8521679

My undergraduate SLAC dropped out of the USNWR rankings altogether, a move I supported from start to finish. I do think, however, that graduate programs, which are all pointed at least to an extent at the common goals of educating their students in a specific discipline and installing their graduates in tenure-track jobs, are a bit easier and more useful to rank. That is not to say that rankings are justified in their present form; indeed, they are not. I think that what StrangeLight means when she says that "rankings are meaningless" is that "rankings should be meaningless." Sadly, that is not the case at all, and any applicant or current student would put themselves at a professional disadvantage by simply pretending that the rankings don't have an effect on the field. Here's why, in my opinion: 1. Those same professors who fill out those (highly unscientific) rankings questionnaires are also the professors who sit on departmental hiring committees. So if they think your program is sufficiently excellent to rank highly, that's more likely to reflect well on you as a graduate of that program and as a job applicant. 2. Following on Americana's contention, if a school has a fantastic record of securing funding and grants for its students, placing them well, etc., then they will do better in the rankings than a school that is less successful in such ways. This is a meaningful, and somewhat quantifiable, matter that no applicant should ignore. 3. Many undergraduate applicants, and the parents who foot the bills for their children's educations, want to see name brands attached to the school's faculty rolls. They see Harvard/Stanford/Yale and assume that they're getting the best education possible, helping to justify the cost of study. This is an unfortunate, but real, truth. A graduate from a ranked, branded school has an unfair job advantage in this regard. Again, unfair, but real, and certainly not "meaningless." Lastly, Americana's tone has indeed been provocative (even unnecessarily so, though it had certainly inspired some impassioned and articulate responses, which is a good thing). But no one on this forum deserves to be flamed in such a way. A number of posters have questioned her character or made unqualified and baseless presumptions about her academic qualifications, and I find that to be fairly repulsive. Particularly 2BPHD's comment that "Yes you are too gud (sic) to admit… in any university." Do recall that ours is a phenomenally small community. 2BPHD, for all you know, Americana, however pompous she may be, could very well be sitting on your tenure committee some day. Learning to respect people is therefore more than polite; it's just good strategy. This is a forum for academics and professionals, albeit nascent ones, and that kind of language does far too much to deteriorate the effectiveness of this conversation.

Most schools require that students have medical insurance, if anything to mitigate the liability of having uninsured students running around. I did my undergrad work in New York, and my impression is that it was the law there for students to be insured. I honestly think it's utterly unthinkable that a graduate program wouldn't offer a health plan. They know perfectly well that you'll have no money and that an individual plan would be utterly out of your range. It strikes me not only as odd that Syracuse lacks a graduate health insurance plan, but in fact it seems downright unethical and incompetent. That's not the kind of school you want, I think. Are you certain there's nothing available through the university?

I'm not stalking anyone. Yet.

So what size cohort is RU aiming for? I'm under the impression that it's a dozen, but I can't recall where I got that information.

I just sat down and wrote a whole new paper exclusively for the application. I spent a couple months researching and a couple more writing. I found all the "right" people to cite after brushing up on the general conversation in that particular part of the field, even working certain articles written by professors at my hoped-for schools into the paper itself. And I made sure the writing sample complemented the goals I laid out in my SOP. I don't think any (really, any) of the work I did as an undergrad was anywhere close to being sufficient, even though I graduated with a 3.85 from a top-tier liberal arts school. The new paper worked. I was accepted to multiple top-20 programs.

I think that virtually every person on this forum would recommend that you take (at a minimum) a year or two off before applying to graduate school. I don't think I've ever heard someone say that waiting was a bad idea, or that they should have applied directly after their undergraduate work. Everybody says the opposite. You'll be more competitive for admission and funding, you'll know yourself and your skills better, and, above all, you'll be an adult. Don't apply now. Just don't.

I should amend too: I meant that I'll also be accepting RU's offer, not that I'm also a romanticist. That's a one-person boat. A lonely, enraptured, heart-stricken, one-person boat.

That makes two of us. Did you make it to the open house? I wasn't able to go, and I've been curious about how it went.

I'll be accepting, too, and was able to visit before the open house on a one-on-one basis. Do feel free to email me!

CUNY takes nowhere near 31% of its applicants. I'm not sure where Peterson gets its information; it can often lead applicants down the wrong path. CUNY makes between 30 and 35 offers each year. This year they had 300 applicants. That's a relatively huge cohort, though, but it is a graduate-only facility, which seems to allow for more room.

There's a math section on the GRE?

That's such an inappropriate way to treat applicants. People apply to a school as a gesture of respect, and they place a great deal of hope on that process. That message on Penn's site is so arrogantly snotty and exasperated; how hard is it to send out a mass-email or field a few phone calls? I can guarantee that everyone who applied spent a lot of time and money doing so, and the least Penn can do is extend a bit of respect in return. I'm glad I didn't apply, and I feel bad for those who did.

Oh man, you've never had a roommate? Well, welcome to the world of cleaning other people's spaghetti sauce off the ceiling. I'm looking in the same direction, though. The key, of course, is to find the right roommates. I wouldn't recommend my roommate from my freshman year in college, for example. Stay away from that guy. But the truth is that it can be a very economical arrangement. The most economical, for that matter. Figure on about $650 a month or so for rent (or so I gather), which isn't too bad at all in the Northeast. Are you planning on taking a car? It could definitely open up some other neighborhoods (Milltown, Edison, Piscataway), which would add a lot of potential properties while sidestepping the undergrad competition.

I won't be at the open house, which is why I visited in advance. Feel free to send me a message if you'd like my email, though, as I'm happy to help you with what I discovered, and I'd love to hear how the open house goes. And thanks for the advice on the legal-aid office. I would never have thought of it. (And what kind of housing set-up are you looking for?)

Same here. I'd accept right now if it weren't prudent to wait for the other decisions to come back. PM me if there's anything else I can help with!