Dr. Old Bill

Not sure this needed its own thread, really... Also not sure anyone can say definitively, I'm afraid. It's probably safe to assume so, but who knows?

It looks like it's just for one day -- March 27th at noon. ProfLorax may have more info though.

Yep, mine too. Also no surprise at this point. But Yopie Prins would have been great to work with.

Excellent points, and I very much hope you are correct. I had thought my research interests were specific enough, but I retroactively remember one of my LOR writers making a very casual comment about the broadness of my objectives. It was really a "passing" comment, but I should have paid a bit more heed. I definitely see the M.A. offer I received as an opportunity to get REALLY specific. Maybe I'll focus my entire research proposal on one line of one poem by some local poet from Wigan. Octocongrats, Unraed!!

I'm in limboland with them too. Have assumed an implied rejection for weeks now, of course, but hearing something remotely definitive would be nice.

I may well be the poster child for swinging for the fences for a Ph.D. program, and falling short (though fortunately catching a great M.A. offer along the way). Perhaps this is a convenient lie I'm telling myself in light of my own circumstances, but I'm starting to think that M.A.-to-Ph.D. is generally preferable. I think the true "star" candidates (top GRE scores, top GPA, publications, conferences, great UG institution etc.) will always have a decent shot of making the B.A.-to-Ph.D. leap, but I suspect that if there's anything that is even remotely "weak" about your application, you might get passed over in favor of someone who has demonstrated excellence at the graduate level. It makes a lot of sense, in a way, regardless of what you yourself (and friends, professors etc.) know you are capable of. I really don't get the sense that it means any more than that, honestly. A good way to find that out is look at faculty webpages at various reputable programs -- you'll see a lot of professors who got their M.A. (or A.B.) at the same place where they got their Ph.D....but you'll also see a lot who got their M.A. somewhere else -- usually somewhere good, but somewhere that is NOT the place where they received their Ph.D. For my own part, I'll have a B.A. from William & Mary, an M.A. from University of Maryland, and I don't think any future Ph.D. program etc. is going to scoff at either of those institutions. The same should be true for you, I would think. The bottom line is that based on most of what I've heard and read -- on GC and elsewhere -- there is usually NO disadvantage to getting an M.A. before getting a Ph.D. On the contrary, it might be to your benefit. ETA: And a funded M.A. offer from NYU is no small feat. Congrats again!

Definitely sounds positive to me! Sounds like they're hedging their bets a little bit, but I don't think they would have sent you an email like that if they weren't at least planning on sending you an offer. Maybe I'll see you at the open house next month!

Yes. This, multiplied by ten thousand. Similar sentiments have been expressed around GC through countless threads over the years (even by CBZ), but it still bears repeating. The process feels personal, because it is an assessment of materials inextricably linked to YOU...and yet it is anything but personal. Some of us will have better "luck" (for lack of a better word) than others, while some of us will have had some minor flaw in our applications -- often a flaw that we don't even know about or even see as a flaw -- that caused adcomms to take a pass on us. It's why I've become so incredibly grateful that I got any opportunity at all out of this process. I don't know you, YoungCharlie, but I highly doubt you're a failure...complete or otherwise! I know it can feel like that (believe me...I know it can feel like that), but that's an emotional response. Realistically, the chances are slim for anybody entering this field, just as they're slim for getting a plum job at the end of the degree. You just have to try to keep your chin up and always remember that it's really not an assessment of who you are as an individual or even as a scholar.

Did you ever know that you're my hero?

There's also this handy living wage calculator you can use for communities throughout the country. It's similar to what MM posted, but also different enough to make it worth posting on its own -- both are definitely great resources.

Barring any highly unexpected Ph.D. offers, I'll be attending the M.A. program in English at University of Maryland. Despite my early equivocation, I'm really quite happy about it, too!

Congrats Kurayamino! And Hypervodka...you can't say I didn't predict a clean sweep! I promise you, folks -- if you wanted to dig through old threads, I called it way back when she only had a mere two or three acceptances! Great job, folks! I never get over the joy of seeing wonderful people get accepted to great programs.

It's a good question, and one I'm glad you've brought up. There are definitely people on GC (both past and present) who have gone straight from B.A. to Ph.D. I spent a lot of time last year reading about how a lot of programs actually prefer candidates with only a B.A. But having paid close attention to the acceptances over the past month, I think it's safe to say that you're probably right: most programs don't seem to take candidates straight out of undergrad. I don't know why this was such a big surprise for me to learn, since it seems to make a lot of sense. Nevertheless, that's part of why I have become not just "accepting" of the M.A. offer I received, but am actually excited about it. For me personally, age is a factor (and I figured it could have been a factor in my favor when going from B.A. to Ph.D.), but as a lot of people on here have pointed out, it is a great opportunity to get the lay of the land of graduate studies, and essentially prove your merit on that level. It worries the hell out of me that it puts me back to the age of 37 before I start applying for Ph.D. programs again (meaning 42 at the youngest to graduate), but I've committed to this path. I may find out that, having pursued an M.A., I'll be happy to take that and explore other options. But getting back to your original point, it really is an important lesson to learn. The problem is that since some folks do get accepted to Ph.D. straight from undergrad, that means it is possible, and since a lot of undergraduates who have availed themselves very well in their B.A. programs have no reason to think that they can't make an equivalent leap, it's hard for them to feel dissuaded from that possibility. I have a friend who is a couple of years older than me and is just finishing up her Ph.D. in a different field. She was stunned when I informed her that so many people I know have applied to Ph.D. programs straight from undergrad. She honestly hadn't even heard of that happening (and she actually has a B.A. in English from a dozen years or so ago). While there are going to be many exceptions, as evidenced by the number of folks here on GC making that leap, I firmly believe that it's relatively rare, and that a lot of misinformation has been spread (probably inadvertently) about the chances. Perfect GRE scores, perfect GPAs, great UG institutions, excellent LORs, unique and interesting SOPs and WSs will always turn heads, but for those of us with a blend of those things, it's probably best to go the M.A. route first. Just my opinion after spending a lot of money and carefully observing the process.

Awesome, Ramus! Can't wait to meet you!

Great news! You're all correct! Bad news! You're all wrong! The problem is that there's really no way of knowing why adcomms choose many of the folks they do. There are some surefire candidates, and I know first-hand that some particularly successful GCers this cycle are indeed of that ilk (hard to explain, but sometimes you just know). But other than the cream of the crop, there are still a large number of "half and half" candidates taken as well, and that's the group that it's all but impossible to predict. That's why one of my biggest bugaboos about this process is the lack of transparency. I've been talking about it a lot around here lately, so I won't spend more time grinding that particular axe, but until there is transparency to the process (which would be aided by brief explanations of why an applicant wasn't selected -- it doesn't need to become a dialogue), then it's really just guesswork on our part. Maybe my age played against me. Maybe my start at a community college (later offset by a high-prestige undergrad college) played against me. Maybe it was my slightly-lower-than-average-for-English-applicants GRE verbal score. Maybe it was something in my SOP...perhaps even a single sentence! Maybe it was something in my WS...not challenging enough? Seriously, I could write a dozen paragraphs speculating about things that might have caused a shutout of Ph.D. programs. Before acceptances and rejections came piling up, I could have written a dozen paragraphs describing all the things I that I thought could make me a superior candidate. The bottom line is that we don't know, and we're not going to know what it was. Sad, but it's the nature of the game. I'll go into the next round more informed, but even then I won't be able to think I've found the magic bullet.

Fabulous news, Angel-Kaye!!! I was a little worried that you'd only applied to three places, so am glad (and relieved!) to see you get in to one of them!

Oh. Yeah. I definitely meant all the programs, even though I only stated Stanford. It IS untenable, really, but boy would it provide a lot more solace... As for the age issue, I think it can be a factor. It's hard to say if it was a factor in my case specifically (again, no transparency in the process), but even if it's a contributing factor, it's no less legitimate. Unfortunately that's one thing I can't change. I'll be 37 when I start the next (presumably final) attempt to get into a Ph.D. program, and I can't deny that it's weighing on my mind quite a bit. It's funny, because I am a very "young" 35. Not in terms of maturity etc. of course, but in most other ways. My wife and I often marvel at the fact that we're both in our mid-thirties. It's kind of astounding to us. I regret not going down this path when I was in my twenties, but sometimes it just takes people a bit longer to find the path. Hell, that's what a solid 1/3 of all poetry is about!

So...not sour grapes here or anything (honest!), but...for a $125 application fee, wouldn't it be nice to have a couple of sentences about why you didn't make the cut and what you could do to make it better for next time? I know that's largely untenable, given the number of applicants, but it's one of my biggest annoyances about the process -- the lack of knowing what, if anything, you did "wrong" and/or what you could improve upon. I suppose this is all part and parcel of the "transparency" issue (read: lack thereof).

Whew! Glad I'm not alone with that. Annoying!

Wowza! Congrats again, my friend!

Oh yeah. I'm 35 and have enough "implied" and "official" rejections to make an NCAA "Sweet Sixteen" bracket.

How I feel about my ultimate resolution to be pursuing an M.A. at UMD this fall...

Despite being shut out of Ph.D. programs this application cycle, I can't deny how amazed and encouraged I have been by so many people here on Grad Cafe! Honestly, the "downs" of this process have been mitigated tenfold by seeing so many you who I have interacted with have such high ups! Way to go, GCers!