queennight

Brown and Pennsylvania don't require GRE Subject Tests, and both are highly ranked Ivys. (Although Pennsylvania will strangely accept your score if you wrote it anyways.) NYU also doesn't require it, but will accept it if you wrote it and are gleefully proud of your score. However, none of these schools are particularly renowned for Medieval Studies (which I think is the direction you're asking for?) so take them with a grain of salt; that being said, I think I've heard a couple times that it's all about the professor rather than the program.

How did you find the process of applying as an international student? I know you're in a different area, but do you think there were extra obstacles to jump over in order to be competitive in the States? (I'm applying as a Canadian, so I'm curious to hear if you have any brief comments on that.) Also - was funding an issue?

Ok phew! One less thing to worry about !

A girl in my program said that she gave basically the title she would want her potential dissertation to eventually have. I think I'm going to opt for the more conservative approach, though? I'm assuming maybe it was a bit of an outlier answer.

Re: Applications, should the personal statement have a unique title (like what we normally would give to an essay)? I've gotten varying feedback on this - some people have put simply 'personal statement' at the top, while others have advocated for a creative approach. Is there a right way to do this? This may seem like a dumb question, but I genuinely have no idea if there's a proper way to do this or not.

From the opposite side of the perspective, I've never taken the time to necessarily have breathing room between my degrees - I've charged through my Bachelors, then Masters, and now on to a further postgraduate degree (potentially). If I personally could do it again, I would have taken a longer Masters program or potentially a gap year between degrees (but alas, money was a big concern for me). I think it's a huge benefit to be able to have the extra time - not only do you not have to panic-apply and figure out what you want to write your thesis on in a tiny amount of time, but you also gain the life experience to be very comfortable in which direction your path takes you.

I'm in a really similar position to you! I always considered law schools (and never even remotely thought about graduate school) until about a year or two ago, when I realized that I loved this stuff too much for a regular English major. The GRE and LSAT ARE NOTHING EVEN REMOTELY SIMILAR. I'm applying to law schools (in Canada) this semester as a Plan B, but I can happily tell you that the two tests are very, very different. Also - on the LSAT, all sections contribute to your score, whereas with the GRE, your aptitude is kind of divided up, for lack of a better word. Which means that you can focus clearly on just the Verbal section if you like (and the Quantitative/Analytical really aren't as important). Don't take it that because you did poorly on the LSAT, you're going to do poorly on the GRE. They both use completely different testing strategies. And after all - the GRE doesn't tell you if you'll do well in grad school, and neither does the LSAT for law (despite what many presumptuous idiots say online). Your success is completely determined by yourself. The two tests aren't linked in any way to a supreme truth; they tell you how good you are at being tested. One thing that is relatively important: there is a very, very big difference between applying to law schools and graduate school. Law school attracts people who are looking primarily for a business-type profession; graduate students are, on the other hand, aware of the job market and still pursuing their studies because of their passion for English lit (Wyatt - and every adcomm ever - might punch me in the head for using that phrase but it is true!). Having applied to law schools, I'd warn you that the process is much easier than applying to graduate school - make sure that you know your idea or what it is that you're hoping to study is something that you quite literally cannot live without, because it's difficult to justify this amount of time and effort if you're hazy on why you're doing a PhD. There's always the risk that we'll all end up working at McDonalds after a PhD; the risk is definitely still there with law school (especially with the so-called law bubble of acceptances), but arguably less. (But please don't even remotely consider that you won't do well on the GRE vs. the LSAT. I found the GRE experience to be completely different - and it took a totally different set of skills to do well. The tests aren't similar in any way.) There's no reason why you won't do well on the GRE; anxiety is a big issue with me as well for standardized tests and I didn't find the GRE stressful in the same way as the LSAT. -- oops, just realized you say that you're already taking time off to figure stuff out and improve your apps! My mistake. Took that section out.

The application stress and struggle is so real at this point

It always startles me how fully funded MA programs are never offered at quote/unquote 'top-tier' programs. It seems strange to me that many smaller universities are able to fund, but larger institutions refuse to do so. (I say this from the perspective of somebody at a partially funded program, where funding wasn't even guaranteed.)

Also - does anybody have advice on attire for conferences? The one conference I attended seemed relatively strict on dress codes (everyone in business casual, except for the odd bewildered student stumbling around in leggings and Uggs clutching their appetizers) but I'm wondering if there are any situations where anything other than business casual is allowed.

I've always been curious about this topic, just because in academia everybody seems to fairly wear what they like (at least during the undergraduate/MA route), but I've been noticing that the PhD students that I come into contact with are increasingly professionalizing their wardrobe. (Yes, there's always that one kid in a suit, but I'm talking about the seemingly increasing trend to wear blazers with jeans, pairing blouses with casual pants, etc.) This hasn't seemingly been discussed on this forum before, but I'm curious to hear input about fashion in academia. The professors that I have had always seemed to maintain a business casual look - so not fully corporate/business, but a decent mix. I'm wondering if this was just at my undergraduate institution, or if this was widespread. I have a couple main questions (that may, incidentally, vary per discipline): What is appropriate to wear as a TA? Are there any tricks to interview attire? Has anybody worked/taught/completed a postdoc at a university that had a strict dress code? I'd love to hear general experiences or opinions!

NABOKOV IS LITERALLY THE GREATEST AUGH sorry I just had to say that. I literally am in love with him. Coetzee is another great. That's an amazing combination of two authors to be your favourites and also probably describes your good taste! (Bias: I repeat, I am in love with Nabokov.)

I did fairly well on my General GRE (165V, 156Q, 6.0A) with about a month of pure studying; it was my gap in between graduating and starting my summer job, so I luckily didn't have any other commitments (other than coffee - socializing at cafes takes up a significant chunk of your afternoon ). I think there are a couple of old threads floating around this forum that have tips for how to perform well. The one tip that I can't emphasis enough - stop dillydallying around, grab the Princeton book (Princeton prep books are equivalent to the Bible for GRE prep) and study the terms. Seriously - take about a day reading through the verbal section (because realistically the V section is the most important), and then memorize every single word/definition in the Princeton book. if you do that, you'll be fine. Take about 2/3 weeks, use flashcards (I literally loathe flashcards at this point in my life) and quiz yourself (there are a lot of apps you can download to even get them on your phone). If you care about the Q score I unfortunately cannot help you (as you can see by my atrocious Q section) because I didn't study for it because 1. I am lazy and 2. I don't care about math. In regards to the writing part, there's a lot of disagreement over how to do well, but know at the end of the day that ETS uses a computer to mark your section first and then a human - if there's a disagreement, a second human (I think? I remember reading this somewhere) will mark it again. How to do well on that section is up to you - I was decidedly more 'creative' in my approach, but the key is to always maintain a strong argument (basic essay format, not difficult), throw in a couple 'hard words' and keep it lengthy. Most schools focus primarily on the verbal section, so if I was you (you have the same timeline that I did!), I'd practice primarily for that section. Memorize the Princeton words!!! I can't emphasize this enough. It'll save you a lot of time.

Actually, now that everyone's mentioning it, it did seem strange how my experience was similar: there was a 'standby' for some reason, and we also started about 20 minutes late. My proctors also kept whispering to each other for the first thirty minutes, which was killer, but what can you do. I was considering asking them to be quiet, but I didn't want to be that rude kid. The weird thing about the October test was that there really wasn't a section longer than 3/4 questions that talked about direct identification (that I can remember) - the longest sections on the test (and there were a bunch crammed together) were maybe 5/6 questions directed towards interpretation, which really was completely different from the four practice tests that I had written in preparation. Princeton, sadly, didn't really prepare me for that at all! Just as a side rant - I find this exam deeply problematic in so many different ways (maybe I'm just bitter about it), but you start to assume that all writing is white British men (granted I love white British men, but still), with side pockets of 'feminists' or 'African American writers' or 'world literature' that still privileges the original authors. I can imagine that somebody who majored in English literature but focused during their undergraduate career on postcolonial literature would be at an insane disadvantage for this exam (except for the one or two questions which might allude to say, Nadine Gordimer or Chinua Achebe, etc.), which is a really strange and effed up way of kind of maintaining the negative forces of ~imperialism~ .. it's a deeply, deeply ironic test. Also the interpretation questions really rubbed me the wrong way - it was such a highschool way of testing what the 'right' answer was .... while we all, no doubt, are aware of the fact that in our discipline we pride ourselves on often having a multiplicity of answers for the same question. I think I can wryly remember one or two (pardon my sarcasm) essays that I've read where the wrong answer is proven to be a valid reading through a fascinating analysis (and I think we can all agree that those essays are often the most memorable ones). Ah, well. At least we're all done! On to the final cramming stages!

IT WAS ALL INTERPRETATION

Good luck to everyone!! (We all probably are panicking for nothing - this is, after all, the least important part of the application. Still, you're all in my thoughts!)

Sorry - I don't know if I was clear enough. Whether you do a PhD in art history or english lit and are aiming for an academic job, there's a high potential for spending a couple of years slogging away as an adjunct. (I have a lot of respect for the art history discipline and am a massive fan of art in general, particularly contemporary performance. Didn't mean to come off as rude!) It seems to be a side effect of going down the academic track, no matter what humanities discipline that you go into; it's a rough job market out there no matter what your area of specialty seems to be - history, criminology, art history, english literature, sociology, the list goes on and on.

Also another note - both a Ph.D. in Art History or an MFA in Poetry are incredibly niched environments. (I say this with deep empathy, as I'm interested in doing a Ph.D. in English Literature, which is also often attacked as an art.) You have to ask yourself the question of what you are willing to put up with - if you can see yourself moving from town to town as a lowly adjunct (nothing wrong with that, it's just an incredibly difficult life bordering on the poverty line, but I have a lot of respect for individuals who manage to pull through it - that's pure passion) then go ahead and try for the Art History Ph.D.; yet I'm not certain that an MFA in poetry would necessarily even place you at a level where you would instantly get a job. Most creative writing professors have been published for years after working as authors in their area - if you check out most creative writing programs, take a look at the professors and see what their qualifications are. I have a lot of sympathy, as I'm going through the exact same struggle right now with English Literature; I simply don't know if it's worth it to complete a Ph.D. if I didn't get into a strong program. My back-up is in a completely different discipline (I also applied to Law schools) - it might be worthwhile taking a few days to consider what other issues/topics/potential work interests you. An MFA, as Wyatt wrote, is a great idea for someone who is interested in being a poet/author - but isn't necessarily the go-to program for somebody looking for a job. It simply provides the environment necessary to really sit down and finish your work. Especially if you are interested in poetry, it is incredibly risky to assume that you will be hired afterwards (let's be honest - fewer and fewer people outside of academia nowadays read up and coming poets). That being said, the market is so insane for humanities hires, that you always could get lucky. Here's a link to Miami University's Assistant Professor posting for a Creative Writing specialist: http://www.scholarlyhires.com/Search/Job/4016-3?utm_source=Indeed&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Indeed . It's a tough call to make, and I wish you all the best of luck! Here's some more links for MFA jobs (from a simple google search that I quickly did), hope that it can help: http://www.indeed.com/q-Mfa-Writing-jobs.html

This thread is like a nice group hug. Guys, we're going to make it through this.

This should be pinned somewhere for all applicants struggling through the subject test to read!

Ooh - thanks so much for the feedback, I must have gotten confused along the way and mixed up the schools. It's a relief to know that it was a different school that the problems were mainly at (although mikers, I'll be taking your message into consideration!).

I've read some pretty terrible things about their application and how the school doesn't even bother to send a rejection letter to students that they don't accept (or even allow any follow-up). I am very interested in the program, but am hesitant on even bothering to apply given their terrible stereotype (at least in previous threads on this forum). For anybody applying/previously applied/attending the program at Pennsylvania, any comments on the process? I'm worried that obviously the application process hints at the quality of the future support given by the department, and would not want to consider a program without a support system in place. (Also, if I spend the money on applying, I want the freaking ability to frame a $200 rejection letter while eating ice cream, throwing a temper tantrum, punching some walls and sobbing into my Netflix account - 'Forgetting Sarah Marshall' style and all.)

I'm hoping to get a 50%ile ... LET'S BE REAL. Wyatt I'm glad we are in the same boat here, although I have an inkling you most likely did quite well!

Not sure if this helps at all as I am coming from the Canadian/international perspective, but my Masters program is a one-year condensed course based program. What this means is a significant amount of crammed material over three semesters (and some brave students finish in two - I am not one of those able individuals). The reading is incredibly brutal. In retrospect, coming from the perspective of someone who is taking the course work option, I wish that I had completed a two-year program, as it would have given me more breathing room to collect my thoughts into the professional direction I hope to take. I also feel (from discussions with friends at Western's MA program, for instance) that the thesis 2-year option gives students more ability to develop their skills. Also if you are in Canada, some two-years have nice funding packages (Queens pops into mind, by example, as well as Ottawa). That being said, I am saving tuition money by only doing one year versus two years, but it would have been nice to have participated in a two-year program instead (and a funded one would have been even nicer). I opted for the name brand of UofT, but obviously that came with a price tag. Also, in Canada, Ph.D.s are often required to have completed a Master's first, and personally I feel that many Canadian ad-comms would look favourably upon a thesis.