nevermind

I just got my first interview request for tomorrow. I didn't expect to be this nervous! ahhhh.

I think that admissions committees are likely to view degrees from evangelical institutions as "non-rigorous". I had a degree from a religious school (not evangelical, but it was where I obtained my M.A.) and it definitely hurt me when competing with students from other institutions (Harvard, Yale, etc.). This book review also alludes to the perception of religious institutions as non-rigorous (at best): https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/06/new-book-reveals-how-elite-phd-admissions-committees-review-candidates

Not sure how "esoteric" it is (although I suppose if you don't work in advertising or the like, it could be). I work with graphic designers every day and we use "lorem ipsum" for placeholder copy while we work on content strategy (and while I generate a list of copy assets), especially for digital.

I'm working full time right now (copywriting), but I just applied to a writing and research assistant job at a top school (in the city where I live). I'm hoping I get it because it could give me another job that directly improves my application + take more (free) classes to fill in gaps in my education (I'm looking at you grad-level stats class). So between waiting for Ph.D. responses + job interview phone call (they already replied via email saying they were interested)...I'm learning how to be patient REALLY well.

You'll fit well into academia then.

I applied to CUA (5 years ago) and was accepted to their Semitics program (no interview). So something might've changed or simply the semitics dept. does things differently. Good luck!

At least you have acceptances! I thought I'd hear at least something (unofficially positive) by now. So THAT's what's making me anxious. Really, the speadsheet only makes me anxious because I think of all the unknown variables. We're working with limited self-selected data...so I'm not entirely confident in my spreadsheet's reliability and just remind myself that it's a reference tool--not sacrosanct. When I applied for PhD programs about 5 years ago, one program conducted interviews that I didn't even know about. There was nothing posted ANYWHERE (including these forums) that the department did an interview / flew short-listed candidates out to campus. This was a top 5 program in its field, so I assumed there would be data available from previous years. I only found out it when a friend (who went to that school) said something akin to, "the department was interviewing today". My rejection 2 weeks later wasn't a huge surprise, though everyone hopes they are a special snowflake where maybe your application was just *too good* that they didn't need to interview you...and all the excuses the imagination feeds itself to desperately hold on to hope... THOSE interviews took place the last week of January. I haven't heard *anything* from really any of my programs (except for one academia.edu hit) and I'm trying not to wonder how many other programs have interviews/unofficial acceptances before they somehow trickle on to the results page...

Good luck to everyone who applied there!

I concur 100%. I think it's easy to read forums like this and see "well, my GRE scores were higher than theirs..." or "I have XYZ that they didn't have...why did they get in and I didn't?" We don't know the whole story behind anyone's application...and in some sense forums (don't nitpick my latin plurals) like these provide simultaneously an inflated sense of self worth and an overwhelming sense of defeat (at least it does for me). It's always important to remember that grad admissions aren't (always) a meritocracy. You can be nearly perfect on paper only to find that it simply wasn't your year. As many others on the forums have noted, candidates who were rejected one year might be accepted the next (even without significantly changing their essays/profile). Graduate admissions committees aren't rejecting YOU as a person. They may not doubt your aptitude for excellence. They are simply evaluating a fit for their department at a particular time, with lots of red tape involved (funding issues, having to reject a perfect candidate because they took someone in the same subfield the year before, etc. etc.). I sincerely hope that everyone gets their top-choice schools (including me). But for those of us who won't (including me)--deep breath everybody. It'll really be okay.

Me too...I put it into a spreadsheet including the range of dates (first acceptance - last acceptance, expected rejection dates), notification type, plus area code of the school...in case they call. No, I'm not on edge at all.

First hit on my academia.edu page! ahhhhh.

Just because you're interviewing with other people doesn't mean you can't work with the POI. In fact, the POI might've already signed off on approving you (If you mentioned them in your SOP). I would email the professor and say, "I'm scheduled for an interview for X program and I'm extremely interested in your work on A, B, C. Do you have time to have an informal chat on such-and-such weekend?" Keep it simple and keep it excited.

A personal anecdote... In 2008, I finished my first M.A. and applied for Ph.D's in a pretty competitive field (Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations). I did my Master's degree to "prove" that I wasn't my undergraduate GPA (very low...I worked full-time and was diagnosed with an autoimmune disease that contributed to a lot of missed classes). I selected my Master's institution based on the fact that it wasn't a competitive program (aka: I could get in) and the faculty that taught there also taught at "Big Name" programs. I did well enough (3.7+), published/presented/adjuncted an upper-level religion class, did some fieldwork...even took a class with someone I was applying to study under (and was one of 2 people go get an A in that class). In applying to fairly prestigious programs, I was shut out of almost everything. (I was offered a partially funded M.A. with the professor that I had taken a class from and a partially funded Ph.D. at another school where the cost of living would be prohibitively expensive, so I didn't take it.) In soliciting feedback for future improvements/rounds of applications, I was told that I simply wouldn't be competitive--regardless of what I did. Part of this was because of my undergraduate GPA (at that point, it was 5 years old), but professors repeatedly told me that I was up against "people with Master's degrees from Harvard and Yale" and there was no way that my no-name institution would stand up against that (their words, not mine). This happened at more than one school, more than one faculty member. I left academia briefly to reconsider what my plan of attack would be in pursuing a Ph.D...since prestige *can* matter (to a degree), especially if all other factors are equal and I couldn't compete at that level. Obviously, this isn't to say that prestige is the ONLY thing that matters (my underwhelming undergraduate GPA certainly didn't help). But it is a factor that seemed to play a role in admissions offers from my experience, but I think prestige also equated people taking every advantage of being at *known* programs--certainly the candidates had *big name* LORs, took a ton of language classes, etc. etc. In my case, going for a Master's degree at a "not academically rigorous" (their words) institution couldn't help me prove that I could do graduate work and couldn't stack up against more qualified candidates. All this to say, prestige is nice if you have it. But if you don't, I don't think it's the end of the world IF your degree is from a respected institution.

Let me know if you need any help (I "worked in" Biblical Hebrew in undergrad/first Master's degree). I've been brushing up on my Modern Hebrew (I haven't used it in 3 years), so I can pass my first language competency exam during my first semester and get that hurdle out of the way.

lots of leftover Christmas candy and french fries.

Hi TurquoiseTurle, I don't really think a second Bachelor's is necessary. It's a much cheaper alternative to register as a non-degree seeking student and begin taking graduate-level classes in your area of interest. This will give you a couple things you're lacking: recent grades, proof that you can handle graduate-level work, and likely, more relevant letters of recommendation. Alternatively, since your goal is in education, you might see if there any certificate programs that would be beneficial to your career trajectory--which would boost your application in a similar way.

I don't know how I missed this, but it looks like we're pretty much background twins, research interest twins, and GRE twins! I'm looking at Environmental History (but the history of water technology)...and have a background in Near Eastern Studies (was a TA for 2 classes) and Science (TA for a Environmental Engineering class)...with a Master's degree (mostly applied research projects) on Agriculture and Development. Where'd you end up applying to? Mine are mostly a mix of History of Science programs and human geography programs. Good luck!

Sometimes Petersons gives a skewed impression of inflated acceptance rates by showing unfunded MA offers along with PhD offers, so it looks like the acceptance rate is substantially higher than what it would be for a Ph.D. candidate. Sometimes, like you've said, the numbers are off completely. It's not a perfect metric by any stretch of the imagination, but for programs that don't provide statistics, it's not a terrible comparison tool. However, I wouldn't tell people to apply only to programs based off of the rates provided by Petersons, because the exceptional candidate for competitive programs will (likely) beat the odds.

Nothing for me yet either. I wasn't expecting to realistically hear back until the second week of February, but seeing how (it seems) many people have heard SOMETHING back by now makes me feel nervous and on edge. I keep telling myself that "no news is good news", but it doesn't help me from wishing that a POI would contact me for an unofficial offer or something.

I'm applying to History of Science / Geography (Human Geography) Ph.D. programs. My research interests are quite interdisciplinary, focusing on the intersections of science, religion, and the environment. Like most people here (I imagine), I'm hoping to research / teach...

Seems like you're arguing more in favor of Harvard than Penn. So maybe you already know which one you'll choose. All else aside, I really don't think you could lose regardless of which one you select (or if you don't get into Harvard). Best of luck in the rest of your application season!

Honestly, if it were between the University of Phoenix or Harvard, obviously, you should go to Harvard. But doing a Ph.D. is hard enough, especially without continually second guessing where you end(ed) up. At the end of the day, you really should attend a program you LOVE, where you feel like your research is supported, and where you get to work with great people (if you're lucky enough to get an offer from such a program...which it sounds like you are). Obviously, rankings matter (to a degree) on the job market, but so do publications/presentations/other professional schtick which are easier to come by if you're in the perfect environment for your research (and for you personally). If you feel Penn is a place where you feel more ambitious/would be more successful--go to Penn. I wouldn't go to a school based solely on brand name value. You could be miserable at Harvard, which would be a waste of your time. However, you should wait until you have both offers in hand and then visit the campuses (if you can). Get a feel for the programs and really envision where you want to be. It's easy to get caught up in the "OMG I got in! I want to go to this school NOW!!!" adrenaline that comes with acceptances. Just be patient and figure out what's right for YOU. (Coincidentally, I applied to Penn and Oregon. Oregon has been tied for my number 2 spot over the "name brand" of Penn...because I feel like I could do really good work with the faculty there. Not likely to have to make a decision between the two...I don't think i got an interview at Penn. :-) )

Does anyone know if they interview for HoS? I got the impression that it was a separate admissions process (HoS applicants didn't have to submit a book review)...even though the departments overlap significantly.

Sounds like you have a great things going for your application! I *do* recognize it's a niche field (I mentioned that on the other forum) and that many people "trained" in STS are people lucky enough to encounter it in a university setting (and usually that does happen at Ivies...and some schools like Oklahoma, Wisconsin, UCSD, etc..) My LOR writers aren't really that well known to STS circles, though they are all recognized in their respective fields (I think)...two sociologists and one chair of an engineering department (my adviser). Hopefully the diversity in theory/science will help me, but I don't really know. I started my undergrad career at a community college and eventually found my way to STS...so maybe others will too.

You (likely) applied to a different department! You'll be fine - you're already kiillin' it with admissions offers! Congrats!