LateAntique

Yes, MTS students are not well-funded at Duke Div. The M.Div students have a lot more scholarship opportunities.

I think a lot of people are humbled by the whole application process. In fact, I don't think it stops here. A lot of people develop 'impostor syndrome' at this point in their academic career and into grad school years. Even people like yourself, who have apparently done *really* well in their undergrad program (nice numbers!), get hit with this. Your numbers are impressive. Your GPA is outstanding, you've done above average on the GRE, you seem to have done good extra-curricular stuff (being a TA, doing research). Honestly - you should shoot for the moon here. I can't see any reason why you wouldn't get into at least some of the programs you're hoping to get into. Don't sell yourself short. I have not attended any of those universities, but I can tell you that going to UNCW is pretty dangerous if you're a beach person. For one - it's hard to go to class/lab when you've got an ocean down the road from you. I have several friends who moved down there for undergrad and never left (or went to grad school and then moved back). It's addictive, apparently.

Does everyone at least know that Iowa is a state? Anyone?

Kiebelle here says something I had not thought of, but with which I totally agree. You don't want the adcomm thinking to themselves, "So they gave being a mail-man a go and that didn't work, tried teaching and that didn't work, and now sees grad school as a ticket out."

I have been memorizing math formulae, but I'm as bad at math today as I was back then (go figure). I imagine my verbal will be above average, so if I can get a 400-500 on the quantitative, I would be happy.

Anyone doing it? Anyone heard good or bad things about their program? I know a few of their professors and they're very lovely and intelligent people. The few students with whom I've spoken seem to really enjoy the program.

Though I don't speak for any particular adcomm, I cannot imagine that they interpret waiving one's right to see the letter in the way it has been interpreted here. Waiving one's right to see the letter seems to imply that you will never see it, thus giving your recommender total freedom and safety to say whatever they would like. I'm happy to be corrected if 'waiving your right' doesn't imply an ongoing state.

As fuzzylogician said, this may sound more harsh than I mean for it to, but this is a really poor essay. I found the most difficult aspect of writing an SoP was just knowing what went where in the essay. I came up with this outline and I've been told by my professors it's one of the best statements of purpose they've ever read: I. Introductory paragraph: I basically just discuss my educational background here. I show (instead of telling) my language preparation, which is pretty key for the degrees to which I'm applying. II. Explain my academic interests and how X school fits into those interests. I work in the names of professors with whom I'd like to work (though subtly). I discuss particular avenues of research I'm interested in and show how I'm already doing work relevant to it (using buzz-words from the field, citing primary sources). III. Another reason school X is good for me - I go on to discuss the research of a few professors and how my interests/background coincide with theirs. IV. Senior Thesis - I give a short paragraph about my senior thesis. I name my advisor (who is a known name in the field), discuss the thesis' relevance, etc. V. Concluding paragraph - I explain my intentions after grad school in brief. I mention that my desire to teach has been with me since my first year of undergraduate studies and that I've been a tutor in some capacity (I give the names of a few courses for which I've tutored) for my entire undergrad career. I give another reason why the program in general is good for me - how it makes people into the kind of scholar I want to become. At any rate, my outline doesn't seem to have the same zing my SoP does, but there you have it. Perhaps that can help.

Likewise. I have no intention of reading mine even if I'm offered them. I have scrutinized every single word I've put into my SoP - I can only imagine how much worse it would be if I were reading someone else's words. I would inevitably end up dwelling on various parts of the letter for months on end, even after being accepted.

I left it vague intentionally. I just want to see what kinds of programs people got into without stellar GRE scores.

Noble's original post was blank (notice my quote). Thus, I felt like every school they listed was a given.

I'm just wondering if you know of people who have been accepted with low GRE scores. I'm taking it this Saturday and although I'm not too worried about the verbal section, I will probably bomb the quantitative. I haven't had a math class in over 7 years. I have a good GPA, my recommenders are all very positive about me going into graduate studies, etc. The rest of the package will be good - but I'm pretty sure the quantitative section will suck. So, do you know anyone who was accepted into a graduate program with low GRE but a good overall package?

Your SoP should not change in any major way because of the knowledge of your LoR. The way you say things about yourself is going to have a different tone than the way your professors say things. Adcomms are going to want that in there. Secondly, if you start addressing things that are in your LoR, someone's going to figure out you've seen them and you lied when you said you waived your right to view them.

I started Greek first and loved it. However, I love Latin too. I think the issue is that Latin gives one more 'returns' on their investment pretty immediately whereas Greek is still very difficult 2-3 years in. Greek makes up for this in the long-run by not being as ambiguous as Latin. I have been reading Cicero's letters this semester and he uses words with a bazillion different meanings (I have never chosen the right one). I don't find that to be the case with Greek. Keep it up and you will hopefully come to love Greek.

Who in their right mind would be mad that someone tells a joke if they had previously been serious in their job interview? "Whoa, pal - we hired a serious person. Now, cut out being personable or we're gonna fire you." You're supposed to be serious during your job interviews unless you're interviewing to take over Bozo the Clown's TV show.

If you use any humor (and this should be a very big if), it should be extremely subtle and under the radar. Unless you're applying to do a masters in clown college, jokes are inappropriate. Yes, professors read tons of statements of purpose - yes, they are often formulaic - yes, it seems like a good idea to spice yours up so you stand out. But, the quote you've got in mind isn't funny - the "joke" of it comes from a grown person quoting a Spiderman movie, which isn't funny and makes a joke out of you - not a light in which you want potential professors and colleagues to see you. Also: This makes no sense. 1) Do you know any children who are not young? 2) Using "ever since" implies that what is being discussed is still occuring (and lets hope children aren't applying to graduate school). 3) It doesn't make sense to use a cliche and then say you've grown tired of them. 4) "The essence remains intact" doesn't make any sense. I only point these out in case you're using this line or a line like it in your own SoP.

I can pretty much guarantee you will get in to all of the schools you listed. Congrats!

Though there have been numerous studies that show that the GRE is a poor indicator of how one does in graduate school, it's a necessary evil. I hate it, don't get me wrong, but it serves a purpose. How does a program decide between two applicants who have identical GPA's, glowing recs, etc? The GRE, of course. I've been told by numerous program to which I'm applying that they see the GRE as entirely trivial and that the only reason they require it is to get fellowships from the grad school itself. That almost makes it more stressful to me. I know that it's arbitrary in one sense and yet extremely important in another. Very silly.

Do your interests cross over? In other words, are you interested in the politics of antiquity? If so, Duke has Peter Euben. Best of luck to you.

Hi! I don't think there are that many of us to start off with - only a few hundred people get their degrees in Classics every year. I don't understand either - we already know who you are. We've been tracking you for months on end. Best of luck to you. If you figure out to which schools you're applying or care to share any more information, we're all ears.

I was going to apply to a large public university's program in Classics but was told by a professor that, due to budget restrictions, they only have two fellowships to give out next year and they're both going to Archaeologists. At least it saved me the 70 dollar application fee.

I realize there aren't that many of us running around, but I expected the Classics majors to represent a little better here. Where is everyone applying? What are your research interests? Plug in other trivial biographical data here!

From what I know, grammatical/syntactical/spelling mistakes in letters of recommendation don't really matter. I know someone who got into a very prestigious program and they had a foreign recommender. The recommender's letter was not what we'd call 'stellar writing', but what was important was what they said about the applicant.

In what way would Ehrman make the difference for you?

I'm applying to the MA program, so I suggest you apply to the MTS so I won't have as much competition. In all seriousness, I suggest contacting the ECS program. Depending upon your previous language preparation, you may go into the MTS or MA.