browncow

I'm applying to divinity school master's programs, and my supervisor (for consulting work in the nonprofit health sector) has asked for some guidance on what the adcom is looking for, as well a list of key points to include. My impression is that whatever he can say about my technical research and writing doesn't carry much academic weight and should get less airtime than whatever he feels most positively about in my contributions, professionalism, and character. 1. Is this the right idea? 2. Are there any particular character traits or professional skills that would be worth emphasizing? 3. Would it be worthwhile or misguided to assess my ability to succeed in grad school compared to his peers in an unrelated professional program at one of these schools?

Are you familiar with the basic math skills that are needed for the test? If so, do you find that you feel "desperate" during the test? I think that can be a big hindrance, especially if you end up spending time looking for complicated solutions to simple, almost nonmathematical questions. If not, can you post examples of questions that you typically have trouble with?

Thanks, Henry Hudson! Did anyone else have to ask for recs many years later? Did you get any negative responses? I need two academic letters and have one yes and one no response. I'm not sure whether I should move on to the next possible letter writer just in case.

IMO max 1 line about your family and max 1 line about your pre-university experiences making you aware of food access issues. Use the space you save to develop your fit and plans further. It's very general. I don't see how it's worth mentioning that the "location" provides many opportunities if you can't say what they are. Is there any graduate program where you wouldn't connect with professors, professionals, and the community? I also wrote my SOP recently and struggled to articulate my plans more than my background, but going through and writing out my thoughts for myself -- not thinking about adcom or word count -- was very helpful in shoring up the second half. Know what you want so you can say what you want.

I was younger than most in undergrad but have been out of school for almost a decade. Can I join? It would be nice to hear from others who are a bit removed from school. Who did you chose to ask for recommendations, how did you offset potentially weak academic recommendations, what part or how much of your experience did you treat in your SOP, etc. If anyone is still interested in exchanging SOP drafts, let me know!

I don't know the Canadian system, but in the US it's relatively uncommon to find a second bachelor's program, you would be ineligible for aid, and you could count some credits but would still have to fulfill a 2-year minimum at the new school. Why wouldn't you just extend your current program or transfer and get a dual degree at the school you want to attend? Do you have an opportunity to pursue research in the sciences? How do you know that you are committed to a science degree if you've never done research or university-level work in the sciences? Even in university, there is a huge difference between fun, general lower-division courses and more serious scientific inquiry. What do you want to do with your BSc degree? Do you have the opportunity to begin building some bio background into your psych degree, e.g., neuroscience? Another option (at least in the US) is a post-bac, which is usually for people wanting to go to med school and the like who don't have the required background. The basic reqs are the same as the core for a typical BS in biology, i.e., 1 year multivariable calc, 1 year physics, 1 year bio, 1 year inorganic and 1 year organic chemistry. If you did well in a post-bac and gained research experience, you should be prepared to go in for a masters. Alternatively, pursue a science core and do well without getting a second degree. You need a first degree and core scientific knowledge for a graduate program, but you do not strictly need a biology degree.

I also would have chosen very differently if I had gone to university at 18 (instead of early), but at this point I no longer count it as a regret. The fact is your life builds on your choices and your opportunities. I don't believe "everything happens for a reason," but if you make the best of your opportunities any direction, good things do happen -- usually good enough that you would not be willing to give them up if you could start over. At 18, I would have chosen a creative liberal arts college over STEM study at my top-10 university. No joke. It would have been an infinitely better fit and almost certainly led to a smoother career path. On the other hand, the choice I did make brought me closest friends, opened a lot of doors, and put me through a lot of rough but very interesting times that I would not be willing to trade in at this point. I am a decade out of my degree. It took me at least half that time to become reconciled with the way it went down. Hopefully with greater age and maturity it will take you less. But as long as you pursue what you want now, when you are more than a couple years removed from this experience and you've seen what it leads to, I think you will make your peace with it. My advice is not to dwell on it. Tell yourself you will put off judgment another three years and then try to let it go. I really relate to this and wish you the best.

No writing score yet. PowerPrep 1: 168 V / 170 Q Actual: 170 V / 165 Q In my assessment, the V score reflects a recent "break" during which I read a lot of horribly dense political analysis and philosophy (personal interest). The Q score reflects maybe some bad test day circumstances but more the fact that I no longer use Q skills and have little confidence in them. I spent a lot of time quadruple-checking arithmetic and really scrambled to finish, whereas I saw three verbal sections and finished each in 20 minutes. I seem to be in the minority of those who believe that standardized tests reflect something real, even if that is a combination of your real aptitude, your recent exercise of that aptitude, and your ability to function under pressure. With that disclaimer, my recommendation for anyone who still has 150 hours to study is to use the skills in question. Read challenging nonfiction texts, solve geometric puzzles, write about topics that interest you. Don't just practice artificial test questions. No one operates at 100% all the time, and especially not on test day. If you have only the knowledge you need to get 170/170 on the GRE, chances are you are won't see that most days. If you build your skills to a higher level, then even operating suboptimally you can feel at ease with the test. For reference: Archaic GRE score: 700 V / 800 Q / 800 A Archaic SAT score: 800 V / 760 Q

My undergraduate degree was STEM, with a minor in literature and creative writing. Years later, I'm applying to a graduate program in humanities, which has stated that they give more weight to letters from professors in the humanities. I have few choices for humanities profs considering a flawless and well-deserved A- record. With the grade inflation at my school, this is not good -- it reflects consistent feedback that I wrote very well but not deeply. I need three letters, at least two academic. I've already asked a TA for a theory course in creative writing, but I'm concerned after reading negative comments on this board. Is a TA's letter less valuable because of his position at the time of the course, or because of his position at the time the letter is written? Since my undergrad years, the TA has finished his dual PhD, been through several prestigious fellowships/visiting scholarships (one at the school he would be writing to), and become a tenure-track professor -- albeit at a school three tiers down. Should I have pursued an alternative? Or which alternative should I try for if the former TA declines? Here is my situation for the three letters: 1. I have a yes from a humanities professor (non-lit), who I believe will write a very positive letter but not necessarily a very strong letter. In other words, he will speak highly of my writing and not dwell on my weaker content. 2. My strongest letter should be from a very old friend who is also my work supervisor. He has a very high regard for me and a fancy pedigree including a terminal degree from the school I am applying to. Of course, all technical/business-oriented. 3. The creative writing TA. I did very well in creative writing, but his was the only course that dealt with theory. Because of that, it was also a massive lecture course (with small sections) and hardly the most rigorous. That said, the TA loved my work, liked me, and generally is a nice guy, supportive of students, and himself pretty nontraditional. I should add that all three are strong writers and are or were supportive of me personally. My alternatives are A. My STEM research advisor, who could only cover the same ground as (2) but in an academic context. B. A creative writing lecturer, who found me exceptional but never saw a word of non-fiction writing from me. C. My minor advisor, who had me for a lecture class where he saw absolutely none of my work. He always tried to be helpful as an advisor and might say yes, but as a straight-up academic (a lit prof, not a writer) was openly baffled by my background and my goals. I'm also concerned that my application will look off somehow if I don't have a rec from my minor department. Any thoughts?