Jump to content

strokeofmidnight

Members
  • Posts

    206
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from MilitaryTeacher2022 in GRE score was terrible.   
    Seadub,

    We'll find out in a month or so
    You seem hell-bent on proving that you are right, and anyone who disagrees with you is not wrong, but also intellectually insufficient. There's no point in having a conversation under these circumstances. Did it strike you that the many people who are disagreeing with your perspective might have valid reasons for holding the opposing stance? You also seem determined to NOT "believe" me when I cite sources that you--as well as I and anyone else on these boards--knows that I cannot quote or name. You're convinced that there's no possible way that someone could have access to information that you lack. So be it. At this point, everyone's apps are in and it's not as though our speculation would make a difference either way. Dealing with your personal attacks, frankly, isn't worth it.

    Best of luck to you in this process.
  2. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from MilitaryTeacher2022 in GRE score was terrible.   
    Your example is supposed to point out that someone who has poor numbers has absolutely no chance at getting into a strong English PhD program. I don't see what the SoP--in this example--has anything to do with it. You ARE, however, completely dismissing the independent (and incredibly influential) role of the SoP in this process by lumping it with the lower numbers.

    You've also "forgotten" to address the rest of my points.

    I don't see why you feel the need to be so abrasive and rude to your peers. What exactly do you gain from it? There's plenty of room to disagree without attacking everyone else...and such behavior will only alienate you in graduate school. While you certainly don't have to be friends with everyone, your career as well as your social life will suffer if you manage to make everyone dislike you.
  3. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from MilitaryTeacher2022 in GRE score was terrible.   
    Actually, Seadub, for the PhD in my field, Berkeley will not even consider GRE or GPA scores. It's all about the writing sample and statement of purpose. My source? Professors who have served on the admissions committee every year for the past decade, backed up by DGS. And before you turn around to accuse me of trying to feel better about my inadequacies, I graduated with virtually a 4.0 from a top university and my GRE score is over 1500. I do know, however, that while the numbers are not meaningless, they play very minor roles in the application process for my field.

    You're right. This is indeed about perception. There are, unfortunately, professors on ad-comms that believe as you do: that the numbers do correlate. However, it seems that many more professors emphasize the non-quantifiable parts of the application. The numbers say very little about my aptitude or preparation for research in my field. My GRE only indicates that I was indeed willing to pour an entire summer into memorizing vocabulary and that I have a knack for high school math. The GPA suggests that I matured early and worked hard from freshman year onwards. It's my writing sample and my statement of purpose that will hopefully tell the committee that my scholarship has potential and I know what I'm doing...and fellowship or TAships won't be wasted on me.

    Professors, frankly, aren't dumb. They know what it takes to succeed in their field. And while the GRE and GPA can favor or hurt an application in case of a close decision, they certainly know that memorizing vocabulary and high school math skills have little to do with the skills that are truly necessarily--at least for my field. Other parts of the application are far better indicators of the student's potential. Your flippant reply completely trivializes the SoP and seems to suggest that you have no idea what it actually *should* convey for...to use your example...an English Lit PhD. The example that you gave would actually be a terrible SoP, and would weed out the applicant even if she had a 1600 and 4.0 from Harvard. A good SoP/writing sample would show that the applicant understand the discourse of her field and can think, research, and write on a level that can contribute to the field.

    Besides, there were at least TWO students accepted into Princeton's English PhD cohort last year...with GRE scores well under 1200. One of them had an undergraduate GPA that wasn't far from the 2.8 that you used as an example.
  4. Downvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from RosieLBurns in How to Indicate Long Omission?   
    I wonder if the unspoken protocols for this vary from field to field, or even department to department? Several of the programs that I considered explicitly stated that they will not read writing samples that indicate "sections to read"...but rather wanted the applicants to commit to the cuts before submitting. When I spoke with professors about how to deal with my absurdly long writing sample (over the twice the desired length for some programs), I was told to cut as best as I could and submit what I have if it's within 20% of the page limit. For programs that require drastically shorter essays, I did cut out several sections of several pages each and discussed the omitted material in square brackets. My field, at least, would not have looked kindly upon ask directing the ad-comm on what to read. But then again, I suspect that these things work differently in other departments.
  5. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from surlefil in Suggested minimum GRE scores   
    I've been in your shoes before (obsessing--and I mean OBSESSING--about my test score), so I can understand your anxiety. But after having taken the test 3 times, applying 3 times (these two incidents are not related, actually), and having taught GRE prep classes for the last three years...I think I can say this with a great deal of confidence: you're over-obsessing.

    "I've been telling myself as I've been preparing for the last couple months that if i don't get a 700+ verbal and 600+ math that I won't even bother applying-- does this seem right?"
    NO NO NO NO NO. Absolutely NOT. Apologies for the emphatic response...but...just NO. I have *several* peers (I'm in a top 5 program) who were accepted with utterly abysmal GRE scores. (some of them can cite sickness, others simply didn't bother to prepare). There are programs--I don't feel comfortable naming them, but some of them are in the top 10--that will not actually LOOK at your GRE scores. Whatsoever. (One of those programs, confusingly enough, actually do post "suggested minimums, but several members of the ad-com told me that they do not take test scores into account at all). It is true that in some cases, a low (we're talking 1000 or under) GRE score can make it more difficult to secure funding--a decision that is generally made by the graduate school (as opposed to the grad program, which makes all the admissions decisions). But this tends to be less true for English programs, since most of the top schools will fully fund everyone that they accept.

    From my own experience applying (both with high GRE scores, and with not-so-high ones)...is that under no circumstances did my GRE score keep me out--or get me into a program. (Over the course of 3 rounds, I've racked up 15 acceptance letters--and just as many rejections). This includes programs where my score was less than their posted "recommendations". In some cases, I received the highest funding package even though my score was below what they "suggest." And I'm by no means an exception, or even the most exceptional case of this: several of my peers (some of them on gradcafe, now attending top-tier programs) had considerably lower scores...and did fantastically well in the application process.

    Programs don't list min. scores because...honestly, the application is rarely--if ever--evaluated that way. Even schools that do use the GRE (usually the verbal, sometimes also the subject score, sometimes coupled with your GPA) to determine the first round cut will make exceptions for applications with strong SoP's and writing samples. I can assure you that no program will make exceptions for students with stellar GRE scores and writing samples/SoP's that didn't make the cut. Ad-comms understand perfectly well that the GRE's are something of a joke (and having taught that test, I'd concur) and although the grad school usually require this outdated huddle, it will rarely make a definitive impact.

    It *is* true that well-prepared candidates tend to fare better in the application process (big surprise, right?), and candidates who are typically well-prepared will also budget time/effort into getting past the GRE hurdle. It would be a mistake to think that their relatively higher GRE scores are what got them into strong grad programs to begin with...rather, it's their work ethic (among other things) that lead to high scores, but also lead to incredibly strong writing samples, 3 or 4 years of consistently high grades, articulate and compelling SoP's (etc, etc, etc). If the GRE is the only thing giving you grief, I'd recommend investing your time, energy, and attention on the parts of the application that will actually count.

    And a word of unsolicited advice: don't compare yourself with other applicants. (been there, done that...it scared the hell out of me for months when I first applied, and gave me a bad case of imposter's syndrome during my first year of grad school). You're not going to see a holistic profile...and besides, I doubt that you (or anyone else who's going through the hair-pulling process of applications) are in a position to view your own work objectively. There will be people with high scores, higher stats, more impressive-sounding alma maters. Some of them will fare better than you, some will fare worse....but comparing yourself to them is truly and absolutely counterproductive.
  6. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from carlisle in James Franco got into Yale's PhD program??   
    I posted about this on a personal journal, and two friends in academia who sort-of know his situation actually defended him. While neither saw his application nor directly had him in class, both actually pretty pretty positive things to say. A colleague of one friend taught his class while he was an undergrad. He was apparently very hard-working and pretty smart. Another friend mentioned that his PhD application was actually solid. I'm not sure exactly what that means, but apparently, it was at least respectable. I don't know whether or not his fame influenced decisions, but at least it looks like he won't be embarrassing Yale while enrolled as one of their students.

    Rumor has it that he's an early modernist.
  7. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from Huckabees in Suggested minimum GRE scores   
    I've been in your shoes before (obsessing--and I mean OBSESSING--about my test score), so I can understand your anxiety. But after having taken the test 3 times, applying 3 times (these two incidents are not related, actually), and having taught GRE prep classes for the last three years...I think I can say this with a great deal of confidence: you're over-obsessing.

    "I've been telling myself as I've been preparing for the last couple months that if i don't get a 700+ verbal and 600+ math that I won't even bother applying-- does this seem right?"
    NO NO NO NO NO. Absolutely NOT. Apologies for the emphatic response...but...just NO. I have *several* peers (I'm in a top 5 program) who were accepted with utterly abysmal GRE scores. (some of them can cite sickness, others simply didn't bother to prepare). There are programs--I don't feel comfortable naming them, but some of them are in the top 10--that will not actually LOOK at your GRE scores. Whatsoever. (One of those programs, confusingly enough, actually do post "suggested minimums, but several members of the ad-com told me that they do not take test scores into account at all). It is true that in some cases, a low (we're talking 1000 or under) GRE score can make it more difficult to secure funding--a decision that is generally made by the graduate school (as opposed to the grad program, which makes all the admissions decisions). But this tends to be less true for English programs, since most of the top schools will fully fund everyone that they accept.

    From my own experience applying (both with high GRE scores, and with not-so-high ones)...is that under no circumstances did my GRE score keep me out--or get me into a program. (Over the course of 3 rounds, I've racked up 15 acceptance letters--and just as many rejections). This includes programs where my score was less than their posted "recommendations". In some cases, I received the highest funding package even though my score was below what they "suggest." And I'm by no means an exception, or even the most exceptional case of this: several of my peers (some of them on gradcafe, now attending top-tier programs) had considerably lower scores...and did fantastically well in the application process.

    Programs don't list min. scores because...honestly, the application is rarely--if ever--evaluated that way. Even schools that do use the GRE (usually the verbal, sometimes also the subject score, sometimes coupled with your GPA) to determine the first round cut will make exceptions for applications with strong SoP's and writing samples. I can assure you that no program will make exceptions for students with stellar GRE scores and writing samples/SoP's that didn't make the cut. Ad-comms understand perfectly well that the GRE's are something of a joke (and having taught that test, I'd concur) and although the grad school usually require this outdated huddle, it will rarely make a definitive impact.

    It *is* true that well-prepared candidates tend to fare better in the application process (big surprise, right?), and candidates who are typically well-prepared will also budget time/effort into getting past the GRE hurdle. It would be a mistake to think that their relatively higher GRE scores are what got them into strong grad programs to begin with...rather, it's their work ethic (among other things) that lead to high scores, but also lead to incredibly strong writing samples, 3 or 4 years of consistently high grades, articulate and compelling SoP's (etc, etc, etc). If the GRE is the only thing giving you grief, I'd recommend investing your time, energy, and attention on the parts of the application that will actually count.

    And a word of unsolicited advice: don't compare yourself with other applicants. (been there, done that...it scared the hell out of me for months when I first applied, and gave me a bad case of imposter's syndrome during my first year of grad school). You're not going to see a holistic profile...and besides, I doubt that you (or anyone else who's going through the hair-pulling process of applications) are in a position to view your own work objectively. There will be people with high scores, higher stats, more impressive-sounding alma maters. Some of them will fare better than you, some will fare worse....but comparing yourself to them is truly and absolutely counterproductive.
  8. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from nonymouse in 6% Quant, 80% Verbal   
    Every English department (and often different professors on the same ad-comm in the same department) will look at the GRE scores slightly differently. However, the general rule seems to be that quant counts for very little, if at all. Jacib's views on this are far more consistent with what I've been told (from English professors who serve on ad-comms): many programs (even those within the top ten or top twenty) will not even look at the quant score. At all. For those programs, it won't matter if you scored in the 99th or 1st percentile. Seadub is wrong, I think, about the role that the GRE TENDS to play in English PhD programs. Some schools (the top one in the country, for example) will not look at your GRE score--verbal or quant--at ALL. It's required as a formality for the graduate school, but doesn't factor into the admissions process. In most places, however, the verbal scores DOES factor into the admission process. (700 verbal is a good rule of thumb, but is by no means inflexible. I was admitted into top 10 and ivy league PhD English programs with a lower verbal score). If you look at Duke English's recent statistics, for example, the AVERAGE GRE score of their accepted students last year is a 662 (and average GPA is only a 3.6!), and it's certainly a top ten program: http://gradschool.duke.edu/about/statistics/admiteng.htm . I suspect that Duke places slightly less emphasis on the numbers than some of their top-ranked peers, but this goes to show that the scores certainly are not the most important factors.

    It is worth noting, however, that graduate schools (as opposed to the English programs) will sometimes have overall min. that you will need to meet if you want to be considered for funding. Those tend to be on the low side (1000, sometimes 1200) and tend to be most pressing at public schools, where funding is generally tighter. If it's still possible, you might want to consider studying for the quant and re-taking the entire exam. A bit of studying can go a long ways, especially if you're starting off on the low end. A 100 point boost in your quant score (which is far more attainable than it may seem) might not help you secure admission, but it can tip the scale in your favor if you're admitted to a graduate school that has min. requirements for funding.

    Then again, it's now almost February, and the PhD deadlines for every top 20 school has already passed. You should find out within a few weeks how you fared. Good luck!
  9. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from augustquail in Straight outta college   
    Good luck, folks! Here's to more (and funded) offers to give Fordham some competition.

    For what it's worth, I think it's *incredibly* difficult to apply successfully as an undergrad, especially to PhD programs. I waited two years before applying my first round, and did quite well. (I didn't spend the time in between doing anything academic-y...though the summer before apps were due, I did start studying for the GRE's/Lit exam and rewriting my writing sample, SoP, researching schools, etc). There's something about simply giving oneself a few years to mature--and for your undergrad training to "percolate" that seems quite effective. Looking over my papers from senior year (which I would have submitted had I applied back then), it was pretty obvious that no self-respecting PhD program would have taken me at "that level"...and for what it's worth, I was a straight-A student from a decent undergrad.

    So I suppose what I'm suggesting is...while I can definitely understand the desire to pay for one's MA (and in some cases, this would indeed be a wise move), it may be to your benefit to simply take some time off, find a "real" job (in my case, I tutored, waited tables, and worked in a coffeehouse...nothing glamorous or particularly attractive on my CV/resume)...and try again.

    This isn't to say, of course, that no one gets into strong PhD programs applying as an undergrad. It happens all the time. But I suspect that far more promising applicants benefited from taking time off than applying "straight." Certainly, most (90, 95%) of the students at the top programs that I know of (though this varies depending on the culture/preferences of different programs) took at least 1 year off.
  10. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from apieceofroastbeef in Straight outta college   
    Oops. I haven't changed my status in over a month. I have several offers that I'm quite happy with...and am largely relieved to be DONE with this entire process.

    This sounds like a really good plan, especially since the program seems to be a good fit for you! I'm curious, though...do the MA/PhD students reapply (elsewhere) after completing the MA portion of their program? I ask because I was also accepted into an MA/PhD program two years ago, and had considered that possibility. When I (delicately) inquired into this, I was rather abruptly told that students *don't* use that opportunity to "fish around" (and in any case, it may not be easy to do so without jeopardizing one's relationship with the current program--since you'll need LoR writers). Of course, there's no guaranteed that this applies to all programs with a similar, or even that the person I spoke to knew exactly how things worked in her own program (I didn't dare ask more students after that incident), but it may be worth considering if you're hoping to transfer out. And briefly...rankings are quite mythic, not to mention outdated and not sufficiently tailored to one's particular field/interests/etc. I definitely wouldn't reapply just to scamper up the (imagined) totem pole. While there are programs that are better regarded than others (particularly for certain fields), those don't necessary correspond with the rankings.

    Good luck either way!
  11. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from fbh in Finding an Edge - How am I doing   
    It might not be a bad idea to scroll through some of the previous posts, even if they don't address your precise question. The repeated refrain among successful applicants in these forums is that the numbers (GRE, GPA) and reputation (your CV, your school's rank) count for FAR LESS than most applicants imagine. I can cite dozens of students from no-name schools, with poor GRE/GPA (or all of the above) who had the luxury of turning down multiple ivy league PhD offers. I can also cite dozens of peers with tip-top grades/scores from tip-top schools who got in nowhere...not even into their so-called "safety" schools.
    It's the writing that counts. Seriously. Your writing sample and SoP will trump almost anything and everything else. Focus on that--not on your grades. Take the next 3 semester (long, if you need it--the vast majority--like, 95%--of extremely successful applicants that I know of did NOT apply straight out of undergrad, but either went through an MA program or simply took a few years to explore non-academic avenues) to develop your skills as thinker and writer, to figure out what projects, topics, ideas, thinkers, writers, etc...that you gravitate towards. To find your own project (however rough), and to make sure that this career path (because a PhD in English is definitely a career path, and an extremely risky and unrewarding one at that) is something that you can't live without. THAT is what is going to get you into strong programs, not a good gpa/test scores.
  12. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from Strangefox in heres the situation   
    I'm not sure that this is enough to counter what everyone else has said already. This sort of thing may vary from field to field, but frankly, in my field, studying for the GRE's and paying the application fees DOESN'T constitute thinking long and hard about what you want--and whether or not the PhD program can help you achieve (not to mention...at what cost, in what field/subfield, under which programs, etc, etc). This sounds like adequate preparation for choosing a college, but nowhere near sufficient for choosing a PhD program.

    At the risk of being blunt, I would suspect (though again, I'm not in your field) that part of the reason that your field indeed has a 50% drop-out is because too many (admittedly intelligent) people enter without fully comprehending why they are there, or what they want to get out of it. Think through those questions first--especially if you may be giving up a great job in order to pursue this option.
  13. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from shepardn7 in 6% Quant, 80% Verbal   
    Every English department (and often different professors on the same ad-comm in the same department) will look at the GRE scores slightly differently. However, the general rule seems to be that quant counts for very little, if at all. Jacib's views on this are far more consistent with what I've been told (from English professors who serve on ad-comms): many programs (even those within the top ten or top twenty) will not even look at the quant score. At all. For those programs, it won't matter if you scored in the 99th or 1st percentile. Seadub is wrong, I think, about the role that the GRE TENDS to play in English PhD programs. Some schools (the top one in the country, for example) will not look at your GRE score--verbal or quant--at ALL. It's required as a formality for the graduate school, but doesn't factor into the admissions process. In most places, however, the verbal scores DOES factor into the admission process. (700 verbal is a good rule of thumb, but is by no means inflexible. I was admitted into top 10 and ivy league PhD English programs with a lower verbal score). If you look at Duke English's recent statistics, for example, the AVERAGE GRE score of their accepted students last year is a 662 (and average GPA is only a 3.6!), and it's certainly a top ten program: http://gradschool.duke.edu/about/statistics/admiteng.htm . I suspect that Duke places slightly less emphasis on the numbers than some of their top-ranked peers, but this goes to show that the scores certainly are not the most important factors.

    It is worth noting, however, that graduate schools (as opposed to the English programs) will sometimes have overall min. that you will need to meet if you want to be considered for funding. Those tend to be on the low side (1000, sometimes 1200) and tend to be most pressing at public schools, where funding is generally tighter. If it's still possible, you might want to consider studying for the quant and re-taking the entire exam. A bit of studying can go a long ways, especially if you're starting off on the low end. A 100 point boost in your quant score (which is far more attainable than it may seem) might not help you secure admission, but it can tip the scale in your favor if you're admitted to a graduate school that has min. requirements for funding.

    Then again, it's now almost February, and the PhD deadlines for every top 20 school has already passed. You should find out within a few weeks how you fared. Good luck!
  14. Downvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from augustquail in Low AW for phd in Eng Lit?   
    I know of plenty of "smart writers" who scored under a 5. Much of this has to do with the way grading is done. They're looking for a certain "clear" (read, heavy-handed and blunt) writing style that we--as English academics--are trained to use far more subtly. Ambiguity (even teased out) is not a virtue. They're looking for you to take sides, to make very clear-cut analysis on issues that (even as presented) that are often not that clear-cut. They want heavy transitions (often looking for transitional words, rather than a logically structured argument that can function without an in-order-face work like "Secondly..."). You will be docked for NOT doing this, even if you otherwise handle the assignment correctly.

    Yeah. Freshman writing style.
  15. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from soxpuppet in Low AW for phd in Eng Lit?   
    I know of plenty of "smart writers" who scored under a 5. Much of this has to do with the way grading is done. They're looking for a certain "clear" (read, heavy-handed and blunt) writing style that we--as English academics--are trained to use far more subtly. Ambiguity (even teased out) is not a virtue. They're looking for you to take sides, to make very clear-cut analysis on issues that (even as presented) that are often not that clear-cut. They want heavy transitions (often looking for transitional words, rather than a logically structured argument that can function without an in-order-face work like "Secondly..."). You will be docked for NOT doing this, even if you otherwise handle the assignment correctly.

    Yeah. Freshman writing style.
  16. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from chaussettes in Low AW for phd in Eng Lit?   
    I know of plenty of "smart writers" who scored under a 5. Much of this has to do with the way grading is done. They're looking for a certain "clear" (read, heavy-handed and blunt) writing style that we--as English academics--are trained to use far more subtly. Ambiguity (even teased out) is not a virtue. They're looking for you to take sides, to make very clear-cut analysis on issues that (even as presented) that are often not that clear-cut. They want heavy transitions (often looking for transitional words, rather than a logically structured argument that can function without an in-order-face work like "Secondly..."). You will be docked for NOT doing this, even if you otherwise handle the assignment correctly.

    Yeah. Freshman writing style.
  17. Downvote
    strokeofmidnight reacted to Medievalmaniac in Low AW for phd in Eng Lit?   
    I take a bit of offense to this statement, that "adcomms realize the AW section is a joke." That might be because I earned a perfect score on the AW section and only 89th percentile on the verbal portion...does that mean that adcomms will view my GRE scores as a joke and question my writing ability? Shall I be more scrutinized as a candidate, deemed suspect because I scored highly on the joke section of the exam? (Is there only one joke section of the GRE...? I was under the assumption the whole thing was suspect, myself... ) That said, whether we like it or not, and whether they explicitly state it or not, the GRE for better or worse does count in our evaluation as candidates, to a greater or lesser degree.

    Going into English, I would think they would expect decent writing scores as well as verbal ones. Have you spoken to adcomms that told you they don't think the writing score is important?

    That said, I think a 4 is a respectable score on the writing section, and if everything else on the GRE was strong, there's no point in retaking it in hopes of a higher essay score. Focus on your writing sample.
  18. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from Sarah S. in How Soon to Contact Potential Professors   
    I'm not sure how else to put it, other than that things look very different from this perspective.

    1. You seem to assume what I think is a false dichotomy between people who are willing to help and people who are not. It's not nearly that simple--as my previous response (unsuccessfully, apparently) tried to indicate. Most graduate students ARE willing to help, but are discerning about who they help, under what circumstances and framework. Personally, I would never speak badly of a professor, adviser, or my program via email to what is essentially a stranger. It's a political risk (even if you reassure them that you'd never share, word does get out quickly). I'd be willing to take it to help a prospective student (aka, with an offer in hand) make decisions (through the phone or in person), but not for someone who--quite frankly--might be among the 90-99% of applicants who won't be accepted into my program to begin with. Being careful who you badmouth your program/professors/peers to isn't overly pessimestic...it's common sense. As as long as you make requests in a format where the respondent isn't inclined to give full disclosure, it's hard to access how honest the answers really are (which isn't to say that they can't be useful).

    2. I don't think it's a snap judgment to respond negatively (or not at all) to an email that is practically a SoP, or bears uncomfortable resemblance to an interrogation. What its very length says is that its writer deems him or herself worthy of the recipient's time, effort, and attention. That's a somewhat dangerous assumption to make in academia, particularly if you're starting out. There's no need to kow-tow every time you meet a person, but one should be aware that academics are insanely busy, and taking two or three hours to respond is unusual courtesy, not a right. The negative characterization of those who would not respond to that email favorable (even if we'd do so courteously) seems to suggest that you think the graduate student or professor is somehow professionally obligated to do view that email favorably. That's the assumption that I'm trying to challenge, I suppose. As foppery stated, such an email (or any such--particularly long--email which asks for detailed feedback) is an imposition. At times it will be worth it for you to take that risk, but most of the time, it probably wouldn't...but in any case, it's probably to recognize that giving detailed, helpful, and truly enthusiastic responses to such long emails from pre-applicants is not in anyone's implicit or explicit job description...and because the request is so unusual (by the standards of academic courtesy), the failure to response positively probably shouldn't be viewed as a black mark against the department.

    3. At the risk of being blunt and possibly bitchy, I think part of the implicit assumption that is so subtly dangerous here is that you're rhetorically positioning yourself in two contradictory stances. 1. You're asking for help in a manner that makes this a one-way street (since this is all about the grad student/professor can help YOU make decisions, or craft a better SoP for this field). That's what I meant by the strange and uncomfortable power dynamics. 2. At the same time, you're positioning yourself as a peer in putting forth your project and (implicitly) demanding several hours of their time. As I noted earlier, we don't know yet if you're a colleague. That juxtapositioning is very difficult to manage, I think. What I keep trying to say is that your email seems to frame as apart of the "family" (and yes, every program is its own little semi-dysfunctional family) when you're not, yet. This doesn't mean you're necessarily inferior (or superior, or whatnot), but it does mean that you may put people off when you expect to be given the same courtesy.

    4. Honestly, researching programs isn't about quizzing the grad students and professors. It's about digging up potential professor's work, reading dissertations, book reviews...etc, etc...until you gain a sense of what projects they support. While there may be opportunities to ask grad students/profs before you're accepted, this isn't the most effective way to go about doing so.
  19. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from Sarah S. in How Soon to Contact Potential Professors   
    Seconding both answers vehemently. There's a lot to be said for getting help from current grad students. When I last applied, I had friends and colleagues at almost every program on my list. Their help was absolutely instrumental: they (knowing my work) suggested professors that I would never have thought of, helped me gauge the atmosphere of the program, edited my SoP and writing sample, introduced me to other graduate students, offered suggestions on other programs, etc, etc. I don't think I can ever pay off that intellectual debt and I feel absurdly lucky. But I knew them going into this process--and in many cases, had helped them in previous years when they were applying. I'm also guilty of favoritism myself: when I find applicants that I would have to have colleagues (either at my program or in academia more generally), I go out of my way to offer feedback on their work, their potential programs, create connections (etc). But--and here's the catch--I need to have a strong and favorable impression of someone (both as a potential friend and future colleague) already before I'm willing to go to such length. It's virtually impossible to create that sort of impression "cold-calling" through an email. In short, the power dynamics and the explicit favor-asking framework doesn't facilitate forming the sort of relationship that would motivate me (and I'd suspect, most grad students) to stick my neck out for you. Like foppery, if I'm not *too* busy, I will answer out of civility and give reasonably honest responses, but I'd be doing it largely out of a sense of obligation, rather than to insure that your application is as strong as it can be and that you're fully well informed. These emails, frankly, also take forever to write.

    Inafuturelife is also completely right on how "gossipy" graduate students (and faculty) are. Even if you aim your email carefully, only at the students working in your field...chances are, they're friends with each other (or at least speak to each other) and this will come up. I've seen it happen again and again, and the result is almost never positive. Of course we'll be civil (or simply not answer)...that isn't necessarily an indication that the email was successful.

    Connections matter in far more subtle ways than simply influencing admissions decisions--and this is part of why I emphasize that if a professor tells you to email someone and use their name, definitely do it. Whenever a friend or colleague (and certainly, a professor) sends "someone my way," I will always take the time to see that the student's concerns are addressed. I suspect that professors adopt a similar approach (though probably with a more complicated hierarchy). But unless you have some sort of an "in"...or a genuine, compelling question that can evade this "just tryin' to get my foot in the door" framework and catch the attention of the professor in question, I wouldn't recommend cold-emailing anyone. Professors are far too busy (and from my experience, usually annoyed even if they're too polite to let you know this) to look on an unsolicited email favorably. We grad students often feel the same way.
  20. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from repatriate in (Not) Contacting Potential Advisors   
    I'd recommend taking a look at this thread:
    or this more recent version:

    In short, "contacting faculty" varies drastically from department to department. From what I understand, it's normal--even expected--in certain sciences. It's quite unusual for English, and (from my experience) tends to against applicants who don't know what they are doing. (General rule of thumb: if you have to ask whether or not you should contact professors, or what questions you should ask while contacting professors in this field--don't do so). The vast majority of the successful applicants (now in top-ranked English PhD programs) that I know of did not contact professors.

    It's worth noting...the norms for applicants vary DRASTICALLY from field to field, and I'd be very cautious about looking to science applicants for a model. They may be extremely well versed on what works for their field, but immitating their approach might seem naive to professors in your field.
  21. Downvote
    strokeofmidnight reacted to Branwen daughter of Llyr in What is a writing sample?   
    The writing sample is a piece of scholarly work (usually a research paper), ranging from 10 to 25 pp (depending on the program you are applying to), which shows your scholarly and research capabilities (obviously, your writing level, as well). A 1 page thesis proposal is definitely NOT considered a writing sample. I don't know how important the writing sample is in the sciences, but in the humanities and most social sciences, it's paramount - one of the most important parts of your application.
  22. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight reacted to Pamphilia in New Here - Sorry for questions   
    It sounds as if you have a lot of thinking and work to do just to figure out the basics of your application strategy. Given that it is already October, I would encourage you to wait until next year to apply in order to give yourself adequate time to prepare a solid application. If you're trying to do it all now (when most other applicants probably began at least two months ago) AND you're still in school...well, yikes. I would advise you to sit the GRE this year if you're up for it, because you're still in school/test mode so it may be productive for you. But instead of actually applying this round, I'd encourage you to do some serious research on the field and the application process.
  23. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from poco_puffs in ...but how do you decide what's realistic and what's a reach?   
    Unfortunately, stats can tell us (and I'd wager, the ad-comm) very little about your chances. One friend who graduated with honors (and departmental awards) from an Ivy did not get into any program the first round she applied. There are students in my (fairly strong) PhD program who came from "no-name" MA or BA programs with medicore scores and grades...but can write/think/research amazingly well. It really truly and absolutely depends on the writing sample, the SoP, and how well your proposed project fits the interest and needs of the programs that you apply to. You might want to comb through some of the other threads on this board--I think the near-unanimous opinion (particularly from those of us current enrolled in PhD programs) is that the numbers matter very little--it's the writing that will make or break your application.

    One brief note about GPA. There's no need to worry about yours (the fact that you went on with an MA will help to pad whatever passing questions the ad-comm might have about your MA grades), but as you probably know, grades work very different in (US) graduate programs. For the programs that I'm familiar with, an A is generally an indication that you're doing "acceptable" work (ie, doing well). An A- or a B is a warning that you're not performing up to par. Every MA-holder from a US university that I know of (except for myself, oddly enough) applied with a 4.0. This isn't to undercut your achievement--it is to suggest that grades work differently then in undergrad, and will not be a particularly assert (or detractor) for your application.


  24. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from perpetuallyperplexed in Top 20 Or Don't Go   
    If a bunch of English prospective graduate students are struggling to understand what the hell you're saying, there's a chance--a tiny one--that the fault doesn't entirely rest with them. I don't know if being denser than Lacan is actually a positive attribute.

    Now that you've elucidated that paragraph for us, I agree with the gist of your claims (it's what you produce, not the prestige) that counts...if not quite your attitude. So who exactly are you trying to recriminate? And why? and why in the world would you do it in this manner?
  25. Upvote
    strokeofmidnight got a reaction from mudlark in Reapplication   
    I think it would not be wise. One common (if entirely understandable) mistake that many applicants seem to commit on their SoP's--in various forms--is to see a space for working out their emotions. I'm not quite stating this very well. I suppose what I'm trying to say that applying--and reapplying, which I did twice--is an emotionally exhaustive process, and it's all too easy to let that exhaustion leak onto the page. With very rare exceptions, I don't think most ad-comms respond well to that emotion vulnerability in an SoP (the PS is another matter altogether) unless it's *explicitly* called for your research project...which doesn't seem to be the case here. Ad-comms do look for a certain level of professionalism in your writing, which entails knowing what to filter out...and how *fully* to think through the very relevant growths, insights, revelations that you've gained since your last application...without drawing explicit (and generally inappropriate) attention to them. In short, *show* them what you've gained through the sophistication of your thoughts and your project, the nuances of your writing, etc...but don't *state* it. Tugging on their heartstrings, I suspect, will backfire.

    When I showed a draft of my SoP to 6 professors (at two very different schools), every single one of them x'ed out my introduction. I had a single sentence that (looking back, rather mildly and gently) was somewhat personal, as it alluded to my rather unusual status. My profs told me that the very use of that sentence broke the otherwise appropriate tone of my SoP and did not reflect well on me as the writer.

    Remember: professors read through the SoP for much more than just your research proposal. They're also gauging the tone to see if you understand what approach is appropriate...gauging your approach to get a sense of your personality, etc. An opening sentence, as you suggested, risk inadvertently sending the message that you are egocentric or theatrical.

    In this case, it isn't so much a matter of bluntness...it's also a question of exactly what that blunt revelation would reveal. A prof might ask, for example, if such a blunt declaration is covering up for your insecurity from the previous round (since drawing attention to this issue is unusual). They might wonder why you're grandstanding this particularly moment. If you do craft a sufficiently compelling narrative to back your use of opening line, they might be impatient that it's taking so long to get to "the meat." It is possible to pull off this opening line...but you've got to be the Picasso of SoP's. That is, you have to master the "traditional" approach--understand exactly why each element/"rule" does or doesn't work (and how they function in combination) before you can begin to tweak it successfully. Otherwise, you risk being perceived as immature or unfamiliar with the usual protocols.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use