of course, have back ups galore! If these two proposed solutions are not to your liking, let me know and I'll try to think of something else that will.

S-- FYI, a B is frequently considered a failing grade for a graduate level assignment. While you may not need to hit the panic button, I think you should forgo the comparing of your work to your office mate's and concentrate on figuring out the message your professors are sending you. On those occasions when I did not like the grade I received, I took it upon myself to figure out how I got the grade I deserved. In my experience, the answers to such questions were always in the mirror. Also, please consider the possibility that relationships and reputation also matter, especially for a graduate student who is at the start of a very difficult journey.

A question that may be more relevant is: How did you get B's on two assignments on which you "busted" your behind?

Because you are defining the dynamic as a "problem," I recommend that you take a look at how you can use your word 'surplus' to your benefit. Maybe ask yourself questions like: Can you develop additional points to support your candidacy? Can you use the extra space to demonstrate your skills as a writer? Do your shorter responses sacrifice clarity for length (i.e. are they turgid)? In contrast to cunninlynguist's reply, I recommend that you also consider the possibility that there can be a differences among a reader's appreciation, a reader's expectations, and a reader's approval. As the objective of the SoP is to secure the latter, I would strive to exceed readers' expectations by writing SoPs that approach, but do not exceed, the word count. My $0.02. YMMV.

Goldie-- At the risk of sounding like a dunderhead, I must confess that I'm stumbling over your use of the word "transcriptions." Are you taking photos of newspaper articles and then converting those photos into PDFs? Or are you scanning the articles into PDFs? Or looking at your issue from the other side, what do you want your solution to do? (I understand that you want to manage them, but in what sense?) I'm asking these questions because I think I may have suggestions, but I want to make sure their useful before I offer them.

IMO, qbtacoma has raised questions that you should address in a soul searching conversation with yourself before proceeding.

Kevin-- Please check your PMs.

Your "footprint" in cyberspace may be much larger than you realize.

IK-- MOO, you should not mention mention your Quora profile. The worst possible outcome is, IMO, they read a post of yours and say "This is why we're going to tell this guy 'no.'"

Do you have either an area or a period in mind?

I agree with the previous posts that recommend you have discussions with members of your committee. Before you have any conversations, I recommend that you first sit down and have a very long conversation with yourself. Ask yourself brutal questions and reply with the utmost candor. As written, your posts suggest some potential questions. Why were you not prepared to pass your qualifying exams? Are you simply "at least partly to blame" or were there steps you did not take that were the difference between passing and failing? [*]Why did you accuse anyone of anything? [*]Why doesn't your department want to go to bat for you when it has done so for other students? [*]Did you exhibit behaviors in this experience that you have in the past? (That is, is this set back indicative of a broader pattern.) Again, be as hard on yourself when you're answering the questions as you can endure. Look at yourself unflinchingly, without offering any excuses. And then take ownership and responsibility for what you see. From these, and other questions, consider developing a "lessons learned" list that you can refer to down the line. To be clear, this exercise should not be about self flagellation, but about self discovery. The reason why I'm suggesting a brutal self-appraisal is so that if/when you talk to members of your committee, you'll be prepared to take their comments to heart then and there--without denial or evasion--even if some of their statements may be tough to hear.

Hard earned experience is teaching me that rapport, trust, and clear lines of communication are important criteria in putting together a committee. Finding out if a potential member of your committee brings these traits to the table can be difficult, but it is incumbent upon you to do your due diligence. If those elements are deficient, the expertise of a committee member, especially the DA, will matter less and less.

IME, students pursuing a M.A. were thrown into the same classes as those trying to earn a Ph.D. The students who were pursuing a master's did not always throw themselves into their work. Sometimes, it showed.

Em-- Three quick comments. First, it seems that in your mind's eye, there are qualities that a "graduate level" writing sample that your sample does not have. Might it be possible to make a short list of what those features are and make them part of your "to do list" for the revision you're currently preparing? If some items on this list are beyond expertise to complete--such as an in-depth literature review that captures every nuance of a specific theory--you could still demonstrate that you know how to execute the basics of such a review. Second, I want to underscore what rainy_day said about trusting in yourself and not driving yourself bonkers by comparing the details of your application to others. Third, IMO, the only stupid question is the one you do not ask. (FWIW, I submitted my undergraduate thesis [without any revisions] as my writing sample. It did not have anything resembling a literature review. In this regard, it was nowhere close to being a "graduate level" work. Yet, it demonstrated basic proficiency in other skills and things still worked out all right.)