R1ceN00dles

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!

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.

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.