Medievalmaniac

Somebody mentioned he's doing two PhDs - is he pursuing them both at the same institution? Isn't it against academic policy (not to mention all-but-impossible logistically) to pursue two PhDs simultaneously at two different institutions?

And ultimately, if he is getting funding, he CAN'T be pursuing two PhDs at two different institutions, so if that's the case and anyone finds out, raise a stink. Funding is contingent on the university's exclusive right to your brain during the course of your studies - conflict of interests, and so forth. That's why people with fellowships aren't supposed to hold down jobs; in some cases (not all, but some), if it is a particularly prestigious fellowship, and you have a job aside from that, they can revoke it and send you packing.

And he's sending his ASSISTANT to classes for him? WTF? What is the point of the degree, then? And aside from that, how does he expect anyone to take him seriously as an academic? It's his assistant everyone's going to consider the scholar, right? lol

I would love to think he really means it. I'm going to keep on deluding myself that no university would take him just because he's James Franco, and why on earth Yale of all places would so do - unless he donated an endowment or something - is beyond me: after all, Yale is the Alma Mater of some of the single most famous and influential people in history. He's a good actor, but certainly not on the top ten of all time list, or at least not yet.

I'm with y'all - I'd LOVE to see his application and SOP.

I'm starting this thread as a chance to help others learn from my mistake(s), and I hope others will be generous with their lessons learned as well.

I JUST thought to look at my transcripts, and realized that two of the classes in which I did the most work in my area of study do not reflect that on the transcript!! They just say "ENGL _____, Literature and Culture" and ENGL ____, British Literature. I didn't even think to talk about the work I did in these classes in my SOP, I focused on my thesis, my conference activity, and what I want to do for my dissertation -so, while I'm sure my professor's letter of recommendation discusses it to some degree, essentially I applied for medieval literature with only one course actually labeled as such on my transcript. My SOP focused very heavily on what I wanted to do in a doctoral program, while (now I see very clearly) only nominally, superficially, expressing why I was qualified to do it. WOW. No WONDER some of the programs I applied to didn't even consider me as a serious applicant!!

So - from my experience, check what your transcript says about the classes you took/the titles they are filed under, and make sure you discuss in detail for about a paragraph the pertinent coursework you did - texts read, etc. etc.

And boy, do I feel dumb!! But at least now I can see where to go in my next round of apps!!

Anyone else got some good, specific pointers?

The DSM-IV agrees with me. I assume you've heard of that? It's the diagnosis manual used by doctors, psychiatrists, psychologist and social workers for the diagnosis and treatment of psychological and behavioral issues. I have been working with this manual for ten years in my current position, and have been trained to use it appropriately.

I think you're ridiculous for absolutely refusing to acknowledge that there could possible be brains that are wired differently from your own. I never attributed a medical condition to the other person, I suggested it COULD BE THERE based on my EXPERIENCE for nearly a DECADE working with a wide variety of high schools students, many of whom have these diagnoses, fully documented and based on psychological evaluations and testing session after testing session.

I would frankly be surprised if there weren't cheating going on at top programs, particularly in sciences and Maths. The pressure to succeed is phenomenal, even more so at major research institutions. There's a lot of money and prestige caught up in the work going on at those places, and it's usually not just your a%$! on the line but also your professor's and in some cases your department's. Grad students freak out - heck, full professors freak out - under continued and sustained pressure to publish first on major research projects. It doesn't make it right, but it is certainly understandable, in our results-oriented culture - we SAY the process is important, but in the end we want to see the bottom line, faster than we ever have before. It is a cheating culture. Look at the big stories in the papers about our government leaders, celebrities, etc. etc. - really, is it at all surprising that someone in America today would attempt to take the fast way out?

It is still wrong. I would absolutely turn someone in and demand that person be brought to line before the honor council. But it would be silly to think it doesn't happen, and more often than we would like to think.

Well, I've already posted this somewhere, but I'll repeat it, because I know everyone is looking for everyone else's take on this All Consuming Topic.

I'm honestly not sure how much better my application can get. My undergraduate grades, which are now almost 16 years old, were not great (2.77, although that's only for the last six semesters, following a transfer from another school where I was a Dean's List student with a 3.5 - they would not combine the GPAs, which would have put the cumulative at a 3.1), but I have an MA with a 4.0 GPA from 2009. My GRE scores were OK - abysmal Math, but verbal in the 89th percentile, and a 6 on the writing section. I do, however, have twelve years of teaching experience at the middle school through college levels, in English/Writing, Art History, and French; for the past eight years I have designed and written my classes from scratch and been able to focus on the subject matter I love best, medieval literature and medievalism. I have seven languages with an intermediate to fluent proficiency including Latin, French (Old, Anglo-Norman, and Modern), Spanish, German, Italian, Anglo-Saxon and Middle English, and I have multiple publications already out (Encyclopedia of Medieval Pilgrimage, Encyclopedia of Medieval Chronicle, Student Companion to Pre-1600 British Poetry, a reference book on Literary Romanticism, and an article in the Virginia English Bulletin, among others). My chapter on teaching Tolkien in an Epic Lit class is currently being edited for the MLA Approaches to Teaching Tolkien Volume. I have also presented at multiple conferences, and been a session organizer; next year I will be presiding over a session at my third appearance at Kalamazoo, and I am an active member of multiple organizations in medieval studies. I have also served as a reader and editor for Hortulus, the online medieval graduate studies journal, for the past three years.

In other words, I am a serious, committed and dedicated scholar, and I have clearly demonstrated not only that I have an aptitude for this work, but also that this is what I want to do for the rest of my life; but that seems not to have been enough for admissions officers in the last go-round. I know it was a tough year, and I also know that my undergraduate GPA isn't up to snuff - but there isn't anything I can do about that nearly twenty years after the fact. Since the undergraduate GPA was the deciding factor in my rejections, despite its having been so old and my having the 4.0 at the Master's level, the only way I can apparently redeem the application is to do better on the GRE.

I have therefore spent the summer studying Math with a tutor, and will begin in on reviewing for the English section next week, with an eye to registering for and taking the GRE general examination at the end of September. I am also taking the subject test in October, and have begun reviewing for that. My entire focus at this point is to push those scores up, because everything else in my application, undergraduate GPA excluded, is honestly as good as it can be. My writing samples are from my published and under revision for publication work, and my statement of purpose says exactly what I want to research, why I want to research it, and how I am going to research it.

i have also contacted a different third recommendation, in order to freshen up that aspect of my application.

If I don't get in this year, it will not be for lack of preparation, desire, and working my ass off to that end. But, if I don't get in this year, there's always next year...and the year after that...and the year after that...

And meanwhile, I am still teaching, researching, writing, and publishing, as well as conferencing...so not getting a PhD will be depressing and heartache-making, but it is not going to stop me from being a medievalist.

that's your opinion. YOU think it is inappropriate. The other person - the one to whom the suggestion was directed in the first place - may not agree with you. It's his or her choice, not yours, whether or not s/he considers my suggestion inappropriate. And since s/he has not weighed in, I think it's safe to say that continuing to hash out whether or not what I said was offensive or appropriate is a waste of time and energy. It's not your decision to make. You can think whatever you want to but in the end, my suggestion was directed at the initial poster and therefore is to be weighed and either accepted or rejected as a possibility by the original poster.

You have an amazing penchant for making every thread you post in all about you.

You really need to lay off. Your personal attacks are unfounded and uncalled for. I'm not diagnosing or insinuating anything about anyone. I was merely acknowledging that there could potentially be underlying conditions that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge could even be a possibility for anyone to have. Your attitude sucks, and your responses are a pathetic attempt to make everyone else look bad, foolish, or not credible. Furthermore, even if I were insinuating something about another person (I never did) you outright call people unfounded and horrific names. You lash out with absolutely no regard for anyone but yourself and what you think and how you feel. You are not the only person in the world with the answers, or even with an answer, to all of the problems associated with the GRE. You really just need to get over yourself, little troll.

Also, can you please tell all of us what schools you have applied to or what schools you have been accepted to, so we can be sure not to go there for fear of ever meeting someone as narrow minded and trivial as you in real life?

And before you lash back at me telling me I'm the one insinuating things and saying offensive things about you without thinking first - don't bother. I have veeeeery carefully considered what I have to say in this post prior to posting - but frankly, I'm fed up with your Holier-Than-Thou tone, your condescending and borderline manic responses to all and sundry, and your overall attitude about the GRE and everything related to this board.

I'm sorry, but really - I think you suck. At least in cyberland. Maybe in real life I'd think you were a great person, but I sure don't feel like finding out.

You really need to lay off. Your personal attacks are unfounded and uncalled for. I'm not diagnosing or insinuating anything about anyone. I was merely acknowledging that there could potentially be underlying conditions that you absolutely refuse to acknowledge could even be a possibility for anyone to have. Your attitude sucks, and your responses are a pathetic attempt to make everyone else look bad, foolish, or not credible. Furthermore, even if I were insinuating something about another person (I never did) you outright call people unfounded and horrific names. You lash out with absolutely no regard for anyone but yourself and what you think and how you feel. You are not the only person in the world with the answers, or even with an answer, to all of the problems associated with the GRE. You really just need to get over yourself, little troll.

Also, can you please tell all of us what schools you have applied to or what schools you have been accepted to, so we can be sure not to go there for fear of ever meeting someone as narrow minded and trivial as you in real life?

And before you lash back at me telling me I'm the one insinuating things and saying offensive things about you without thinking first - don't bother. I have veeeeery carefully considered what I have to say in this post prior to posting - but frankly, I'm fed up with your Holier-Than-Thou tone, your condescending and borderline manic responses to all and sundry, and your overall attitude about the GRE and everything related to this board.

I'm sorry, but really - I think you suck. At least in cyberland. Maybe in real life I'd think you were a great person, but I sure don't feel like finding out.

I've been thinking about this thread and about the responses and conversations that have been posted. And I think what it boils down to, ultimately, is perceptions, and who has them, about what, and based on what.

When you argue that "going to any school that is less than a top-twenty school" (in some cases, a top ten, dependent upon your situation and who you have been talking to) is pointless - where did you get that statement from? Surely as an undergraduate you didn't think of it yourself. Ten to one, you got it from one or more of your own professors. Who all have their own ideas about things. Who all come from programs they either loved or got through, who have all had their own ups and downs and experiences with the system and the market and everything else. I have a professor who went to a very elite, overseas university with one of the best programs in the world, literally, for medieval studies. When she came back to the States, she was beat out for a job by someone from Yale because he held an Ivy League doctorate. Her degree absolutely outranks his as far as the field of study is concerned, but the department just saw Yalie Blue available and pounced. She got a different job, and as it happens has won numerous awards already for teaching and for scholarship, on the international level. He has one article out, and it wasn't that well received. Needless to say, she's a little dismissive of the Ivy programs in general and of Yale in particular, because her degree has gotten her farther, faster, in the overall world of medieval studies on the international level than has that of the fellow who beat her out of the slot at Prestige U. - but, she also resents hell out of them because here in America, they get the largest piece of the pie even when they don't yield the most productive scholarship and teaching.

Other professors have told me "if you can't go to a top school, don't go". Many of them are jaded because they didn't end up where they wanted to be - in research institutions - and they think that's the sign of success; they didn't set out to work in liberal arts colleges, but that is where they ended up - so yeah, they're a little bitter. I had one professor (now retired) who went to a state school - not even a flagship state school - and was a top scholar in his field, a Fulbright scholar, and an incredibly prolific and well-respected authority in his subject. The school is not even ranked according to Forbes et al. I wouldn't bat an eye about going to the same program, which still has a good, solid reputation but isn't ranked - because that's the kind of scholar I want to be. I've had professors from top programs who really can't teach. I've had professors from top programs who are the best teachers you could ever hope to study under. I've had professors from No-Name U in both categories, as well. I'm not sure it's the program that determines whether you can convey what you know to someone else, I think it's the individual scholar/teacher - some are teachers, and some aren't. A top scholar from a top program who can't interact with his or her students is nowhere near as valuable as the middling university graduate whose courses are full because she's so good at what she does. Some of the best medievalists in the field are at small, liberal arts colleges and don't even take graduate students. Some never conference. They are busy doing their jobs as teacher-researchers. They're priceless, and not interested in teaching at a prestigious university. Some of the biggest names in English hardly ever teach at all. Some of them tech freshman comp. It's all a matter of where your priorities are, in my opinion. There's no good or bad, right or wrong - there are just all kinds of academics and all kinds of mindsets about what that means, and we have to decide as graduate students what is for us and go to a school that fosters our particular view of the thing.

I have friends currently at top 10 and even top 5 schools. Some of them are having the time of their lives; some are really unhappy. At least two of them are very, VERY ABD, and will probably never finish. I wouldn'I want to go to a name-brand school and then just do my best to get through it. I'd rather go to a B-level or even C-level program where I matter to my professors and where my work is appreciated and my energy is harnessed and my ideas are considered. This is not to say that all Ivies or all elite institutions are like that, but I do think there's a tendency to think, "you're in, you're golden," and I don't believe that. I think you really do need to consider yourself as an individual and what you want out of the experience. And that is a very individual choice, that has to be made about each individual department, by each prospective scholar. A department that looks perfect on paper and has a stellar reputation may, in person, be a den of conspiracies and negativity, but not yet recognized as such; a department not really noted may have hired several new professors and be on the up-and-up - as someone else here has pointed out, things change, and the stats don't always keep up - which is why in-person visits and talking with current students is soooo important.

My perception of the anti-Ivy schtick is that yes, in some cases it is sour grapes. In some cases, it's a genuine distaste for elitist, entrenched patterns - whether this is true or not, the impression remains. In some cases, it stems from deep-seated resentment of people who went to an ivy and just happen to be in someone's life, made it unpleasant, and therefore the whole shebang is tainted. In some cases, it's a desire to see a more even playing field in academia overall. There are just a multitude of possible reasons behind it. Who knows? Again, it's so personal and subjective.

For my part, I'm a first-generation college student who went to a public ivy for my undergraduate experience. I worked full time and commuted from home to make it happen. My grades suffered because I had no free time to get the reading and papers done properly. That's OK - I finished, and frankly, at that point, I was glad to graduate at all. As an adult with children, I have very different considerations than many other applicants when I make choices as to where to apply. But I don't think deciding to have a family should preclude me from getting a PhD, and I know that my work and research and current projects are top-caliber, because I am winning awards, being asked and paid to give presentations to groups, and working with a publishing house on my first monograph. there's a program out there that will gladly overlook my undergraduate GPA in light of the fact that everything I have done since then has put me in the position I am in today - an avid and dedicated scholar, a strongly capable teacher, and a passionate representative for my field of study. I thought I was top-shelf, and so did my recommenders - two of whom graduated from top-shelf programs. Turns out, top-shelf doesn't think so, and that's OK, it really is. Sure, I'm disappointed - but I also believe that there's surely a program out there that will think so...I just have to be patient, research programs, and apply until I get into one of them.

I will not be going to Harvard, Yale, Cornell, Princeton, UNC-Chapel Hill, Florida State - or any of the top programs in my field - not because I don't want to, or because I have something against them, or for any reason other than that I cannot get in because I made different choices. That is OK with me. I would not trade my children for a degree, nor any of the experiences that have made me the person and the teacher I am today - a far, FAR better one than I was originally on the path to being, thanks to some excellent mentoring from my Dean of Academics and, mostly, to being a parent myself and to the students I have taught over the years. Maybe I'm not top shelf as far as ad comms at many programs are concerned. But, I will go to a PhD program somewhere, and I will finish it, and I will continue to work with the scholars from those institutions for the rest of my career as a colleague. I'm already corroborating on projects with some of the students in these programs, and already making working relationship connections with the professors in my field that I admire.

So, for me, I may never teach at an R1 institution - but that is not my personal definition of success. My definition of success is to be a respected, contributing member of the overall academic community and of my field in particular, wherever I end up - and that's not on my degree program, my recommenders, my professors, or anyone else - it's on me. It may be a lot harder for me to get my foot in the door initially, but ultimately whether I am a success or failure has nothing to do with the program I attend, it has everything to do with what I do with that education. It's on me to make it work, as well as I can. If I succeed brilliantly, it will not be because of the piece of paper on my wall, but because of my character.

I hope this post conveys what it is intended to, which is that success is personally defined, even if society overall has a generally accepted view of what it means. For me, success is and always has been an ongoing process. My end goal is to conduct excellent scholarship and to teach at the university level. If I apply three or four times before I get into a PhD program, but ultimately I get in - OK, I didn't get into a top program, but I succeeded in meeting my goal of getting into a program that will qualify me to teach at the university level. When I graduate from that program, I'm still going to be Professor Medievalmaniac, even if it is as a commuting adjunct at three community colleges, and as Professor Medievalmaniac, I will continue to research, write, conference and publish, whether that's easy or hard. (Currently, I pay for my travel out of pocket and if I want to conduct research, I have to travel over an hour to get to the nearest academic library and beg my friends to get me copies of articles from JSTOR - I am OK with it's being hard to maintain my professional activities). There may be people who will shake their heads and say ruefully, "ahhh, just think what you could have done if you had just gone to Brand Name University". That's not my problem, that's theirs...I'll be busy teaching, researching, writing, and being a professional scholar. I just want to do the work, and frankly, I don't care where I do it, or who I do it with - it's not about that. It's about me and my scholarship and teaching. Having worked in urban public schools, rural public schools, and an elite boarding school, in departments that have been collegial and departments that have been total snakepits, I have learned one crucial thing about success as I define it for myself - which is that If I'm focused and passionate about my work, then I'm going to be fine wherever I end up.

If I had not spoken personally with one of the departments in question and been informed that no decisions had been made, I wouldn't be quite so distrustful, I think.

I can buy the idea that someone has received an unofficial acceptance or two, i.e. word of mouth - although, I wonder at the professor who would put him or herself in that position - if no formal decision has been made, then there's the possibility of major egg on one's face in that instance.

I don't think it is widespread practice, but it just caught my eye (I like research....! lol)

I'm not trying to cause trouble, I just really wonder why someone would post anything without a firm admit in hand. I laughed aloud at the suggestion that it might be a payback action! ;op

But definitely, I'm feeling the stress alongside everyone else and want to be supportive and supported here!!

Tarski - you're right, it's always a good idea to practice healthy skepticism. )

Read, read, and read some more.

Whose work do you admire? If you don't know, this is a good time to find out - and you do that by finding scholars through your reading.

When I started out in my own reading and writing as a child, I was mostly in love with fiction, and at that mostly anything that had supernatural elements, especially dragons, fairies and elves. I was also fascinated with mythology, especially Ancient Greek mythology. I also loved travel writing, especially books about France and the UK. From these initial loves, it was an easy jump to related nonfiction - from The Hobbit to "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" and "On Fairy-Stories", for example, from the Narnia books to Lewis's The Allegory of Love, from Spenser's Faerie Queene to Rosemund Tuve's incredible work on metaphor in early modern literature, from Bullfinch to Joseph Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces, from the Prydain Chronicles by Lloyd Alexander to the Mabinogion and on to scholarly articles on Welsh medieval literature, and then from those authors I was more familiar with to those I had not yet met. My critical writing is, both consciously and unconsciously, modeled on the writing of scholars I have come to admire as individuals - meeting them at conferences, interacting with them on listservs, and so forth - and also as names over articles and on the title pages of books I admire.

It's difficult to develop a fluid style that is clearly recognizable as your own, but this becomes far easier when you are using as models those writers whose writing suggests the kind of style you, yourself, love to read and hope to achieve. I am fond of the jam-packed sentence, of clearly and forcefully laying forth my arguments, and of incorporating as much evidence/support as I can though examples. I prefer wide, general ideas that spiral into close readings, but I am also adept at the quick point of attack. My style, ultimately, is best-suited to book-length work, but I have learned through imitation to craft decent article-length pieces as well. I prefer writers who don't overclutter their work with academic jargon, who use theory without pointing out that they are so doing, and who are honest in their dealings with a text - they don't try to push the text to offer up what isn't necessarily there, or exaggerate or push to make their arguments; but rather. they sort of sit with the text and let it tell them what it has to say. My preferred scholars are those who develop relationships with the pieces they are writing on, over time, building from one article to the next to a deep and profound respect and love for what they are doing which is evident in their writing. IU also prefer the "Renaissance writers" - those whose knowledge and interests span large areas of time and text, and who are able to draw on a much larger body of evidence as a result, which (to my mind) makes for more interesting arguments.

I am also a "writerly" scholar, in that I am concerned with grammar and syntax as an author might be, owing to my own work as a fiction writer. I craft my sentences, and I am excessively fond of archaic expressions and old-fashioned points of grammar (as is probably evidenced in this very post, lol). This is more than likely due to a childhood steeped in C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, as well as so much work with medieval and Renaissance texts, with their use of rhetoric. But I have taken what they did and recast it so it works for a modern audience as well.

So - long story short - you need to find some models of the type of writing you want to do as an academic, read these, parse them out, learn how those writers craft and develop their arguments, and then adapt through practice to suit your own stylistic and academic needs.

Read, read, and read some more.

Whose work do you admire? If you don't know, this is a good time to find out - and you do that by finding scholars through your reading.

When I started out in my own reading and writing as a child, I was mostly in love with fiction, and at that mostly anything that had supernatural elements, especially dragons, fairies and elves. I was also fascinated with mythology, especially Ancient Greek mythology. I also loved travel writing, especially books about France and the UK. From these initial loves, it was an easy jump to related nonfiction - from The Hobbit to "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" and "On Fairy-Stories", for example, from the Narnia books to Lewis's The Allegory of Love, from Spenser's Faerie Queene to Rosemund Tuve's incredible work on metaphor in early modern literature, from Bullfinch to Joseph Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces, from the Prydain Chronicles by Lloyd Alexander to the Mabinogion and on to scholarly articles on Welsh medieval literature, and then from those authors I was more familiar with to those I had not yet met. My critical writing is, both consciously and unconsciously, modeled on the writing of scholars I have come to admire as individuals - meeting them at conferences, interacting with them on listservs, and so forth - and also as names over articles and on the title pages of books I admire.

It's difficult to develop a fluid style that is clearly recognizable as your own, but this becomes far easier when you are using as models those writers whose writing suggests the kind of style you, yourself, love to read and hope to achieve. I am fond of the jam-packed sentence, of clearly and forcefully laying forth my arguments, and of incorporating as much evidence/support as I can though examples. I prefer wide, general ideas that spiral into close readings, but I am also adept at the quick point of attack. My style, ultimately, is best-suited to book-length work, but I have learned through imitation to craft decent article-length pieces as well. I prefer writers who don't overclutter their work with academic jargon, who use theory without pointing out that they are so doing, and who are honest in their dealings with a text - they don't try to push the text to offer up what isn't necessarily there, or exaggerate or push to make their arguments; but rather. they sort of sit with the text and let it tell them what it has to say. My preferred scholars are those who develop relationships with the pieces they are writing on, over time, building from one article to the next to a deep and profound respect and love for what they are doing which is evident in their writing. IU also prefer the "Renaissance writers" - those whose knowledge and interests span large areas of time and text, and who are able to draw on a much larger body of evidence as a result, which (to my mind) makes for more interesting arguments.

I am also a "writerly" scholar, in that I am concerned with grammar and syntax as an author might be, owing to my own work as a fiction writer. I craft my sentences, and I am excessively fond of archaic expressions and old-fashioned points of grammar (as is probably evidenced in this very post, lol). This is more than likely due to a childhood steeped in C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, as well as so much work with medieval and Renaissance texts, with their use of rhetoric. But I have taken what they did and recast it so it works for a modern audience as well.

So - long story short - you need to find some models of the type of writing you want to do as an academic, read these, parse them out, learn how those writers craft and develop their arguments, and then adapt through practice to suit your own stylistic and academic needs.

I'm teaching at a private school.

I'm teaching at a private school.

This is an important issue for women in academia - especially if you're married to an academic. In many instances, especially those in which the husband is older or better-known in the field, having his last name can potentially hurt you (I think of Roger Sherman Loomis, the great Arthurian scholar, and his wife Laura Loomis, who was extremely competent, but who ultimately only published a handful of articles because she was eclipsed by her husband's star). However, there are also cases in which a married academic couple are well known as such (I think of the Potkays at William and Mary, for example, who co-authored a very popular Bible as Literature study). There's also the ever-looming concern over what happens if you get divorced and take on a different name, but have published under your first married name? Name changes can get dicey for women.

Ultimately, I think a lot of academic women choose to keep their maiden name for professional purposes and use their married name for their personal life. For me, that would be so confusing! I would never be able to keep up with it all - paychecks to my maiden name, bank account in my maiden and married name, bills to married name except for professional association dues, to maiden name - ack! WAY too much for me to keep track of...plus, what about my kids? Maiden or married name for them? What happens when my colleagues become my friends - by which name do they call me then? I know a lot of women do it, but it's definitely not for me.

A lot of women will hyphenate to avoid that sort of scenario - but I personally don't like that one, either - maybe it's the lit critic/feminist scholar in me, but I see the hyphen as too-obvious a compromise, and a physical dividing within my very name of my Self. Also, our kids are our kids, they're not hyphenates. I want the same last name as my kids! lol Finally, the hyphenate is also a clue to adcomms and to search committees as to your marital status- they're not supposed to ask, but they can assume, and it can be detrimental to getting the job in some cases. I want to be judged on the merits of my scholarship, not on my marital status...so I wanted an identity that spoke to my place as a wife and mother but also established me firmly as an individual to be judged as such.

So, I didn't hyphenate. I kept my maiden name as a second middle name, as it were, and added my married name to the end, in (on paper) a seamlessly interwoven construction of my whole Self (think along the lines of Jada Pinkett Smith, for example). I think many women are doing this now as an alternative to the hyphenate, because it acknowledges the married relationship but also maintains the individual identity without subjugating it to the married one.

Ultimately, of course, this is an intensely personal decision and one you have to make for yourself...

Good luck!!

This is an important issue for women in academia - especially if you're married to an academic. In many instances, especially those in which the husband is older or better-known in the field, having his last name can potentially hurt you (I think of Roger Sherman Loomis, the great Arthurian scholar, and his wife Laura Loomis, who was extremely competent, but who ultimately only published a handful of articles because she was eclipsed by her husband's star). However, there are also cases in which a married academic couple are well known as such (I think of the Potkays at William and Mary, for example, who co-authored a very popular Bible as Literature study). There's also the ever-looming concern over what happens if you get divorced and take on a different name, but have published under your first married name? Name changes can get dicey for women.

Ultimately, I think a lot of academic women choose to keep their maiden name for professional purposes and use their married name for their personal life. For me, that would be so confusing! I would never be able to keep up with it all - paychecks to my maiden name, bank account in my maiden and married name, bills to married name except for professional association dues, to maiden name - ack! WAY too much for me to keep track of...plus, what about my kids? Maiden or married name for them? What happens when my colleagues become my friends - by which name do they call me then? I know a lot of women do it, but it's definitely not for me.

A lot of women will hyphenate to avoid that sort of scenario - but I personally don't like that one, either - maybe it's the lit critic/feminist scholar in me, but I see the hyphen as too-obvious a compromise, and a physical dividing within my very name of my Self. Also, our kids are our kids, they're not hyphenates. I want the same last name as my kids! lol Finally, the hyphenate is also a clue to adcomms and to search committees as to your marital status- they're not supposed to ask, but they can assume, and it can be detrimental to getting the job in some cases. I want to be judged on the merits of my scholarship, not on my marital status...so I wanted an identity that spoke to my place as a wife and mother but also established me firmly as an individual to be judged as such.

So, I didn't hyphenate. I kept my maiden name as a second middle name, as it were, and added my married name to the end, in (on paper) a seamlessly interwoven construction of my whole Self (think along the lines of Jada Pinkett Smith, for example). I think many women are doing this now as an alternative to the hyphenate, because it acknowledges the married relationship but also maintains the individual identity without subjugating it to the married one.

Ultimately, of course, this is an intensely personal decision and one you have to make for yourself...

Good luck!!

Well, as I said, the emails worked for me. I was specific in my questions to grad students and in my inquiry to professors because I wanted to make sure that the programs to which I apply are a good fit, especially after last season. By current grad students, I was complimented on being thorough in terms of my questions, and told that it was a great idea to ask them. By current professors, I was complimented on being so detailed and specific and told it was a good idea because it made it easier for them to see what I was looking for. At one program, the DEGS wrote back asking me to come visit at my earliest discretion, and other professors suggested I come visit other departments as well - so I guess the length of my email did not put off those folks - and frankly, if it did, then I would probably not be happy at that department. I want them to be enthused at my enthusiasm, if that makes sense to you. So far, I've gotten back an effort in responses that corresponds to the effort I put into my emails, and I see that as a very positive sign - it hasn't been a generic "I like Arthurian studies" "OK, go ahead and apply" kind of interface, but much more thoughtful and interactive, and I think that's because of the detail and time that went into my queries. So - I'm happy with them.

Ultimately, obviously, it's an individual thing and I just posted these as an example of emails you "could" send to a potential department, for people who hadn't thought of it or didn't know what sorts of things to ask/put in such an email. I certainly think there are multiple ways to go about it or not to go about it - in my case, I was thorough and detailed, and it worked for me; in your case maybe you don't want to go into such detail or you feel they're too long- and that's totally fine, everyone has different ideas about all aspects of this process.

and no, that's not a bitchy thing to say;). I just didn't want that line to sound as pompous or dismissive as it might, which is why I inserted it. So far, hasn't seemed to bother anyone...nobody emailed back and said, "I liked your query, except the "lol" bit." From my experience at conferences and in two graduate programs, I think grad school students or applicants occasionally forget that the professors are people, too and that often, they have a sense of humor equal to or stronger than our own. The occasional lighter moment is not going to mean immediate rejection or antipathy; certainly not in an initial query email. I certainly wouldn't write it on my SOP when it comes to application season, though!!

In the end, I think this is just a personal choice to make. My posting of the emails I sent was meant solely as one possible approach - maybe not the best, maybe even not great. I just put it there as an example of what worked for me.

Well, as I said, the emails worked for me. I was specific in my questions to grad students and in my inquiry to professors because I wanted to make sure that the programs to which I apply are a good fit, especially after last season. By current grad students, I was complimented on being thorough in terms of my questions, and told that it was a great idea to ask them. By current professors, I was complimented on being so detailed and specific and told it was a good idea because it made it easier for them to see what I was looking for. At one program, the DEGS wrote back asking me to come visit at my earliest discretion, and other professors suggested I come visit other departments as well - so I guess the length of my email did not put off those folks - and frankly, if it did, then I would probably not be happy at that department. I want them to be enthused at my enthusiasm, if that makes sense to you. So far, I've gotten back an effort in responses that corresponds to the effort I put into my emails, and I see that as a very positive sign - it hasn't been a generic "I like Arthurian studies" "OK, go ahead and apply" kind of interface, but much more thoughtful and interactive, and I think that's because of the detail and time that went into my queries. So - I'm happy with them.

Ultimately, obviously, it's an individual thing and I just posted these as an example of emails you "could" send to a potential department, for people who hadn't thought of it or didn't know what sorts of things to ask/put in such an email. I certainly think there are multiple ways to go about it or not to go about it - in my case, I was thorough and detailed, and it worked for me; in your case maybe you don't want to go into such detail or you feel they're too long- and that's totally fine, everyone has different ideas about all aspects of this process.

and no, that's not a bitchy thing to say;). I just didn't want that line to sound as pompous or dismissive as it might, which is why I inserted it. So far, hasn't seemed to bother anyone...nobody emailed back and said, "I liked your query, except the "lol" bit." From my experience at conferences and in two graduate programs, I think grad school students or applicants occasionally forget that the professors are people, too and that often, they have a sense of humor equal to or stronger than our own. The occasional lighter moment is not going to mean immediate rejection or antipathy; certainly not in an initial query email. I certainly wouldn't write it on my SOP when it comes to application season, though!!

In the end, I think this is just a personal choice to make. My posting of the emails I sent was meant solely as one possible approach - maybe not the best, maybe even not great. I just put it there as an example of what worked for me.

I don't think it hurts to contact people in the prospective departments...I know that it saved me a few hundred dollars in application fees last go-round, because although the webpages of certain departments listed my interests as things being worked on, it turned out that they were no longer up to date and in some cases the professors were working on things utterly unrelated to what I wanted to focus on, despite what the website said...things change.

In the interest of being helpful, here are (edited) versions of the two emails I send out - one is to current graduate students in the department, and one is to professors whose work aligns with my interests. I will say that overall, I get an amazing response to these, especially from the current graduate students (I change or alter them slightly for each department, but mainly they stay pretty close to what is here). A few people have written me several pages in response outlining everything they can think of to help me make my decision. A few even forwarded the email to other graduate students I did not know about who could help me further. Professors at some departments have also forwarded my email to other professors they thought I would like to hear from. There are a few short, curt responses ("only you can determine whether or not you think you would be a good fit here" etc. etc.) - but overwhelmingly, the answers have been helpful and detailed, refreshingly open and honest in terms of both praise and criticism of departments, and I have received answers from everybody I emailed at every department. So, this was a very rewarding approach for me.

If you want to cut and paste from these letters or to use part or whole for your own purposes, please feel free to do so. As I said, I'm posting them in an effort to help others out who might be considering this route.

Graduate Student email:

Dear [current graduate student's name],



I hope you won't mind the imposition, but I am considering [x,y,z university] as a possible location at which to complete my PhD(applying for Fall 2011), and I was hoping that I could get a first-hand perspective from some of the students in the program. For the purposes of clarification as to what I am looking for, I am a literature person; my primary subject area is Medieval, and my sub-areas of interest are Renaissance/Early Modern and Nineteenth century. I have researched the professors in the department insofar as these areas are concerned, and am quite heartened to find figures such as [professor brand name] there. But, of course, "who" I study with is only part of the equation, so I'm reaching out to current graduate students to attempt to ascertain whether the "what" matches with the "who" prior to applying.

I am applying MA in hand, and am aware that many (most) of those credits will
not confer to the degree at [university] - but I have discovered that this is the case
pretty much anywhere, so as far as that goes, I'm prepared to do more
coursework - besides, how can it be a bad thing to do more work on the subjects
I love best with others who also love them? However, I want to make sure that
this coursework is going to challenge me above and beyond what I have already
done - so, my first question is, in your experience how strong is the teaching
component of the program at [university]? How willing are the professors to work with
individual students to develop their strengths and address their weaknesses in
terms of subject matter? How open are the professors to helping you construct
an independent line of research in conjunction with the coursework you are
doing? How are the classes structured, and how much preparation have you found
it to be necessary in order to succeed? Are there any classes and/or professors
you would particularly recommend, or that stand out to you as being
particularly excellent?

Continuing with questions about the department itself - how would you classify
the department overall? Do people seem to be collaborative, interested in
working together, or is it primarily an individualistic program in which
professors work within their own disciplines and rarely cross-research? Is
there a particular pet methodology or critical school employed in the
department? (For example, I know that at [close university in area], it's very
centrally focused on [specific theoretical approach], which is not really my thing). What
critical methods are employed most often in literature courses? How often are
graduate students asked to work with professors on research projects? Are
professors willing to read over and critique independent work completed by
graduate students with an eye to publication and/or conferencing? Are graduate
students encouraged to publish and conference? Are there ample options for
teaching/lecturing available to students? How supported do you feel as a
graduate student overall by the department? How supportive of one another do
the graduate students tend to be?

I am also applying with family in tow; do you know how the department views
graduate students with children? Do they seem to be at a disadvantage in terms
of resources or attention? Are there many graduate students in the department
with children? Do graduate students with children successfully complete
the program on a regular basis? Do you know what the attrition rate and the
rate of successful placement is overall from [university]?

I would be grateful for any information you could provide me with concerning
any or all of the questions posed, and I assure you that anything you disclose
to me will be confidential and not repeated; as I said, I'm just seeking to get
a feel for what it would be like to work at [university], and the more honest
the responses are, the better chance I have of getting a real idea of things.

Thank you,



Professor of Interest email:

Dear [Dr.____________]

I am researching options as concerns doctoral programs in English, with the intention to make application this coming fall, and find that [x,y,z university] seems potentially to be a good fit for my particular set of interests. I wonder if you could offer me some thoughts in terms of this?

My primary area of interest is Medieval Literature, and my secondary areas are Renaissance (Early Modern) and the 19th Century. Specifically, within the medieval tradition I focus on Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Norman (French of England) and Middle English literature. My overarching subject areas of interest are Arthuriana, outlaw literature, and Celtic/ Old Norse folkloric materials; my central thematic interests lie in concepts of identity (both individual and national), the supernatural/monsters/magic, violence, hagiography, particularly as regards women mystics, gender issues, and (predictably) chivalry and courtliness (especially the function of feasts in courtly narrative). I am deeply and profoundly obsessed with textual transmission and questions of textual and subject matter provenance. In the Early Modern period, I focus predominantly on Spenser and Sidney, and also work extensively with Shakespeare (who doesn't...? lol). In the 19th century, my interests lie specifically within the Gothic and Romantic traditions, and more specifically in terms of their appropriation of the medieval/ medievalism. I tend to take a predominantly New Historical approach to the texts, although I also work with feminist, linguistic/structuralist, myth and postcolonial theory.

You could certainly classify me as obsessed with all things medieval. It would, however, be very difficult for me to list an area of literary studies in which I am not interested (I just picked up the zombie version of Pride and Prejudice, I teach Virginia Woolf and Rebecca Wells, I have taught Dave Eggers and Dom DeLillo, for example…!) So, I am a really flexible student in that regard; I know what I want to focus in, but I'm also open to other areas of study as well. As for my background: I earned a BA from [university] in [year] in French; I then taught for two years in public schools, and returned to complete graduate work in medieval and Renaissance studies at [university] in [year]. After a year at [university], I taught for several more years, and then completed my Master's degree at [university] last spring with a 4.0. My thesis was entitled: "King of the Who? The Collective Unconscious and the Crafting of National Identity in Medieval Arthurian Texts", and I took an experimental psychological approach to the material, focusing on Jungian theories of the collective unconscious and also working with Jung's ideas concerning alchemical transformations. This project is now being developed into a monograph in conjunction with [publishing house]. I currently teach literature and Art History at [private boarding school] where I write and develop my own courses - six courses a term, five terms a year (among my most recent courses are “Bad Boys in British Lit”, which focuses on the Robin Hood/outlaw tradition, “The Bible and Literature”, in which we focus on biblical passages and correlative literary allusions, and “Monsters and Violence in British Lit” in which I introduce my students to literary theory by using Jeffrey Jerome Cohen’s “Monster Culture: Seven Theses” as the cornerstone text and showing them how to apply it to the various works we read throughout the term). I have a number of publications in all three of my eras(mainly encyclopedic in nature), and have presented at several conferences, including [names of conferences].

I must admit that location is a major factor in my decision, for family reasons - however, barring that, the [university] English department website list of publications and research interests seems to indicate that there are a lot of interesting and compelling overlaps between my interests and the work several faculty members (yourself included) are doing. Does this seem to be the case, in your opinion?

I look forward to any insight you might be able to provide in this matter.

Best,




(I will add that the above email to professors garnered a lot of interest from 3 persons of interest, one of whom wants to meet me in person at my convenience - so including your specific areas of interest in detailed fashion does lengthen the email, but ultimately can be very helpful, in my experience.)




hope this is helpful. I have in no cases found anyone to be annoyed or irritated at my contacting them - I think they'd rather you check and then apply knowing for certain it's what you want, especially at smaller departments. That's the impression I have been given, at any rate.

also - in terms of finding graduate students to write to - many departments list their graduate students on the website, but you can also find some names by reading department newsletters, looking at the page for the graduate student association, and checking out the adjunct/lecturer faculty listings as well. Honestly, the grad students were incredibly great about giving me really detailed and honest feedback about the departments.

Well, as I said, the emails worked for me. I was specific in my questions to grad students and in my inquiry to professors because I wanted to make sure that the programs to which I apply are a good fit, especially after last season. By current grad students, I was complimented on being thorough in terms of my questions, and told that it was a great idea to ask them. By current professors, I was complimented on being so detailed and specific and told it was a good idea because it made it easier for them to see what I was looking for. At one program, the DEGS wrote back asking me to come visit at my earliest discretion, and other professors suggested I come visit other departments as well - so I guess the length of my email did not put off those folks - and frankly, if it did, then I would probably not be happy at that department. I want them to be enthused at my enthusiasm, if that makes sense to you. So far, I've gotten back an effort in responses that corresponds to the effort I put into my emails, and I see that as a very positive sign - it hasn't been a generic "I like Arthurian studies" "OK, go ahead and apply" kind of interface, but much more thoughtful and interactive, and I think that's because of the detail and time that went into my queries. So - I'm happy with them.

Ultimately, obviously, it's an individual thing and I just posted these as an example of emails you "could" send to a potential department, for people who hadn't thought of it or didn't know what sorts of things to ask/put in such an email. I certainly think there are multiple ways to go about it or not to go about it - in my case, I was thorough and detailed, and it worked for me; in your case maybe you don't want to go into such detail or you feel they're too long- and that's totally fine, everyone has different ideas about all aspects of this process.

and no, that's not a bitchy thing to say;). I just didn't want that line to sound as pompous or dismissive as it might, which is why I inserted it. So far, hasn't seemed to bother anyone...nobody emailed back and said, "I liked your query, except the "lol" bit." From my experience at conferences and in two graduate programs, I think grad school students or applicants occasionally forget that the professors are people, too and that often, they have a sense of humor equal to or stronger than our own. The occasional lighter moment is not going to mean immediate rejection or antipathy; certainly not in an initial query email. I certainly wouldn't write it on my SOP when it comes to application season, though!!

In the end, I think this is just a personal choice to make. My posting of the emails I sent was meant solely as one possible approach - maybe not the best, maybe even not great. I just put it there as an example of what worked for me.

I don't think it hurts to contact people in the prospective departments...I know that it saved me a few hundred dollars in application fees last go-round, because although the webpages of certain departments listed my interests as things being worked on, it turned out that they were no longer up to date and in some cases the professors were working on things utterly unrelated to what I wanted to focus on, despite what the website said...things change.

In the interest of being helpful, here are (edited) versions of the two emails I send out - one is to current graduate students in the department, and one is to professors whose work aligns with my interests. I will say that overall, I get an amazing response to these, especially from the current graduate students (I change or alter them slightly for each department, but mainly they stay pretty close to what is here). A few people have written me several pages in response outlining everything they can think of to help me make my decision. A few even forwarded the email to other graduate students I did not know about who could help me further. Professors at some departments have also forwarded my email to other professors they thought I would like to hear from. There are a few short, curt responses ("only you can determine whether or not you think you would be a good fit here" etc. etc.) - but overwhelmingly, the answers have been helpful and detailed, refreshingly open and honest in terms of both praise and criticism of departments, and I have received answers from everybody I emailed at every department. So, this was a very rewarding approach for me.

If you want to cut and paste from these letters or to use part or whole for your own purposes, please feel free to do so. As I said, I'm posting them in an effort to help others out who might be considering this route.

Graduate Student email:

Dear [current graduate student's name],



I hope you won't mind the imposition, but I am considering [x,y,z university] as a possible location at which to complete my PhD(applying for Fall 2011), and I was hoping that I could get a first-hand perspective from some of the students in the program. For the purposes of clarification as to what I am looking for, I am a literature person; my primary subject area is Medieval, and my sub-areas of interest are Renaissance/Early Modern and Nineteenth century. I have researched the professors in the department insofar as these areas are concerned, and am quite heartened to find figures such as [professor brand name] there. But, of course, "who" I study with is only part of the equation, so I'm reaching out to current graduate students to attempt to ascertain whether the "what" matches with the "who" prior to applying.

I am applying MA in hand, and am aware that many (most) of those credits will
not confer to the degree at [university] - but I have discovered that this is the case
pretty much anywhere, so as far as that goes, I'm prepared to do more
coursework - besides, how can it be a bad thing to do more work on the subjects
I love best with others who also love them? However, I want to make sure that
this coursework is going to challenge me above and beyond what I have already
done - so, my first question is, in your experience how strong is the teaching
component of the program at [university]? How willing are the professors to work with
individual students to develop their strengths and address their weaknesses in
terms of subject matter? How open are the professors to helping you construct
an independent line of research in conjunction with the coursework you are
doing? How are the classes structured, and how much preparation have you found
it to be necessary in order to succeed? Are there any classes and/or professors
you would particularly recommend, or that stand out to you as being
particularly excellent?

Continuing with questions about the department itself - how would you classify
the department overall? Do people seem to be collaborative, interested in
working together, or is it primarily an individualistic program in which
professors work within their own disciplines and rarely cross-research? Is
there a particular pet methodology or critical school employed in the
department? (For example, I know that at [close university in area], it's very
centrally focused on [specific theoretical approach], which is not really my thing). What
critical methods are employed most often in literature courses? How often are
graduate students asked to work with professors on research projects? Are
professors willing to read over and critique independent work completed by
graduate students with an eye to publication and/or conferencing? Are graduate
students encouraged to publish and conference? Are there ample options for
teaching/lecturing available to students? How supported do you feel as a
graduate student overall by the department? How supportive of one another do
the graduate students tend to be?

I am also applying with family in tow; do you know how the department views
graduate students with children? Do they seem to be at a disadvantage in terms
of resources or attention? Are there many graduate students in the department
with children? Do graduate students with children successfully complete
the program on a regular basis? Do you know what the attrition rate and the
rate of successful placement is overall from [university]?

I would be grateful for any information you could provide me with concerning
any or all of the questions posed, and I assure you that anything you disclose
to me will be confidential and not repeated; as I said, I'm just seeking to get
a feel for what it would be like to work at [university], and the more honest
the responses are, the better chance I have of getting a real idea of things.

Thank you,



Professor of Interest email:

Dear [Dr.____________]

I am researching options as concerns doctoral programs in English, with the intention to make application this coming fall, and find that [x,y,z university] seems potentially to be a good fit for my particular set of interests. I wonder if you could offer me some thoughts in terms of this?

My primary area of interest is Medieval Literature, and my secondary areas are Renaissance (Early Modern) and the 19th Century. Specifically, within the medieval tradition I focus on Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Norman (French of England) and Middle English literature. My overarching subject areas of interest are Arthuriana, outlaw literature, and Celtic/ Old Norse folkloric materials; my central thematic interests lie in concepts of identity (both individual and national), the supernatural/monsters/magic, violence, hagiography, particularly as regards women mystics, gender issues, and (predictably) chivalry and courtliness (especially the function of feasts in courtly narrative). I am deeply and profoundly obsessed with textual transmission and questions of textual and subject matter provenance. In the Early Modern period, I focus predominantly on Spenser and Sidney, and also work extensively with Shakespeare (who doesn't...? lol). In the 19th century, my interests lie specifically within the Gothic and Romantic traditions, and more specifically in terms of their appropriation of the medieval/ medievalism. I tend to take a predominantly New Historical approach to the texts, although I also work with feminist, linguistic/structuralist, myth and postcolonial theory.

You could certainly classify me as obsessed with all things medieval. It would, however, be very difficult for me to list an area of literary studies in which I am not interested (I just picked up the zombie version of Pride and Prejudice, I teach Virginia Woolf and Rebecca Wells, I have taught Dave Eggers and Dom DeLillo, for example…!) So, I am a really flexible student in that regard; I know what I want to focus in, but I'm also open to other areas of study as well. As for my background: I earned a BA from [university] in [year] in French; I then taught for two years in public schools, and returned to complete graduate work in medieval and Renaissance studies at [university] in [year]. After a year at [university], I taught for several more years, and then completed my Master's degree at [university] last spring with a 4.0. My thesis was entitled: "King of the Who? The Collective Unconscious and the Crafting of National Identity in Medieval Arthurian Texts", and I took an experimental psychological approach to the material, focusing on Jungian theories of the collective unconscious and also working with Jung's ideas concerning alchemical transformations. This project is now being developed into a monograph in conjunction with [publishing house]. I currently teach literature and Art History at [private boarding school] where I write and develop my own courses - six courses a term, five terms a year (among my most recent courses are “Bad Boys in British Lit”, which focuses on the Robin Hood/outlaw tradition, “The Bible and Literature”, in which we focus on biblical passages and correlative literary allusions, and “Monsters and Violence in British Lit” in which I introduce my students to literary theory by using Jeffrey Jerome Cohen’s “Monster Culture: Seven Theses” as the cornerstone text and showing them how to apply it to the various works we read throughout the term). I have a number of publications in all three of my eras(mainly encyclopedic in nature), and have presented at several conferences, including [names of conferences].

I must admit that location is a major factor in my decision, for family reasons - however, barring that, the [university] English department website list of publications and research interests seems to indicate that there are a lot of interesting and compelling overlaps between my interests and the work several faculty members (yourself included) are doing. Does this seem to be the case, in your opinion?

I look forward to any insight you might be able to provide in this matter.

Best,




(I will add that the above email to professors garnered a lot of interest from 3 persons of interest, one of whom wants to meet me in person at my convenience - so including your specific areas of interest in detailed fashion does lengthen the email, but ultimately can be very helpful, in my experience.)




hope this is helpful. I have in no cases found anyone to be annoyed or irritated at my contacting them - I think they'd rather you check and then apply knowing for certain it's what you want, especially at smaller departments. That's the impression I have been given, at any rate.

also - in terms of finding graduate students to write to - many departments list their graduate students on the website, but you can also find some names by reading department newsletters, looking at the page for the graduate student association, and checking out the adjunct/lecturer faculty listings as well. Honestly, the grad students were incredibly great about giving me really detailed and honest feedback about the departments.

1. I would never expect anyone to badmouth a program or a professor (although you'd be surprised at how much candor some people will respond with if asked point-blank). I sent an email of questions. I didn't expect answers, I asked for them, and if someone chose not to respond, that would have been totally fine with me (in fact, many people didn't). I know how busy people are. I'm an academic myself, after all. I teach six classes a term, five terms a year. I've done a thesis. I've worked on articles and conference papers - I'm working on one right now. I do understand that my email was a long one, and in no way did I expect anyone to answer all of the questions - notice that I asked specifically for any information each person could or would share with me, I did not "demand" answers. These are the same questions we are counseled to ask in interviews, during open house weekends and campus visits, and over the phone when looking into programs, so I fail to see why sending them via email is so much worse or so much more a time-waster. Luckily, I received some very kind responses, had my questions forwarded to other people whose names/emails I didn't originally have, and the department in question appears to be as open and supportive an one as it initially seemed to be, as evidenced by their willingness to take the time to respond to me.

2. I sent a detailed email to the professors because I want them to see specifically what I am looking for. As I said, I know exactly what I need and want from a program, and I am looking for a professor to tell me, point-blank: "Yes, your work would fit here" or "no, based on what you have said you wouldn't do". Sending a general, vague email that says "I'm interested in medieval studies" is going to result in "oh, OK, you should apply". I sent this one to the professors of interest at one program and was inundated with responses that "no, we definitely do not do that here, try x,y,z uni instead", despite the fact that the faculty interests as listed on the website were very much aligned with my interests - the faculty had recently shifted, and they weren't working in these materials as much. I'm glad I did not waste their time or my money applying to a program that through initial research had seemed so perfect for me. I didn't send this email to every professor at a program, I sent it to the professors I would specifically be interested in working with. I was told this is a good way to go about doing this by my own professor, and in fact, the results were positive. So while you disagree with me, I respectfully continue to disagree with you. My email was in no way an SoP, which would be far more polished. It was a request for the professors' view as to whether or not, if I am a good candidate, my work would fit in with what they are doing. I see no problem with being specific and to the point on that. I know as a teacher myself I would rather someone take the time to tell me exactly what s/he needs and wants to know than that s/he expect me to read his or her mind. Many of the professors I sent that message to agreed with me.

3. My email was asking whether or not they felt I "could be" a good fit into the "family". I'm not a peer yet. I may never be a peer. But if my work would not be a good fit, I should know that before I apply and waste their time. I'm not asking them to tell me how to write an SoP or to tell me how to make decisions. I know how to write and how to make up my own mind about things. I'm asking them if they feel as though the department could support my work or not. That's a perfectly acceptable and important question to ask prior to embarking on a doctoral degree, which would be a major investment of time and money both for me and for them.

4. I have read the professors' work, looked over their CVs, and researched the department as a whole as much as possible through the usual venues available via internet websites - recent graduates' work, dissertation topics, department expectations, placement rates, and so forth. This was the time to get in touch with real folks in real time and see what I could hear "from the horse's mouth" as it were. I don't send these emails to every program, only to the one(s) I am seriously considering. I will also be visiting the campus at the beginning of next academic term, and will be following up on these emails at that point with a face-to-face conversation wherever possible, because as has already been stated in this thread, the in-person conversations are really important as well.

I understand your points, and I see where you are coming from. I can also see why your points might be valid ones, and that many people might agree with you on them. I just don't agree with you on them, myself. That is my prerogative.

It seems to me that, having apparently exhausted our helpfulness to the original poster, any further discussion concerning my particular situation would best be broached via personal messages, rather than in the open forum...at this point, your responses to me are appearing to be much more personal than collective, as it were, and I honestly don't have anything further to contribute - I stated my personal view of the matter, having been asked for my personal view on the matter. You disagree, apparently vehemently, with my view. That's totally fine - but it's not going to be of any help to the person who originated this asking for our viewpoints for you to continue to tell me what you think (or, don't think) of me, and it might end up making either you, me, or both of us look bitchy, foolish, or both. At any rate, strokeofmidnight, however strongly we disagree, at the end of the day, I would still buy you a beer and listen to your newest research project.

This is going to be a long post, but I want you to understand this. I do understand where you're coming from, and I think that my experience will help you.

Well, I lost my way and obtained my undergraduate degree in 1994 (from a good private school), and then lost my way further when I obtained a law degree in 2000 (from a top 20 school). Only now am I getting around to do a Masters in Architecture (what I started out wanting to do in the first place but got sidetracked a long time ago, before I was badly counseled by physics professor and my architectural history professor retired conveniently as soon as I got to undegrad). I'll be honest. Undergraduate transcripts were important, as maybe the gpa and maybe the school where you graduated, but probably the most important things are the good relationships with the professors at a city college that I've been taking night classes at for the last 8 years (to change my career from misguided law to architecture) and my ability to write a good essay. Personally, I think it would be good for you to take classes at night (or in the day if you can do it) so that you ('a') get back into art and build good relationships with professors, and ('b'), most importantly, get back into the academic environment so that you are not shocked when you first attend a lecture and get the syllabus in the masters program.

I know for I gave up a profitable career in order to follow the career within which I was truly interested. It's hard. It's hard mostly because there is generally lack of emotional support from others--people don't like change, especially in their friends or relatives, so they do things subconsiously many times to keep you where you are--unintentionally though. I had to take a crap job in the day time to survive in San Francisco (as a secretary in bad places and sometimes good places), and I chose not to take the bar because that brings in so many more economic handcuffs (well, it was circumstasnce that determined that). So, I've been taking 3 and sometimes 4 classes at night after work 5 pm. for a while--looking at the light the end of the tunnel, distant on the horizon. But, the classes got me more involved, and while I droned away at work, I lived for the classes at night. The kept me focused on my purpose--to learn and then apply. The classes introduced me to new ideas and new ways of thinking. And, most importantly, I got really good letters of recommendation from great people who I would otherwise not have had, YEARS after I obtained my undergraduate degree. They would know that my focus and determination were not a fraud.

Also, while my night classes and full-time work did not allow me to build up a portfolio like I would have liked, I WAS able to build up a portfolio. Since you're going to go into a MFA program, I highly HIGHLY recommend you take printmaking or similar classes to not only show your enthusiasm but to build a portfolio. You will not only build a portfolio but you can ask your professors to look at your portfolio to get a good feel about it. (Studio time at night is generally figure drawings classes and print classes, not the architectural drafting classes that I truly needed to get into graduate school.... however, you know what? I'm going to Georgia Tech this fall, if I ever find out the loan information, he he). I would also recommend that when you're building your portfolio you go to a good school (as close as possible) and check out the portfolios that have been submitted by other applicants. I didn't. But, if I had, my portfolio would have been far more stellar because I could easily do what they did, and better. I just didn't think about it until I didn't have the time. But on the good side, the difference I think between you and I and other "yung'ens" who get into the same programs is that we know we have 'limited time'. We are there to do great, and get out and then make a name for ourselves. Though I had lots of starts and stops at the city college, I racked up enough classes. And you know what? I was able to get straight 4.0 in the architectural classes that I took, all like 20 of them, along with the other classes that I took.

I understand what you're going through, but believe me when I tell you that the hardest thing you have to change is mindset. You HAVE to believe in yourself and your determination will take you anywhere. I'm serious. I'm not being cliche'. Most people give up. Most people don't show up. Show up. Be in class. Talk to professors. Become the star of the class. Do not be ashamed. Make a point to embarass yourself constantly. Make a point to yell out the wrong answer. It helps people laugh. It also makes it easier for you to yell out when you know the right answer. It's easier the next time. Determine yourself to do it. Take as many night classes that you feasibly can. This gets your recommendations and good portfolio pieces. The portfolio pieces can be used in your application. Also, I would also encourage you to take five classes regardless of your printmaking and art skills: general math, geometry, trigonometry, algebra and advanced algebra. You do not need more math on the GRE but these classes in the quantative section, but you need it to be fresh in your mind. (What I didn't do.) I would take the last algebra class as close to the final GRE that you take, but before you start taking the GRE class (because they're lots of algebra on the GRE, and you'll be wasting your money for the class). You need the math fresh in your mind. Do not just get As in the math classes. Study to get As in the class and ace the GRE. (My algebra class was like 4 years before I took the GRE, a big mistake on my part, though not critical.)

From what I see in all the crap that people spew about their GPAs and this and that on this site or others, it's only to make others feel worse. In reality, it's bunk, and they're mainly just self-conscious about their standing with other academics--and they have to compete against something. In reality, a high gpa only means that you were lucky and you were in the right program for you. (When I was in law school, I kept having to read the same paragraphs over and over, and I was bored out of my mind, and I couldn't stand anyone, and they bored me, blah, blah, blah. It was because I was bored with the topic. I did well mind you, but only because I had to put in 3 times the effort that everyone else did, and then become really depressed in the process.) If you are interested in what you are doing (I mean really interested), it will soak in easier. You'll learn like white sponge in cola turning brown. It will still be hard, but time will pass far more pleasantly. If you get into a program that you like, you'll get good grades because you'll spend the time--you'll invest the time--to get better grades. The 'causes' that you plant in yoru present fruit with 'results' that either benefit your future or negatively impact your future. However, let's be honest, the graduate school will look at mainly the last 2 years of your gpa. However, depending on your program they might take into consideration the later classes that you take after you obtain your undergraduate degree. Some won't. Focus on the ones that put you in the best light. But, I doubt that it's the main factor given the incredible portfolio that you will have for the arts program. Let's face it. Mainly scientific and brainy programs focus on grades in their discipline. People who are interested in science or some programs take a lot of them, but they would fail in any art class. Art programs focus on classes in their disicipline also, but their discipline is art and so its more representative than quantitive numbers.

Another thing you'll need to overcome is GRE fear. My recommendation, take a class, and do stellar in the class. In contrast to what I did, take the class about a year in advance (not just before). Take the class (I reiterate) and then take it again right before the exam. However, after you take it the first time, you ABSOLUTELY need to take the GRE to get a FEEL of the exam, and then immediately cancel it. I was scoring 730 v/780q on the exam in the class and then freaked out because I've always feared tests (because it mattered), and my grade dropped. I didn't believe I deserved 730/780, and I created a self-perpetuating effect. (Minorities, gays and women somettimes do this a lot...because we only have to look society as represented in the t.v. and news to hear how 'stupid' we are, how 'fat' we look, and how someone else 'deserves' something more. It seems that we are the only ones who really question where we belong, and do we belong in some programs. Regardless of how much a jerk someone else will be to us, we have already said the same thing 10 times to ourselves before they've opened their mouths. We are almost always our worst critics.) I was nothing short than devastated, even though I got a good grade and a very good score on the writing section. Little did I know that even with the drop, I was better or the same as almost every other candidate who got into a top 5 program in architecture--it was just that my portfolio sucked. Like, it was as if I put pictures in a garbage back and threw it over a fence for people to rummage through. Maybe the raccoons went through it, I have no freaking idea. Granted, I still did come out with high GRE scores, and a good portfolio apparently. But my momentary lapse of personal forgiveness kept me from getting the best score I possibly could. This will not happen to you because you will believe in yourself.

Spend the money to believe in yourself and that you can take the timed test. I know it's expensive, but you're spending the money on yourself. It will set you back about $2,000 for the classes, but do it. Seriously. I had to get on my feet from almost being on the street, and then pay off $26K in credit cards when I left law school, and take secretarial jobs because no one would hire me, then eventually pay off all my debt, then finally get a job that would help me live on my own in SF, which allowed me to pay for the night class, and then finally be able to take the GRE class. But, you must do it. [Personally, I recommend Kaplan's Online class, but that's because i could do it at home religiously like I was taking a class over the summer. Also, I tried taking the in-class programs, and I would always have to quit half-way through my temp jobs at the time got in the way or something. Take the on-line class if you can. Make it as easy as possible.] Then, you're going to kill me, but before you take the GRE that you want to SCORE, take the class a second time and then, since you've already been under the time crunch and since you've already seen the hell that the computer test puts you in, you'll JAM. You really will. It's important that you have a righteous belief in your ability to not only compete with other but to succeed where others fail. Others fail because they see failure in their own selves. You will not. Because failure is only a belief in your own sense of lack--a lack that has no reality and is only based on fear. You MUST get over the fear. Don't fear the 20 year old who'll get into grad school and then piss their mommy and daddy's house away. Be indominable, be strong, know yourself, follow your heart and mind. But, at the same time, when you succed, and when you get the high gpa, and when you get into the program, don't be a jerk about it. Make sure you help someone else succeed too. Help another person to believe in him or herself.

But for you.... Do it. Don't just talk about it. Prove everyone except that voice inside you wrong.

Good luck.

Send me an e-mail if you need any other advice, even if you think what I said is bullcrap.

1. I would never expect anyone to badmouth a program or a professor (although you'd be surprised at how much candor some people will respond with if asked point-blank). I sent an email of questions. I didn't expect answers, I asked for them, and if someone chose not to respond, that would have been totally fine with me (in fact, many people didn't). I know how busy people are. I'm an academic myself, after all. I teach six classes a term, five terms a year. I've done a thesis. I've worked on articles and conference papers - I'm working on one right now. I do understand that my email was a long one, and in no way did I expect anyone to answer all of the questions - notice that I asked specifically for any information each person could or would share with me, I did not "demand" answers. These are the same questions we are counseled to ask in interviews, during open house weekends and campus visits, and over the phone when looking into programs, so I fail to see why sending them via email is so much worse or so much more a time-waster. Luckily, I received some very kind responses, had my questions forwarded to other people whose names/emails I didn't originally have, and the department in question appears to be as open and supportive an one as it initially seemed to be, as evidenced by their willingness to take the time to respond to me.

2. I sent a detailed email to the professors because I want them to see specifically what I am looking for. As I said, I know exactly what I need and want from a program, and I am looking for a professor to tell me, point-blank: "Yes, your work would fit here" or "no, based on what you have said you wouldn't do". Sending a general, vague email that says "I'm interested in medieval studies" is going to result in "oh, OK, you should apply". I sent this one to the professors of interest at one program and was inundated with responses that "no, we definitely do not do that here, try x,y,z uni instead", despite the fact that the faculty interests as listed on the website were very much aligned with my interests - the faculty had recently shifted, and they weren't working in these materials as much. I'm glad I did not waste their time or my money applying to a program that through initial research had seemed so perfect for me. I didn't send this email to every professor at a program, I sent it to the professors I would specifically be interested in working with. I was told this is a good way to go about doing this by my own professor, and in fact, the results were positive. So while you disagree with me, I respectfully continue to disagree with you. My email was in no way an SoP, which would be far more polished. It was a request for the professors' view as to whether or not, if I am a good candidate, my work would fit in with what they are doing. I see no problem with being specific and to the point on that. I know as a teacher myself I would rather someone take the time to tell me exactly what s/he needs and wants to know than that s/he expect me to read his or her mind. Many of the professors I sent that message to agreed with me.

3. My email was asking whether or not they felt I "could be" a good fit into the "family". I'm not a peer yet. I may never be a peer. But if my work would not be a good fit, I should know that before I apply and waste their time. I'm not asking them to tell me how to write an SoP or to tell me how to make decisions. I know how to write and how to make up my own mind about things. I'm asking them if they feel as though the department could support my work or not. That's a perfectly acceptable and important question to ask prior to embarking on a doctoral degree, which would be a major investment of time and money both for me and for them.

4. I have read the professors' work, looked over their CVs, and researched the department as a whole as much as possible through the usual venues available via internet websites - recent graduates' work, dissertation topics, department expectations, placement rates, and so forth. This was the time to get in touch with real folks in real time and see what I could hear "from the horse's mouth" as it were. I don't send these emails to every program, only to the one(s) I am seriously considering. I will also be visiting the campus at the beginning of next academic term, and will be following up on these emails at that point with a face-to-face conversation wherever possible, because as has already been stated in this thread, the in-person conversations are really important as well.

I understand your points, and I see where you are coming from. I can also see why your points might be valid ones, and that many people might agree with you on them. I just don't agree with you on them, myself. That is my prerogative.

It seems to me that, having apparently exhausted our helpfulness to the original poster, any further discussion concerning my particular situation would best be broached via personal messages, rather than in the open forum...at this point, your responses to me are appearing to be much more personal than collective, as it were, and I honestly don't have anything further to contribute - I stated my personal view of the matter, having been asked for my personal view on the matter. You disagree, apparently vehemently, with my view. That's totally fine - but it's not going to be of any help to the person who originated this asking for our viewpoints for you to continue to tell me what you think (or, don't think) of me, and it might end up making either you, me, or both of us look bitchy, foolish, or both. At any rate, strokeofmidnight, however strongly we disagree, at the end of the day, I would still buy you a beer and listen to your newest research project.