Minnesotan

Agreed. It doesn't make sense to call attention to areas you don't want to highlight.

There's a way to save money as an MA student? =)

Spite! I had 1-2 writing samples per application, both cycles.

Get more eyes on the paper. Hand copies out to strangers on the street corner, if you have to. You need more feedback.

Yeah. A lot of great programs are in crap places to live, like California and Texas. I can't understand how someone would choose to spend their entire stipend on half of a tiny apartment that is statistically likely to be robbed twice in the four years between MA and PhD. I had to cut my list down to college towns, or big cities whose cost of living wasn't outrageous. Where I ended up, I only spend 15-20% of my pay on rent, and I'm very happy about that. (I do live with my partner, though, so I still have a roommate of sorts.)

In the humanities, the best idea is to keep it polite, short, and somewhat spartan. I believe I adhered closely to the example given in Gregory Colon Semanza's book (something about making a career in the humanities in the 21st century - I forget the exact title).

I would list all of their direct competitors in that box. It encourages wavering committees to snatch you up, if they think Next Door U might grab you instead. If it appears you are not in demand, they could string you along. More on this in Playing the Game: The Street Smart Guide to Graduate School, by Frederick Frank and C. Karl Stein. (I think they talk about the psychological effects of introducing competition during the interview process, but it's all the same, really.)

I would be wary of those averages, too. They include people who are not accepted into PhD programs, people who take it in their sophomore year as practice, and people who have been out of school for 20 years. I would aim for a 95% in the important category, and at least 60% in the less-important one for your field. Anything less makes you look either A) lazy, or inconsistent. You really don't want people to start asking questions about thing like grade inflation, student motivation, or work ethic. These are topics you don't need an adcom to bring up when looking over your app. among a stack of 600.

I would try not to read anything into those status pages. I actually had false information on two of mine last year.

My advisors told me it matters quite a bit. Wat I would do is sign a new copy and fax it to each prof. That way, at least there is a signature on file.

Sorry -- I assumed most of us were already involved in the debate about grad admissions, so I skipped a few steps in my logic. As Rising says, I'm not trying to be elitist. In fact, the opposite is about right. The system in place is exploitative. From undergraduate to MA, too many people are accepted, many of whom are unfunded. These are called cash cow programs, and each paying MA will subsidize a PhD. From MA to PhD, many people get cut out of the loop cause of over-admission at the MA level. More distressing is that of those who are not cut out by now, up to half won't get jobs in academe. Yet universities keep admitting far too many MA students for the cheap labor, or for the tuition income. It is irresponsible. The point I was making is that A) we're all safe, since you can't fire a slave and, the tools of the master won't tear down the master's house.

If a program states a preference, I would go along with it. It seems the safest bet.

Saying that if you have not lied or cheated on a test, you should "live a little" certainly is an endorsement of actions that break with academic integrity standards, including the case of fraud we are discussing (and to which the quoted post is a response!). Reading comprehension: get some.

The quicker you can rid yourself of that false notion, the better. Academics are as judgmental as everyone else, and the folks with the keys to the kingdom sold out long ago, whether they admit it or not. Grad students are like academic children -- they should be seen but not heard.

Some day, when you're a department head, you can get your vengeance on the negligent office staff who offended your sensibilities in the past. Until that time, it's best to grovel before their majesty and power. You just don't piss off the department secretary.

That seems to be a ploy by the powers-that-be. York has been on strike for a couple of months. No classes = no tuition = worried executives who rake in multi-million dollar salaries (including perks). I hate to say it, but a cut in grad admissions would be a very good thing for academics. Not only could current grads bargain for pay above the poverty line, but we could make a shift back toward tenure-track being the standard hiring situation. If that's not enough for you, perhaps the argument that most PhDs could have jobs when they graduate would work. =) I know my graduate school trains about 15x more PhDs per year than they hire. Unless the SLACs pick up all that slack, the math is not encouraging.

I locked that one 45 minutes ago, ya big jerk! =)~ (There's nothing to see, folks. Carry on. Carry on. No moderator SNAFUs here.)

If you're in the humanities, you might not be so bad off. The Chronicle reports that ETS is predicting much lower numbers of GRE takers this year. If there are more applicants, it will come from a much higher percentage of non-trads. While this makes sense, will the number of folks being laid off and returning to school make up for the number of folks who aren't applying out of undergrad?

Have a very large stein of beer and play some mind-numbing, violent video games (or whatever your guilty pleasure might be). Celebrate and stop worrying for a day or two.

Some people will happily chuck your application in the trash, if you turn a 500 word limit into 1700 words. I'm not kidding.

I realize you were having a laugh here, but if you insert much academic jargon, this is exactly how it will read to an adcom, too.

The only problem that I foresee is that ed. majors are perceived as weaker applicants to some humanities programs, since their coursework is normally not of the same caliber as majors in the discipline. Since you are fulfilling a double-major, you might be in the clear on that one.

Sorry, UKbound, but I consider this attitude a clear endorsement of nonfeasance. Since you followed up on UKgraduate's post, supporting the shift of topic from fraud/forgery and academic integrity to perceptions of racism, that is what created the confusion. Either way, you're both wrong, and kinda funny smelling. Pffft!

I normally use something along the lines of "Listen, bitches: you best get yo acts together before I come down and slap some sense into ya!" No, I don't. When I was doing this, I didn't want to offend, either. What I realized is that every serious applicant is going to do this, and it's not an unreasonable question to ask. Just treat it as if you worked for FedEx: "I'm checking on receipt of x, y, and z..." Serious, polite, professional, and (most of all) patient. Some schools don't "have their shit together," but there's no need to be a jerk about it and stand out; just send them a new copy, and ask for more time if necessary.

Please post each question only once on these fora. Thank you.