Caien

Dramatic confession: I still haven't done my CV

As you say, practical matters are unlikely to change for international, it is a matter of people wanting to live in a country under a Trump presidency. The time spent in a PhD program is not confined to a University campus, we will be living in these communities and if quality of life in the US begins to drop significantly, particularly for immigrants, it will make for a difficult few years. In the months following the Brexit vote there has been a dramatic increase in the UK in physical and verbal abuse of both immigrants and UK citizens who are not white Anglo-Saxon, which is unfortunately a dramatic intensification of a trend across Europe. I'm comforted somewhat by the fact (and correct me if this is false hope) that most of my programs are in states that voted Clinton, but although I've intended to leave Ireland since my teens as career prospects here are limited, our boring, predictable, rock-solid centre-left democracy is beginning to look more and more attractive.

I cannot speak to the issues for domestic applicants, but I can tell you that as an international, while I do not think I will no longer apply (I'm too far gone at this point), I'm considerably less enthusiastic than I was yesterday about the prospect of spending 5-6 years minimum in the US. As far as how this affects US academic overall, I would expect a decrease in international applicants over the next 2-3 application cycles and thus, fewer international students in cohorts. Have any educational institutions put out statements? After the Brexit vote many of the UK institutions did so, though they couldn't reassure us much beyond, 'you will not be immediately deported. We are very sorry this has happened.'

Thanks for your thoughts guys. I've just drafted a fit paragraph without naming profs and its come to about 600 words, so I can certainly make my case, but I suppose it comes down to whether I want to take a risk of ignoring a convention. The department is fairly large, and I can definitely put together a committee of 3 supervisors who can help in all that major areas that intersect in my proposed dissertation, its just there isn't one perfect match. Funnily enough, in regards @poliscar's point, the three professors who supervised the previous dissertation that is quite similar to my proposal in texts and methodology are not those I would have picked from my knowledge of the department. The link is there, but its tenuous. One is an expert in the same time-frame and genre but a different national tradition, one is a postcolonialist, and since the literature is question is of a former colony that must be the connection, but we're talking a colony on the opposite side of the planet and with a completely different colonial history to that of the supervisor's, and the dissertation was not even dealing with postcolonialism! So its a bit odd. I actually emailed the phd candidate in question (now an assistant prof in a highly ranked department) to ask about her experience but received no response. I can only assume perhaps its a question of the project changing significantly from its starting off point.

Does anyone have any experience of submitting an SoP without naming faculty members with whom you would want to work? I'm applying to a particular department for because they have excellent collections in my area of interest and host a lecture series which brings scholars in my field to speak at the uni. I know two professors work quite well but they would be about 50 years removed from what I'm looking to research; having had exposure to their work as an undergraduate I could work in a mention, but it strikes me as a little insincere. Its not that there would be nobody at the uni to supervise me (in fact, someone recently competed a thesis there that was very similar to my area of interest in terms of texts and theoretical approach, supervised by professors who are still on staff), but I don't want to just name people to tick off that box - I have genuine reasons to apply to the department beyond specific faculty members.

Thanks for clarifying @thepriorwalter and @bhr, it was the wording that threw me, 'reader's guide', I actually had one of these last year, though it wasn't as extensive as you guys seem to be suggesting.

This is what I was thinking when I started the thread, having 3/4 versions of the same essay sounds a bit dangerous - when editing it would be hard to keep track of how the argument was building, as you'd have to remember all the specific remarks, evidence etc. that you've left out for the sake of trimming a page or two. While seeing an admissions guidelines allowing up to 30 pages might seem tempting when having to cut down a dissertation, I'm also inclined to think, as you say @thepriorwalter, that being concise may be the best thing. Particular considering the target audience is someone who will be reading dozens, if not hundreds, of these papers. I've never heard anything like this before, is it a Rhet/comp thing?

Does anyone have any opinions/strategies on how to manage different writing sample requirements between schools? Posters here generally seem to talk about their writing sample in a way that implies they have only one. Is this what people usually do? Go with the shortest length and submit that for all applications? Or do people do light editing? In my case I have some schools requiring 15 pages max, some requiring 30 max, and some with a range of 15-20 or 20-25. I'm thinking I'll have one main writing sample of about 22-23 pages( and do some meddling with margins/spacing/font to get it down to 20 where I must) then have another strict 15 page/5000 word version. Thoughts?

This is all great advice Ramus, thank you!

Can you clarify what you mean by 'show' here? Some programs do require you to name faculty, but in my experience it isn't really feasible to limit your applications to only schools with faculty whose work you were previously familiar, if only for practical reasons like funding etc. I hate the namedropping thing too, and am trying to figure out a way around it, and my professors have told me to name 2-3 faculty at every school, in case one retires/takes another job etc.

Re: the state of the field issue, there's this from the Berkeley guidance page on SoPs, but this is general advice fro all disciplines, so I suppose its up for debate: Here you indicate what you would like to study in graduate school in enough detail to convince the faculty that you understand the scope of research in their discipline, and are engaged with current research themes. (link) I am proposing a specific project, though personally I find its helps me articulate what I want to do, as in: I am interested in such and such theoretical approached as applied to this subfield, and an example of this would be... *insert clever proposal here* (that's terrible, but its late here in Europe) A professor from my university who graduated from Stanford's PhD program not long ago told me its a good idea to propose a project, even if you're unlikely to stick to that project for the length of your time in the PhD program. She said it gives the adcomm a sense that you understand what it is to do research in English and can come up with relevant ideas. I struck out last year with an SoP that was mostly just an overview of my interests with only a few lines of an example project, that didn't address the existing critical field. It may be relevant to note that when I think of the state of current research, I mean in relation to the specific texts I want to work with (for now). Because I'm applying to masters degrees in Europe as well, which require a proposal for a project that can be completed in a year, I have a specific project fairly well mapped out in my head. I'm considering referring to this as a sort of hypothetical chapter of a hypothetical phd dissertation. It also means I have read extensively almost all the significant critical writing on this set of texts, as masters proposals are expected to be original research that refer to existing critical literature. I think its important to note that there's no one way to do this, no formula you can follow that guarantees admission. I'm sure that admitted cohorts produce a variety of different SoP forms/styles.

This is just my two cents, but I'm not sure how you would avoid indicating how your research fits into the current climate of your proposed field. My understanding is that part of the point of the SoP is to persuade the faculty that your research needs doing and that therefore they should give you the time/space/money to do it. In my mind this necessarily requires you to address how your work is similar/different to existing research, both historically and in the here and now, and thus what you will add to the field. Though I'm from Europe where we plan detailed PhD research proposals in advance, so perhaps I'm overestimating the extent to which you need to demonstrate understanding of the current critical landscape. I'm struggling with this as well, as I'm interesting in the confluence of different theoretical strands and interdisciplinary work. Luckily my subfield is comparatively neglected, so its possible to actually read all of the significant critics, but as to how I'm going to get my critical awareness across along with how I intent to apply three different theoretcial schools and incorporate other disciplines within a 1000 word restriction, I have no idea!

Yes, this is sensible. I think I'm in an irrational phase of the stress cycle. Keep calm and carry on.

Some thoughts re the matchiness question. I actually got some advice on this exact matter from someone on an adcomm at a top 10 department this past year. This is paraphrased a bit, but they said that the SoP and writing sample should work together and point in the same direction, as it were. That the research questions you propose in the SoP should 'in one way or another' be manifest in your writing sample. I'd quote the whole thing, but I'm not sure if that would be frowned upon since it was a personal mail from an adcomm member? They were keeping it vague themselves in order to not be unethical. Most of the general advice seems to be to preferably submit a sample in your proposed area of interest. I have one fairly mundane essay (an A+, but just written in response to a set question) in my exact area of interest, a close reading with zero theoretical framing, and which to be honest brings nothing really new to the table. However my dissertation is on a contemporary novel that very well demonstrates my theoretical leanings and research interests, as well as being the first ever academic study of the text in question and is just generally a much stronger work. I emailed a few graduate admissions officers with this info and the response was always to pick the strongest sample and the one that best represents you as a scholar, so while its a bit nerve-wracking to have to lean on a sentence or two in the SoP to convince the adcomm you can do work in a temporal field without any evidence to back it up, I think in certain cases its actually the better option. As an aside, in the UK they are actually quite strict on the writing sample being in the same temporal/geographical research area as the thesis proposal. Both Oxford and St Andrews state it explicitly on their website. In the case of the OP, and this is just my feeling from brief emails with my own professors and graduate admins, I wouldn't say there's any need for your writing sample to match the SoP very specifically. As a few other posters have said, you'll be expected to grow, and it might be for the best not to seem like you have only one very narrow interest. Finally, hope its okay if I jump in with a related question, there seems to be some advice out there about the writing sample needing to engage with prior/existing scholarship on a text. In my case, there is none (on the novel itself I mean), is there a possibility this may be an issue in terms of not showing engagement with previous scholarship?

Thank you!

Any chance of a link to the AMA charmlemagne?

Hi Knp, thanks for the response. The Anglo-Irish Gothic novel (Charles Maturin, J Sheridan Le Fanu, Stoker, Wilde amongst others), also the historical novel and 19th century Irish historiography. Your suggestions for how to approach the SoP was essentially exactly what I did unsuccessfully last year. It was likely not clear, but your remarks on branching out are what I meant when I said I'm a Irish lit specialist who hopes in the future to work on British and American literature of the 19th century as well as Irish. Of course I did not say in the SoP that I am interested in '19th century American literature', I did specify writers/works and how they would relate to my previous work. When I mention my preferred research area as 19th century British, Irish and American, I refer to the fact that on application forms for English PhD programs, they require you to state a very broad geographical/temporal research area, which is used to direct the application to the appropriate member of the admissions committee. Additionally, my SoP was structured around a theme, which was the interrelation between historiography and the novel. However, its very likely that my SoP didn't sound entirely committed, as on the advice of some of professors, I simply put together a potential thesis project as an example of what I might study in the future, with an awareness of the fact I would not be tied down. It requires a bit of cognitive dissonance, I think, to propose a thesis as if I am 100% committed when a big part of why I am applying to the US is because I don't want to commit to a very specific project at this stage. If that was the case I would likely just do my PhD in the UK. This is clearly something I just have to work through. Finally, when you mention 'Atlantic/ocean' studies do you mean transatlanticism? Because yes that is becoming popular in English departments. Having done some serious digging on good SoPs and reading discussions here on Gradcafe, it really does seem like writing the SoP is a simply a learning process. Thanks very much for taking the time to make some suggestions, I will definitely be keeping in mind the emphasis on persuasive rather than explanatory writing.

Hey guys, did much stalking of the 2016 thread last year, but never posted, so I just want to say in advance that many comments on this forum have been very enlightening, so a general thank you to all posters! Does anyone know if there are any resources where we can see examples of successful SoPs? I was 0/7 on apps last year, so a complete overhaul is called for I think. On literary theory in the writing sample, has any one heard anything about using multiple types of theories in an essay? My WS is an extract from my undergraduate dissertation, and I actually use three different theories in my argument: reader-response, intertextuality theory and, well, Roland Barthes (his post-structuralist writings on history mainly). During the writing process I was concerned about this making the dissertation seem a bit all over the place, but my supervisor assured me using multiple theories wasn't an issue. Then, when I got my feedback, the only critique was that the argument 'could have been more explicitly theorised'. Now, its likely that my execution, rather than the concept itself, was poor in integrating different theories into one argument, but I still have doubts about it making my WS seem lacking in focus. Any thoughts much appreciated!

Thanks for the replies guys. JungTung, my uni is actually a four year degree, but thanks for the thoughts nonetheless. Definitely going to apply to more MAs this time around, including in the UK (The plan was to apply for 4-5 UK Masters last year, but my supervisor told me not to, go figure.) ExponentialDecay, my concern regarding my academic CV is part of my understanding that there are more qualified applicants than places. In terms of being an 'exceptional candidate', its difficult to see how that can be quantified on a paper application other than having essentially a perfect application. What I'm getting at is, if there are two applicants who meet the most important criteria (excellent WS, SoP, great fit for department etc.), but only one place, then will not the logical step to be take the applicant with the sparkling academic CV over the one with basically nothing? Or in someone else's case, take the applicant with perhaps the high GRE scores? Or better grades? I've made a few attempts to get an award or an undergrad publication in recent months, but as I'm already a year out of uni, the submission eligibility has limited my options. Your advice regarding niche competency is well taken though. The main reason I want to study in the US is that I feel the open entry format is much better, not having to have your thesis project locked in for a few years. I'm an Irish lit specialist, with a double major in history, but I've been hoping to have 19th Century Irish, British and American as my research area. As such I was sort of resistant to applying to only programs that would be strong in Irish studies, as I didn't want to pigeonhole myself. I've come to realise that applications are basically a matter of getting yourself in the door, and that that there are a lot of universities that would be strong in Irish literature (thereby making it easier for me to argue fit) and have generally strong programs overall, so I can branch out later if I so wish. (Though the fact that still, it seems, Irish literature in academia basically means the modernists is somewhat frustrating!)

Hello all, long time lurker first time poster here! I'm just reaching out to see if there are any other international applicants to US PhD programs here, or current international students already in a US program, who may be able to shed some light on the process of applying from abroad. Having applied last application cycle with exactly zero success (well, one Masters offer that I couldn't afford) to 7 programs, I'm gearing up for this year and trying to put together a new game plan. Here are some things I suspect let me down this past cycle: 1. Academic CV I know this is not considered the most important part of the application, but I can't help but notice a lot of US applicants have whole piles of awards, prizes, publications etc, even at undergraduate level. I did not win any prizes at undergrad, and it wasn't something that I thought to worry about until I came on to GradCafe! There wasn't really any emphasis on that kind of thing in my department. 2. Letters of recommendation While I'm sure my professors, who were very encouraging and supportive, wrote strong letters for me in the context of our own academic culture, I can't help but wonder if there may be a significant difference in what's expected of the letters in the US. Obviously there's no way to investigate as the letters are anonymous, but for example one professor told me not to send him my applications materials to help him in writing the letter; he wrote it from my 'file' :/ 3. SoP Did my best, since I got no offers I'm inclined to think it was terrible. I did get feedback from a number of professors, including two who had graduated from US PhD programs as well as my undergraduate advisor and other professors who knew me fairly well. They all assured me that not only was my SoP quite strong, but that I was quite a strong candidate overall. Now, of course I know that English PhD admissions are incredibly competitive, but I have to admit it really threw me to get no offers at all after essentially being told to reduce the number of applications I was submitting as I was sure to get a handful of offers. I can't help but wonder could there be a significant deficit in both my own and my professors understanding of what makes a good US application. Basically I'm just reaching out to see if anyone has any wisdom to offer in this regard! Finally, for context sake, I'm applying from a world top 50 English department in the UK with a very strong reputation, and I was applying to top 50 programs. Thank you to anybody who has read this far!