pip

I can corroborate that ETS does not send AW essays to schools. I spoke with a customer service agent at ETS who assured me that the essays are confidential. I asked if this was a change in policy and she said it wasn't as far as she knows. Myth: busted.

Good idea. And I am happy to add some colorful GRE scores to the mix. Undergrad: Good liberal arts college, double major in sociology & anthropology (but a very sketchy early college career) GPA: 3.83, 3.87 in-major GRE: V 640 / Q 440 / AW 4.5 Research, Presentations, etc: Senior honors thesis; second author on a publication in a well-known journal; researcher and co-author for a collaborative research project between the soc department at my school and a local organization; 2.5 years as a research assistant for anthropologist working on my general topic; research assistant for an NSF proposal; TA for upper division anth class; two regional conference presentations of my thesis Interests: Globalization, culture, theory, ethnographic methods Schools: Berkeley, Columbia, NYU I did not pursue relationships with professors at my schools beyond two perfunctory hellos. I've been told my LORs are stellar. What else. I know I'm shooting high. I'm very, very nervous.

I did not include an abstract or title page. I also used 1" margins rather than the standard 1 1/4". So it was really quite a loose interpretation of ASA style. I wouldn't worry about it.

Update: I haven't heard back from the grad admin, but I got an automatic email this morning thanking me for my submission. I'm taking that as good news.

Yeah, I'm really hoping the low Berkeley showing on the boards reflects a larger trend. So what's the theory? Deterred by budget crisis? jacib: Columbia and NYU are my only other schools.

Yeah, I think it's hard to make the fit paragraph work without tweaking other aspects of the SoP as well. Even though I discussed all the same research background in my SoPs, for each school I wrote a few transition sentences leading into slightly different research proposals. The aspects of my research proposal I that tweaked were based on two things: my perception of the school's overarching research agenda, and how well the proposal utilized the department's distinct faculty strengths. This approach gave me a segue right into mentioning faculty I want to work with in a way that made it sound obvious all along. It did kind of make me feel like I was pandering to schools, but I comforted myself knowing that I did not change basic elements of my proposal, and would be happy carrying out any version of the research I proposed.

That's what it looks like. I'm not ready to upload my writing sample yet, so I can't say for sure. Give me a deadline of Dec 18th and I'll take it.

I know, I am a horrible procrastinator. Four minutes before deadline, I was proofreading my writing sample. Three minutes before, I started trying to upload it. You know where this is going. The server finally cleared up at about five minutes after deadline, and I submitted anyway. Has anybody ever heard of a grace period for online application submissions? It's not my top choice school, but I'd still like a shot. I emailed the gsas admin while the server was jammed and asked him if there was any precedent for slightlylate applications being considered. I guess we'll see.

For anyone else still writing, this email I just received from the Sociology department might allay some of your anxiety: ----------- Write about what feels appropriate in your situation. You can use either as a "prompt" [the sociology dept's prompt was slightly different than the one on the application]. It is rather fluid essay, so don't get too worried about which one you are answering. Use whatever parts of the questions maybe be useful in helping you think about your own situation or story. You can put your "gaps" explanation in whichever essay you feel that it fits most appropriately. Again, there are not fixed rules for these things. ----------- Back to work!

I've just read the thread over in the other forum, and it sounds like we're on the same page. I'm writing about my experience of moving frequently with my family across geography and class boundaries, and how it shaped my sense myself as an observer. The whole narrative arc is that going from overstuffed, underfunded public schools in South Central L.A. to all-white private schools later in life gave me an acute awareness of constructions of whiteness and my own privilege, eventually leading me to sociology and to my specific research topic. What I'm still not sure about is whether this is the place to explain gaps in my transcripts. I gloss over the inconsistencies in my education in my SoP nicely, but I'm dealing with a ten year undergraduate career here, so I was hoping to use the PHS to explain inconsistencies more fully. If using the first essay prompt, they do seem appropriate to discuss; with the second, not so much. So I'm back to your question about how these essays are used by the adcoms. If they are just used for funding decisions based on underrepresentation or recognition of inequality, I don't want to spend much time on the medical issues that kept me in and out of school for years. Edited to clarify: Any opinions on whether the PHS is the right place to discuss personal challenges (ie: illness), or just challenges based in social/gender/some other inequality?

I see two different personal history statement prompts for Berkeley, one on the department website and the other on the online application. The grad admin hasn't gotten back to me about which to use. #1, from the dept website: In an essay, discuss how your personal background informs your decision to pursue a graduate degree. Please include any educational, familial, cultural, economic, or social experiences, challenges, or opportunities relevant to your academic journey; how you might contribute to social or cultural diversity within your chosen field; and/or how you might serve educationally underrepresented segments of society with your degree. or #2, from the application: Please describe how your personal background informs your decision to pursue a graduate degree. Please include information on how you have overcome barriers to access higher education, evidence of how you have come to understand the barriers faced by others, evidence of your academic service to advance equitable access to higher education for women, racial minorities, and individuals from other groups that have been historically underrepresented in higher education, evidence of your research focusing on underserved populations or related issues of inequality, or evidence of your leadership among such groups. The difference for me would be between focusing on "experiences that made my academic journey unconventional" and "experiences that helped me understand barriers faced by others." Has anyone else run into this?

The high school reference in the first sentence really threw me off. My actual thought was, Is s/he posting in the right forum? How about, "An influential teacher once told me that..."

Berkeley is still my top choice despite the budget problems. I do wonder how much the cuts affect grad funding versus the much publicized undergrad tuition.

I think it would depend on the relationship between the two programs to some degree. If we're talking about demography and sociology, for instance, I don't think splitting your application would work against you. You'll probably end up being an asset in both areas either way, and the programs typically have a close working relationship. If it's a wider leap, like psychology and sociology, then yes, I think you risk looking indecisive (unless you make a compelling argument for your interest in both).

Are you familiar with Anna Tsing? Her work sounds right up your alley. She's at UC Santa Cruz.

The night before, I suspect servers will be crammed. Otherwise, my impression is that submitting just before deadline is fine. I know I will be!

I know two people in a top five school--quantitative sociologists, no less--who scored lower. I think we all know by now that the GRE is one factor among many that determines admission, and not a very important one at that. There are also factors beyond our control at play (which doesn't make admission a crapshoot, just harder to predict). One of the quant people I mentioned, for instance, had a regional focus on Russia and project proposal that appealed to one of the adcomm members, a Russia specialist. Had that professor not been on the committee that year, my friend says she doesn't think she would have gotten in. If it makes you feel any better, my Q score was a 430 (V 700, AW 5.0), and I'm applying to top 10 schools. As per the advice of past professors, I'm not even going to mention mine.

I'm applying to five. I'll probably wait for next year if I don't get into my top choice. Still trying to keep an open mind about it though.

I am also trying to decide how to address past depression and gaps in my education. My record of the last few years is stellar, but the first seven (yes, seven) years were pretty sketchy. I took classes at six different schools part time, finishing some and not others. Where I had major depressions I withdrew completely from semesters or let them go to incompletes. The biggest factor of my recent success is that I got sober and started taking medication regularly. It's night and day on my transcripts. Clearly, I can do the work. I feel up to it and know that intellectual challenges give me confidence. But my task right now is to reconcile my past and recent records in my SOP, and I'm struggling. I do think I some version of the truth is necessary to explain the inconsistency. A past professor said absolutely do not mention addiction (even though I've been clean five years), and only discuss depression very delicately, if at all. Two other professors said my current record will speak for itself and beyond a passing comment addessing it, I shouldn't dwell on it. They didn't have the transcripts in front of them, though. Another option I have that I haven't discussed with my professors is to talk about PTSD. I was the victim of a brutal rape, and it's possible to explain my past in terms of the trauma being debilitating for many years. It's not the whole truth, but maybe partial is best in my case. It just feels a little misleading, since I've always thought of myself as suffering from depression first and foremost. Thoughts?

Hi Astronautka. These responses were from Berkeley. Neither of the professors were particularly cold. They both encouraged me to continue to research the program and talk to grad students, and wished me luck. But demonstrating my familiarity with their work and suggesting that my research proposal engaged questions they are currently interested in just didn't get me very far.

I let up on contacting professors after two discouraging responses. Following the suggestions of current grad students and board members here, I introduced myself, summarized my research, expressed interest in their work, said I was assessing my fit with the school, and asked if they were taking students for next year. Both professors responded by saying, essentially, "that's not how it works." One went on to clarify that here in the US (I'm American), students get in on their own merit, not on the basis of matching students to particular research agendas. The other said that students aren't matched with advisors until much farther along in the process. My emails didn't show any presumption of a future working relationship, merely curiosity, so I was puzzled. How have others applying to doctoral programs in the US fared with the phrase "taking students"?

I'm wondering if those of you who have already submitted applications can clarify something about the online application process for me. Do I have to submit my statement of purpose before the system allows me to send LOR requests to my professors? I'm looking at the UC Berkeley application steps right now and that looks like the case. I'm nowhere near done with my SOP and Personal History Statement, so if that is the case I will just request hard copies of LORs the old fashioned way, but I'm hoping it's not.