Ms. V

Not a classic, but Flowers for Algernon is a really great read! Brave New World is also a classic and a pretty good book.
I need to start reading more frequently as well. 

Orientalism by Edward Said

thanks! I can see you are also accepted in three programs, so congratulations!. for me, it is 2/6 up to now...waiting for my dream program...fingers crossed 

Congrats! That is great news. 

I like to use LaTeX. There are some very neat CV templates around, like these: https://www.sharelatex.com/templates/cv-or-resume

Depends... Did they offer to pay for you to come or say anything about interviews with faculty. If they did then I would say no not everyone got the email but if it seemed really generic and offered no funding of any sort then I would say most people received the email. 

If you need to know (e.g. you have another offer and time pressure to make a decision), you could reach out and explain the situation. In general, I think it's best to wait. If you really feel like you need to know, I think a better question would be "when can I expect to hear", or "what is the adcom's timeline for making decisions". Before you do that, though, I would recommend searching through the Results tab to see when your schools sent out notifications in previous years, to give you an idea of when you might expect a decision (though of course there is no guarantee that they'll stick to the same timeline). 

In my opinion it's best to keep things short and to the point.  The general format is something like this:
Hi [insert professor's name],
My name is [so and so] and I'm a prospective graduate student planing on applying to your program.  I have done research on [blah blah] using [this and that method, technique, analyses, etc.].  I became aware of your work and have found that it relates to my research interests for [this and that reason]; given how well your research lines fit with my interests, I am very interested in the possibility of working with you.  Are you considering accepting students this upcoming academic year?
Thank you for your time,
[Your name]
Obviously you can tweak it to make it sound better and more professional, but I would keep to about that length for the initial contact email.  Once you receive a reply you can follow up with more information or specific questions.

I highly doubt any PhD program is sending emails to get rich via fee payments. You are right that for some programs these emails don't mean that much--they aren't necessarily personal. However, it isn't about fee payments, it's about getting the attention of a broad and diverse pool of applicants. That's what we care about! I want good students, including those who may not have had the privilege of having undergrad experiences and support that directed them to me as a potential grad advisor. That's one of the reasons I still come here and why I think this resource is amazing.

sometimes it happens when they are inundated with such emails in this season. I think the best strategy is to give a very short summary of your potential project, which is supposedly in line with the POI's interests, (better to be with his current project), showing that you have already consulted their profiles or have read one of their books/articles carefully. being persuasive and determined is a key to attract and "hunt" them but be aware of being pushy! personally, I don't think one gotta wait like 3 weeks to hear from a professor as such a gap might imply his/her lack of interest in the proposed project beside being too busy. maybe another strategy is to contact the head of the program you are intending to apply to and ask him/her to introduce a professor given your proposal context. they are very helpful most of the time. but do not waste your time waiting...just continue sending emails and you will end up finding a "real" professor!  

Yes! I am interested in religion and media, so no matter which program it is I would want to study the same topic. That's why I think it might make sense to apply to both, but as you mention my fear is they will see it as indecisiveness about the PhD or something. I'm glad to hear someone else who feels that it could actually be a strength, and I like what you said about making it clear that the MA would not *only* be a method to pave my way for the PhD, so I will keep in mind to make it clear that I see the MA as valuable in itself, with or without the PhD at that school afterward. After all, it will certainly help increase my preparation for doctoral study moving forward. Thanks for your response and good luck deciding on yours as well! Though I think we have both answered our own questions that it could be a very good idea.

First, my credentials. Well. I can spell my own name, though I don't usually know exactly how old I am. I'm within a year or two, but I'm usually wrong until I've done some subtraction. I teach composition and like to write calculus equations on the board when I take classes in poetry writing. But, here's my real credentials: consider what is written herein in conjunction with what the various instructions on SOPs that you've read have said, with the requirements the program you are applying to has put forth, and with your own experience as a writer. Do you think I know what I'm talking about? Should you pay any attention to it? Is any of it useful?
 
Second, I'm not going to give you a formula for what the standard SOP is like, or a list of things the various thousands of admissions committees will be looking for. There are plenty of prescriptions on the internet, many of them written by professors who have presumably gotten sick of badly written SOPs.
 
Third, I'm not promising that SOP writing be easier after this. It'll be harder, actually. I'm not promising that you'll get in to any place you desire, or that there is any one best thing to put in the SOP to get noticed. That would be totally impossible. Each discipline has its own needs and values, as does each university, each department, and each faculty member on the admissions committee (adcomm). There is no one size and it doesn't fit most, let alone all. There are conventions (use Standard English, for one), but other than include your research interests, I won't advocate that any one thing is strictly necessary. I leave that up to the more knowledgeable.
 
The advice:
 
First thing is to deeply understand that you should write an SOP for each program. Most people take this to mean write one master SOP and then tweak as necessary to make the one SOP applicable to each university (U of A becomes U of B, Professor X becomes Professor Y). You can do that. You can be very successful doing that. You most likely, really shouldn't do it.
 
The next thing to understand is the SOP's purpose. Why do the adcomms want to see SOPs? Shouldn't transcripts, letters of recommendation, and a writing sample do it? After all, transcripts and samples show the actual scholarship and the letters verify it. The SOP isn't for showing scholarship off, or to act like a resume, or anything. So why do the adcomms want an SOP? Why are the SOPs one of those make-it-or-fail things? What is the SOP's purpose? In job hunting terms, the SOP is like a cover letter. The cover letter is to make clear connections between the resume and the job ad. For you, its primary purpose is to make the adcomm offer you admission with full funding. For the adcomm, its primary purpose is to help them see how you would fit into their program (make connections between their program and you). By fit, I mean do they have faculty (or enough faculty) in your area of research interest that can advise, mentor, supervise, and/or committee you through the program to get your degree? Do you have the kind of understanding of the discipline, your research interests, and their program that would make you successful? Do they have something to teach you? Offer you? What can you offer them? They want to brag on you as much as you want to brag about them. If they offer you admission, will you be a good scholar? A good student? Here is the most basic question the SOP should answer: What is it about you that makes you a better prospect than everyone else who's applying?
 
Understanding the SOP's purpose, in practical terms, means that you will know what to put into it and what to leave out of it. And how to phrase it.
 
So, with the purpose in mind, there comes the question: what should you put into it and leave out of it? What format should you use? (MLA? APA? Is footnoting okay?! What about citation?!) Should I stick in a personal story that everyone seems to recommend, except for the half that don't? My research interests? The story about why I got on F in that one, very important class? I'm not going to answer those questions because I can't. Every discipline and department is different. I will give you an answer you won't like: research. Find out the requirements each program you're interested in has for the SOP, think of the SOP's purpose: and now research.
 
Research is one of the basic keys to writing an SOP. It's no different than the writing sample you'll be including in your application packet. For each program you apply to, do some research. How much research you need to do depends on a lot of things, the least of which is your personality. More research does not automatically mean a better SOP. Less research doesn't automatically mean a better one, either. What makes the right amount of research? The ability to craft an SOP that is specific for the program that you're getting into. Here's some ideas (not an exhaustive, inclusive list of what to do) on what to research:
The program itself. Look at the recent graduates and, if possible, read their theses and/or dissertations, at least in part. The acknowledgements can give you an idea about the program's culture. The introduction can give you an idea about what kind of scholarship the program produces and expects. It will also, and this is very important, give you an idea as to how the program uses language. If you speak to them in their own language, that helps your case. You've likely done this, if not, seriously, you should have done this. Look at the program's website and read it all. What kind of classes are offered for both undergrad and grad. Who are the faculty, the tenured, the assistant, the visiting, the emeritus, and the graduate students. What kind of ties to the community (both academic and their local town) do they like to talk about? Do they talk about how their graduate students are working with community partners? Do they host conferences? What happened at the last one? This gives you a taste of the program's culture. The faculty. All of them that might be on the adcomm and the ones that are relevant or somewhat relevant to your interests. Crack open JSTOR etc. and search for recent faculty publications. If you're basing your interest on a faculty member on the interests they've got listed on the site and a reference to them in an article from a decade ago, or worse, only their reputation, you don't have a strong basis to establish clear reasons why they have anything to offer you. Read their recent publications, see who they name drop in terms of theory, other faculty, and so on. Make a list of what each faculty member can offer you in terms of research, not just the ones that are directly related to it. If you're into studying apples, but Dr. V works with oranges, think about how Dr. V's work might help you out. Take notes when you research. Each program has a bunch of people, and you're likely applying to multiple programs. It's easier to refer to notes than to go back and look it up all over again. What's happening in the field with your current research interests, if necessary. This is so you can situate your research interests in the discipline, and then situation your research interests in the program. You can just tell them what you're research interests are and leave the situating to them, but you can lose that chance to sell yourself as the best amongst the rest. Research you. Yup. You. Scribble out some lists or paragraphs or whatever that inventories you. Who are your influences? Who are the theorists you keep coming back to? Who are the theorists you loathe, mock, and/or ridicule? What are your research interests in general and specifically and anywhere in between? Some SOPs will need to be more general, some will need to be more specific. Length restrictions, what you found out about the program, the faculty, the state of the discipline, and so on, can alter this for you. What kind of scholar are you? Student? What's the difference? How do you manage your time? Stress? Health? Do you expect to bring your dog? Do you have health issues? Do you have any academic things that are a negative? If you do, how negative are they? It's easy to see that as an either it's entirely bad, or it's somewhere in the huge good category, but some things are negatives that need to be addressed for certain programs, while other negatives can be ignored, or you should discuss with the one relevant letter writer so they can address it. While Sam ultimately received a C in the Research Methods course, the grade doesn't reflect the actual scholarship as Sam fell ill during the mid-term and consequently failed it; my course policies do not permit re-taking the test. What are the good things about you? Not just the grades, awards, publications, and presentations, but also the character traits. What are you weaknesses? Don't do the job interview baloney, my greatest weakness is my perfectionism. Of course, the important, probably ought to be on the SOP questions: why grad school? What will you do with the degree you want? Why are into the research you're into? Why that particular school? Why are you worth admission and funding?
 
Research the assistanceships. Some SOPs will want you to write a bit about teaching or research with assistanceships in mind. So, do a bit of research on what these entail in the programs you're looking at. What do they do and how do they get it? Have you done assistanceships in the past? If so, what were they like? Do you have a teaching philosophy? If not, make one. Have you done anything that can be discussed in terms of the assistanceship? I taught kung-fu to white belt children, so I have teaching experience. I was part of the state herpetological society and went out to help them with their field counts twice a year. I learned that licking petrie dishes is always a bad idea, no matter how much they resemble pistachio ice cream.
 
Research SOPs. You're doing that, right? Go on to forums (like this one) and read the SOPs people have posted and then read the responses. Look particularly at SOPs in your discipline or related disciplines. Psychology might look at other social sciences. Physics might tell the joke about the Higgs Boson and Sunday mass. Bear in mind that the people responding to and/or criticizing the posted SOPs are likely not on an adcomm. Some have been  or will be, but it's not likely they'll be on the adcomm you're hoping will like you best. However, you can start to get a sense of what SOPs are like. What format is it in? Does yours look like everyone else's? Do you have the exact same opening sentence as half of the people hoping to get into a program in your discipline? I've always wanted to be a librarian since those wonderful, summer days I spent in my (relative of choice)'s home library. 
 
So, to take stock. First, understand the purpose. Second, research. A lot. Let the purpose of the SOP guide your research efforts.
 
Next, get the specific requirements for the SOP from each program. Make a list of similarities. If they all ask for a statement of your research interest, score! One sentence fits most! Most of them will be of different lengths and will have different ideas of what specific information they want. Most won't tell you enough, aside from length and one or two "should have" things. They mostly won't tell you if you should use APA or if you should footnote, or how to format it. Single space? Double space? They will tell you whether it should be on paper or what kind of file format to use. I have only one suggestion: consistency. Okay, two suggestions: unless otherwise specified, don't include anything other than the SOP. No bibliography or footnotes. If you quote or paraphrase someone, cite them in the text the way they do it in the average newspaper article. As Scooby says, "Ruh-roh!"
 
Now, start writing. Create something of a master SOP, or a set of master sentences for the SOPs. Some things should be in every one of them, like what your research interests are. Because length requirements are different for each program, you should work out more than one sentence or set of sentences for each thing you plan to put into more than one SOP. Have a more detailed explanation of your research interests and a more concise one. Even though this might be central and, perhaps, most important to the SOP, you don't want most of a short SOP taken up by one thing. Make these sentences do extra duties. If they can explain not only why you're into what you're into, but also why it's significant to the discipline/program, and how the program factors into it, bonus! The more functions one sentence can serve, with clear, readable logic, the more room you have in the length requirements to bring in other things. Think of this master SOP as more of a set of sentences you can hang on the individual SOP's unique structure. A flesh and skeleton metaphor can work here. You can order all SOPs at this point, you'll probably want to put research interests in the middle or toward the end, rather than in the first sentence, but the key here is that the skeleton of the individual SOP and most of its flesh will come from the needs of the program you're writing it for, not from some predetermined formula. No generically applicable, master SOP that has a few tweaks here and there.
 
Here's the thing. The SOP is one of the most important documents you'll write in your life. It's not something that should be done in a few hours, after looking at the program website and spending some time on the net searching for a how-to-write-an-SOP-guide. It takes work backed by research. The readers can tell quite easily how much research you've done on them by the way you structure and write your SOP. They can tell if you're sending out a generic SOP to several programs because it will be too general. You can't change faculty names in and out, along with a detail or two that makes it seem tailored to the program. The individual SOP should be tailored from the beginning. Some sentences won't change much, so you can pre-write them. But how they fit into each SOP, the reasoning you'll use to try to convince the adcomm that you're the best applicant, and the perspective you'll take all the way to the words you use should be done with the program in mind. It shouldn't be generic. Even if it doesn't seem noticeably generic to you, that doesn't mean that the adcomm won't notice it. They read many, many SOPs every year. People who read SOPs develop a sense about the generic, the cut and paste work.
 
How to name drop gracefully, or bring up the theory and histories and whatnot you're working with when there's only a teeny amount of space for everything? That's a bit easier than it might seem. It's not in the explanation; it's in the usage. If you can use the relevant theories and people and methodologies correctly in a sentence, you don't have to show the adcomm that you know how to use them, or how they're related, by explaining it. Trust them to have enough education to make a few connections for themselves when it comes to the discipline. Example: Novels such as Twilight exemplify how Marxist alienation can be applied to childbirth. My research interest lies in the alienation of women from the product of delivery in Modernist American fiction, such as Faulkner's Sound and the Fury. (Huh, I wonder if that would really work?) Two sentences and I've referenced theory, period, history, relevance for today, and some methodology (it's literature, not science). Use it, don't explain it.
 
If possible, have a professor you know read the SOP to your preferred school and give you some advice. They know more than most other groups of people. If not possible, your current university's writing center can help, or other people who are familiar with the field, or with writing. Your high school English teacher or your English major buddy can probably say something about your grammar, but might not be as helpful as expected. Example, in English, the convention is to speak of historical people in present tense. Shakespeare writes, "To be or not to be," because he thinks it is the question. History has kittens. Shakespeare has been dead for centuries, he can't write! Past tense! Shakespeare wrote, "To be or not to be," because thought it was the question. Someone in the field is preferable!
 
Finally, a word about my real credentials. The adcomm is going to do to your application what you've just done with this post. They are going to judge your credentials (your ethos, trustworthiness, veracity, credibility, knowledge, and so on) based on the impressions they get of you from what you've written. So, be knowledgeable about you, your field, and the program, and use that knowledge well.

@wandajune & @MentalEngineer : thank you for your responses. I think they are helpful.
 
@Ms. V : I think what has been in mind is something like what @dgswaim suggests; something like providing evidence that you've done work in this area—really show some intellectual engagement with your interests. The problem is this: I'm not sure what a nice concise way of doing that looks like, or at least I haven't seen a nice example of that. But, I suppose my original question just is what all this talk of 'doing philosophy' amounts to in an SOP. 

One piece of advise that I got from my MA thesis advisor was this: Make it clear what your interests are, and try to provide evidence that you've been doing work in that area in a meaningful way, but try not to come across as "closed-minded." Your interests will change, and in a sentence or two, it's good to express some sentiment to the effect that you're open to such change. It was pointed out to me that this can help to make people who are outside of your area (and who might be looking at your file) more disposed to think of you as someone they'd like to have around.

I've never sat on an adcomm, but I've read a few dozen SoPs for people in the last couple years. The common wisdom among the faculty at UWM who teach our workshop on writing samples and SoPs is that the SoP can very rarely help you, but it can hurt you. A stellar SoP isn't going to take a so-so application over the edge, but a bad one can get a good application thrown out. Mostly, you avoid having that happen by not trying to be too gimmicky or innovative. It's kind of like fashion - you can do, like, one thing that's kind of outside the norm as long as you can make it fit, but you can't completely disregard what everyone else is doing. Look at some samples, or get people you know to send you theirs. Keep things that feel authentic to you and change things that feel fake and research, research, research your schools.
As I mentioned in the other thread, I think the main positive thing you can do in your SoP is prove that you're a great fit for the particular program. In that sense, your SoP is a piece of philosophy, because it's an argument to the adcomm giving some of the reasons they should choose you over all the other applicants. Your writing sample proves (hopefully) that you're good enough at philosophy. Your SoP proves that you know what the program you're applying to does - not just in broad strokes of "I'm interested in philosophy of mind and Program X has many outstanding faculty who work in that area," but what faculty (and grad students, if they do something cool) have actually done recently. Your SoP proves that you have an idea of what you want to do at that particular program. Yes, your interests will likely change during the course of a PhD, but going into one without having thought about what you're going to do at all does not bode well. Your SoP proves that what the program does and what you want to do are a good match for each other. Ideally, it proves that not by declaring it to be so by fiat - anyone can do that, and adcomms get piles of applications that look like that. Instead, you prove it by pointing to things you have already done - courses taken, papers written, workshops attended, scholars corresponded with, and so on. Doing these things shows that you're approaching your graduate work with a professional attitude and not just applying for the hell of it. Since the ability to think professionally about what you do in your program is almost certainly a necessary condition for successful completion of a PhD, applicants who can already do it are, ceteris paribus, preferable to those who can't. Ceteris non paribus, of course, but you can't help that, so you should act as though they are.
Having a well-turned phrase or two in there doesn't hurt either.

I agree with the above posters.  You should first send out a quick reminder email (one or two sentences max).  If they still don't respond after a few days you may even want to send a new (brief) message with a different subject line.  If that doesn't work and you are really committed to working with this person, try contacting the director of graduate studies.  While you don't want to be pushy or annoying by sending out too many messages, it's better to do that than not apply in my opinion.  
I also agree with pbjcafe that being repeatedly non-responsive is a red flag.  If someone doesn't have time to check and respond to their email, they may not have time to mentor their graduate students.  This isn't necessarily true but it's something to keep in mind. 

I will not apply to faculty who are unresponsive to my emails (currently, there has been only ONE).
Honestly, I know they are busy but this is part of their job description, and I think it is a bit rude as they went through the same process we did to get to where they are today. Ya know?

I think attempting to "do philosophy" is probably bad advice. It's a cover letter.
My statement was mainly an outline of my research interests and relevant background, with a short quip about how I got interested in philosophy. I also opened with a light joke, which admissions committees mentioned as a positive aspect of my application. (Not everyone can pull this off, however, so make sure you have others proofread your statement to ensure that you've achieved the right tone.) The best advice is to stay on topic, but if you can show a bit of your personality in the letter, that can help you. 

This is a frustrating situation! Have you tried emailing them a second time as a reminder? I've sent follow-up emails along the lines of "I know you're probably very busy but I would really appreciate knowing whether you will be taking a student since the application is due soon." In general, I've received replies to my second inquiry quickly.  
I work with a graduate student who advised me to be wary of professors who are non-responsive over email as it may be a red flag to how they work with their students. I would take that advice with a grain of salt... but I would definitely be hesitant to apply to a program where I never heard back from a professor. 

so it was a misunderstanding for me! I thought you meant submission to the journals as for publications. in that case (essays for admission or writing samples), SLPgirl95 is absolutely right 

In my experience, the school specifies whether they want single or double spaced. However, I would probably err on the side of single-spaced; it makes your personal statement seem shorter and comes across as less "work" for the admissions counselor, considering that many have limited time to read our essays.

I think a thesis excerpt is fine and probably preferable to a full paper if it demonstrates a better level of writing and research. Unless a school specifically asks for a full paper, I'd choose the sample that best showcases my abilities - the thesis. There are two things to do to improve on just sending an excerpt. The first is to have a summary of the rest of the thesis, to help situate the excerpt in the context of the thesis. The other is to make the whole thesis available to the adcom - either send the whole thing with an indication of which pages to read (ask about this option, some might not appreciate it if you send a 50-page paper when the limit was 15), or put the whole thing online and list the link prominently in your writing sample.

This is the exact way to go.

Most first drafts of SOPs I've seen start with a narrative of the person's past and background, and only get around to their current/future interests towards the end of the essay. To have a good SOP, however, the focus should be on your current and (mostly) future research plans, and it should be apparent what your interests are as early as possible. It's the same advice I get now for writing papers - don't recount the history of all your failed attempts and bad starts, tell me the path that succeeded and show me what you can do with it.

For a good, focused SOP, you should be able to demonstrate that you are familiar with the inner workings of your field. Address strengths and weaknesses in current thought about your topic, or suggest a fresh way of looking at it; choose a project that is feasible in size for the degree you're applying to; aim to have similar interests/methodology/both as the researchers in the department you're applying to. Remember that you're not committing yourself to actually doing the project, you just want to show the adcom that you can think through the details of a possible project within your area of interest. Choose no more than 1-2 interests as your main interests and spend most of your time talking about them. It's OK to have secondary interests, but it should be clear where your interests lie.

Aside choosing the right kind of interests to discuss, fit is also understanding your intended department's attitude towards things like collaborations, innovation, going in unexplored directions, doing quantitative/qualitative/theoretical/practical/etc work. Talk about things that make sense for that department. Mention anything unique that the program offers - resources, reading groups, any kind of opportunity like an exchange or a diploma. If it's not a school that emphasizes teaching, don't dwell on that. If you're not sure that you'll be encouraged to take courses at other departments, make sure before you mention "resources" that are not really going to be there.

If you want to mention coursework in more detail, most applications will allow you to e.g. upload a summary as a supporting document or as part of your CV. You can also attached it to your transcript. Include a list of course names/numbers, the instructors, and a one-paragraph description of each course (+optionally, the grade and nr of credits, but that should be on your transcript; optionally2: the topic and short description of term papers you wrote for each course). All those details don't really have to be in your SOP, unless they're directly tied to your current/future interests. If you've caught the adcom's eye, they'll go look at your credentials anyway. Optionally: give a link to a website that contains all the work you're comfortable with the adcom seeing. It can be a simple googledocs-based site, I hear they are easy to make. If they're really interested, the adcom might want to know more about your work, and that's a great easy way to give them that extra information.

This is a whole bunch of great advice.

For what it's worth, my SoP focused entirely on:
~ideas I had been recently exploring (reflected in my writing sample),
~how they led to the proposal I was suggesting for grad school, and
~why I wanted to pursue said proposal at their institution.

The only mention of my undergraduate degree was half a sentence in the second paragraph, and the only mention of my MA in a related-but-not-quite-the-same field was a line toward the end, and both references tied explicitly to the outline above. I took the same approach with work experience, only mentioning it (briefly) if it was directly relevant. In fact, the whole essay hinged upon what, on paper, was a blip in my student record--a grad lit seminar I took as a non-degree student a year ago--since that course was the Pandora's box that, once opened, led to my current line of inquiry.

And intextrovert brings up a great point about the methodology of a department being an important part of its "fit." To my surprise, one of my two admittances--and the one that I ultimately accepted--was from the only school for which I didn't list specific professors in my SoP. Instead, I talked mostly about how I liked the faculty's general approach to their scholarship, and how this approach would complement the project I was proposing. My other successful app did name faculty members I wanted to work with--and cited them in my writing sample, no less--so I'm not sure how typical the first response was. But I do think it illustrates that, at least in humanities-land, naming profs you love isn't the only way to convince an adcom that you're a good "fit" for their program.

Just my two cents based on my own little bubble of largely subjective data, but I hope it helps.

Medievalmaniac, I really don't think that the SoP is the right place to explain your coursework, unless it has direct relevance to the narrative you're writing about your development. I just attached a sheet with all my applications called "Undergraduate Coursework in Literature" or "Relevant Coursework," and then divide it up into "English" and "French." Under each category, I had the course number, the actual full title, the prof, and my grade in it. That way they can cross-reference with my transcript if they want, but they have the important info that they'll really be mining my transcript for isolated for them already. And I didn't have to take up precious space in my SoP explaining them.

As for what I did in my SoP that I think worked, I have some perspective on that, having been roundly rejected two years ago and pretty decent success this round (though UVa and U Washington, what is UP?! Still waiting on them). I really think the difference between my two SoPs is the big thing that made the difference, as my numbers and other qualifications (and even most of my writing sample, though I edited it) are the same. So here's what I think made the difference, in three alliterative categories:

1. Focus. Like it or not, they want to be able to categorize you. You can have secondary interests, but they have to be clearly secondary and bear some relation to your main focus. Last time I tried to tell too many stories of my development, and there were too many directions I could go in. This was partially a reflection of where I was at the time, and honestly I think they were right to reject me straight out of undergrad - I needed some time to reflect, to think about what I actually wanted to do in the field. Now that I have, my SoP reflects that clearer sense of direction and purpose.

2. Fit. Everyone tells you this, but it's true. I spent a lot more time really researching profs on the websites, then looking up and scanning through a few key articles, and skimming through the courses they taught. It really gives you a better idea of whether their interests and methodologies ACTUALLY fit yours, or whether it just looks like that on paper. I then tailored my fit paragraph to show how multiple faculty members could support my research interests (this may be English-specific, as in other non-humanitites disciplines you are applying to work with one advisor). Also, if the department has a pet methodology, it's helpful to know that - they'll look for students who fit that bill. Interdisciplinary programs that faculty are involved in and subfield/methodologically-specific colloquia, etc. are also things to look for.

3. Future. This could vary, depending on how much of an academic past you have, but for me what helped was focusing discussing even my past towards showing how it formed a trajectory for the future. I've said in other places around here that the best advice I got for my SoP was that you should think about demonstrating that you are capable of conceiving of a larger project; whether or not you end up doing that project is irrelevant, as you probably won't and the adcomm is well aware of that - the point is that you are CAPABLE of conceiving of a future direction for yourself. I focused on telling a story (i.e. "I'm interested in the relationship to place in Modernist literature") and cutting all details of my past that didn't mesh with that. So by the end I was able to say look! What I discussed doing in paragraphs x (gloss of relevant coursework/advisors, focus), y (challenges and triumphs of writing my thesis and learning theory), and z (teaching, living different places) all feed into the project I'm proposing in this last paragraph (though the project was sufficiently broad so as not to pigeonhole me). I said that I wanted to go in certain different directions, but it was clear that it would be a continuation of my development, not starting anew. They want to see that you are capable of functioning independently as an academic (should be demonstrated by your past and by the fact that you can independently come up with good future directions), but that they have something to offer in terms of guiding you.

Hope that helps!