jacib

Talk with the career counselor at your undergrad. A lot of schools have archiving services that will save the letters until you're ready to apply (a few school don't accept letters from archiving services... Yale for instance). However, I'm two and a half years out of undergrad and all my professors still remembered me, even ones I took one class with almost five years ago. Though sometimes I feel like my undergraduate thesis adviser, who I took two separate graduate level classes with as an undergrad, needed a reminder as to who I am....

There are more sociology of politics people than there are sociology of religion (I'm applying to sociology of religion and most of the time I am having to emphasize the political aspects of my project to be a good fit: I want to do Secularism in Turkey). If you sell the switch well, it can totally work. You will likely have to repeat your master... I have found almost all programs say explicitly "A non-sociology degree won't hurt you, but we do prefer a strong background in the Social Sciences". You seem fine by that standard. Find good fits, that's the most important thing. This dude at Harvard, without seeing my scores or transcript, told me: "Sociology will not be able to serve your interests, as there are no sociologists of religion in the department, and as no one studies Turkey. Unlikely that we would admit someone with your interests. We have to look closely at program-applicant fit these days, particularly given that we have very few spots (last year, 8 spots for 260 applicants). I hope this is helpful. Perhaps Princeton or Berkeley sociology? " This although they do have someone listed online with an interest in religion, they have the best [and one of the only] Ottoman and Turkish Studies departments, and have a history of training Sociology of Religion PhDs. The good schools for sociology of religion seem to be Chicago*, Princeton, and Berkeley, and Yale (which is the least competitive of those four), but yeah, it's a small field in terms of training. Especially if you want to work on something outside of Christianity/America. I'm also applying to Columbia because they have someone good who has worked on Turkey and Politics. But yeah... fit is more important than a sociology background, it seems. I'd really emphasize the politics more than the religion, or at least emphasize them equally, because there are just very few places that do sociology of religion. What's your topic? Where have you been thinking of applying ? *Chicago Sociology's deadline is today, but I'm applying to the Anthropology/Sociology of Religion program at the Divinity School.

Your test scores aren't the highest nor the lowest (who the hell knows what "average" or "minimum" is and every school weights them differently). However, what you've done seems pretty cool. I would be wicked impressed by that "go-getter" attitude if I were a professor and those things fit my own interests. Now the magic word is "fit". I recently emailed the graduate coordinator at Harvard (in sociology--I'm not applying to history programs, I'm just procrastinating for a moment), and he said, without seeing my grades, scores, or even undergrad institution: "[Harvard] Sociology will not be able to serve your interests, as there are no sociologists of religion in the department, and as no one studies Turkey. Unlikely that we would admit someone with your interests. We have to look closely at program-applicant fit these days, particularly given that we have very few spots (last year, 8 spots for 260 applicants). I hope this is helpful. Perhaps Princeton or Berkeley sociology? " (though they do have a department of Turkish and Ottoman studies at Harvard, and one sociology professor who lists "religion" as one of his research interests, and a long history of training sociologists of religion). Though that was for a very particularly selective sociology department, I think that's the way it is in general these days. I think the key is selling yourself to a department. For sociology departments where the emphasis is on politics rather than religion, that's what I'm putting in my statement. Sell yourself to their research interests. Hopefully I'll be able to do what I want once I get there, but before that I need to really "emphasize selectively" my goals and history.

Some--not all-- schools take your best score for each section, rather than your best sitting. If you are really worried, email the schools, ask them if you should retake. They'll generally be honest and tell you the truth. I've had several schools tell me, "Your project sounds cool but we'd never let you in [because you're not a good match for us and we get to be selective]" This is without knowing my score, grades, or undergraduate institution. Ask them, it won't hurt.

I think the PhD question is a good one... though I think it might not be necessary if he writes you an absolutely glowing rec AND you have some recs from more prestigious professors. It'd be one of those things that I think is fine, if it's balanced. Schools I'm applying to generally want three recs that show "academic ability" which this rec would clearly do.

I'm also looking at Sociology of Religion. Princeton is obviously tops, but Chicago has two or three people (Omar McRoberts is wonderful; his book sounds like something you might be interested in. Riesebrodt is nice but very very German; people I know who worked with him liked him) and Harvard are both often mentioned right after. Berkeley is essentially my dream school, since it is the only place with a PhD program that has a sociologist studying exactly what I want to study and it has tons of people working on religion and/or nationalism, plus there are a two really cool anthropologists working on modern Islam there. Yale is a top 20 program with two or three religionists (that doesn't exactly make it a safety). Of the schools I'm not applying to, consider Brandeis as well (I only know about it because my father teaches there); it has a small program, but the sociologist of religion there is Wendy Cadge and she's quite cool and really really helpful. I don't know if there's anyone who's into your other interests, but if you're a good fit there, definitely apply. They are small enough that they accept mostly based on fit. I think they only accept two or three students a year. UVa has quite a few sociologists of religion, but they're all very Christian/America-oriented, which I am not so I didn't even really look at it. I got advice very much based on not wanting to look at those things, so if you are studying religion and Christianity in America, then there are obviously schools I'm missing. Where did you apply last year? Was it with the same topic? Did you study sociology undergrad? That I think is going to be my biggest weakness: I took exactly one and a half sociology classes undergrad, and none of the places that I'm interested in offer stand alone masters.

As far as anyone can tell, the algorithm focuses on structural things; variety of sentence structures, conjunctions/transitions, clarity of thought, length, spelling, clear focuses on examples, restatement of your thesis, certain key words, well structured introduction/conclusion, no "cold showers" in the intro. Teaching dull formulaic SAT essay writing strategies to foreign students for a few months definitely got me my 6.0.

My old man is a sociologist at a small but respected department and says that for most of the applicants they admit, the first time first time they have direct contact with them is the application it self. Don't assume its a perquisite for admission. If you know you're a good fit for a place, you can still list faculty on your statement even if you've never contacted them. That'd probably be a better way to deal with it than faking it at the end. It shows you actually know the department's resources. However, it is useful to let people know what you're thinking if you're maybe an iffy fit, so they can judge that themselves (I have a very specific project in mind combining two ill studied fields): a gentleman at Penn told me my project sounded great but he couldn't advise me, and then suggest some who could; a gentleman at Northwestern suggest I contact one of his colleague and apply anyway, but that I didn't seem like the ideal match for the department and that while my project was good, I might be passed over if there were equally qualified candidates who were better fits; a gentleman at Duke told me "Yes, apply right away, you're exactly the kind of student we want".... so I saved myself the money for the Penn, know I have to sell myself as a fit at Northwestern (I'm talking about some faculty who are good matches in other departments) and I get to feel good about Duke.

Email your programs and ask. In my experience, programs are generally prompt in replying. Some might want you to include your old scores.

It's not a great score, however, if your TOEFL/IELTS scores are alright I doubt it will matter very much. I think almost everyone considers AW the least important part of the GRE. 520 is a decent score for someone whose first language is not English.

This hasn't been used in a while, but I thought I'd add to this: 24 years old, applying Religion graduate programs, Sociology programs with strong Sociology of Religion (Berkeley, Princeton, Yale... probably not Chicago [i'm applying to the Divinity school's "Anthropology/Sociology of Religion" program] but maybe Harvard even though I'm applying to its Religion program), and maybe two Anthropology programs (CUNY if I could work with Talal Asad and Berkeley if they don't mind me applying to its Sociology program as well). I hope to focus on Secularism, specifically secularism in Turkey.

I would mention your law school experience in your app, but only in a sentence. Say what was missing in Law school and what you will find in the academic study of history. I'd mention it in the last paragraph or wherever you put your "fit" paragraph.

I posted this somewhere else but for the vocab, learn it. I wrote this in another thread, but I'll repost it here: "Don't remember what supercilious means, remember that supercilious means vainglorious means cavalier means haughty means insolent. There are shades of difference between all of them, but that doesn't matter. Remember that they all mean 'bold (-)/ arrogant' and that 'meek/humble' group is probably going to be their opposite. I have my students, especially the female ones, cut up the different sections of the list and put them around their room so they can passively study while they're looking in the mirror, picking out an outfit etc. and associate all the words on the list together and with a specific place. With some time and a thesaurus you can probably make your own lists like that. That's the best way to learn words fast. If you have more time, (like a year), check out the damn near comprehensive barron's list. Barron's is also really good because it give you all the possible relationships in the analogies section." For further things, laconic, pithy, terse, and concise are all used quite differently BUT they all carry a sense of shortness that should be contrasted with loquacious, garrulous, and verbose. As for the math, learn how to do the easier problems FAST, the little tricks, and that way you can spend more time on the long problems. Also, answer every question so work on pacing. If you think a question is going to take you more than two minutes to do, make an educated guess and move on. Your time could be used better elsewhere. Lastly, I got (from a friend) that book of old GRE questions from the paper based test. They were really useful because it taught me more about time than anything else. I really learned where I should guess and move on in math and where I should guess the unknown word in verbal.

I'm not doing anthropology so much, but I found that if you want to do something specific, just contact some experts in that field and perhaps half of them will help you. I'm interested in doing secularism, and just emailed a few big names (ones often at schools without graduate departments) and asked for their advice. Jose Casanova at Georgetown (probably the most famous non-Emeritus scholar of secularism after Talal Asad) ended up having a half hour phone conversation where he listed everyone he knew in Anthro, Soc, Religion and especially Poli Sci. Scholars tend to like you joining their particular specialty. So with that in mind, email David Graeber. He'll probably know what's what in terms of where to apply (an since he's in London, you can email him about programs in the States without feeling guilty about asking about competition). Also, he's a total intellectual badass.

Powerprep 760V 790Q 740V 800Q Real deal: 800V 780Q BUT, I should add, that on my practice tests the only questions I was really messing up on were the antonyms, and on my real exam the antonyms were so easy that I thought I had made serious mistakes and got sent down a lower track. Basically I lucked out big time, but I was so nervous I did the whole experimental section at the end because I didn't want to see my score. In the math, on the real test I got caught up on one problem that I misread. I spent like 6 minutes on it before realizing I was calculating the wrong thing (I was doing x+y, it wanted x+z kept getting these funky results even though I knew how to do the problem). There was another problem about a triangle inscribed in a semi circle that I know I got wrong because I just had to guess and move on (totally the right decision). But here's one thing I should add: The algorithm that some of the test companies used is quite different from the real GRE's. In the verbal, my scores were the same on the Powerprep and Barron's, but because most of my math mistakes were from misreading the problem, I am as likely to get a problem wrong in the middle as the end. The real GRE didn't seem to care, but on my Barron's practice CD tests, I definitely got like in the 600s for math both times.

I teach the SAT and the GMAT and the GRE and the verbal section is ALL about vocabulary. Try to find a good list of words (princeton review had a good list of like 293 words for the SAT that was really good). Don't remember what supercilious means, remember that supercilious means vainglorious means cavalier means haughty means insolent. There are shades of difference between all of them, but that doesn't matter. Remember that they all mean "bold (-)/ arrogant" and that "meek/humble" group is probably going to be their opposite. I have my students, especially the female ones, cut up the different sections of the list and put them around their room so they can passively study while they're looking in the mirror, picking out an outfit etc. and associate all the words on the list together and with a specific place. With some time and a thesaurus you can probably make your own lists like that. That's the best way to learn words fast. If you have more time, (like a year), check out the damn near comprehensive barron's list. Barron's is also really good because it give you all the possible relationships in the analogies section. Math... work on timing and short cuts, I guess.

From what I've heard, the verbal section has gotten harder. Buy Barron's (it has the most comprehensive word list) and study maybe a list a week (reviewing your old lists when you're done). Get the old GRE test book, the one with official questions from the paper based test. It will be useful for practicing both the sections. As for timing, try to get your timing down using computer practice tests BEFORE you take the real one. Everyone takes longer in the real one (everyone wants to be "sure') so on your practice tests try to end with a few minutes left over. Also, if you come to a question you don't know how to solve, or you know how to solve it but it would take you more than two-three minutes, get rid of the illogical answers and move on. You can actually get quite a few questions wrong and get a good score, but they hate blank questions at the end. Also practice writing like a robot because a computer grades your essay (use a lot of transitions, vary sentence structure, use key words, say what you're doing like "for example", "therefore", "in conclusion" and "this clearly show that" so the computer can understands)! Base every body paragraph around an example! Use an intro and a conclusion!

I've been teaching the SAT, GMATand the GRE for about a year now (I love being in a foreign country--I could teach the GRE before taking it... and the GMAT without ever taking it). What I always tell all my students is, "This is the least creative essay you're ever going to write." It's a formula, I mean, the GRE and the GMAT actually use COMPUTERS as one of the two "readers". How much can the computer really understand of your writing? Basically, if you don't write long enough, don't vary your sentence structure, don't use transitions and perhaps most importantly if you don't follow their asinine format of basing each paragraph on a discrete example, then your writing score will suffer. However, I don't think it's really looked at for anything that requires a writing sample. I get the impression it's mainly to weed out foreign engineers and the like... (no seriously, look at the essays that earn 1's and 2's).

Are you from New Zealand or something?

Didn't intend to imply that you are not interested in other religions. I am saying that you are not applying to the same programs as me and therefore the competition, strictures, requirements are quite different. Because I want to study secularism and Islam does not mean I am abandoning my interest in Jesus and the OT. My first exposures to the study of religion were Mircea Eliade and source criticism of the Old Testament. Both interested and still interest me. More than half of the course I took for my religious studies BA were exclusively or majority Judeo-Christian, including, I should add, the best and most interesting (if anyone ends up at Chicago, kiss whatever ass you have to get into a class with Constantin Fasolt, who studies the Reformation and Early Modern Europe in the History Department). While all of that still interests me, it is not relavent to my PhD search because, well, there's a lot less competition for my spots than yours. I think? I wanted a more accurate gage of the difference though. I don't think the non-Christian studyers on this board are excluded or unwelcome--more like alone in a crowd.

What did you do your MA in? Where are you applying for religion and society? Don't mention Orhan Pamuk in public in this country, it can get ugly fast. My first day of work, I mentioned I liked him. Later, one of my coworkers asked a [very nationalistic] student what he thought of me, "Him? He is a good person... if he is not spy of America."

UVA has pretty much the best Tibetan Buddhism program going on, and is quite impressive in that, but they only have an Islamic studies concentration rather than an interdisciplinary program. They're very interested in "what these texts actually say", which matters a lot less to me than "what people swear up and down that these texts mean". It is a very historical program with little focus on the modern era. While cool, it's just not for me. Son, seriously, I hope you have read Drudgery Divine. It's so good. J. Z. Smith is my intellectual idol. That book focuses exactly on the effects of classing Christianity with the so-called Mystery Religions. Also, just for shits, you should check out Tomoko Masuzawa's book, though its obviously more general than your interests.

Maşallah, maşallah! Those are impressive languages and so forth. I think if you explain why you started at community college, why it took four years, how you continued to better yourself and improve throughout the whole process, emphasing your excellent research experience for the BA in the end in you're statement you'll be quite a competative candidate anywhere. It does come down to match, however. Though there are other people "affiliated" with the department, applying to a place like Penn it comes down to how good of a match you are with Prof. Elias, who, by himself, is the Islamic studies section of the religious studies department. Prof. Elias is wonderful and knowledgeable and completely honest. He told me that, though my topic sounded cool, he just didn't have the expertise in my field (modern Turkey) to help me at all. That kind of honesty is rare. Chicago's religious department, on the otherhand, is TWO full scholars, so you could fit EITHER of their interests. While your numbers are compelling, make sure you are the right match. The two Islamists at Northwestern, for example, both concentrate on Islam in Africa. If you want to study something from the classical or medieval period, you'll be alright anywhere probably, but if you're interested in more modern work, especially outside the Arab world, look closely for departments with good matches. If you find a department where you are an excellent match, you could get in with lower numbers and skills, but the best numbers in the world it seems like won't get you into a department that can't advise you (which has been my problem). Anyway, good luck, and I am curious about what aspect you want to look at. P.S. What does an MA in Islamic Studies from a seminary mean? Like, you wish to be a mufti or a qadi? Or like you're a Christian and you want to do missionary work/interfaith dialogue in the Muslim world?

Modern languages not so big with this group, eh? I've got 2 of French (though I've forgotten a bit, I can still usually manage a newspaper), I have 2.5 of German (which was enough to let me read the tabloids without a dictionary, and stare gape-jawed at a Newspaper of Record). I've been working in Turkey for the last two years, and have been able to make some progress here without ever taking a class (I understand about half the articles in a tabloid without a dictionary, get the rest with one, and a the grammar in a proper newspaper literally gives me a headache), though I'll start classes in January after this application mess. I don't want to go to a program where I'll learn either Ottoman or Arabic.

Secularism, particularly as it is practiced in Turkey. More generally the interactions between politics, nationalism and religion, the limits of religion & civil religion, the methodology of religion (like anything J. Z. Smith wrote, for example... I hope you've read Drudgery Divine), and Islam outside the Arab-Persian world. Popular religion to some extent. Basically most things that don't involve philosophy, theology or mysticism. How are you structuring your personal statement, about a specific religion in the Roman empire? .... how are you on languages? I can't apply to most Islamic studies programs because I'm not so interested in learning Arabic, and I'm definitely not interested in writing Quranic exegesis, so it's almost all weird interdisciplinary religion programs and sociology programs (and maybe one anthro program) with particularly strong sociology (/anthropology) of religion programs. Most of the Islamic studies programs are historical anyway, and most have at most two or three scholars. No one deals with modern Turkey that I know of, or for that matter secularism at any prestigious school (except three anthropologists, two at Berkeley, and then Talal Asad at CUNY, and one sociologist at Berkeley) so except at the biggest schools like Harvard and Chicago, I have to email every department individual department and ask "Is there someone whose expertise this project could possibly fall under?"