unræd

Crapcrapcrap--in my haste to not be one of those people who post acceptances but not stats per the other thread, I put the wrong GRE score. It should be 168 verbal, not 169.

Ahhhhh! Berkeley!!!

Welcome! Assuming these were individual emails and not bulk ones, I'd think they're more positive than not! If they were concerned about your fit in the program, I don't think they would have gone to the trouble of letting you know--programs tend to just reject people, rather than sending speculative emails about why they might not want you. So it could be a good sign! Also, might I suggest posting in the Literature sub forum? This one is intended more for people pursuing creative literary paths (MFAs, PhDs in Creative Writing, etc), and there you'll find more people interested in the study of literature--I'm a medievalist, myself. There's also a sub forum for Classics, but it's not quite as active.

Alas, I have no idea--aside from the chair of the committee, who's not an English person--who'll be interviewing me! I'm prepping for the faculty who would likely act as supervisors on the off chance they're on the admissions committee or were pulled in for my interview, but beyond that I gots nothing.

I took a pretty similar approach, sillyrabbit, and feel fairly ambivalent about the whole notion of "fit." One caveat is that since I'll be doing Old English, it's a very restricted field--most programs have only two Anglo-Saxonists at the most, so all my advisors said that it was far less important to find someone who did the exact same sort of work I want to do (in terms of issues, texts, and to a lesser extent, methodology) than someone who would be open to/able to supervise the sort of work I want to do. Like you, I applied to some programs where I think there's a really strong sense of fit between my interests and those of the Anglo-Saxonists on faculty; a few others were based more on the general strength of the program or direction they might be going in. I've heard back from two programs thus far, from each of the far ends of that spectrum--an acceptance from a school that I think is one of the absolute best "fits" on my list, and an interview request from a school which I applied to for more general reasons (the SOP I sent them wasn't really tailored to them at all, and didn't mention a single prof by name). The interview might well not become an acceptance (and in part because of fit, no doubt!), but you can certainly make it to a short list/not get rejected on spec with a more general approach.

Congratulations to the overnight admits! Waiting's a bitch, but you know what makes it a little bit more bearable? Waking up in the morning to good news on the fora!

Pshaw! I understand what you mean. But think about it--if you're a strong enough student to have won that award, that sort of academic ability will shine through your apps even without the line on the CV!

WOOOOOOT! Congratulations, people!

Mine's for a Medieval Studies program, and I keep trying to remind (convince?) myself that they won't think that watching me scratch my head at a sight Latin passage is a good use of their Skype time.

For what it's worth, I only notified two of my LOR writers about my Skype interview request because I happened to bump into them at a lecture. I let them all know when I got my first acceptance, and I'll keep them posted generally, but I too was unsure where to draw the line between "keeping them updated" and "omg somebody likes me!" I decided to be a bit more low-key with this one, especially given that this video interview appears to be a preliminary stage to a further interview process. But different strokes, and all! And thanks for the list, hypervodka (and congrats on USC!!!)! That seems to cover all the questions I'd been thinking of; if I come up with any others, I'll post them.

Pshaw! I'll cop to being nice, but I draw the line at--and certainly hadn't intended to imply--being fancy! But an appeal to research? Shucks, hreaðemus, them's the magic words.

This is interesting! I've specifically avoided sharing statistics both on the fora and in my (single, lonely) acceptance result post for two reasons. The first is because I hadn't thought the stats would actually be useful in a meaningful way to other applicants. Given published information on minima and averages, it's clear that even the best schools admit applicants with a range (sure--a much smaller range in some the case of some programs) of scores and GPAs, and I think sharing those more easily quantified items distorts their importance in a field like English, where all evidence suggests that what really discriminates between applicants at the final stage of the process is both luck and the highly subjective, much less quantifiable parts of the portfolio. There's no handy way to communicate the details of your writing sample, statement, and letters (to say nothing of research fit!) on the results board. And even if there were, self-assessment of those parts of the application wouldn't be a particularly sensitive diagnostic, anyway--presumably we all think ours are good, if we've used them in our applications! The second reason is pure midwestern reticence/reluctance to self promote, combined with the sense that it's often that sort of thing that has animated some of the less salutary aspects of GC--worry, anxious comparison--which I have zero interest in contributing to. Numbers are easy to hold on to, but that doesn't make them good handholds. So hearing this from you--someone whose discernment I respect and whose numerical parts of the application (this isn't intended to put you on the spot, and I hope it doesn't) are very, very stellar--really makes me think about things in a different way, especially if you (and others) would find that sort of sharing useful and even generous rather than just overweening. It's presumptuous to assume I'll get another acceptance (and given the way the timeline of the next set of notifications is structured, I'm much more likely to get a rejection first!), but if I do, I'll be sure to include the relevant data.

Woot! You will nail it. A friend of mine regularly does Skype interviews for admissions to a UK school, and in terms of Skype-specific advice he said make sure you have a phone available in case audio fails, be in front of a neutral background with good lighting, and WEAR PANTS.

This is very helpful--pretty much what I expected, so it's nice to know I was on the right track in terms of issues to think about! Thanks!

I was saying it in her voice, too, in my head!

Speaking of interviews: I have a Skype interview coming up in the next week for one of my programs (not an English department). Those who have already done interviews in this or prior seasons, what sort of questions are generally asked? How'd you prepare? Any tips/advice? I just reviewed my SOP for the school, since I hadn't looked at any of my materials since submission, and: oh my God. Don't do that, people, unless you have to. shudders

Oh, Jean Luc.

Congrats to the Madison peoples! These are wise words all! And like HesseBunuel90 says, getting into all of your programs would be ridiculously overwhelming. Madison and Chicago are two programs of many; it is still really, really early. It's interesting. You're right, of course: knowing I've been accepted by a program--and one of my top ones, to boot!--is lovely. But while I might have imagined that after an acceptance I'd be floating along in a serene pool of beatific calm, that hasn't happened. It hasn't so much given me peace of mind as a new set of issues to ponder!

Congratulations, mollifiedmolloy! And: how the hell can they give us so few up votes when there are so many people to congratulate?!

Woot! Congratulations!!!

And here I thought today would be a day of no news--congrats!!!

Congrats! I noticed earlier today you'd upped your signature to two acceptances, but didn't want to call you out.

Really? That's so cool--good on them!

Woot! Congrats!!!

Another good place to check would be the forum for Religion applicants--I know there are some over there applying this year!