kokocwire

All, many thanks for your feedback. And yes, I certainly did come off as prick-ish in my original post. The freakout session was borne of the story I've been spoonfed for the past several years: that you're allowed to screw up periodically as an undergrad, but not as a grad student. In retrospect, this is a pretty stupid way of proceeding. And the negative feedback the post garnered made it perfectly clear that I'm approaching the process the wrong way. So, terribly sorry for coming off like a crybaby

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.

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!

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, Yale and Princeton in Political Science, Duke and Harvard in Near Eastern Studies/Religion, and Michigan in the joint History/Anthropology program. 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, but no anthro specifically), 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!

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!

Thanks for the feedback! Agreed, I'm totally done over-exerting myself, as this year taught me. No one at school bothered to mention that taking 14 graduate credits in a single semester (when the standard is 9), alongside this book project, is suicide. I'll be done with my book at the end of the summer, and in my second year I can focus and take the standard course load, shoot to write a solid MA thesis, and all will be well. Still, I can't undo these two A minuses. With Chicago, I'm reticent to do NELC because it's very pre-modern. I'm more interested in the modern period, hence my interests being more in the social sciences. I just want a grounding in pre-modern thought, but I certainly don't want to write my dissertation on that period. With Michigan, I'm not applying to anthro, but to the joint history/anthro program, and since my work in my current MA is almost entirely pre-modern history, I'll have that end covered. As for the anthro end, one of my undergrad majors was sociology (I wrote my honors thesis in sociology), think that might stand to cover me better? Yep, I'm working on statements as we speak, and I know I will have very solid recommendation letters. My key faculty all know how much I've taken on this year, and are outright amazed that I'm writing my book in the same year I'm undertaking MA work. So, my thought is that if they mention as much in their letters, perhaps it will mitigate the record a bit? Or is that wishful thinking? I'll post up on the interdisciplinary forum as you said. Hopefully some folks will have some ideas there. Thanks so much!

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!

Hi all, I am gearing to apply to the two aforementioned fellowships for the next term, but I'm having a bit of difficulty determining how to construct a winning application. I've gone through the NSF process (made honorable mention last time), so I'm very familiar with that, but I've been unable to find a single person who is well-versed in either Javits or Ford. Can any previous winners say much about the criteria? In the case of Javits, my understanding is that they give more awards to humanities people than social sciences, so would it be judicious for an interdisciplinary person like myself to spin a humanities-oriented proposal? I'm doing an MA in Islamic Studies presently, and will be moving on to doctoral work either in political theory, anthropology (both social sciences), or history (humanities). I'm working on doctoral statements of purpose as we speak, so since I'm applying to programs across disciplines I will be armed with proposals representing several spectra, from normative Islamic political philosophy, to ethnographic fieldwork, to historical archival research. Would it be more judicious in the case of either Javits or Ford to privilege one over the other? In the case of Ford, any suggestions on personal statement or research proposal? Not having met a single person who won the award, I really don't know what criteria they're going by. Also, can anyone say a word about candidate profile? I have a really strong undergrad background (4.0 GPA), decent GRE scores (660V, 730Q, 6 writing), and I've published quite a bit -- 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 this sort of thing a deal-breaker for these fellowships? In other words, is the candidate profile more about a spotless transcript, or about achievements *outside* the transcript? Do they care much about extracurricular involvements, overseas experiences, etc.? Finally, about recommendation letters, would it be better for the purposes of these awards to select recommenders who speak primarily on behalf of your *academic* strengths, or on behalf of your personal and leadership skills? I did humanitarian work abroad and can muster a very powerful letter from my old advisor (who is a professor and prominent scholar, but I never studied under him per se). That letter speaks far more to my aptitude for social justice than it does about my academic work, though it does make reference to it. Would something like that be more efficacious, or is it best to stick with professors who will speak solely on my academic work? Any feedback would be really appreciated. Thanks!