Medievalmaniac

That. Unless a university has a rolling admissions policy (and there are many that do) the ad comms are not going to be meeting until after break at this point. From here until then, the admissions office is screening applications for completeness, for minimum requirements, and so forth. Department ad comms will get them next year.

"Didn't she apply here last year?" "Yeah. We liked her mostly, but bad undergraduate GPA." "Well, she has a 4.0 for her MA." "Yeah, we noticed that last year." "Has anything about the application changed?" "New SOP, different writing sample, more publications on her CV, different LOR writer for the third rec." "Oh. So, she changed a lot of things, that shows some initiative." "Have we heard of any of her recommenders? Any name-brand profs?" "No." "OK, then." *toss into reject pile* "Next?" "Oh, lookie! Stanley Fish wrote his LOR!" "Full ride, four years!" siiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

One thing to remember, is that MLA has both a student paper guide, and a style guide for publication. So while as a student in a course you are expected to have the date, course and professor, the official MLA publication style (obviously) does not include any of that information. I don't think you have to keep it, unless you really want to. The most important thing is to maintain a consistent citation style throughout your paper.

Title page with all of the identifying information. Name, status (PhD English admissions candidate) and page numbers in header. Endnotes rather than footnotes and in lieu of in-text citations. Ended up with 20 pages, exactly.

also, I agree with Sparky - do tell them you are interested in working with the introductory students. You're going to have to anyhow and they are looking for people to teach the introductory language courses. But tell them what ELSE you want to teach, also.

I'M not dead-set on teaching Dickens, that's not even close to my field! lol I'm a medievalist. I was trying to come up with an example that would appeal to a broader range of folks, and figured Dickens is more exciting to more folks than is Geoffrey of Monmouth .... i think, in terms of applying for an instructorship, you need to be specific about what you can and/or want to teach...remember, they are going to own you for x number of years - if you don't want to be stuck teaching two sections a term for eight terms of French I until you are so sick of ER conjugations you could puke, then you need to tell them what would float your boat as far as teaching goes...once they deem you competent and advanced enough, that is. No one gets out without teaching the first years... in the end, you asked what they were looking for; the question you posted is looking for a specific statement on what you are interested in teaching and how it fits in with your research and writing. My example is just a suggestion (made up on the spot as an answer to your question) of how to go about constructing such a response. Use what you can, discard the rest - but I think we are all inclined to tread too much on the side of caution and circumspection. Remember, they intend for you to be specialized in a single area of study by the time you leave. If you know what you are most interested in working in, then you should state it as clearly and specifically as possible, or at the most give two or three suggestions of areas you are interested in. If the department is a good fit, then you'll get the spot, if not, you won't. My first go-around to graduate school (MA), I got in (with a 2.66 undergrad GPA) because I wanted to work with the Pleiade writers in 16th century French literature, and the French department head at the time was working in that area. She told me if I hadn't been so specific, I wouldn't have gotten that spot because I didn't have the grades. As it turned out, I did very well in the program - but I got in because I was specific about what I wanted to do, and it happened to fit perfectly with where the department was at the time. So - the question from Berkeley is asking you, what do you want to teach and how does that fit in with what you want to research in? I suggest being specific and honest as possible.Getting in is important, but being happy there once you are in and in the middle of the work is even more important. There are a lot of people out there who dropped out of doctoral programs because they weren't happy once they were in them. If you can avoid that from the get-go, why wouldn't you?

Just write what you want to study, why you want to study it, and why you are qualified to study it. Then clean up your language so it sounds polished and call it a day. And try to relax. Writing about what you love to do should be the easiest part of your application!

Just tell them what you are interested in, right now. You can always change your mind once you get in...they just need to see that you have thoughts. Coherent ones. About a particular subject area. If that changes once you are in, that's not your problem.

Yes. While I have always been a very strong writer I have, over the past two years, gotten particularly good at writing SOPs...

"State fully your reasons for applying for this appointment, including some comment on how your teaching interests and, possibly, experience may contribute to your academic training in a large, research-oriented department." They want to know that "you want to be a college professor when you grow up." At a major research institution, grad students are expected to teach, period. Berkeley is one of those places. They want to know how your interests are going to mesh with the rest of the department - in other words, what would you be teaching and writing about, and how would that corroborate your own training? For example - you could write something like, "Berkeley's department is well-known for its strengths in nineteenth century British literature, and the library houses one of the largest collections of 19th century serialized British novels available in American university holdings today. In my research and writing, I am working with the intricacies of narrative and plot design in the novels of Charles Dickens, particularly the way in which Dickens inscribes his works not only with autobiographical matter but also with the good, bad and ugly of Victorian cultural and political issues. As an undergraduate in a lower-division literature course, I found the Dickensian text, structured as it was around the requirements of writing for a wide audience in serial publication, both fascinating and frustrating. Since then, I have developed methods for studying and teaching this particular type of novel that I feel are innovative, easily understandable, and will help my own students to grasp more fully and completely than I did as an undergraduate the very nature of the serial novel in Victorian England. I am eager to research more widely in serial novels, and to apply what I find to my own understanding of Dickensian plot structures; I am also eager to test the methodology and rubric for studying the serial novel which I have developed to work with Dickens's novels out on my own students, as I truly feel it renders Dickens more approachable and comprehensible for readers new to the study of this genre. In this fashion, my research and writing as a student, myself, will inform my teaching, and I hope to learn to integrate the three into a seamless program of scholarship, on my way to becoming a professor of literature." Or, whatever. I have no idea if Berkeley has any of those things, to be honest - but that gives you an idea of what they want for an answer to that question. Essentially, they're looking for what you are planning to do as a scholar, and whether that is going to translate into something they can offer as a class. Hope that helps...? Good luck!

Well, I bit the bullet and forked over my $12.00 - score: 640/82%. Not exactly what I hoped for, but a helluva lot better than I imagined it was going to be, and hopefully (if Harvard's average is, indeed, 650) good enough to nab me a slot somewhere I've applied. I'm trying to bear in mind that I did better than 82% of the people who took this test as English majors hoping to get a spot in a masters/doctoral program, and was not testing against the general populace, and that this is therefore a respectable score (that's true, right??!) Just really glad it is OVER and I don't have to take it, ever again!

Thanks for sharing! This is hilarious.

I +1'd the above poster as well. I just wanted to say, that it is so nice to read through this thread and see how much reasonable, rational, logical, and thoughtful dialogue is going on about this oftentimes extremely volatile and emotional subject. It's refreshing, and also calming, to see so many agreeing that yes, the GRE sucks, but in the end, a bad score means a bad score for a reason, whether we like that reason or not - and that in the end, it still is only one aspect of our multifaceted, for obviously good reason, applications. For my part, I was a bit disappointed with my verbal score (620/89th percentile), delighted with my AWA (6) and totally nonplussed by my totally expected abysmal Math score (490). I'd like to say I have test anxiety, I ran out of time, the questions were a joke, it doesn't really measure how well I would do in a graduate program, I had a 4.0 leaving my MA so the test is bunk -- but honestly, if I'm being honest and self-reflective, I think the test is an accurate reflection of my ability on a 3 hour test, and that it does in large part point to my academic strengths (writing, probably the sentence completion and analogies and most of the reading comprehension) while clearly singling out my academic deficiencies (Math, obviously, in pretty much any form, and reading comprehension questions on which I am reading too much into a passage (know too much "outside knowledge" on the subject and interject that, instead of reading the way "they" expect me to, which is based only on what is in front of me.) Being someone who likes to make connections, I do sometimes have a hard time JUST looking at what is RIGHT in front of me. I also think I flubbed some of the analogies, in the end.) I'm hoping the high AWA and decent verbal score, plus my writing sample and SOP, convince the adcomms that I am a literature student worth coaching. It's nice to see people in this thread able to look at the big picture as well. Yay, you guys!!

An emeritus faculty member cannot serve as your dissertation advisor in most cases (I have heard of some programs, such as psychology/social science programs, that do allow emeritus faculty to chair dissertation committees, but remember that in many cases professors emeriti are at advanced ages and various stages of infirmity...seven, five, four, even 3 years can be a long time. As regards emeritus activity as members of the committee, itself, here's a write up from one university that echoes the policy at many, at least in the United States: "According to the Graduate College, Emeritus faculty cannot chair a committee without the approval of the Graduate College. However, Emeritus faculty can sit on committees, put together reading lists, submit questions for the Field exams, direct the Research Exam paper, and can be fifth readers. Emeritus faculty do not count as full or tenured members of committees in determining if the committee makeup satisfies Graduate College requirements." In other words, emeriti can work with you, but they don't "count" in terms of committee requirements.

What would you do in the case that your recommenders had sent letters in to all of the programs you applied to except for one? I'm missing one recommendation, but the professor in question submitted the other two, both on the same day. I'm wondering if he missed the notification on the third one, is writing a different rec for the third one, or thinks he sent the third one and there was some sort of SNAFU electronically. I don't want to email the program and harass them, since it is an applyyourself application and they'll likely just tell me "The program does it automatically so if he sent it it should be noted as such". But then, if he sent and it didn't go through, there's a problem with the system they might need to address - and he would still need to re-send. But either way, I feel kind of stuck in a rock and a hard place. Should I just wait a bit and see if it goes through....? what would you do? As far as I know, subject test scores aside (and those are mailed out the 24th) this is the last piece I need in order for all of my applications to be complete and, as you can imagine, I am quite eager for this to be over and done with. Thanks for any suggestions or comments on this matter.

While I do not write recommendations for college students applying to graduate programs, I do regularly write recommendations for seniors applying to college, and many of my students have been told that their letter of recommendation either got them into a program, or that they were funded/offered scholarships based on the recommendation - so I guess my recs are what admissions folks look for. I'm happy to share with you what I do on them, if that helps. First, my letters range from 3/4- 1.5 pages in length, and I point-blank refuse to write a recommendation for a student I am not genuinely interested in, invested in, or excited about. Not fair to the student, not fair to me, makes my recommendations worth less, and could negatively impact later students using me as a recommender. Smaller colleges, over time, build relationships with teachers and professors who regularly recommend students - or at least, they have so done with me. I teach at a private boarding school, and I have personal contacts at several small schools. In two cases specifically, the admissions director has told me "If I see your school's name on the application, I check to see if you wrote the rec; if you wrote the rec, I have no problem recommending the student for admission because your kids always seem to do well." In other words, there are SOME cases in which a particular teacher or professor writing the rec actually can put a kid across the line, especially in a borderline case (I have a student right now who is applying to five-year pre-med programs with a 3.1 GPA and a 1980 SAT. Technically, these programs should not be looking at him. But I KNOW this kid, and I can speak to the GPA (he tries to do so much more than the required reading and research that he gets bogged down) and that SAT (he went into it with a fever and refused to miss and reschedule) as few others can, because we are a small school. I wrote, in his letter, about his academic work, his work ethic, his ability to remain calm in any situation, leadership positions, and so forth, and then at the end I wrote: "[...] is focused on developing himself as the best version of a fully-actualized individual he can become. His quietly passionate nature plays into everything he does. He is enthusiastic without being zealous, interested without being obsessive, and vitally present in his day to day living, rather than “going through the motions, waiting for life to start”. I wish I could teach his character and approach to life to all of my other students. He actualizes what I feel constitutes the ideal American adolescent in effortless, humble, and inspiring fashion. [...] has my full endorsement as he makes application to university at this time; I recommend him absolutely without reservation, and further recommend without reservation his nomination for any award available to incoming freshmen involving character, academics, or a combination of both. If I had to name three students as being the very best students I have taught in a thirteen-year career, he would be one of them." And, I meant that. This is a truly extraordinary young man, and while I have spent much time writing recommendations, I have never spent quite as long making sure one said what I wanted it to say as I spent on that one. It paid off for him. Our admissions counselor said that the director of admissions to one of these 5 year programs told her point-blank: "Ordinarily, we would not even consider a student with a GPA lower than 3.5 for this program, but based on that letter, we would like to conduct an interview of this student." I am, of course, delighted, and desperately hoping he gets in; but even if he doesn't, I do know what I wrote made the difference in his chances that he needed; the rest is up to him. While I very much doubt many of our grad school recs are along these lines, hopefully they at least tell a story or give a strong idea of who we are in the eyes of our teachers; in my opinion, a letter of recommendation that is personally invested in a student does matter. Then again, I got into a very strong undergraduate program because a 4-star general in the Army who was an alum of the program and knew my Dad wrote "I am an alumni of the University (Class of '48) and I fully endorse this young woman's application. Sincerely yours, XYZ, 4-Star General, United States Army, Fort Sheridan, Il., December 1, XXXX." So - as with everything else, who knows? But it sounds to me like your professor's letter was complimentary, and you probably have a good portfolio for an adcomm to review.

Agreed - I can't think why on earth they wouldn't send it out on the 20th or so, at least, the 24th is just silly. And I wish ETS and grad schools would align their deadlines and score reporting dates more clearly - I'd think this would be desirable on their end, as well as on ours. But, eh ben. What can you do?

I think that's great, and gives you a perfect topic for your SOP. "As an undergraduate, my focus was on African American and Women's Studies, where I specifically looked at <insert specific topics you wrote about in these courses>. As a graduate student, I have found my interests expanding to include more theoretical and rhetorical approaches to literature, including specifically work I have done in Bakhtinian views of <insert specific topics here>. As a doctoral student, I hope to combine these interests into a research program that....... You get the picture. Just tell them where you were, where you are, and where you see yourself going. Hope that helps!!

Sorry- I'm just going to chime in here, because this is something that bothers me a lot about academia in general and about the thinking surrounding graduate work and professor's work specifically. If you want it badly enough, you will make it work. If it means you have to teach four classes a term at two colleges twenty minutes away from one another on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and then take graduate classes at night on Tuesdays and Thursdays, if what you really want is to get this PhD degree, then you will do it. If it means you have to teach every day and take class every night, or teach every night and take class every day, if what you want is the PhD, you will make it work. If you are doing what you love, then you are going to find a way to do it. Ideally, you will get smart about it. Which means, you will align the classes you are teaching along the classes you are taking, so you can make your research and reading stretch across both responsibilities. You will test out theories, ideas, and the work you are doing in your doctoral courses on your students. You will write papers based on your teaching, and refine your teaching based on the feedback you get on those papers. Your research agenda will align with your teaching, and they will together support your work in the doctoral courses you are taking. The entire time, you are compiling a working, annotated bibliography of every source you use as a teacher and as a student, and ideally, you are working in both areas with an eye on what you envision as your doctoral dissertation. In the end, you are steps ahead in the work you have to do, AND you are so much better prepared to be a professor with teaching duties. Example: Let's say I want to write my dissertation on the language of adultery in medieval Arthurian texts. Right - that means I know I am planning to be working in medieval romance, medieval chronicle, women's and gender studies, historiography, linguistics/language usage, and probably postcolonialism to some degree, Arthur being a post-Conquest figure. I may also need to work in dream vision, hagiography, and medieval alchemy. To be marketable, I'm probably going to need two other areas of interest, so I'm logically choosing Early Modern and 19th century, which have the most to do with Arthuriana. I am taking two doctoral courses this term: Early Modern excluding Shakespeare, and Nineteenth Century British Literature. I am teaching four classes at local community colleges - three sections of rhetoric and composition, and one section of British Literature I, through the 18th century. Here's what I am going to do: for my seminar paper for the Early Modern class, I'm going to focus on Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene (an Arthurian text) because that is going to enable me to work in Arthurian studies and to compile a bibliography of sources in that area. For my seminar paper in the 19th century Brit Lit course, I'm going to work in Romantic reconfigurations of the Arthurian tradition, because I can compile more modern resources still directly related to Arthuriana, and because they were so heavily influenced by Spenser that this will link my two courses as regards the reading and research I'm doing. My Brit Lit I class will include as many Arthurian pieces as I can manage - Chaucer's Wife of Bath tale, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Malory, Spenser, etc. because that will let me compile bibliography for medieval Arthurian, specifically, and for Spenser as well, which will lessen my load for the Early Modern doctoral course. My rhetoric and composition courses will be structured along department guidelines, but I will more than likely be allowed to choose the texts I'm working with. No-brainer: my students will be reading the same things I and/or my own students in Brit Lit I are reading - Sir Gawain, Chaucer, Spenser, Tennyson, etc. etc. Alternately, I am presenting my rhetoric and comp students with some literary theory in gender studies, women's studies, postcolonial studies - all of the theoretical frameworks I'm thinking of using in my dissertation. Teaching it helps me understand it so much more profoundly, and my students will clue me in as to how much explanation I should expect to have as regards my methodology in my dissertation by their response to my teaching. By the time I get to writing my dissertation, if I keep on in this fashion, even if my actual idea doesn't work out, I am totally poised to write a dissertation on some aspect of the Arthurian tradition, I am familiar and proficient in discussing and using the methodologies I might be employing, and a lot of the preliminary reading and research has already been done. Bonus: You have also worked out a lot of the problems, concerns, and woes so many new teachers face their first few years in the classroom, so you are going in with professional experience teaching and a professional approach to it based on that experience. If you handle it like this, the workload is still heavy, but far more serviceable to your ultimate aims and goals and far more manageable than it otherwise would be. And I cannot stress enough: if you want the PhD, you will do what it takes to get the PhD. I completed my Master's degree with a 4.0, working full time at a year-round boarding school, teaching 6 courses a term, 5 terms a year. That's THIRTY PREPS (yes, each course is a different course). I am also the mother of two. I managed while doing this also to rack up a number of publications and to do a little acting on the local stage, so I didn't sacrifice my personal life to do it, either. I just teach what I study, study what I teach, and make everything do double-duty - and I WANT IT (the education and the degree) - end of story. I will do whatever it takes. I hope this post either encourages or inspires some of you to reconfigure your thinking about the teaching - I have found that in many ways, it is a major aid to me as a scholar - students give me ideas, I have classes to bounce my ideas off of and elicit feedback for them, and bonus - I can check out THEIR bibliographies, in addition to my own!