Dr. Old Bill

No one has chimed in yet, and I have a pretty good idea as to why. Usually program research is done earlier than November, and usually (though not always) geography isn't as important as fit. In other words, you need to have a solid idea of what you want to be studying at the graduate level, and what programs have the faculty and resources that best complement those studies. Additionally, there are many great programs in the greater L.A. area: UC-Irvine, UCLA, USC, UC-Riverside, UC-Santa Barbara, Claremont...and several others. But it all depends on what you want to study, what your long-term goals are, how strong of an application you can prepare, and myriad other things. At this point, it would be a good time to start considering programs for next year's applications (and perhaps you are doing that already), but you may be hard pressed to assemble all of the necessary application materials etc. for this year's applications in the next three weeks.

Thanks a ton for your advice, friends. I'm working on a third draft of my SoP, and your thoughts have made me a lot more confident in the direction I take.

Hey all, Some of you may recall that I had a bit of a crisis over writing samples a couple of months ago, which truly defined which direction I would go when submitting applications (I was basically caught in a tug-of-war between professors who loved one potential paper over the other...and vice versa). Fortunately I was able to hone in on one a month ago, and have put that sample through a top-to-bottom revision, and am waiting on feedback from several professors. Assuming all goes well with that, I'm now having to figure out positioning. The problem is that all of my program research etc. was based on using the other writing sample and going in a different direction (not markedly different, but different enough). All of this is a preamble to saying that while I am very happy with the direction I have chosen to go in (a philological / historicist approach to Shakespeare's Sonnets), I'm having difficulty expressing my position in my SoP in a way that is neither too broad or too limiting. There are surprisingly few Sonnets scholars across U.S. institutions, and almost none of those take a philological approach. My own interests are not limited to the Sonnets, but I do feel the need to speak at length about my research in that regard. I recognize that rehashing what is in one's writing sample is a major no-no, but based on feedback I have received on early drafts of my SoP, and based on my own personal history, speaking at length about my specific interest in the Sonnets is probably quite important. Of course, given the paucity of scholars working in this area, I always want to be sure that I am not sounding TOO limited in my research interests. I haven't done a lot of philological / historicist work on other material as yet, though I very much want to (I am doing some research on Coriolanus in that regard, but am not sure how much I can play that up). And since there are more early modern philologists and historicists than there are Sonnets scholars, I suspect that I need to put a lot of weight on those methodologies. Ultimately, this is a question of balance, and I would greatly appreciate any advice that you have. Most of the programs I am applying to have the kind of scholars I really want to work with, but since only a few work on the Sonnets...how do I demonstrate that it is interesting and important research that falls within the wheelhouses of the non-Sonnets folks? I think that this nuance is absolutely vital to the success of my SoP, yet I am having a very difficult time with judging how much weight to put on the Sonnets and how much weight to put on the philological methodology. Thoughts?

I don't know about the relative strength of UMD's department (probably farther down the list), but I will say that our CompLit program includes a young Chinese woman who is focusing on ancient Greek literature...and the new program director is an early modernist with a strong interest in the classics as well (I took a "Renaissance" course with him that included the Timaeus and De Rerum Natura among others). So file that in the "FWIW" drawer.

This is most generous and helpful, @Warelin. Thanks!

Hey all, Slightly off-topic given this forum's ultimate purpose, but I'm wondering about venues for undergraduate publication. I have encouraged one of my students to send out his latest essay, because I think it's definitely publishable (which is saying a lot for an English 101 student), but other than in-house college publications and Young Scholars, I can't seem to find any decent journals that publish undergraduate essays. Surely some of you have had a bit of publication experience at the undergrad level... Any ideas?

What's funny is that I run into professors from BOTH camps. Some encourage casting a wide net, while others suggest focusing on six or seven at most and making the applications really really good. I'm definitely more inclined to cast a wider net because, like the Hunger Games, the odds aren't ever in your favor... So this time around I'm applying to approximately twelve, and all of them seem to be good fits. The cost sucks, but so does the prospect of an alt-ac career (at this point, at least).

Last time around, I spent an estimated $3200-$3500 on applying to 17 schools. This time will be more like $2500, all told. It ain't cheap.

This is ONLY my personal advice, based on what I am thinking of doing, so take it with a sizable grain of salt... ...but I think I'm going to nix Berkeley and Yale from my list, since my GRE subject score is still mediocre. It's a bit better than it was the last time I took it, but it remains somewhat below the 600 / 70th percentile that some schools seem to prefer. It annoys me greatly, since I KNOW the test is in no way an accurate picture of me as a candidate, but the reality is that some programs have the subject test scores as an unofficial cutoff. There are ALWAYS outliers and accounts of people getting into Ivies with sub-par scores, but the general tendency makes a crapshoot even more of a crapshoot. In other words, I think conventional wisdom around GC about the value of the subject test score is largely (but not entirely) wrong. Also, to the school that @Warelin says weighs the GRE subject test score more for graduate students...screw you! Seriously, that, more than anything, demonstrates how clueless certain adcoms are about what is actually ON the subject test and how it is conducted. As I recall, there were maybe five questions on the test that engaged with stuff I learned as a Master's student. The rest all derived from my undergraduate knowledge. And it's not like I've suddenly become a faster or more critical reader in two years...or not to the extent that would make a difference on this abhorrent test. In case you can't tell, I'm annoyed...

Yeah, I think pretty much everyone knows the subject test is utter bunk (and I promise I will say the same thing if I manage to snag a good score this time). Unfortunately, until top schools stop using it as a weed-out factor, it will remain a necessary evil for the Ivy hopefuls. As for my field, I'm an early modernist. In other words, I'm sort of the ideal demographic for the GRE test, and yet I still had to skip a bunch of questions due to a combination of lack of time and unfamiliarity with certain texts. Such a silly, irrelevant undertaking...

Yeah, last month was my second time taking it, and while I felt pretty confident both times, I found time management to be MUCH more difficult the second time around. Simply put, almost all of the questions were related to long passages of text -- more than the Princeton book tells you, and definitely more than the first time I took it. If you're a relatively slow reader, you just have to hope that you can skim and scan the passage effectively enough to answer the questions. You certainly won't have time to actually, you know, read it critically like we're trained to do. A big part of me feels (quite strongly) that it's a nearly impossible test to study for. Tips and tricks are all well and good, but having taken it twice now (and again, feeling confident about what I know on the test), I'm not sure that even the POE method the Princeton book recommends is all that effective anymore.

Excellent, pertinent advice as always, @Ramus. One quick follow-up question: do you think it is worthwhile to mention teaching experience / teaching interest? I recognize that one's research is what usually gets an adcom's interest, but is it worthwhile to mention my legitimate love of teaching, or is that too irrelevant to an SOP?

Thanks for this, HC! Some great input there.

I'm quite amused (mirthlessly) by the fact that ETS' website has been malfunctioning for nearly two weeks. The amount of money they rake in is astonishing, yet their transition to a new system has been plagued by technical glitches. I haven't been able to order score reports, or make any basic changes to my appointment. I would be annoyed, if not angry, if it weren't so typical -- we're forced to jump through a series of unnecessary hoops...and when those hoops break, we're hooped.

Some excellent points there, @knp. I have nothing to add -- just saying "thanks" for a great post.

You're a sweetheart, @EmmaJava -- thank you! There were a lot of developments today -- too many to list here, but I'm definitely feeling better about things in general. I approached another professor about a LOR, and he joyously agreed...until I reminded him that I am an early modernist. I have taken a number of 20th century courses (two with him) so I can understand how he might have forgotten. While he is still more than willing to write me a letter, he strongly encouraged me to find another professor in my field...whether or not I have even had a class with that person. I've heard a lot of mixed opinions on that subject -- whether all of your LORs should be from professors in your field -- but he was quite insistent on its importance. As a result, I will talk to yet another professor in my general area, though I can't deny that it feels a bit like I'm going door-to-door. At least everyone is willing to write me letters...I just wish I had someone to take me under his/her wing a little bit like I did as an undergraduate. That's a naive wish, I know. As to the WS question, the director of the graduate writing center (where I work) made a fantastic point: if I decide to use both WS's, or choose one over the other, I can always mention the other paper at length in my SOP. Her strategy for going about it is rather clever as well: since one of the two potential WS's is going to be expanded into a Capstone/Thesis in the spring, I can essentially introduce it as a larger research project -- one that isn't complete enough to use as a WS. We'll see if that's what I wind up doing. Both of my potential WS's are generally in the same ballpark, though one engages mostly with historicist race theory, while the other deals mostly with a "history of the book" issue -- both grounded in the early modern era, of course. My writing style is quite different in both as well -- the history of the book paper is more lively and personal (I use "I" a lot more), while the historicist race theory paper is more tonally sedate. So as of right now, there are no slam dunk "solutions" to my dilemma, but at least there are some legitimate options. I just wish this didn't erode my confidence ever so slightly. It's hard to hear something akin to "you're good, but not great," from a scholar you admire, even if it's truly not a damning proclamation.

Thanks, folks. Honestly, I'm more annoyed than anything else, simply because everything seemed to be progressing smoothly -- I had my writers, my WS was getting closer and closer through guided revision, and my informal timeline for having everything done was solid. This double-wrinkle can definitely be overcome, but it just adds to the general pressure of an already highly pressurized process. The professor I am meeting with today is renowned in his field, though he is firmly a 20th century scholar, when my field is early modern. Not a big deal, of course, but I was hoping to have all three of my writers early modernists. I'm still undecided about the WS issue, however. I guess I have a bit of time to figure that one out...

Soooo...one of my letter writers asked to meet with me today. We're on great terms, like each other a great deal etc., but he wanted to tell me that based on the writing he has seen from me so far (a 20-page paper for his course a year ago, as well as a 15-page paper I've been planning to use as my writing sample), he can only give me a GOOD recommendation, not a great one...so I should consider if I want that, or if I should find someone else. He emphasized that he truly wants to read drafts of my WS and SOP as they come along, and offered every level of support possible...but I can't deny that the takeaway is disappointing. I'm in a bit of a weird situation. All three of my letter-writers have read my proposed WS. One of them is very much a fan of it, thinks it is great work and is well-written etc. Incidentally, her specialization is the closest to what the paper is about. Another letter-writer, who is my mentor, thinks it needs a lot more work, and suggested I might want to use a paper I wrote for her course a year ago instead (which does have relevance to the programs I'm applying to etc.). The third, the one I mentioned at the outset, thinks it is good, but doesn't have enough of my voice in it, and engages too much with critical scholarship (something that my mentor also mentioned). Incidentally, I ran it by a Ph.D. student at the Graduate Writing Center, and he thinks it's very good, requiring only a few tweaks here and there. So it's definitely a dilemma. I'm going to meet with another professor I have a great rapport with, and see if he is willing to write me a letter. The problem, of course, is that now I'm really torn about my proposed Writing Sample, and what WS to even use. The one my mentor suggested is a paper that I really enjoyed writing, but it received an A-...so I basically filed it away without thinking more about it. Now that she's telling me that it's a better paper overall...well...it's a quandary. One possibility is submitting truncated/edited versions of both papers, giving adcoms a "two-fer," as it were, but I don't think that's the best idea. Any thoughts?

I suspect that most of us who are applying to Ph.D. programs are doing so more because our interests dictate the need, rather than out of the idea that there are jobs aplenty in the academic marketplace. The "no jobs" rhetoric has been discussed to death at GradCafe in the past -- often with obnoxious or ad hominem results -- but I do have a slightly related question/thought. Given that the landscape is what it is, how many of you have tried to gear your academic interests to the market? Part of the reason I ask is because I've seen a surprising uptick in the number of rhet/comp applicants here on GC in the last couple of application cycles, and I can't help but wonder if it has to do with the fact that it is the biggest growth sector within English right now. If so, it makes me wonder how possible it is to predict market shifts five-plus years in advance. In other words, there are [some] jobs in rhet/comp now, but will that hold true in five years? Seven? I hasten to add that I do not bring this up to be alarmist -- I'm a HUGE proponent of rhet/comp, and I firmly believe that getting a Ph.D. in almost any field is a productive endeavor in its own right. I also think that rhet/comp has a lot more growth potential than most literature fields. Given that the end goal of a Ph.D. is typically future employment, however, do most of you generally dive in to your interests (whether those are rhet/comp, literature, or something else) and hope for the best, or do you try to "ride the wave," so to speak, focusing on the area that you think will make you the most marketable / employable in the future?

While I wholeheartedly agree in principle, I have read a lot of accounts (backed up by advice given by my advisor, who routinely sits on adcoms) that suggest that the two should match fairly closely. Of course, it's an open question as to what "closely" even means. The WS should certainly be in the period of the interests stated in your SOP, and if you have a particular critical methodology / approach that you like to use, it probably makes sense that that methodology is reflected in your WS and mentioned in your SOP. But it does sound as though the OP is thinking the two need to be hand-in-glove, and I'm not sure that's the case. If your WS is "a bit off" from your SOP, that shouldn't be an issue. As @knp and others have said, demonstrating your research and scholarship potential is probably a bit more important than demonstrating that what you have written about is what you want to do.

This is more of a conversation starter than anything, but how are people striking the balance between having a busy academic semester and preparing Ph.D. (or Master's) applications? Personally, I have two 10-hour per week assistantships, a junior lectureship (teaching ENGL101), and am taking two graduate courses this semester, all while trying to prepare twelve applications. My WS is solid, having gone through one major guided revision, and needing more tweaks than overhauls at this point, but it will still need some work. I retake the GRE subject test on September 17th, but will simply not have time to study too much for it (bearing in mind it's nearly impossible to effectively study for the material). My biggest concern is that I have yet to draft a single SOP, and I DO intend to write a distinct one for each program (with perhaps a bit of overlap). I've always been very organized and good at time management, but I would welcome any tips or tricks from those of who who have successfully navigated the process, or are currently going through it with a similar workload.

I remember a very similar question coming up here a couple of years ago, and the general consensus seemed to be that if you are really attached to a long piece and can't exactly cut it down, you can at least cut parts out and leave a summary description in its place...usually in square brackets, like: [Three paragraphs that discuss the use of kairos in passenger pigeon communications] 34 pages is MUCH too long, of course, and adcomms will either despise you or not read the whole thing...or (most likely) both. Of course, I also see the dilemma with trying to turn a 34-page document into something less than half that length. Some will argue that learning how to cut a paper down is a skill you're going to have to learn anyhow, so now would be a good time to start honing...but in an important document like this, you really do want to put your best foot forward.

There's a "hedge fund" joke in here somewhere, I just know it!

There's lots to unpack here, and @jungThug addressed a few points, so I'll just cover a few others. First of all, at the risk of sounding ever-so-slightly naive, I'm pretty sure that you do NOT need to worry about being a South Asian student working in early modern studies. Even though the perception is that early modern / Renaissance folks are a bunch of old, white guys, that's often not the case. Ania Loomba at Penn is an excellent example. She is a veritable luminary in early modern studies, with multiple books, and as her name indicates, is of South Asian descent. Even beyond examples, however, I'm not going to claim that NO racial discrimination exists, but in my experience over the past few years, not that kind of discrimination, at least. @jungThug touched on an important point, and I'll summarize even further: don't do symptomatic readings for the sake of doing symptomatic readings. You have to build off of 20th century French theory. In scholarship over the past fifteen years or so, you will often see authors name-drop one of the key theorists in their articles, just as a way to both situate their writing, and to acknowledge a broad field of earlier theoretical analysis. Hell, even I -- a theory-shy early modernist -- use the term "Bakhtinian" in my writing sample...and it's relevant. As for your research aims in your SOP...that is very important. Vital, in fact. I do worry a bit that if you haven't had a lot of that sussed out by this point -- late August in an application cycle that ends in just over three months -- it might be tough to do an effective job of demonstrating your knowledge of and long term interests in your field. While actual citations are not necessarily required, familiarity with the academic landscape in and around your interests is. In your SOP, you are basically proposing where you belong (or want to belong) in the academic conversation. Remember that the people reading your SOP are all scholars...most of them in your proposed field of study. THEY certainly know the academic landscape, and they'll often see right through any apparent ignorance on the part of the applicant. I've been working in this field for a few years, and have a year of graduate study under my belt, yet I still worry a bit about any gaps in my knowledge about recent scholarship, despite engaging with it regularly. Hopefully these points give you something to think about.

Just time for a brief response, but an academic publication shouldn't matter TOO much at this point, nor should a conference presentation etc. unless it's a significant publication or conference. Remember that adcomms consider the whole package. Most M.A. students won't have a worthwhile publication -- it's certainly not a requirement, though it could be seen as sort of a cherry on top of an otherwise great application. Also, this only matters if you are planning on pursuing a career in academia. If you are indeed going to apply to Ph.D. programs this cycle, then you might consider sending something out...but it certainly won't have been accepted (or even rejected) by the time adcomms convene, meaning that it might be a moot point anyhow. Long story short: it can't hurt, but it's also likely not worth the time and effort at this juncture. ETA: Cross-posted with ED.