lily_

I find this post misinformed and stereotypical on so many levels.

I don't know why you think that people who got on waiting lists are ones who slacked off in ug and took basket-weaving or dancing instead of classes that could strengthen their applications. I also don't understand why you put liberal arts in the same category as basket-weaving, but I'm not going to dignify that with an explanation of why you're wrong. People who get onto waiting lists are usually very good applicants who the department would love to accept, if it had more funding. They are not anything like what you describe.

As for the advice to prove to the adcom that you would do anything for a place in their program, including spending hundreds and hundreds of dollars, I'd be very weary of doing that. There are so many reasons not to be the person who wants things too badly. You want to be appreciated and well payed for your trouble; you don't want to be the person who everybody knows can be offered less and will still do more. Stay within reason. I also wouldn't be surprised if professors don't want to work with people who seem too invested in their work, it's a bit uncomfortable, and can give off an impression of naivete.

As for learning languages in general - that could be good advice for some people in some disciplines, and useless for others. If what you do has nothing to do with languages and you find an awkward way to work the fact that you taught yourself 3 languages into your SOP - it's going to be just that: awkward. Not to mention that it'll take up space you need for more pertinent things. [case in point: I am doing a PhD in linguistics and have in fact taught myself and learned several languages, but none of that made into my SOP. My CV mentions my language skills, but no one really cares about how I obtained them. If anything, language courses have documentation and as a result receive more recognition than self-teaching].

As for Rosetta: I don't understand why you would spend so much money on a resource that can be replaced by much cheaper resources that will give similar results. There are online sites for beginners in many languages, there are books and tapes, there are language exchange programs at most universities. Why not start there? Your money will probably be better spent on summer courses and immersion camps after you acquire some basic skills.


It is good advice to try to boost your profile as much as you can - both before you apply and once you're on a waiting list. Take the time to figure out if there is some important skill that you don't have: it could be a language, stats, math, programming skills, advanced classes in your major, writing skills, experience writing a large paper or working on a research project, or something else. Do what you can to first of all acknowledge that there is something missing, which the program might be worried about in terms of abilities and fit, and try to do what you can to fix it. Take a summer course, for instance (and mention that you plan to do so somewhere on your application). Teach yourself, take private lessons, work one on one with a professor. There are many options for improving deficiencies. Consult your mentors - there is no one quick solution like the one in the post I quoted. But there certainly are things you can do.

I just had a professor who sits on admissions committees look over my SOP.

My introduction was talking about how I liked to go to museums as a child and was fascinated by the ancient world. He said that starting out like this is a huge mistake. Obviously if you are applying to study archaeology at the graduate level, it's pretty much assumed that you're fascinated by the ancient world and probably enjoy museums. But so do lots of people. What makes you unique. Attempt to illustrate your passion for the field without really telling some kind of silly story about your childhood. This is also an approach that many people take, and if you really want a strong SOP you'll find a better, more mature, and more creative way to say it.

The next point is, whether or not to talk about the negatives on your application. I wrote mine this year mentioning them extremely briefly and moving on. My thought behind this was to simply focus heavily on all the points that make me a competitive applicant. However, some graduate programs explicitly say that your SOP is the place on your application to mention your negatives and why the committee should overlook them. Obviously, this should not be the focus of your SOP. What the committees are looking for here is growth and improvement above all. Do not make excuses for poor grades, weak GRE scores, or a spotty work record. Do, however, point out how you have grown, how the committee can see improvement, and then highlight the things that make you a fabulous candidate.

The last thing I will mention is also very important, particularly for PhDs. Make sure that you know who you are applying to study under, and what your project is. Demonstrate that you would fit into the department like a glove and that you read Dr. Octopus' latest article on the newest theory, etc. etc. etc. Also, have a concise project in mind. Remember, you're not married to this idea, but you need to show the committee that you can ask the right kind of questions concerning your proposed research and that the project is something that the faculty could help you on based off of their interests and previous work. Do not make this project a carbon-copy of something they have previously accomplished, but a project that complements the research they have already performed. It is also highly advisable, since your job as a PhD student is essentially to perform lots of independent research, to demonstrate that you are capable of performing independent research. Although you want to show that you are a good fit for the program, you do not want to appear as though your adviser will have to hold your hand for the next five years.

Hope that helps! I'm no expert, but these are simply my thoughts on the process.

There is nothing stopping you from going straight to a potential advisor. If you've thoroughly researched the program and its faculty, then you've likely identified a few whose research interests align with yours. Extend an initial greeting letting them know that you've read [insert paper here] and are really interested in their work. Mention when you plan to apply to the department. If they respond and tell you to go through a gate keeper (program coordinator), then go back that route. However, you've already opened the door and gotten your name in front of them.

I think the GRE will only appear to be easier. In fact, it will actually resemble the LSAT and will be much more difficult than the current test. It will also be much more analytic and will require more complex computations from test takers. Even though I do agree that the elimination of analogies/antonym makes the content of the verbal part of the test much easier (especially for non-native speakers), I am sure the questions will actually be much longer, complicated and in that sense more difficult. They might actually resemble LSAT's reading comprehension and/or even logical reasoning sections to some extent. Even though calculators are of course "helpful", it also means that we will be asked to deal with much more complicated questions. In a nutshell, we will be asked to perform much more complicated computations and the questions will be more intricate.

Notice that the LSAT has the same deceptive appeal (no knowledge required, per se - simply logical and analytical reasoning) and yet it is undeniably extremely difficult.

Wow. Expect every Jack and his mom to achieve a perfect score '11 onward. As if admissions weren't warped enough, now a former standard gets dumbed down as well. Apologies if I sound too harsh, but this simply comes across as pandering to the masses and lowering the threshold -- perhaps to produce some illusory appearance of more people doing 'well' ?

I finally got my results. I was invited to be a non-matriculated student for a semester. I don't know if that is what they send to everyone who was rejected, but it read like a probationary acceptance. I'm not in a position to be picky, and since Hunter is affordable I'm going to try my luck, take classes, work hard, and then hopefully become matriculated in the spring. I just hope I can finish the degree in two years, but I feel like there is nothing else I can do to go on with a degree in anthropology unless I get an MA and raise my overall GPA. It's my life dream to get a PhD and my backup is law school, both of which require a more competitive record than the one I have now.

Here's hoping for the future, and I am pressing on. Good luck to everyone else.

Ok, you got me, again.

I'm not going to respond to you any longer. You are pretty rude most of the time. I've been polite, and I don't want to get in a flame war, I don't think this is the place for it. Feel free to comment about how this makes me a baby, or ill-equipped for graduate study. It's an online forum, no admissions committee is going to read this, and there is such thing as a typo. We don't all suffer from excessive Type A personalities, and thank goodness, I'd hate to see what your blood pressure is like.

Hi all,

First, let me apologize for potentially offending anyone with my previous set of posts -- I'm new to this forum, so I didn't really understand the rules of engagement, so to speak. My guess from the negative feedback is that what I wrote came off as pompous. Terribly sorry abou that.

That said, I'm currently considering Michigan's joint history/anthro Ph.D., but I don't have an anthro background: I did political science and sociology as an undergrad, and I'm doing Islamic history for an MA (so the history side is covered), but no anthro specifically. Is it a lost cause? Or is there a way to compensate for the lack fo anthro background? Might the related social sciences be a just cause? I'd really appreciate any feedback anyone could provide. Thanks!

So this would be my question about your application to anthropology, or anthropologically oriented projects....most admissions committees will probably be curious as to how you fit into their department and the discipline itself. There is actually quite a difference between religion studies, political science and anthropology, in terms of canon, methodology, the types of objects they encounter, scope, etc. I am myself a cultural anthropologist who is deeply engaged with history in particular ways but it is not a mere footnote to my research that this relationship takes a particular form - it is probably the greatest theoretical burden with which I am concerned. I suppose what I'm asking is: In what ways is your work "anthropological"? This is something that as a student with interdisciplinary leanings I bumped up against time and time again and I think it will be of serious concern for prospective departments. I think the reason it comes up is that when you are finished you will be looking for jobs in a discipline that will require you to be clearly defined in some way, that's the nature of academic politics - are you a historian who is interested in anthropology? are you an anthropologist who is interested in history? etc. You may well be aware of this, and already well equipped to answer this question, it was just the one thing that popped out for me. From what i hear from my colleagues, I think on all the numerical factors you stand in very good position among any applicant pool, but very often these are the less important of the factors determining your admissions decision. I can't speak for political science, but friends of mine in intellectual history (a department and field with which I often in conversation) say the same thing about history.

Hi all,

I'm currently a first-year MA student in Islamic Studies, and will be applying next year to Ph.D. work to several top programs -- Chicago and Yale in Political Science, Duke, Princeton and Harvard in Near Eastern Studies/Religion, and Michigan in History/Anthropology. I've got a strong undergraduate record (4.0 GPA and multiple majors), decent GRE scores (660V, 730Q, 6 writing), and a pretty strong publishing record this early in the game -- several articles, several conference papers, and I'm working on my first book as we speak. The thing is, in my first year as an MA student this past year, I took a bit of a ding, getting two A minuses (in language courses, not content courses). It was entirely on account of taking on waaay too much this year -- I took 1.5x the standard number of graduate credits, and juggled it around this book project, which was just a recipe for disaster. Still, the A minuses are there, and they aren't going to go away...

I know graduate GPA is expected to be higher than undergrad, so I'm wondering, is an A minus here and there as an MA student a deal-breaker for top Ph.D. programs? I imagine it varies across the spectrum of programs, so if anyone can comment intelligently about any of these programs all the better -- especially Michigan, as I don't specifically have an anthro background (I have sociology as an undergrad major, and I'm doing history in my MA), so that one is going to be a little trickier. Will a less-than-perfect (but still strong) MA record stand in the way of admission to these top programs?

If this does stand to pose a problem, might it be worth retaking the GRE? My scores were above 90th percentile across all registers, but I know the verbal can stand to be improved. Might that be necessary in this case?

I practically had a panic attack after getting my *second* A-minus (I was borderline by half of a point, and my prof refused to budge). I just took on waaay too much this year, otherwise I don't think this would have happened. I'd really appreciate any feedback anyone can provide, as it'd go a long way to alleviate my angst. Thanks!

I have been invited by the research fellowship program I completed last year to speak to current students. They are all from groups underrepresented in academia and planning for a PhD and/or career in academia.

The topic is "Paving Scholastic Excellence".

As my expertise right now is limited to just applying and getting accepting I'm focusing on that. I have had all kinds of thoughts over the past couple weeks as I try to decide what I'm qualified to say. The information isn't exactly a narrative so I decided to do some bullet points as a hand-out. The talk will elaborate, of course, but I thought that when controlled for audience the stuff I learned as written here might be useful. Or, not. Your call.

Five or Six Things I Like To Think I Learned at Awesome Program (AP):

1. You are worthy.

a. No matter how senior or acclaimed the scholar, always remember that you bring something valuable to the table. What’s a sensei with no pupil?

2. Contextualize all advice.

a. One of the most popular and well-reviewed books on graduate school is “Getting What You Came For” by Robert Peters. First published in 1997 it features many gems … and then there are passages like this:


“The standby method of backup [for your computer files] is to copy your data onto floppy disks as soon as you finish using your word processor or other application. (363)”


Floppy disks? That advice is only 13 years old. Many professors were last in graduate school 20, 30, 40+ years ago.

Many will offer you a lot of well-meaning advice. Learn to filter that by considering the source (ever sat on an adcomm? are in your discipline? Teaching college vs. research university?).

Contextualize all advice as much as possible…including mine.

3. Trust Yourself

a. You are the authority on you.

4. Invest in yourself…starting now.

a. Consider how you spend your summer stipend

b. Plan ahead for any financial aid refunds and/or anticipated earnings the summer BEFORE your first semester of senior year:
i. School visits and interviews
ii. Association dues
iii. Technology

5. Realize the cultural divide in which you now reside

a. Few of the people you love will understand what you are doing, and you’ll love very few of the people who do. Piece together the ultimate mentor – the cheerleader, pragmatist, the expert, the walking resource, etc. – from various people in your life. One person cannot be everything you need.

6. A special cultural note on contextualizing advice, information, sources, gossip, etc.

a. “poor”, “hard”, “tough” are all relative terms. (As in the market for PhDs is so "hard" and the job is so "hard" and you'll always be "poor" -- all relative. When you hear these things ask or determine what the speaker/writer means by the words -- do they mean "poor" to be $65k a year? -- and decide for yourself if it means the same thing to you.)

b. Having no expectation of what I deserve or any assumptions about what academic life should be is, what I consider, the great benefit of being a “minority” in the academia. For example, I'm not nearly as upset as some by the idea of the decline of "jobs for life" -- or coveted tenure track positions -- as I never entertained the idea of such a thing. Where I come from -- and where many of you are from -- the idea of a guaranteed job is totally foreign. Losing something you never expected to have? Not such a big deal.*



Websites I found useful (keeping in mind numbers 2-6):

• www.h-net.org – an online database of listservs by discipline and/or research interest

• www.orgtheory.wordpress.com – most posts are for organizational theory folks but they have a group of posts called “Grad Skool Rulz” that are universal. A post specifically for grad students of color is particularly enlightening

• GRAPES is hosted by UCLA. It is a searchable database of funding opportunities similar to the one you’ll have access this summer but it doesn’t expire once the program is over. (http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/grpinst.htm)

• www.academic360.com – A list of academic-related websites

• www.academia.edu – Facebook for academics (also helps to “clean up” your online presence by becoming the primary hits when your name is googled.)

• www.thegradcafe.com – a moderated but democratic discussion board for grad applicants, students and recent grads. It’s not for everyone. If you like commiserating and swapping info though it’s a great online community.




Habits I developed by trial and error:

• Apparently I’m a study-in-the-library person and not a study-on-the-couch person. Who knew? I should have. You should, too.

• I filter all the emails from academic listservs and organizations (using gmail: settings --> filters -->skip the inbox-->apply the label). I set aside time to scan that folder semi-regularly, respond, etc.

• I set up “google alerts” for people and schools I want to keep up-to-date on. It emails me when Dr. Superstar at My Dream Program is mentioned on the web. I can then send a note of congratulations on a new book or sound knowledgeable next time we talk. Or, at the very least I’ll know more about what I’m getting into!

• Link to my academia.edu page and digital CV (set up using free google sites tool) in my email signature.

• When I meet people I try to add their info to my address book as soon as I’m next at the computer.

When you have money you almost never have free time and when you have plenty of free time you almost never have money. At AP you’ll have both.

Spend both well, don’t waste too much time sleeping, and enjoy it!


ETA: *it was brought to my attention that this is unclear or, rather, it does not accurately communicate my meaning. In the interest of internet fairness I won't edit the original but let me clarify.

I don't mean not to have expectations of treatment or your career trajectory. I mean having no rigid guidelines about what a career in academia should look like makes one more flexible and open to what a career in academia may be becoming or will one day be. No preconceived notions is a good thing in a time of such massive transformation and change -- less angst, more aware of opportunity, more willing to take risks and less disappointment and bitterness.

I shed my tears and sucked it up. I'm actually really proud - I ended up practically doubling my running mileage during the period in which the rejections came in!

Then I contacted the departments I was rejected from, and asked them (hopefully without sounding too desperate or emo) what I could have done better. The answer was the same from all: earn an MA and do really, really well. So, low and behold, I found an MA program in my city and met with the person I'd most like to work with, who said he would write me a LOR for that department. The application is due Thursday, and I have everything in and have been sending my SOP to anyone willing to read it to tear apart. I also contacted another colleague of mine who supervises a project that I could participate in and potentially craft a thesis topic out of that is parallel to what this professor at the MA program does. So my SOP says essentially, "HEY LOOK AT ME I HAVE A RELEVANT PROJECT!"

So, my plan is, get into this MA program and kick major ass, take names, run a marathon and try my luck for the PhD in 2012. Best part about this MA, it's dirt cheap, instate tuition with opportunities for work-study, and the grad courses are in the evening, so I could work and go to school and not owe the government a house. Yay.

And here are some cheesey quotes that help me get through the day: It look Babe Ruth over 1,300 strike-outs to achieve his 716 (correct me if I'm wrong) homers! And Thomas Jefferson said that he believed in luck, the harder he worked, the more of it he found.

Best of luck everyone!

By the time you get to the PhD level, grades are not the most important thing anymore, not by a long shot. Actually, it can be frowned upon, for reasons such as your "panic attack" after getting an A-. The programs generally don't give a crap about your grades as long as you don't get put on academic probation. They want you to be focused on research, and if you are the type of student who is freaking out about an A-, then you may wind up taking time away from your research to strive for A's, and honestly, programs do NOT want that. Probably the type of lesson your prof who wouldn't budge on the half a point from a A was trying to give you.

I think the grade-obsession is a very immature approach to grade school.You say your grades dropped this year because you took too much on, but do you expect less from grad school? If you are looking for a funded PhD, not only will you have the full load of classes, but you will probably be TA-ing and doing research too. The average work week in grad school is 6 days a week, and anywhere from 50-70 hours depending on the advisor.

And as you can tell from the reputation value this post has given you (in case you don't know what it is, the red number at the bottom right hand corner of your post), I think you REALLY need an adjustment in your priorities. This post came off as a narcissist who is being insecure and seeking validation from everyone that you are still wonderful. I am sure you are a great student and you didn't mean it that way, but still, that is how you are coming off to your peers, and could in the future to professors and other grad students. You need to build networking and relationships in your field, and honestly no one is going to want to listen to stuff like this.

So pretty much the overall message of my post is chill out! Get over the grade-obsession, because it's not going to get you anywhere in life. Re-taking the GRE's is not going to help you any more if you are already in 90th percentiles, A-'s are not going to kill you. The best thing you can do for yourself is chill out, and focus more on research in your MA, get more publications, and really make sure your recommendations and SOP are awesome. I am sure you will get in, just think you need to see the big picture more instead of obsessing on a 4.0.

To put it in perspective, in my undergrad I had a 3.65 GPA, 75-80th percentile GRE's, and I got into and am attending the #9 ranked program in my field, and an Ivy. What got me in was my 3+ years of academic and industrial experience, and stellar recommendations. So RELAX!

Hi all,

First, let me apologize for my previous set of posts -- I'm new to the forum, so I didn't quite know the proper etiquette and decorum. Judging from the negative comments I'm guessing what I last wrote came off as pompous. My apologies for that.

In any case, I'm vying mostly for programs in political theory, focusing on Islamic political thought. Chicago, Yale, and Princeton are immediately coming to mind. Also considering NELC/religious studies programs at Duke and Harvard. I've got a strong undergrad background, but this year in my MA program I got dinged with two A minuses. I keep getting told that your GPA as an MA student is a lot more important than your undergrad, so I'm worrying that this can stand to compromise my candidacy. So I'm wondering, is this really something to lose sleep over? I suppose I have some other stuff to compensate for it (decent GRE, some conference presentations, etc.), but if programs expect a flawless MA record, then I'm in trouble. Any ideas or feedback would be really appreciated. Thanks so much.

Well then, be bold about it. Tell them you're rescinding your application and tell them why.

I would rescind as well and express disappointment with their department's inconsiderate handling of the application.

Even the busiest of departments manage to communicate and respond to communications in a timely manner. There is no excuse for this school not conveying your status.

If they can't handle updating people personally, maybe they should invest in an easier-to-update website applicants can check, since it sounds like they don't have one.

Hi all,

I'm currently a first-year MA student in Islamic Studies, and will be applying next year to Ph.D. work to several top programs -- Chicago and Yale in Political Science, Duke, Princeton and Harvard in Near Eastern Studies/Religion, and Michigan in History/Anthropology. I've got a strong undergraduate record (4.0 GPA and multiple majors), decent GRE scores (660V, 730Q, 6 writing), and a pretty strong publishing record this early in the game -- several articles, several conference papers, and I'm working on my first book as we speak. The thing is, in my first year as an MA student this past year, I took a bit of a ding, getting two A minuses (on account of taking on waaay too much this year).

I know graduate GPA is expected to be higher than undergrad, so I'm wondering, is an A minus here as an MA student a deal-breaker for top Ph.D. programs? I imagine it varies across the spectrum of programs, so if anyone can comment intelligently about any of these programs all the better -- especially Michigan, as I don't specifically have an anthro background, so that one is going to be a little trickier. Will a less-than-perfect (but still strong) MA record stand in the way of admission to these top programs?

If this does stand to pose a problem, might it be worth retaking the GRE? My scores were above 90th percentile across all registers, but I know the verbal can stand to be improved. Might that be necessary in this case?

I practically had a panic attack after getting my *second* A-minus (I was borderline by half of a point, and my prof refused to budge). I just took on waaay too much this year, otherwise I don't think this would have happened. I'd really appreciate any feedback anyone can provide, as it'd go a long way to alleviate my angst. Thanks!

I am receiving a B.S. degree in computer science at the end of this summer. I know for certain that I am not the type of student that any top-tier graduate school wants to accept: my GPA is 3.0, I have completed very little research (a project that merely consisted of using genetic algorithms to populate a blackjack strategy card- definitely nothing groundbreaking), and am getting my degree from a fourth-tier dump in Florida that goes by the name of Florida Atlantic University. I am seriously considering getting a second undergraduate degree in physics. For some strange reason, the University of Maryland accepted me into their undergraduate program for the fall 2010 semester. An adviser there said I could have a B.S. in physics in two years. If, hypothetically, I were to earn a high GPA during the completion of my second degree and do research and get high GPA scores, is admission to a top university for physics or computer science, such as MIT, CalTech, Cornell, or Stanford still an impossible dream? My worries are that even if I were to get a 3.8 GPA, my total average GPA would still be below 3.5, and there is only one and a half years to go to the application deadline for these places. I'm afraid that my low GPA will discourage those undergraduate summer research programs from accepting me next year, so I won't have that on my transcript.

DEFINITELY get a stronger letter from an industrial supervisor instead of a crappy one from a prof who doesn't know you well. It will be glaringly obvious who really knows you and how you work. The requirements depend from school to school, but usually for mine they asked for at least one academic recommendation, and the rest had to be from people in the field. I used 2 professors and 1 supervisor from industry, and got into top 20 schools in my programs.

I would be slightly concerned about the length of your relationship with your recommenders though. If you look at the recommendation form, they almost always ask how long they have known you, and at the time that they write the recommendations, the internship supervisor and research project advisor sound like they will have only worked with you for a few months. So just be wary of that, and review all your options. If you don't have anyone else that you can ask (were you close with any profs at your Community College? I think the quality of the letter and their relationships with you is more important than where they teach), then just you REALLY have to work your butt off to build a personal relationship with them, so it doesn't sound like a generic letter of rec. This is also hard though, because some people are hard to get to know that fast.

After writing this I feel like I sound like a Debbie Downer! But truly, it sounds to me like you have a good shot, you just need to be aware of where you need to improve your application. Good luck!

Oh, a lot of debt. But the good news is I don't have any debt now because I had a scholarship throughout the time I wasted here at FAU. My understanding is that MIT, ect. turn away students with GPAs above 3.8 all the time. I know of people with high school honors GPAs above 5.0 who got rejected to their undergraduate programs. I actually got through to MIT's computer science graduate office over the phone once, and they told me that, even if I enrolled in another graduate program and later applied to theirs, my undergraduate performance would still be heavily weighted. My original plan was to start somewhere else and try to transfer there. Another flaw in that plan is that I do not have the educational foundations or research experience to excel in graduate school at this time, especially if I enroll as a non degree seeking student in a decent one.

Oh, and I need to leave Florida. The culture here isn't exactly one that encourages discipline in academia. Or any form of intelligence.

1) What MIT says about admissions is what MIT does. It has no bearing on what other top schools do in their admissions processes. It would behoove you to investigate more than one program, particularly since you seem on the fence about computer science vs physics.
2) Getting a second undergrad degree won't wipe out your GPA from the first one. When a school asks for your undergrad GPA, you will have to calculate it based on both degrees you earned.
3) If you're worried about a lack of research experience, I don't think doing a second BS in two years is going to fix that. You're going to have to spend all of your time on coursework, and its associated labs and homework. If you want research experience, then get a job or volunteer gig that will let you get some. But don't think that doing a second degree alone will be enough to get you the research experience you admit you lack.



Way to offend everyone from Florida. Just a FYI, there is plenty of serious research--by undergrads, grads, and professors--that happens in Florida. There is also a great deal of intelligence in the state, even if it may be lacking in its political leadership. Denigrating whole states won't get you very far in life, just so you know.

It's very likely that you could've gotten involved in research at FAU and taken advantage of the opportunities available there. There are plenty of people on this forum that have gone to "fourth-tier" institutions as undergraduates and have gotten into top-ranked graduate programs in a variety of fields. It's not our fault if you didn't get better grades or pursue research, either through summer REUs or by being an undergrad research assistant. Look inward, not outward. Think seriously about what it is that you need to do to make yourself an attractive candidate. Speak to graduate program directors at a variety of institutions you would be happy at. Know what your end goal is (it needs to be more than just the degree or you won't finish). Do informational interviews with people who have the job you want to have and find out what they recommend for you to get there.

No, it's not impossible. But it is going to be harder than usual.

There is nothing much you can do if some institution or other refuses to even look at your application because of your GPA, and as you say, that may happen on occasion. All that means, though, is that you'll have to apply to more diverse programs and to a larger number of them than a conventional applicant in order to get your foot in the door. If you're serious, you'll eventually get your break. The best way to get into a summer research program is to make connections with your professors during the school year and impressing them into hiring you, lower grades in your previous degree or no lower grades. You'll want to make those connections anyway in order to get the strong recommendations you'll need to get into tier1 universities.

You can't change your past, but you can change your future--and that's what you should be worrying about. If you have a clear game plan - get good grades, do some research, get to know the professors - you should be able to overcome your low GPA. Your application will show your dedication to your topic, and you'll have the higher grades and the research experience to back it up. As for applying after only 1.5 years at your new institution, my suggestion would be to see what happens when the time comes. If all goes according to plan you would have already made a good impression on faculty and have had some research experience. Apply and see what happens.. worst case scenario, you'll have to apply again after you graduate. For now, I think you should concentrate on getting your credentials in order, and not worry about things that are out of your control.

Well, it's hard to tell.



These are all the things that will get you past cutoffs -- but they are not what is going to get you in. It sounds like you're doing OK in this category.



Here are the things that matter. It is usually the recs, experience, sop and writing sample will get you into a school.

Writing a good SOP is hard work and is not just (or mainly) about being a good writer. It's about taking some serious time to reflect and decide what topic interest you; being able to formulate a reasonable research question you are interested in and will show that you understand where your field stand and what would be a good-sized project that will contribute to the knowledge in your field; convincingly arguing that you have the background to do this project, and that you chose the right school in which to carry the project out (showing that you 'fit').

You didn't write about your writing sample, but is some fields that is a very important part of the application packet. If you don't have one yet, spend the summer/fall working on a paper which ideally presents a well-contained and argued-for argument on some topic relevant to your grad school interests.

One small research project may (or may not) be enough...are you also writing a seniors thesis? If not, consider writing one, or doing some kind of independent study with a professor of your choice. You don't have to have a publishable product at the end, what's important is having the experience doing actual research so the university knows you have a fair idea of what is going to be involved in a graduate education and that you've invested in at least one long-term serious project.

Recs: also a major issue. You want at least two of your three recs to be glowing. The third can be just "OK." Again, a thesis, RAship or independent study are all good places to impress profs. Otherwise, be sure to enroll in a small seminar and start making an impression early in the semester so you can get a decent letter by its end.


You still have time to boost you application in many ways. If you do these things....then yes, you have a fair shot.

Hello all you MSW hopefuls! So I am just looking out there to see if anyone else has had the same experience as I have. I applied to U Washington, USC, and Portland State. I was trying to get into the program straight away from my undergrad. I thought that I had done enough to get in! I have been a volunteer with disadvantaged people for 5 years now, I have a 3.5, a kick butt essay (says my lit professor), and glowing LOR's. SO, then why have I been rejected from PSU, waitlisted at U Washington, and have yet to hear from USC?? I have worked so hard, I just don't understand.
Of course I have not lost hope, I will work for awhile and then reapply. I am just trying to see the positive in this. I'm not trying to be dramatic..I know this isn't the worst thing ever and may be a blessing in disguise..I was just wondering if anyone could shed some light on this for me..

Some friendly advice, from someone who's a mere wannabe and a wannabe in an entirely different field to boot: don't think about this in terms of what you've done and what you deserve as a result. I had a disappointing application season, too. I have a really solid undergraduate profile as well, and I've done some stuff I'm pretty proud of since getting my BA. But I think that one of the biggest mistakes I made during the process was trying to figure out where I stacked up amidst everyone else, which is not only a hopeless line of thinking (there are always people who are going to be more prepared and people who are going to be less prepared: that's a given, and that kind of comparison begets madness, in the form of simultaneous self-deprecation -- "I suck compared to everyone else!" --and self-exaltation -- "no, I'm awesome compared to everyone else!") but also an entirely misguided way to think about applying to grad. programs.

My wonderful undergraduate thesis adviser suggested that in the wake of a pile of rejections, I concentrate on the genuine feeling of having a lot to learn. He is entirely right. No matter how prepared any of us are, we have a lot to learn -- that's why we're applying to programs instead of, say, entry-level academic positions. So, instead of thinking about what you had last time and what you felt you deserved from your last application season, maybe think about the things that you still want to learn and accomplish? For me, this keep-your-head-down-and-learn approach -- which is how I approached my entire undergrad life and the two years that I've been out of school since -- has not only helped me become a stronger applicant already, but it's also helped me remember why on earth I want to do this and get a little bit of my mojo back. And it's made me a far less unbearable person, which is awesome: maybe this time I won't drive my partner insane with my constant rantings about "measuring up"!

I understand how easy it is to find your mind wandering along the "I worked so hard, I totally deserve this, why didn't I get this?!" train of thought. Like I said above, I never thought like that UNTIL I began the application process, which, as it turns out, brings out the worst in me -- I really didn't see this particular attitude problem coming, and I was surprised when I realized how easily my brain had gotten sucked into it without my even being aware that it was happening. (When my former adviser made that suggestion, my first reaction was, "Well, obviously, I already know I have a lot to learn.") But at some point during the difficult, somewhat soul-crushing process of applying for something with long-shot odds that I very badly want, I lost sight of what was previously second nature to me and I began to look at all of this in the entirely wrong way. And I wasn't able to pull myself back from what was a problematic mindset until I got the rejections and until my adviser nudged me in such a way. So, since you asked about seeing the positives in this situation, I thought I'd suggest that perhaps one positive (which can garner more concrete positives) would be the impetus to adjust your attitude. It sure has been for me.