coffeekid

First, if possible, take consolation in the fact that there are thousands of people going through this anxiety this time of year. Second, try to establish a mentality that whatever comes your way, you'll make the best of it. That is, try not to stake your existence on what results are on their way. We're all guilty of this, but it helps to keep in mind that your life is not over if you don't get in to wherever, it's just nominally different. Third, try to preoccupy yourself with something healthy and, ideally, social that will get your mind off of the waiting. If you have nothing to do (besides your normal work, that is), then waiting is all you will have to do. Go biking, go out with friends, pick up an instrument. Lastly, and I don't mean this by any mean as a last resort, consider some counseling. Especially if you are in a university right now, hit up a free service that people pay top dollar for when they're out of their program! Even highly productive people make great use of it. Best of luck with your applications!

Ok, buddy, get out of the forums please. It's clear that you are just out to mess with people. Go to a bar for that, where you actually have to own up to what you're saying. People here are trying to help and inform others with their decision making.

Are you seriously being that presumptuous? "[Y]ou obviously lack basic analytical skills... lack cognitive analytical abilities." Well, you obviously lack a capacity for logic, considering the conclusions you make. I know many rigorous analytic writers who have had hiccups on standardized writing exams, and yet they still publish. Why do you think that the ETS offers a re-scoring of your GRE (for a fee, of course)? Because even a pedagogically homogenized organization like them realizes that scoring is inherently interpretive. I really hope you are just a friend messing with this person... otherwise, good luck making connections in academia with that magnitude of condescension!

A friend of mine, who established a strong relationship with the administration and faculty at VDS during [their] application process, received a phone call on Friday (2/4/11) from someone in the department that letters were in the mail, but that [they] were eager to let [them] know asap because of their strong relationship. This person received a top scholarship for their program (MTS... full-tuition), so I am not sure if this group of letters includes the entire group or just those receiving the nice packages. Wish I could say more, but that's all I have to contribute. Good luck, especially with the anxiety! And if you're interested in VDS, message me if you have any questions.

My blood boils at these sorts of programs too, but for a very different reason. When most people in top religion/theology phds are not getting jobs, I can't help but feeling mortified at the thought of people getting taken in by something like these programs, which I imagine would tank you much further than $100k when you take into account the opportunity cost of not working during that time. I would by no means become upset at these sorts of things, but rather take compassion on the fact that even bright, hard working people can get sucked into something like this, which totally sucks. Yeah, a bunch more people will have a Ph.D. on their CV... if you (generally) are getting the degree so people can call you "doctor", then you have your own issues and have room to be pissed off. If you're getting it in hopes of finding a job teaching, then these degree won't make any difference in the challenges you'll face.

My experience is in the American system, and I don't know a lot about these specific programs, so you should take the following with a grain of salt. Masters programs in philosophy are an interesting beast, from what I've heard/experienced. The most pressing issue for you is going to be the specifics regarding number of students admitted and funding situations at the programs you mentioned. I know some stronger masters programs exist that admit somewhere in the ballpark of a Ph.D. program (4 - 10) and hand out nice stipends, and I know programs who are happy to let in as many competent people that are willing to shell out serious dough. If these programs are at all like the latter and you're OK with that situation, then I'd say you probably don't need to stress applying to many other programs, though knowing more about your profile would be helpful (e.g. - are you Canadians victims of the GRE as well?). However, I wouldn't advise going that route; I know horror stories about debt and these sorts of degrees. If you're dealing with competitive masters programs with good financial packages and selective admissions, then the sad truth is that you should apply to as many as you can afford and is reasonable. Even phenomenal applicants are subject to some luck when 200 people are taking a stab at 5 spots. You'll have to flesh out what the situation with these institutions is. Lastly, not exactly sure what you mean by "obscure", but philosophy tends to be esoteric, if that's what you mean, especially with a specialized SOP or writing sample and when it is being submitted to an institution that has strength in that sub-discipline. Just make sure that "obscurity" means sophisticated and focused, not cryptic.

Thank you all for the constructive thoughts and insight, especially those regarding specific opportunities for volunteering and research. The one thing that I am taking from this all is that there needs to be a further distinction with "clinical experience" between "clinical research experience" and, simply, "clinical experience", i.e. - volunteering in a clinical context. One thing that might have been helpful to mention is that this clinical program, Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, is unique in its heavy emphasis on psychodynamic, phenomenological, and humanistic approaches to psychotherapy. I am well aware that this is counter-cultural in academic psychology (I'd appreciate being spared from proselytizing!), but the significance of mentioning this is to highlight the significance of "psychapplicant2011"s comment (thank you!) regarding the disparity between what different departments consider to be significant. Am I right to presume that heavy empirical research might be helpful, but ideologically incongruous with their methods? I suppose that the burden is on me to inquire further regarding what this specific program might desire in terms of "research". Thank you all again for helping me flesh this situation out, but I imagine that others might benefit from this thread continuing to elaborate the situation of gaining clinical experience, broadly.

I am in a bit of a conundrum. Last year, I applied to a Clinical Psychology Ph.D. program (yes, only one, for odd ideological and geographic reasons), got an interview, and was rejected. Although I know for a fact that my GPA, GRE, and general accolades exceeded that of their average ACCEPTED student (they publish them), their reason for my rejection was that I "lacked clinical experience", which is true. I'm done with my bachelors now and working on a masters in religion and philosophy in the mean time (it was free), taking as many courses in psychotherapy and clinical assessment as possible, with the intention of reapplying to the Ph.D. when I'm done. My problem now is: how do I acquire the "clinical experience" so that they can't reject me on the same grounds next time? I've inquired to one clinical practicum, but they said I needed to already be in a clinical program to be considered. It seems that I need clinical experience to get a clinical degree, yet need the clinical degree to get the experience. Hmmmmm. My question is: How do I do this! Can anyone give me any insight from actual experience as to what they mean by "clinical experience"? The best thing I have going for me is a field study in my masters to work for a semester at a crisis line. Would this count as clinical experience? I feel that this is something so easy to get that it probably won't impress anyone. Does anyone have any specific suggestions or advice on how to get my foot in the door? I would even consider taking a year off after this degree and before I reapply if it would mean gaining that experience. I'd really appreciate any thoughts.

Mocha001, I'm in the same boat as you. I am definitely going to go through the 800 list, but I'm reluctant to waste that much time on 3500. Question: Does anyone have a success story or anything to definitively make a case for the 3500 list? Even if it is an anecdote about raising your score with it, I need SOMETHING to keep me motivated if I tackle that monstrosity.

You're right, the schools themselves do not explicitly say this. The reason I mentioned this is because I received a personal email from the admissions office at Chicago that said otherwise. The woman said that the GRE held weight when it came to their top scholarships, which I can only infer means that it also plays a role in general admission. I didn't apply to Harvard, but I heard a similar account from a friend who was admitted and visited. But your right, some places (like vanderbilt) don't even require the GRE. My advice might be to play to your advantages if you have them. SOME places will emphasize the GRE, SOME places won't.

As someone who is currently in a decent divinity school, I would say that you have a good chance at many of those places, especially if you can get a GRE verbal above 700. My experience has been that even elite divinity schools are willing to accept a lot of students, the catch is that the real competition comes with regard to the best scholarships. Some sad news for you (as it was for me) is that all the small details about your transcript and your extracurriculars will have essentially zero impact on the admissions committees. I was in a similar situation... decent GPA with all sorts of above and beyond info on my transcript.... overloaded semesters, upper level coursework as a freshmen and sophomore, etc. These things can help you, but only if you manage to integrate them eloquently into your SOP. Maybe, for example, emphasize that the reason your GPA wasn't phenomenal was because you always chose to be amitious and go for the harder and more edifying seminars, even if you knew you wouldn't get the A. Again, your strength in GRE verbal will be a huge asset to you. Places like Chicago and Harvard tend to put a decent emphasis on it considering their huge applicant pool. Also, don't sweat the quantitative... I rocked the math and it had no impact on anything. I have literally heard from three profs on admissions committees in the humanities who have told me that the quantitative is not even considered. So, for you, the GRE is out of 800, not 1600. And try not to botch the AW. The only additional info I can give is that Chicago told me that they accept over 100 MA students, but only 5 get full tuition offers... the rest get 50%, which still leaves you with $20,000 to cover on your own. I guess i didn't even bother to ask what sort of masters you are applying for. I assume that since you are looking at history/political science that you aren't interested in an M.Div., which is unfortunately where all the best scholarships and stipends are. Hope this helps!

Thanks again, Tdearr. This is all really valuable insight to hear from someone who is on the inside. It sounds like it may have just been early for me to be talking GRE scores for applications next Fall. I guess this is just my lot in life... The SAT switched from the 1600 to 2400 point system Spring of my junior year in high school and I was forced to take both of them as well!

Thanks for the confirmation, Tdearr. But still, I'm wondering what application comittees are going to think of any new scores they receive for Fall 2012 matriculation. I just spoke with someone on the admissions comittee at a program who told me s/he had not even heard of the new GRE and advised me to take the old version before they change it! I feel like it is not out of the realm of possibility for a prof to look at a new "170" and say, "OMG! I can't believe this person even bothered applying!" This might be a bit outlandish, but i definitely feel like faculty will scatch their head at how to interpret a certain score, even if it has a percentage by it. Then again, it might make the score a moot point and (hopefully) force them to actually look at the rest of the application. I honestly don't know what to make of this.

Comet7777, I'm really glad that someone got this post going. I tried in the religion forum and got no responses, so I think I'll recycle from there what is still relevant here... I think that the change is going to be most significant for those of us applying in the Fall 2011 for Fall 2012 admission (like me), in that ETS is doing the revision starting August 2011. Some of the changes include... - A new scoring scale (130 to 170 for verbal and math sections, with one point increments) - Revised verbal section (no antonyms or analogies, more emphasis on reading comprehension) - Revised math section (online calculator included, more emphasis on data analysis than mental math) There are some obvious advantages of the new format. The revised math section (not that it matters for humanities applications) is a better assessment of quantitative problem solving skills in a normal environment; the new verbal format, I feel, will be a more appropriate judgment of linguistic skills because of the revolutionary discovery (cough) that language acquires its meaning from context. Most importantly, the single point increment scale will more realistically portray the difference between applicant scores ("Oh, these students are only five points apart, we'll have to look at their applications more closely" rather than "Obviously we're taking this person, her/his score is FIFTY points higher than this person!"). The question is, do we stake our applications on the traditional GRE that we all love to hate, or do we risk it and take the new GRE late in the application season, perhaps without enough time for a retake, and not even really knowing how to gauge the numbers we get? Obviously, some of us will do better on one or the other, but the real issue is how schools are going to read these scores, especially for those of us who will be submitting a history of old AND new scores (also like me). I've heard department one department head at a reputable program tell me clearly that that the most recent score is the only one that matters to them (he even mentioned that taking it "eight times" doesn't matter to them), but will they take the new scores less seriously because of their unfamiliarity with it? And, will the new GRE and its incremental scoring make the GRE any more or less of an influence in applications? That certainly would be wonderful for those of us who have strong applications apart from the standardized test!

Check out Duquesne University's Psychology Ph.D.. I'm not exactly sure what sort of end game you are thinking (teaching/research, applied psychology, counseling?), but Duquesne's program practices psychology as a "Human Science", which draws heavily not only on humanistic and existential approaches to psychopathology, but also straight up continental philosophy (especially post-Heideggerian hermeneutics). It's a catholic university (technically) and has a very reputable philosophy department with a heavy emphasis on 19th - 20th century german and french thought. Realistically, you could do some "religious studies" there, but it would be more along the lines of theological anthropology/psychology. Only draw back for some is that it is explicitly a clinical program. I know that people have gone through there and taught, but they are leery of accepting people with no interest in the clinical aspect of the program. Not sure if this would be up your ally, but at least check out their page... it's pretty unique.

Insanely funny! The only sad thing is that I'm starting to think a lot like the professor.

Tsuroyu, I had a similar situation first time around in terms of phil/relst applications and GRE scores (Really high math, decently above average verbal). Got rejected from all six philosophy PhDs and my consolation prize was a decent religion masters at vandy where I can at least take courses in the philosophy grad dept in the meantime. The only thing I have to add is to not worry about your math score going down. I don't doubt that you heard the "both scores need to be above 700" about SUNY, but I've spoken to faculty on the admissions committee at Vanderbilt and Villanova who said that verbal needs to be high, but they don't even look at the math. I'm guessing this is true at most continental philosophy and relst programs. I don't think this is anything new to you. Assuming that you're applying to continental programs, I would focus as much of your time on verbal as possible (98%?). Barring a focus on logic, I think phil/relst programs are looking to see that you are capable of calculating your own GPA without having to ask the registrar. Not exactly sure where this line gets drawn, but I really doubt it is as high as 700 for most places. In fact, I know of at least a handful of people in well-known programs (Vanderbilt, Loyola Chicago, Villanova) who had math scores sub 650, even in the 500s. Of course, this is not to say aim low for math. I wish you a 750 in both!

For those of us in the applying Fall 2011 for Fall 2012 admission, we are in a bit of unique situation. ETS is doing a pretty substantial revision of the GRE starting August 2011. Some of the changes include... - A new scoring scale (130 to 170 for verbal and math sections, with one point increments) - Revised verbal section (no antonyms or analogies, more emphasis on reading comprehension) - Revised math section (online calculator included, more emphasis on data analysis than mental math) There are some obvious advantages of the new format. The revised math section (not that it matters for religion applications) is a better assessment of quantitative problem solving skills in a normal environment; the new verbal format, I feel, will be a more appropriate judgment of linguistic skills because of the revolutionary discovery (cough) that language acquires its meaning from context. Most importantly, the single point increment scale will more realistically portray the difference between scores. The question is, do we stake our applications on the traditional GRE that we all love to hate, or do we risk it and take the new GRE late in the application season, perhaps without enough time for a retake, and not even really knowing how to gauge the numbers we get? Obviously, some of us will do better on one or the other, but the real issue is how schools are going to read these scores, especially for those of us who will be submitting a history of old and new GRE scores. I've heard department heads say that the most recent score is the only one that matters, but will they take the new scores less seriously out of unfamiliarity? Will the new GRE and its incremental scoring make the GRE any more or less of an influence in applications?

HA! Well, if you know what you want, consider yourself lucky. I'm sorry I won't get to meet you at VDS, but I'm sure BC will be great for you. Best of luck!

Just to comment on Vanderbilt's personal/spiritual/community feel. I've only visited there twice, but it seems like a pretty solid community environment. Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday they have some form of a community gathering that ALOT of people in the program comes to (i.e. - worship, spiritual discussion, and coffee hour with free donuts and food). To be honest, this was a big pull for me, because I could tell that in addition to making a good next step academically, I will actually enjoy my time there in terms of community support. Also, not sure of any denominational preferences, but VDS definitely seemed like an eclectic bunch. There is a slight lean towards Methodist, but they were all over the place in terms of faith when I was there, ranging from Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, to non-Christian (I imagine there are a fair share of atheists in the mix as well). Perhaps a current student could further elaborate on this?

Nick, First, congrats on getting into some great programs! From your sub-profile, it looks like you may have already gone with Vanderbilt. I've already committed there for the MTS as well, so PM me if you are so we can meet up. As for languages, I don't know of any MTS programs that require a language (I've looked at a few), but if you take the initiative to take the courses as electives, they can go on your CV all the same. I know that Vanderbilt has all the relevant bib languages regularly. Also, if you are just interested in developing a language on the side, you can audit any course at the university for less than $100, and it will go on your transcript (without a grade of course). To be honest, I would think BC being so flexible with your coursework would be a strong point. My understanding is that diversity of perspective while maintaining some focus is a definite plus for the academic route. Vanderbilt lets you take a little over half of your coursework as electives, but only TWO outside of the div school and GDR. My specific interests are a bit different than yours, but I think that Vanderbilt has a pretty solid biblical studies faculty (A.J. Levine especially for NT). As for Nashville, it was surprisingly beautiful down there. The div building was so so, but the campus as a whole was gorgeous and the area is pretty culturally diverse (though, not to the extent that Boston is, to be sure). Hope this helps!