rainbowpink

There is no Applied Linguistics at UChicago, so I'm not sure what that is about... maybe the person that posted that can clarify. However, as a current student in the linguistics program I can tell you that decisions have been made. Following last year's timeline, I'd say those accepted should hear back (via email) by maybe next Sunday night.

I've only had one (with McGill) when I was applying last year, but it was with video. It'd be safe to assume that it'd be with video so that you will have a webcam prepared and all (if it's not built into your laptop).

At least one person got accepted really early on last year too, on Jan 6th (you can do a search and see). Looked like most of the others heard back in February. Good luck to everyone!

Depends what you mean by bombing it. I felt like I wrote garbage, but my score came out okay. If it's at least a 4.0 I'd say don't even worry about it (I don't know about lower scores). You'll have to submit a writing sample with your applications, and that is way more important. If you have a decent writing sample I wouldn't worry. But if the score was really bad (like below 3.0) and you have the time and you're sure you can do better (sometimes we only learn how to handle the exam after we've experienced the actual thing), you can take it again just so you won't stress over whether a low score is going to hurt you.

Currently about to start a Ph.D. in Linguistics 1. Linguist or professor/researcher in whatever I'm interested in 2. Science writer and/or novelist 3. An artist/designer of some sort (I especially like drawing and photography) 4. Internet entrepreneur (not qualified at all) 5. Singer-songwriter (I have some background in music, but nope, not qualified at all here) 6. Video game designer or composer for video games... whatever. I just want to do something with video games, even going back to #1 above, researching it.

I enjoy writing immensely, but I've never taken any sort of writing class in college, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I think the way you go about answering the question and what you say about your writing indirectly highlights the nature of your writing. Is there anything specific you always aim to do when you write? For me, I personally always aim to be clear and organized, and I tend to get complimented on that. I want intelligent people outside my field to be able to understand what I write; I want my friends and family to be able to understand what I do (at least to a certain extent). The question is even more open-ended for an MFA, I think. Do you like writing about particular topics? Do you aim to represent the voice of specific populations? What is unique about your writing? What/who are your inspirations? Just some thoughts.

First paragraph: I'm personally not a fan of this style of writing because it seems to say too little with too many words and descriptions, at least with the first two sentences. You could just say that when you were young you were obsessed with analyzing the dynamics between your peers and found yourself being the one they seek advice from... or whatever it is -- just keep it simple. If possible, change the story to something that speaks more to your uniqueness (I mean, weren't we all interested in other people's business back in middle school?). Second paragraph: "factors that contribute to alcohol use" sounds really broad to me. Did these factors that the project investigated fall under some category so that you can be a bit more specific in the description, like "______ factors that contribute to alcohol use" or "how alcohol use correlates with factors relating to ______"? Third paragraph: "quite a few" can be replaced by something less wordy, like "several" or "many" Fourth paragraph: I think it would be a good idea to be more specific about the projects the research group does. If it's related to the specific things you've mentioned, mention that. Basically, you want it to be clear that the program is a good fit for you because of the alignment in research interests and/or approaches. The last sentence should be a given so you don't need to include it. Last paragraph: I'm not really a fan of the last sentence. I mean, it's kind of broad ("a betterment of humanity") and in a way kind of a given (who doesn't want to do that?). My suggestion for aiming to be more specific with your broader end goal (kind of a contradiction, I know) would be to look at your research interests and say why it matters for the field to gain a better understanding of these things. It doesn't have to be super profound. Talking more about your research interest would help reinforce your passion for it and give readers the sense that you really believe in it.

Your primary job is to be a graduate student. You got the TA position because someone wants to fund your education, not because they specifically need people to teach (although grad students = cheap labor). It's up to the students to put in their own effort to learn; the TA can't control every aspect of the students' learning. That said, I'm still scared to look at evaluations. I was a TA for a really nice professor that was always on the TAs' side and knew what some undergrads tend to be like, so there wasn't anything external to worry about, but it's really difficult not to focus on the negative comments. I had 5-6 discussion sections to run per week the first year of my MA, and there were days when I had a few back to back with my own classes included, and the classrooms were on opposite sides of campus so sometimes it's just really difficult to put in 100% effort and stay after class to chat with students and all that. You have to realize that while you should obviously try your best at your TA job, there are so many factors that prevent you from being able to put in close to full effort (e.g., other academic priorities, shitty attitude from students, etc).

I graduated from undergrad within four years but during that time, I did a double major in neuroscience and philosophy (mostly focusing on philosophy of science), and took a lot of Scandinavian studies courses. I also took upper-level courses to fulfill almost all my liberal arts requirement, so like, history classes that history majors took and whatnot rather than intro courses with hundreds of freshmen. I also had a lab job and volunteered in the community, plus I volunteered in research labs to get research experience. Basically, I was all over the place and not very prepared for graduate school, even though I've always known that I want to become an academic. I applied to PhD programs in history of science during my senior year, since it's a field that combines my several interests. Didn't work out too well because I was only accepted to one unfunded MA program, so I tried to apply to programs for teaching ESL because there were local schools that had late deadlines and I've always been interested in language anyway so I thought maybe I'd do that for a while, learn some linguistics along the way (by that point I've met some linguistics students who got me interested in the field), and then try to apply to PhD programs later on. I did get into some of those ESL programs but I decided not to do it because even though tuition was not that high, I just didn't feel like it was for me because even though I love teaching, I just knew that it's learning and research that I'm most passionate about, and I'm into theories and scientific details and all rather than applied stuff. So I decided to "take a year off" after college, and I took a few classes (including my first actual linguistics class) for fun and spent time doing other things. I decided I wanted to apply to MA programs in linguistics for the following year because even though my BS was in other stuff, they were relevant enough to linguistics and I heard that it's not uncommon for people to come into the field from related fields. I was surprised that I was accepted to so many programs, and two of them actually offered full funding. I ended up being a TA for an intro linguistics class after having only taken one linguistics class (which also used the same textbook). It was kind of crazy because I overestimated how much students would be able to grasp just because I assumed it should be easy since I learned all of that quickly enough. Anyway, I graduated after two years and am about to start my PhD at one of the best schools for linguistics with awesome funding (and also a prestigious school overall). Among other things, I knew that I wanted to study linguistics because I've had experience doing other things, and I didn't do some of them very well because if I'm not completely passionate about something then it's very hard for me to put in too much effort constantly. But with linguistics ideas came to me easily I barely studied for most of my exams, and most of the work didn't even feel like work. Additionally, I grew up bilingual so there's a lot of personal connection to language overall, and studying linguistics really changed how I view myself, like when school gets tiring and stressful I can honestly tell myself that this is the best thing I could be doing with my life. Considering all the twists and turns there, I feel very fortunate that I'm at this point three years after I graduated from college. For several years it was so much applying to stuff and worrying about the future, and now there is at least some direction lol.

I don't start until the end of September. I seriously can't wait. I already moved a while back and am now at my parents' place for a bit. This past month has been mostly Netflix and video games.

If it's a small class, you might have some luck, especially if you can make a good impression right away in class. If it's a bigger class where you won't even get to interact much with the professor, I feel that it's quite risky.

If you've actually had some research experience I would just use the space to note that, like briefly describe the project and how long you were involved. Concrete skills that are relevant (e.g., statistics, literature review, data collection, etc.) would also be good. These things speak louder than general comments about how organized and detail-oriented you might be. Focus on things you've actually done.

I think the best thing to do is to contact professors in programs you're interested in and see what they think, since they will know better about their field than students.

I was offered a teaching assistantship both at the University of Iowa and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee when I applied for my MA. Programs that offer both MA and PhD typically prioritize funding PhD students, but unless they explicitly say that they do not offer any funding to MA students I don't think it would hurt to apply there. For example, Michigan State's site says, "A large majority of our Ph.D. students are funded. A few of our M.A. students are as well." I would definitely recommend the Canadian schools though (listed in fuzzylogician's post). As far as I know, the system is about the same as US schools. UChicago no longer has a terminal MA program in linguistics. Well, I said "no longer" but I'm actually don't know about the history of the program, i.e., if the MA from there is just part of the BA/MA program that their website mentions. https://linguistics.uchicago.edu/graduate-program/masters

I've encountered several people who are nervous about not being sufficiently prepared for PhD applications in one way or another but somehow feel the need to jump from an undergraduate degree or a foreign MA that is significantly different into a PhD, and the same thing I suggest to them is to go for (funded) MA programs first. Personally, I feel that it's not worth it to just hope to try to get in "somewhere" (for a PhD), even if you're funded, especially if you will have to spend some of those funded years catching up with other people. In many advanced courses, depending on the course/field, we read a lot of papers from the past decade. Eight years away from the field is quite a long time when you're thinking of doing research at the PhD level.