chaussettes

I don't think they use the writing portion scores for the cut-off; in fact, I have never seen it mentioned as a factor by departments that give explicit numerical cut-offs for GRE scores. It makes sense that they wouldn't. Firstly, the other portions are scored on a wider range of numbers and have a lot more give, and thus are, to an extent, more consistent indicators of performance (or at least might appear to be so). If you really mess up on one or two questions in those portions, it might affect your score by a few points. If you make a comparable mistake in the writing section, especially given the subjective way in which they are scored and the nature of human perception, that can be the difference between a 5.0, which seems like a decent score, versus a 4.5, which according to you seems awful enough to preclude admission into any English program at all. It seems that they might potentially be cutting a much larger proportion of viable candidates by setting a minimum writing score requirement than by only requiring certain verbal and/or math scores. Secondly, the writing portion is a ridiculous exercise, and the skill it measures has a direct alternative for comparison in the SOP and writing sample. I will say that I got a 4.5 writing score and was admitted into programs, including some very fine ones, that do use GRE cut-offs and/or take them into consideration in the admissions process (because candidates with higher scores are more likely to receive prestigious university fellowships, which relieves pressure on the department to fund those students themselves). My verbal and math scores, on the other hand, were quite high.

I just searched the results for my program. The postings for the last two years (2013 and 2012) showed a total of one acceptance, but I know that 10+ people were accepted both those years. So the guess that 10% of acceptances posted sounds about right, if not on the high side.

Dartmouth has a very good terminal masters that offers funding on a competitive basis, but it's a one year program.

Many (if not most) schools will not allow you to apply to more than one department at a time. You can certainly apply to both English and Comp Lit programs during your application cycle, but don't count on being able to apply to both at the same school.

I'd say none of your stats would preclude you from getting into a top PhD program, although of course you certainly shouldn't count on it. It'll all come down to your SOP and writing sample, mostly. But there doesn't seem to be any reason why you shouldn't be trying for PhD programs, if that's what you want. On the other hand, it actually wouldn't be that much trouble at all to apply to MA programs at the same time as PhD--the process is pretty much identical, so applying to X number of MA programs and Y number of PhD programs wouldn't be more work than applying to X + Y number of PhD programs. That is what I did in order to hedge my bets during the last application cycle. Even though you've said you can afford to pay for it, though, I would advise giving your most serious consideration to MA programs that offer some sort of funding, which tend to be more prestigious and offer better preparation for doctoral work. In the current climate, it seems like a bad idea to pay for any humanities degrees beyond the bachelors (and even the bachelors itself, I'm sure some would say); also, unfunded MA programs are often just convenient ways for a university to make more money, and students in unfunded programs are often neglected in favor of funded doctoral students. It isn't a coincidence that several of the better MA programs (for instance, Comp Lit at Darthmouth and French at Bryn Mawr, both of which offer funding on a competitive basis) belong to departments that do not offer a PhD. Alternatively, you might consider pursuing a masters abroad, maybe in the UK or France; I don't know very much about specific programs, because I wasn't willing to apply internationally, but I do know that the masters in the UK is often a more serious and rigorous degree than its equivalent--especially unfunded--in the States. I don't know what that application process would entail, though. I'm sure you'll be a fine candidate for PhD programs, but if you can afford the extra time and application fees, it doesn't hurt to hedge your bets by applying to a few MA programs as well, especially if you're set on top 20 programs. Good luck with your applications!

This is not strictly true. I can't speak for every program, not having researched all of them, but many, maybe even most, Comp Lit programs seek to prepare their students for placement in national lit departments as well, since that is where most of the available jobs are--this is probably more true of more "traditional" national literatures focused programs that maintain rigorous language requirements. My program, for example, basically requires everyone to obtain mastery of their major language (or in some cases, major languages) equivalent to that of a national language department candidate, with the expectation that the student will then seek a job teaching the literature of that language. In general Comp Lit students with a strong background and evidence of language mastery (teaching, studying abroad) do not find it too difficult to get national language jobs, although they should expect their language credentials to be more closely scrutinized than those of national language candidates. I know of several professors at my school who got Comp Lit degrees and are now appointed in national language departments (our Comp Lit department only has one faculty member whose appointment is solely in Comp Lit; the rest all hold joint appointments with national language departments, which I think is a very common situation). Regarding this, it will be most useful to look at each program's recent placement record when considering where to apply/accept (you should be doing this anyways, regardless of what discipline you choose)--if the program has a strong record, you don't have much to worry about. That being said, I believe Medievalmaniac may be correct in that English may be the one instance where the above does not apply, probably owing to the insane competitiveness of the field. There is no general prohibition against using English as a language in Comp Lit programs, although some programs will specify that English can only be chosen if the student intends to study Old or Middle English--not a problem for a medievalist. Also, I believe in some programs, it may be possible for a student to choose to do English one of the primary languages and then learn an additional foreign language to make up for it in fulfillment of the requirement for x languages other than English/student's native language. I do not know, though, how competitive a Comp Lit candidate will be on the English job market--that seems to be a question that can be answered more clearly by a professor, or at least an English candidate who has seriously considered and researched Comp Lit and is more familiar with the situation. I do know that there are students in my program who are choosing to study English, though, so it definitely isn't unheard of. Alternately, since you are interested in Old Castilian, you could do Comp Lit with Spanish as a major language and be qualified to get a job in Spanish or Comp Lit.

Yes to all three! If your language background is not attested by your transcript, you should definitely mention it in the SOP; in fact, many Comp Lit programs explicitly ask you to address this in the directions for the SOP. Listing languages on academic CVs is also common practice, although how closely and carefully each adcom will look at your CV is variable--still, it can't hurt to remind them what languages you know. Using your writing sample to demonstrate your language ability is also a smart move. If you've quoted your primary source text in the original and provided your own translations into English, be sure to include a footnote saying so. A lack of formal language training can be an obstacle when applying to Comp Lit, but it's definitely not an insurmountable one, especially if you are otherwise a strong candidate and if you are well-versed in and interested in studying theory--so if you really think Comp Lit is right for you, don't let this discourage you from applying. One concern I do have, though, is whether or not you have any Latin. Most people (not everybody) find that acquiring proficiency in Latin is more difficult and time consuming than vernacular languages, and as a medievalist in any field, you will almost certainly be expected to learn Latin if you have not done so already. If you don't have any training in Latin and if it's at all possible for you, I would advise you to take a course in Latin, preferably, or else try to teach yourself a little. Not only will having a background in Latin (even just a little) stand you in good stead as a medievalist candidate, whether you are applying to Comp Lit or English or any other discipline, but it will also demonstrate your ability and willingness to acquire languages.

Sorry to be posting again, but I just wanted to add, regarding your concern about accommodating both of your primary fields of interests--it is important to look at faculty specialization and interests not just within a school's Comp Lit department but also in that school's national literature departments as well (in your case, Spanish and English), since as a Comp Lit student many (if not most) of your courses will be taken in those departments rather than in the Comp Lit department itself. You might discover some important people that you overlooked by limiting your research to faculty actually appointed in Comp Lit. Many Comp Lit departments are very flexible about whom they will allow you to work with; for instance, some would allow you to choose an adviser outside the department, or to have a certain amount of faculty outside of Comp Lit on your dissertation committee (or even faculty outside the university!). Comp Lit students can often end up working with more faculty and fellow students outside of Comp Lit than within it. Also, if an otherwise suitable program is weak or lacking in something specific you are interested in, many Comp Lit programs are very flexible about letting you arrange an independent study, or study at another school as a visiting scholar, or even take some courses concurrently at another university. In other words, as I said before, it does vary by program, so it is important to do your research, but overall I feel Comp Lit programs offer a potential for interdisciplinarity that cannot easily be matched by most national literature programs.

As a medievalist in Comp Lit, I agree with most of what you've said. I would say, however, that not all Comp Lit departments are theory-heavy; it varies incredibly from school to school. More traditional Comp Lit departments focus on major and minor literatures with emphasis on a period of historical specialization; the benefit of programs like these is that they can combine flexibility and interdisciplinary with the rigorous mastery of (at least) one national literature on par with that obtained by a national lit program candidate, which is advantageous on the job market. Conversely, not all national literature departments are very accommodating of true interdisciplinarity, even while they pay lip service to it; again, it varies. Many national literature programs, even if they technically permit it, look at you askance if you take more than a couple of courses outside of the department. This is often a product of a school's culture; I have heard from friends and acquaintances that programs at, for example, Columbia and NYU are not very open to inter-departmental work and collaboration, compared to somewhere like UC Berkeley. Therefore, I would add to my previous thoughts that it is extremely important for medievalists to be well-acquainted with an individual school and department's philosophy and culture. In general, though, the intensive interdisciplinarity required of a competent medieval scholar is extremely well-supported by the traditional Comp Lit structure.

Yes! Comp Lit programs are great for medievalists! The division of literature into national language departments is an artificial, somewhat limiting classification that, while useful to the understanding of modern literary traditions, really doesn't make much sense when imposed upon medieval literature (or medieval anything, really). Not that a medievalist couldn't flourish in a national literature department, but interdisciplinarity is really crucial to medieval studies in a way that it isn't to modern fields, and Comp Lit departments are a great environment for encouraging the development of the broad and varied skill set and background required of a well-rounded medievalist. Not to mention that specialization in medieval literature requires one major thing that a Comp Lit program, moreso than a national literature program, will be sure to provide--command of several languages. At the same time, Comp Lit is more established as a literature degree than, say, more permissive but less structured Medieval Studies programs are. Hope that was helpful!

Regarding withdrawn funding, I suspect the problem is the difference between an unofficial "offer" and an official one. Many departments will send unofficial correspondence regarding admissions and funding so that admits will not have to wait for the paperwork to go through the university's bureaucracy in order to find out such things. However, once an official offer is made, I do not think that it can be withdrawn or reduced unless there are exceptional circumstances. The way one professor explained it to me is that the offer letter is like a contract--they absolutely cannot give you a smaller stipend than what is specified in their official offer. That obligation would not apply, however, if someone from the department had just emailed and said, "We're going to give you x amount of money."

From what you've said on this thread, it does NOT sound like a linguistics program would be at all the right fit for you, unless you 1) are willing to focus on language/discourse to the exclusion of your other interests, which sound considerable, and 2) find a program that allows a non-theoretical focus (UCLA, for example, has a separate department for applied linguistics). Most linguistics departments, however, are very heavily theoretically oriented, so even if you were admitted (which is certainly possible even without a strong background in linguistics coursework), the core of your courses and the focus of most of your peers' and professors' research would be of very little interest or relevance to you.

As someone who probably would have benefitted immensely from a stronger weighing of "tangibles" (GPA, GRE) in the admissions process, I cannot in good conscience say that I think it would be a good move. Case in point, besides a high overall GPA and good GRE scores, I earned a high GPA in my Linguistics major, including some graduate coursework. I have a paper which I wrote for a grad seminar that I got an A on, which would probably be a fine writing sample to use. Yet I did not even consider applying to Linguistics programs because I realized that I do not really have the aptitude or motivation to do original research in any area of Linguistics. The only things that would bear this out would be my inability to formulate a half way convincing SOP and my (probable) failure to secure LORs from three professors who could speak enthusiastically to my research potential. I agree that this reliance upon SOP and LORs is problematic in some respects, but I firmly believe that, alongside the writing sample if required, they are by far the best indicators of research ability and potential.

Most of the advice regarding the SOP has been spot on, I think, but I would add that if you have any professors who know you and your work particularly well (your letter writers, I should think), ask them for advice about what should go into your SOP and how you should approach it BEFORE you begin writing. Gradcafe, while immensely helpful in that regard, is not a substitute for the guidance of your advisors. The two professors whom I asked for SOP advice, one a veteran of his field and the other a member of the adcom of a program I was applying to, were able to give me very helpful and field-specific pointers regarding unsuccessful/successful approaches they had seen in SOPs and what direction they thought my SOP should go in, based on what they knew of me and my interests. In fact, if you are having trouble defining your research interests, you might find that in the course of conversation one of your professors who knows your work well will be able to describe it more coherently and articulately than you! You can save yourself from a lot of the time and agony of revising the SOP if you start off on the right foot with a first draft that, while perhaps roughly written and not conceptually complete, is pointing you in the right direction from the get go. Also, if you are applying to a program that requires a diversity/personal history statement and have access to someone in the know, ask them about the relative importance of this. There is no need to stress out about writing a diversity statement and to give it the same attention as the SOP if it has no bearing on admission to the department and is used for diversity fellowship eligibility purposes, as was true in my case.

I will play the devil's advocate here and say that this isn't necessarily true. I do know of someone who is simultaneously enrolled in two PhD programs (working in different subfields of the same discipline, i.e. he is getting the same degree twice but specializing in something different in each one), at universities much farther away from each other than Yale and Houston, with the expectation that he will fulfill all the requirements for both programs. Not saying that this applies to Franco's case, but it does happen.

It is fine (and perhaps admirable) for you to post this warning for the benefit of prospectives who might consider UCI's Comp Lit program unaware of the depth and seriousness of the issues you described, but to use your individual experience in one program at one school as an indicator of the worthiness of the humanities in the entire UC system as you do in your first post is shortsighted and egocentric. As mentioned before in this thread, every school and every department is dealing with the financial situation in its own way, and I can guarantee you that although it does, by your account, sound as if Irvine's Comp Lit program is suffering tremendously, that is most certainly not the case in a lot of other programs at other UCs, many of which are as strong (or nearly as strong) as they have ever been (of course, this would also vary by subfield). Of course, most students (certainly all well-informed ones) are aware that the UC's humanities programs often cannot offer funding on par with other comparable institutions, but many find that it is worth the sacrifice--and you'll find that other Comp Lit programs at UC schools have quite a secure amount of funding and have made their best students generous offers by any standard, not just in comparison to other UC schools. Additionally, your assertion that west coast schools have little knowledge of European history and literature is not only unfounded but also quite insulting to the many fine scholars at those institutions, especially those who are choosing to accept or remain in less lucrative positions out of love of the UC system and/or a commitment to public education. Your opinion and your warning may be quite valid, and if I had been considering Irvine I would definitely be taking a second look, but as it is, your post comes off as a bitter and presumptuous potshot against the UCs motivated by your own personal dissatisfaction in a program that can hardly be considered the sole or even a primary representative of the state of the humanities/Comp Lit in the UC system.

Although it is possible to find a studio for $700-800 not that far (~20 min walking distance) from campus, (1) the competition for these places is fierce, especially because most undergrads don't stay in the dorms for more than a year or two, and (2) most will likely be snapped up in the spring, because their student tenants will leave at the end of May. I am currently in a very decent studio (separate bathroom and kitchen, water, garbage, and heat included, ~5 min walk from campus) for $1000 a month, so yes, I would agree that the $900-1100 range is a more realistic expectation (you might even be able to get a very small 1 bedroom), although with the caveat that if you are looking to move in in the fall rather than the summer I do not know what will be available. Also, as I type this, I realize that this is only applicable to south side. I am not familiar with north side housing, but I think the general trend is that you can get better places for less, but the living environments are pretty different. Hopefully that is helpful!

If I understand correctly what "problem" you're referring to, it's not a problem at all. Just because they give you a number doesn't mean it's set in stone--it just means that whatever they end up giving you, it can't be less than the amount specified in the letter. This ultimately works to your advantage. The schools that have asked me to keep them abreast of other funding offers have both offered me specific monetary amounts already but have said that those numbers can be negotiated if I get a more generous offer.

I don't think there's any problem in letting schools know about other offers you have received. In fact, at the last program I visited, I was asked about offers I had received from other programs. When I responded that I had another acceptance with undetermined funding, I was explicitly asked to let them know when I find out what the other school decides to offer me, and they said they can reconsider their funding offer (which is already 5 years of full support) based on that. That said, however, I would not, under any circumstances, tell a school about another program's offer if that school has not already accepted you--that just seems tacky and presumptuous.

I am doing a triple major in Comparative Literature, French and Linguistics and have not been given the impression that it will have a very significant positive impact on my application. I think it is more important to have a breadth and depth of coursework that shows you are informed and prepared for your proposed field of research, so that the fact of a double major is less important than the quality of the coursework that it brings with it. On the other hand, I have heard from a faculty advisor in Comp Lit that the senior thesis absolutely crucial for anyone applying to grad school, and that one of the first things that admissions looks for in applicants is whether or not they have done (or are doing) one.

Thank you for your reply! I'll keep that in mind, although that isn't really my situation--I guess I feel that all these professors know me equally well at this point. With all other beings equal, I was wondering what would be more important in a recommender.

When I was in high school, I took three math classes through SDSU. I got unit credit for these courses at the university I am currently attending, and it is listed on my transcript under my AP credits as SDSU: 10 units. I am planning to apply to grad school for Comp Lit. Will admissions look at me askance if I have these 10 units unaccounted for? I don't want to go through the hassle of ordering transcripts through SDSU (they are cheap, but the process is tedious, esp. because I have lost the ID number SDSU assigned me) for three courses whose units I do not need to graduate and which are completely irrelevant to my field of study. Since they say I have to have transcripts from all institutions attended, do I really have to order the transcripts for the math I took in high school?

Hi! A newbie with a question. I'm planning on applying to grad school for Comp Lit next year (medieval lit, French, Spanish and Latin), and I was trying to decide now whom I would like ask to write recommendations for me. I already have one recommender in mind (a professor who is very well-known and with whom I have taken several classes, including a graduate seminar), but I am trying to pick two more out of three. What I am unsure of is whether it is more important to have a recommender who is tenured (or tenure-track), or someone whose interests are more closely aligned to what I intend to study (and apply for) in grad school. The three people I have in mind are: 1. An associate prof in Comp Lit and Classics. 2. An assistant prof in Comp Lit and Classics, but a medievalist. Focuses mainly on medieval Latin, but does other medieval literatures as well. 3. A lecturer in Comp Lit. Does medieval French and Welsh literature. Despite being a lecturer, is relatively well known, has numerous publications (including a well-reviewed book). Edited one of the ms in the recently published edition of the various Chanson de Roland, alongside some very well known and distinguished scholars in the field. I have done extremely well in classes with all three of them, but I don't know whom to pick. All the sources of advice I have read say that it is best to choose a someone who is tenured or is tenure-track--some even say that, if possible, the recommender should be a full professor, not an associate professor. Does tenure outweigh the importance of relevance to my intended field of study? I am trying to decide now because next semester, the associate prof and the lecturer are each teaching a class at the same time, both of which I am very interested in, and ideally, I would like to take a class with whomever I plan to ask for a recommendation. Any advice you have to offer would be much appreciated!