JerryLandis

I think the importance of learning math for most people (beyond your essential, very basic stuff you get in middle school) is that it's good mental exercise and helps people learn how to think logically. I always hated math but I understand why I was made to take it beyond the practical level. I'll never make practical use of any of the math I learned beyond 9th grade. I think that making Calculus compulsory for all high school students is ridiculous - setting higher (and unnecessary) standards for kids won't help them meet the lower standards they already struggle with. For the GRE, refreshing your algebra skills can really help. But you don't really need a math class to do that - if you learned it when you were 14 or 15, and you understood it then, you should be able to refresh your memory about most of it and re-learn the formulas and rules by using a GRE book. If, as the above poster said, calculus is necessary for your degree, I'd put much more weight on taking care of that than I would taking GRE-specific classes. Much of the math on the GRE is about "logical thinking," NOT working out equations. I'm the kind of person who feels the need to plug all the numbers in a solve the problem (after years of having to do that in school!), not guess at the answer based on estimations and tricks, so I found the quantitative section a bit difficult to get used to. If you use a book (I used Barrons, but if I remember correctly it didn't cover slopes so you may want to use a different one) and diligently go through the whole chapter, and do all the practice problems, you should be able to refresh your understanding of algebra. It probably won't take too much time either if you spread it out over a couple weeks.

Well, I'm not entirely sure, and I don't know if this advice is redundant (since you said "email" in your title), but if you do contact them I'd suggest emailing instead of calling. That way you can explain everything neatly instead of having to make it brief on the phone and coming across as impatient due to an abridged explanation.

I am waiting to hear back from my schools, at which point I will write thank you notes to let them know where I did and didn't get accepted. Partly, I just like any excuse to get out pretty cards/stationery and write notes to seal in little envelopes. As lame as it sounds, I actually already have little cards picked out whose images correspond with their particular research interests (stationery I bought when visiting historic sites). I like getting handwritten notes from people, so I try to write them myself for others. Also, I think that showing appreciation is a good thing because I don't know about all of you, but I intend to ask at lest one of these professors for another letter when I reapply for PhD programs in a year or two. I would thank them by baking something nice, but I'm wary of doing stuff like that for people whose class I'm currently taking, because I don't want them to get the wrong impression and think I'm sucking up. I've only ever given gifts to teachers after finishing their classes. Meanwhile, the other LOR I'm on friendly terms with is kind of on a diet so I don't want to give him something that will make him feel like crap!

I'd be interested to meet one of my professor's arch academic nemeses (is that the plural?). The stories I've been hearing are making me rather curious if she is actually human or not. All the big names in my field either work at departments that only offer completely unrelated PhD fields, or are independently wealthy/emeritus faculty who write books all the time but never take students. Actually, there's one relevant woman who has the benefit of being young (wouldn't retire or die during my time with her), but I tend to disagree with everything she writes so I don't intend to apply where she works.

I think that by "real jobs" he/she meant stuff like waiting tables, working in retail, stuff where you have do deal with customers who assume you're somehow beneath them. In my experience, you don't get paid too well in those jobs either. And you sure as hell don't work 80 hours a week! Whatever, who cares, it's all work.

Doesn't sound too bad to me. I wouldn't be too worried about a letter like that, and I wouldn't be surprised if one of my letters said something similarly "unprofessional." Everyone knows college students like to party. Acknowledging that just makes the person's reference seem more sincere and less impersonal.

Yes, I am stalking you. Look out your window if you don't believe me. I do offer relevant insight here, the advice that anything you say should be received somewhat skeptically. I'd hate to think what my application process would have been like If I'd received "advice" from you.

My approach was to allow myself less time on the other verbal questions, and to devote more time to the reading comprehension. I did not scan the passages, but read them thoroughly. I think it's important to do that because each passage comes with multiple questions, so if you don't really understand the passage, you risk getting 3 questions wrong instead of just 1. I've always hated standardized test questions that are given in a group and all related to one passage or diagram. Give me individual questions for crap's sake! With the reading comprehension, it drives me crazy how it's always about some random planet or sea sponge. Maybe if I take the test enough times I'll get a history-based reading comprehension section and kick ass.

Testarossa, I don't know anything about your field, but I just thought I'd suggest that you take anything seadub says with a gigantic grain of salt. He is not here to give helpful advice, but to yell at people and ingratiate himself. I haven't seen any posts by you before, so, assuming that you are new, I thought I'd give you a heads up.

I think you're missing a letter in there somewhere.

I wouldn't think an MA would expire after 20 years. But I don't know what the expectations are for that field.

If it makes you all feel any better, I'd kill to be waitlisted right about now. Sure, it must be frustrating, but at least what it tells you is that you are good enough to be considered seriously. It also suggests that were this not a bad economic year, you'd be in. Straight rejections don't offer that kind of reassurance, they just make you feel worthless!

What sort of ranking was the university that told you this, might I ask? Do you think that they are unable to let an MA compensate for a low undergrad GPA simply because they are already inundated with applicants whose GPA's are perfect, or is it that they want all their entering students to be at the same level? Also, you are in Literature/English, right? Or are you in history?

The question is whether the retiring baby boomers will just be replaced with adjuncts.

Something I find interesting about the GRE is that its computerized format, with questions worth different amounts, makes it entirely different from the standardized tests most of us grew up taking. Learning how to take the GRE was confusing for me because it went against much of the test-taking knowledge I had previously built up. Being able to read something with pencil in hand really can make a huge difference. I never read anything important without a pen or pencil in my hand to underline or make notes (which probably pisses off some people at the library). Not being able to do that is a very subtle difference that made the reading comprehension section extremely difficult for me. Reading off a screen is just much harder than reading off a piece of paper! I suspect that will cease to be a problem as younger generations of people start to take the test. I have a question for the ADD folks out there. Do you take medication for it, and if so, do you take medication regularly, or just before you have to do certain things? Does it help?

I think the whole cash cow thing is a moot point. I don't think that admissions committees evaluating PhD candidates say to themselves "well, this MA doesn't count, because it's from a cash cow kinda place." Judging from what I've read about it (which is quite a bit, since I'm considering the path myself), participating in such a program requires a large amount of drive and motivation if you want to emerge successful. Personally, I intend to use my time in an MA program to work on my languages, and also to establish contacts with well-known American professors. I know that a lot of people decide to do an MA in whatever liberal arts subject they majored in as a way to put off real life for another two years. I think it's pretty foolish to do that, what with the cost of such programs. But I don't think it's foolish to pursue an MA if you'd like to reapply for PhD programs, especially if you had a rocky time as an undergraduate and don't have the best grades. Now, I have no personal experience to back this up. But judging from what I've read about other people's experiences, I would definitely say that working towards an MA is a much better way to improve your future PhD chances than, say, working for a few years. More experience in the field cannot hurt.

Sounds like a real pain in the ass. The good thing about people like that is that there's often no need to retaliate - they'll perform the task of screwing themselves over without any help. There's a student in a class I take who never shows up (should have been failed by now) and when he does show up, not having done the work, has the audacity to disagree with the professor about everything. The professor's not a very confrontational guy, but I can imagine it probably annoys the hell out of him to be disrespected like that. In any case, I think the student has finally crossed the line in terms of absences and not turning in work, and will not be graduating this semester as scheduled. It makes you wonder though, if someone is so incapable of doing basic things like showing up for class, how did he manage to get by in the military?

I once petitioned an essay grade that was given to me by a graduate student. He was very friendly in person, and was a very good teacher, but the comments he wrote on my essay were extremely insulting and actually made me cry when I read over them. I had worked for weeks on the essay and, while I recognize that hard work does not guarantee high grades, I would have appreciated if he had acknowledged my hard work in writing his comments (instead of simply writing "you failed to do x, y, and z") in the evaluation form. There was no constructive criticism offered. It was clear from some of his comments (for example, he refused to believe that I had read a non-English text, based solely on the assumption that undergrads must only speak English) that he believed undergraduates to be a bunch of idiots, and that he was God's gift to academia or something. Anyhow, the essay was regraded, and I received a somewhat higher grade. More importantly, the person who regraded it explained clearly why certain points were deducted. After that awkward experience, the graduate student and I still had the rest of the semester to go, and it was pretty uncomfortable. For example, he never responded to my email to him saying I intended to have the essay re-graded, and never mentioned the incident to me in person. I understand that he probably felt annoyed about me undermining him, but I don't think he handled the situation very professionally. I would have appreciated it if he had offered to speak to me about it in person, and maybe have a look over the essay with me. I suppose that is what I suggest you try doing with your student. Mind you, I have no teaching experience myself (dumbass undergrad here), and I'm not trying to compare you with my jerk of a tutor. But, if you have a little chat with the person, or at least behave in a friendly manner towards him for the rest of the semester, you'll be more likely to win his respect and also to "win" in the unspoken rivalry. That said, aside from this one particular individual, the best teachers I have had as an undergraduate have been graduate students. I find that they tend to be terrifying, in that they expect work to be done and do not take excuses. Keep in mind that someone who has had to deal with a not-so-understanding TA may automatically assume that you operate with the same cutthroat policy of hating all undergraduates.

Saving up money is definitely a big one - which I'd be able to do if I moved back in with my parents and worked for a year. Also, a year's break would be a great opportunity to work on language skills to boost my next round of applications. Receiving my first rejection from a PhD program actually put me in much better spirits about everything. Knowing that I'm not going there, and probably won't be starting a PhD anywhere else next year, has allowed me to get my head out of the clouds and to focus on my ongoing undergraduate work. I'm more committed to finishing with a bang, bringing up my grades so that I'll have better luck the next time around. Everyone, including me, was very surprised at how little my rejection upset me. The way I see it, not getting in this year will give me an excuse to enjoy my youth a little bit before plunging head on into the soul-munching horror of a PhD program.

Considering the OP has told us he/she has already been diagnosed with ADD, I don't really see the problem with suggesting that symptoms of ADD (like issues with time management) could be contributing to his/her difficulties. If someone told me he was diabetic and asked for advice about low-sugar foods, I wouldn't say, "Sorry, I cannot help you until I have given you my own official diagnosis." Why is MedievalManiac expected to do that in this situation? Generally speaking I'm skeptical about people receiving extra time on tests - since the time factor makes it more difficult for everyone, allowing only certain individuals to get extra time seems pretty unfair, especially when you consider the crazy diagnoses patterns for ADD (for example, about half of my high school test was medicated for ADD - something has to be wrong there!). But then, the GRE is a load of balls, so I'd be happy for anyone managing to do better on it despite its annoying limitations. Perhaps you should apply to MA programs where acceptance would be most likely, and use the time in that program to do what's necessary to get the extended time. Perhaps talking to your doctor might help, as he might be able to have some pull. Who knows. Best of luck.

I don't see how attending a super-competitive top program would make a person complacent. Not me, anyway. I refuse to be mediocre at anything - either I work my ass off on it and do my best, or I don't do it at all. If I ever get lucky enough to be accepted at a top PhD program, I'll be scared shitless. I can't imagine how intimidating it must be, after years of big fish small pond syndrome, to wind up in a cohort of insanely competitive, intelligent, and hard-working people (as I'm assuming you must be to be admitted, generally). I suppose I would either buckle and drop out, or spend every waking moment working my ass off to reclaim my bygone position of "best student in the class." I think I would be far more likely to rest on my laurels at a less renowned university, because 1) if the place was really bad, I'd be the big fish again and maybe it wouldn't be so challenging and, more importantly, 2) spending a number of years at a lower-ranked institution would instill in me the belief that that I belonged there, and not anywhere better. I think it would damage my confidence a bit, which wouldn't be the best motivator for my studies. I suppose everyone is different. I guess what this means is that you should attend the lower-ranked program, and leave a spot at the higher-ranked one open for me! Then we'll both be happy...

I want a Gruffalo for my advisor. Some smooth sailing that'd be.

In school I was taught never to use "their" this way, but to pick either he or she (or use he/she if necessary, but obviously that can get tedious) and be consistent with whichever pronoun I decided to use. "His" could be [technically] gender-neutral, but "hers" and "she" could be used to discuss a hypothetical person of unspecified gender, if the person writing wants to avoid being exclusive of females. Personally, I alternate between the two, although of course never in the middle of a sentence or example. I suppose I take this for granted because, as a female, I rarely get accused of sexist tendencies. It becomes funny, of course, when I write something anonymously or on the internet, and the person reading has no way of knowing I'm female (or simply assumes that I'm not because my username is Jerry). Take for example a recent conversation (flame-war, to be more accurate) in which I was accused of being insensitive/sexist for calling someone a "he" because I did not know their gender and it turned out to be a "she." Nah mate, actually I was just reverting to the technically gender-neutral term. I don't get worked up when people I've never met get my gender wrong, so I don't see the big deal. But I guess I understand how the issue could be annoying for men who don't want to give the wrong impression! Man, this is turning out to be a long post. Just wanted to add that my personal pet peeve is when people put apostrophes at the end of a singular word to denote possession. For example, to say belonging to James, people write James' instead of James's. What the hell is a Jame anyway?

Reminds me of Soul on Ice by Eldridge Cleaver, from the opposite perspective.

I've heard of it happening, but this is my first time applying so it's never happened to me before. If you're worried about specific schools doing that, I'd try checking the results board to see whether/when/how people received rejections from them in previous years. My guess is that what with email correspondence being the norm now, they're more likely to just inform people. But of course you never know! Best of luck.