Dr. Old Bill

Jhefflol: this is exactly why I'm not worrying about it. One can always broaden one's knowledge, but the bottom line is that you have no idea what will be on the test. The "Slumdog" principle is at work here: you might luck out and get a test is full of things that you know, or you might get one that deals with most of the stuff you just couldn't find time to study. There are some constants, of course, but beyond trying to broaden your knowledge as best you can, it's just not something that you should be overly concerned about. I'm seriously feeling zero stress about it, personally. Maybe that will change closer to the date, but cases like Chadillac's definitely ease my mind even more.

Yep, I agree with Xypathos. Right now you are in a favorable light with the DGS. You don't want to do something that could inadvertently put you in an unfavorable light. There's a fine line between good-natured enthusiasm and obsequiousness, and you definitely want to make sure your toes are on the right side. It can't hurt to email him to briefly remind him of your existence (i.e.: Dear Professor X, I just wanted to touch base with you to let you know that thanks in part to your support last year, I will be reapplying to the program), but keep it brief and reasonably professional, and try not to impose any expectations or make any requests (i.e.: do not ask him to flag your application -- if he remembers you, he'll probably do so anyhow). Best of luck!

Yeah, I asked that question awhile back and responses were pretty much the same as Unraed's. I figure that if I get 650 or better, I'll send it to the places that say it can help but won't hurt. Otherwise, I'll just send it to the six (gulp) that require it. My last practice score was also pretty mediocre...so I suspect 650 might be pretty optimistic anyhow.

I agree with Poiple. In spite of my advice in the other similar thread, don't let a GRE score prevent you from applying, unless you have the ability or inclination to retake the test. Since only one of your schools requires it, I wouldn't worry about a retake.

It is often said that GRE scores don't matter much, and that is true for the most part. But anything below a certain general baseline (maybe 160, maybe 155) should probably be addressed in the SOP. The one big X factor here is that you say you're planning on applying to state schools. Bear in mind that many state schools base their funding on GRE scores, and your scores probably won't cut it at most places. I'd say you should take it again. It's a pain, and it's expensive, but your current scores might be a bit too low to get you past any undisclosed admissions threshold. By the way, slightly off-topic, but if you're in Arlington, you should probably check out George Mason. Not a "great" school by any means, but they've got some interesting looking MA programs in English. Their late admissions deadline (mid-March) and fairly high acceptance rate (70%+ IIRC) makes it a plan B for me, since I'm also within driving distance of GMU.

Wow. That's kind of insane. I've never heard of that before. I tend to buy most of my own research materials, rather than borrow, though I suspect that as the amount of research I need to do increases, the amount I'll have to rely on a library will increase as well. I'm kind of surprised to hear that this sort of thing happens in good programs.

Good for you. Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one approaching academia from the creative side.

I also have zero data, and this is 100% unscientific, but I do find the lack of new GC members a little interesting. This isn't a complaint, but just an observation. It looks like in years past, the English forum at GC had at least twice as many active posters as we do here now. There are maybe only 20 of us regularly posting so far this application season. It might mean nothing at all. Like I said, it's unscientific. But then again, you never know... Maybe the bleakness of the job prospects in this industry has finally scared enough people off.

That's a great take on it by allplaldeverything (welcome, by the way!). Being willing and able to diversify and adapt is important, I think. I was chatting with a professor yesterday about this exact topic (in fact, I mentioned this thread specifically), and he talked about how a former colleague of his had the insight to apply for teaching jobs at nursing schools, and managed to get a tenured position teaching not only composition, but also literature. Perhaps it was literature with a medical focus, I don't know, but the bottom line is that it was a TT position doing what he got his Ph.D. for...it just happened to be at a vocational institution, rather than a standard R1 etc. Stories like that encourage me, because it shows that if you think outside the box, even a little, you can find a great niche that will make use of your education in a way you might not have predicted.

No, don't be ridiculous, we're all going to get into the Ph.D. programs we want, we're all going to get awesome tenure track jobs at R1s when we're done, and we're all going to spend our days off deciding whether we should drive our Bentley out to the Hamptons, or hire a jet to take a quick jaunt down to Cabo San Lucas. Hey, it's a nice fantasy, right? Seriously though, it's probably good timing for you to have brought this up. There's a reality that a lot of folks don't like to hear around this time of year, and for good reason...but there's just no point going into application season blind to the eventual job prospects. Things are indeed bleak, and whether you read The Chronicle of Higher Education, poke around on topical websites, or just chat with professors and other students, you're bound to hear just how bad things are. I recently learned that Ned Balbo, a well-regarded poet and adjunct professor was just terminated from Loyola University for seemingly no good reason, even though all of the tenured English professors at Loyola signed a petition to try to convince the administration not to do so. Didn't matter. And this is hardly an atypical case. Tenure track positions are quickly falling out of favor, and adjuncts have no job security and no leverage, even when they have widespread support of colleagues and students. It's kind of dismal, really. Here's the good news, however: you will still have a lot of control over your future once you get your Ph.D. so long as you are realistic about these job prospects. It means that very early on, you need to decide if you'd be fine with moving around from city to city on a year-to-year basis having adjunct or "visiting assistant professor" status until you can pin down a stable job. It means that you have to consider teaching at a prep school or -- heaven forbid -- a high school while constantly keeping your eye on the job market. It means being prepared to have some financially lean years ahead while maintaining a love for what you've just been studying for the past decade. But if you can get into that mindset, particularly early on (i.e. as you are even considering applying to grad school), then you're going to be ahead of at least half of your peers. There is a widespread delusion among many that "if you try hard enough, it will happen!" It's sort of the American Dream, really...though in many ways, it is categorically untrue. Fantastic as an ideal, great for self-morale, but not particularly helpful for career planning. My own situation is a bit unique. I'm older and have had at least a couple of different "careers" to this point. They never satisfied me -- in the first instance, I enjoyed what I was doing, but it paid (literally) next to nothing and was utterly unsustainable, despite having a degree and assurances to the contrary. In the second instance, I made half-decent money, but could derive no enjoyment whatsoever from what I was doing, and had to relegate my creative and academic pursuits to the realm of avocation. Now that I'm in my mid-thirties and have experienced different facets of life and employment etc., my perspectives are different. I'm primarily getting this Ph.D. for my own edification, though I'm obviously just as keenly interested as anyone else to get a lifelong teaching gig once I'm done with my degree. But I don't have that as an expectation, which sounds like a simple case of semantics, but is actually an exceptionally important distinction. I'm mentally resolved to doing work that is "beneath" my eventual Ph.D. status. It's not the ideal, but I'll be fine with it. And that's not just self-delusion. I think it's essential to be realistic about the bleakness of the job market in our fields. I mean hell...I'm going into poetics. How niche can you get? (Okay, a former professor of mine was into Papyrus studies, so I guess you can get nichier, but still!). The bottom line is this: if you want a degree that's going to get you a stable, well-paying job, a Ph.D. in English isn't it. It might be, but there's not the same surefire guarantee as you'd have with other degrees. But if you're fine with scraping together a living while having some measure of distinction while doing what you love, then yes, that could pretty much be the tagline for a Ph.D. in English! If you can live cheaply and/or find (or have) a significant other who makes a decent living, it makes the struggling-for-what-you-love even easier. Money and job stabliity are two major concerns with this path. It just depends on how highly you value those things compared to how much you want to try to eke out a living while doing what you love.

Ahhh...what a great response, Peachypie. That's really interesting. Thanks!

Thanks CBZ, and I apologize for the redundancy -- I hadn't come across this question at GC. I definitely don't think of the question as a way for them to trip an applicant up. I'm honestly trying to put myself in an adcomm's shoes. I can envision them saying "Okay, so he says in his SOP that he thinks we're the best match, yet he's also applying to thirteen other programs...so does he tell them that they're the second-best match?" In other words, I'm probably overthinking it, just as I did for the ethnicity question. But in a situation where most folks say it comes down to intangibles, trying to anticipate as many of those intangibles as possible strikes me as prudent, even if there's not much that can be done about them.

I've come across this question (or one similar) in a few applications so far. I've been answering honestly, of course, but I can't help but wonder: why do they want this information, and how is this used? I'm applying to 14 schools overall, and I worry that listing 13 schools other than the one I'm applying to on a given application makes me look indiscriminate, and goes some way toward discounting the integrity of my SOPs (which are obviously earnest and honest too, but might appear less so since I'm saying similar things about fourteen programs). Do you suspect it would be more prudent to just list a few of the other schools? Leave the field blank? List everything as I've been doing? Just curious.

This sounds terrible, but I really don't know if I'm going to have time to study much more. My mid-level baseline score on the practice exam encourages me a bit, particularly since I got 82 wrong...and most of those were "POE guess" wrong. I figure that means that without any specific studying, I could probably get 70th percentile or more, which isn't great, obviously, but it also doesn't worry me overly much. I am going to try to study. This certainly isn't laziness talking. But I'm feeling oddly calm and confident about the subject test regardless even though it's in... it's in... it's... in... lessthanfourweeksOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG

Some programs specify, and some don't. For my own part, I know that Vanderbilt, Cornell, and Washington University (WUSTL) prefer them single-spaced. I'm sticking to strict MLA format unless otherwise instructed. I suspect that either way isn't a big deal so long as the content is interesting.

I'm just back in full swing of school, and have (of course) a ton of reading to do. I won't be studying as much as I'd like to. I took a practice test last week and got a decidedly "average" score. Oddly enough, that didn't bother me. It did make me question the logic of the Princeton GRE book a bit, however. I wonder if I would have done better if I hadn't guessed on almost all of the questions I didn't definitively know, and had skipped them instead. POE guessing or the "skip" method? Hmm...

Welcome, and good luck to you! The forum's been a bit quiet lately, but I'm guessing things will start picking up soon!

Yup! And you know what's also encouraging? Going to the "results search" and checking out certain schools you're interested. Take a look at some of the acceptances and rejections. A few have their GRE score information beside their names...and it's quite interesting to notice a few abysmal subject scores among the acceptances to top programs, and a few stellar subject scores among the rejections... Maybe it's a little strange to find this comforting, but...I find it comforting!

I start back on Thursday. It's going to be a very busy fall, but I feel pretty good about things. My SOPs are mostly done, my WS is pretty much done (pending opinions from a few people I sent it to a couple of weeks ago...), I've got a couple of applications completely under my belt, a few others started, and just need to worry about the GRE lit test next month. One of my LOR writers has uploaded his letter to a couple of my applications, so that bodes well. Beyond that, I'm just glad I had the luxury of time this summer to get most of this stuff done. It would have been far more difficult to juggle it with my coursework, that's for sure.

Don't panic, ToC...you've got this! I'll definitely check in as soon as I can after the subject test, though since I'm actually taking it out of town (at Cornell, incidentally, which is kind of cool) due to a wedding that night, I might not get a chance to sign in right away. Knowing myself, no matter how well I wind up doing, I'll probably think I did horribly.

I definitely think you can do it, based on what you've described. Time will be a big factor here, but if you're on the ball, you can get it done. If you can recycle some (if not all) of that published article on Toni Morrison, you've got one of the most time-consuming parts out of the way. And you certainly won't be lacking for material to write in your SOP. Try not to make it too personal, but in your case, they'll be interested in your journey. And it sounds like you have had an interesting journey, so be sure to give them a few tidbits. For the record, prior to entering undergrad a few years ago at the age of 32, I had an interesting enough life as well. I have regrets for not getting a degree earlier, of course, but I don't feel any kind of shame about it, that's for sure. So I know exactly where you're coming from. It just happens that my gap came before undergrad, and yours came after. One thought: could you perhaps audit a local course or two? Maybe identify a local professor or two that have some mutual research interests as your own, then reach out to them via email and see if they'd be amenable to meeting in person (possibly), or just discuss your plans. Be open about your background and your future hopes, and they'll usually be receptive. I don't think it's an insane amount of work to do, by the way. It's definitely doable. In fact, I'm willing to bet that half (or more) of all applicants to grad school have yet to truly start the process. It's not ideal, of course, but it's doable. Honestly, the only real obstacle I see is finding LOR writers. But since you have that published article under your belt, you can probably make use of it -- send it to any well-regarded or academic person you know. It will give them a strong sense of your writing ability, enough to be able to comment on your suitability for a given program. And one important thing that I haven't mentioned yet is that an LOR doesn't need to be glowing, usually (though it doesn't hurt). It just has to be positive. Different programs place different weight on LORs in general. If you do decide to go down this path, I'd be happy to look over your materials for you. Just PM me if and when you decide. Good luck!

I very respectfully disagree with this for a couple of reasons (though recognize that these are all opinions, so YMMV). I think it's unrealistic not to think that there is going to be some concern on the part of various adcomms about your age. As someone who is in his mid-thirties, I basically live this scenario, and while there's not much I can do about it, it is worth keeping in mind. In my case, I don't feel that drawing attention to my age is necessary or helpful, since I'm currently enrolled in a program, making my education demonstrably fresh and recent. Contrast this with grades from ten years ago, when you were probably in your mid-twenties...and how much has time erased? I'm thinking of this from an adcomm standpoint, by the way. Sentimentally, I think anyone and everyone should be considered for all programs, but realistically, there are some valid concerns that will be felt on the part of adcomm members. This segues into the second reason: they will see the gap, and they will wonder about it. To my mind, there is no question about it: they'll notice. And because they'll notice, you'll need to say something in your SOP that explains your circumstances. Normally I would advise against drawing attention to age and unusual circumstances, but here's the thing: your supporting information will already draw attention to those things. The good news, however, is that you can almost certainly "spin" it into a positive -- something that is appealing to an adcomm. I don't know many of your circumstances, but like I said in that monstrous post above, your background in writing and editing during your post-M.A. life is surely something that can be framed in a positive way. I can imagine SOP lines now, like "Through several years of working closely with editing texts, I gradually realized my intense interest in digging deeper into the written word, which explains why..." etc. etc. You get the idea. But the bottom line is that in your case, I think it needs to be addressed head-on, or else the lingering questions in the minds of the adcomms could hurt your application chances. You still have time to get all the assorted materials together before the deadlines start popping up in December. You'll have to get on it soon, however. The process takes a lot longer than it might appear on paper.

First of all...welcome to Grad Cafe! As for whether or not you should get another M.A. or try to go directly into a Ph.D. program, well...that's a good question. All I can offer is my opinion, which should be taken with a sizeable grain of salt. Be that as it may, here are my thoughts on the matter: I suspect the biggest concern is the gap between your last degree and your current plans. The main problem that comes with that is not having any current letter writers (unless you've kept in touch with old profs) other than employment-based ones. It also shows that you may be out of touch with current educational standards, and might be far removed from the scholastic environment. Have you done any programs or studies at all in the intervening years? Have you kept tabs on things in the interim? Even things like being a subscriber to the Chronicle of Higher Education, or something along those lines can always help in your SOP. Your other Master's was not in English, but was at least in a field that is in the ballpark of English, and given that your B.A. was in English, I'm guessing that that won't be a big problem. It's also a major bonus that the work you've been doing involves a lot of writing an editing. These are the sorts of things that can inform your SOP as well. Teaching experience probably doesn't matter much either (most folks here, other than those on the comp/rhet track have little or no teaching experience either -- in other words, it's really not a prerequisite for Ph.D. applications). Not having a recent writing sample shouldn't be an issue, so long as you have a writing sample that is of the right length and quality (assuming its on an historical topic, or something that isn't inherently tied to 2005). The other option, of course, is to write something new from scratch. This would be a good idea if your specialization interests have evolved since you graduated nine years ago. Is funding a concern for you? Funded M.A. programs exist, of course, but they are almost as competitive as funded Ph.D.s., and fewer and farther between. And if you're just looking at an M.A. as a springboard to an eventual Ph.D., then it's worth considering that some programs seem to prefer candidates with only a B.A., while some prefer candidates with M.A.s. Having two M.A.s has the potential to make your academic trajectory look unfocused (i.e., an adcomm in a couple of years might see your B.A. and two M.A.s, not to mention your age -- you must be well into your thirties -- and think you're a "career student"). So there's that angle as well. My gut tells me that, depending on your area of interest, you should try going down the Ph.D. route. Be forewarned, however, that you'll need to take the GRE general test (at the very least), and some potential programs might require the GRE subject test, which is only offered twice in this cycle: late September and late October. Also, you'll need to find at least three quality LOR writers, whether they are former professors, current supervisors, or others who are very familiar with your writing and/or professionalism, work ethic etc. Your SOP will have to be fairly unique, and I suspect that in your case, you'll want to explain why you've spent the last ten years in your current field, and why you now want to get a Ph.D. It's unusual, but not unheard of. And some programs will see your experience as a benefit (I'm not personally mentioning my age directly in my SOP, but it's always required on application forms and it can be inferred anyhow). Anyway, I'm not sure how helpful all of this is, as it's just my opinion based on what you've presented. I think it will be a bit of a harder sell for you than for some others, but not by such a large degree that it's not worth pursuing. The biggest obstacle at the moment will be getting everything together over the next three months. You'll probably need to do some very thorough research in a short span of time to determine the best program "fits" for you. This is easier if you have a research focus in mind, as you can correlate that focus with the interests of other professors / departments. After that, it's a question of getting all of the materials sorted out: SOP, WS, LORs, GRE tests, transcripts (you'll want to get on that sooner rather than later, thanks to the time since your previous graduation), a C.V. (this will be more important for you than for some others), and other intangible items. It's doable, and if your true goal is to be in the academic environment for the rest of your life, then it is worthwhile. I don't think (personally) that getting an M.A. first will be worthwhile. It's just one more year (or more) of schooling, considering that few of the credits transfer over, in most cases. This is a long spiel, delving into "tl:dr" territory, but as a fellow "non-traditional" applicant, I hope that at least some of this makes sense for you. Either way, good luck, and feel free to PM me if you have any "older applicant" questions.

I think hreaðemus' post is quite wonderful, and even though I too am still an undergrad (albeit a non-traditional one as well, being in my mid-30s) at a good school, I can't help but think that the supposition is correct: you were chosen! You can doubt yourself all you want, and feel like a mistake was made, but in all likelihood, it wasn't. Remember that adcomms look for potential just as much as they look for past scholarship. This just makes sense. Why would they want someone who is already established and set in his/her development? It's great -- essentially, really -- to have a solid foundation in your field of interest, which was probably established with your WS, but your SOP likely pointed to future development, whether it was by talking about mutual interests with a POI, or some other indicator of room for academic growth. I have a feeling that by the end of your first year of graduate school, you will feel as confident as the other people you mentioned. What's going to happen is that you'll start off being meek and unsure of yourself, only to say something at some point that will prove very interesting to someone...which will lead to a conversation about a topic that you're more familiar with than the other person. And this will build confidence, and you'll start to see something very important: that knowledge isn't linear. You'll come to realize that for all of the things those seemingly advanced students know, they'll have gaps that you don't have, and as the famous line from Rocky goes: "She's got gaps, I got gaps. Together we fill gaps." In other words, it's natural to feel overwhelmed and unworthy when you're new to pretty much anything, let alone an academic field. But it will pass. Like hreaðemus (a.k.a. "the Bat") says: they wouldn't have picked you if you didn't have the potential to be worth it. I'd give the Bat even more upvotes if I could -- just such a great and resonant post.