Rani13

All is not lost! I had a catastrophic transcript that I thought would sink my PhD applications. Happily, that was not the case. Here’s what helped: I did an MA in English, this (good) transcript superseded the one from earlier. I also went after whatever opportunities and honours my MA institution offered (research fellowships, writing awards). In my PhD SoP, I focused mainly on pitching my proposed project (which I made sure was well defined) and also elaborated on the honours I had received during the MA. I only devoted a few short sentences to my past failures and described what I had learned from them before returning to my current work and inquiries. I also asked my advisor to briefly address the problem in her letter and affirm my commitment as a graduate student. Considering the circumstances, I had an unexpectedly good season. I recommend a (funded) MA because graduate training will always matter more than adolescent mistakes! Good luck to you!

Rehashing this conversation from a while ago. I'm trying to figure out what taxes* will look like on a fellowship during non-service years. I know that the university does not deduct taxes in those years. I was also told by a graduate student in the department that taxes do not apply for non-service fellowship years (aka there's no need to report said fellowship as income). I know there's conflicting advice on this, but wondering what the insight is on GC? *I'm terrible at taxes/numbers.

Annnnd I just accepted my offer from the University of Pennsylvania. This was an agonizing decision but I'm convinced that I've made the right choice. So pleased to be joining a program featuring so many brilliant and generous scholars in and beyond my field. Equally thrilled to be doing a PhD in a city that I know and love. My path to the PhD has been rough, and for a long time I did not expect to get here at all, so this feels especially sweet.

Just turned down Princeton and their incredible Centennial Fellowship. That was heartbreaking.

I just declined my offer from Brown. That was hard given the many brilliant scholars in the department. Really hope they go to the waitlist!

I just turned down my offers from Rutgers and the University of Michigan. At the latter school, I also turned down the Rackham Merit Fellowship. I hope this bodes well for some of you!

To be clear, I don't mean to suggest that more “approachable” schools are automatically better at placing students at state schools. From what I can tell, that's not quite the case. My sense is that one is a strong candidate for any job if one comes from a program considered to be strong (or maybe even the “best,” whatever that means) in one’s field, and if one is backed (advised, recommended) by scholars who are well known and respected in said field (as well as in the academy at large). I just meant to say that the “best” is not always a matter of the big three, in fact the big three (in some fields) have a reputation for being intellectual wastelands (not my words). Obviously, there's no hard and fast rule about this and one’s work is what matters in the end. We're all just reading the tea leaves here. I just think it's not enough to choose a school based on prestige vs approachability when there is strength/reputation in one's field to consider. And, not to forget, the financial resources that a program can offer.

I'm not sure, I can only speak with any knowledge of English and Comp Lit. If I understand you correctly, you're thinking about academic job market prospects in fields other than the field you'd be housed in (US/ethnic studies). Is that right? In any case, it might help for you to pay close attention to where people are getting hired from the two institutions you are considering.

I'm told (by friends who are young professors, but also some senior scholars) that there are many times when a degree from the "big three" will actually count against you. This is true for academic jobs at less fancy institutions and also at state schools (including R1s), who are reluctant to hire from these schools because of a perception of eliteness, lack of teaching experience, and also the knowledge that these candidates will likely leave the moment a fancier/better job shows up (something that is arguably true for PhDs from any institution: a good job is a good job). There's also the fact that these big threes can often be really old guard (depending on your field), and so are really lagging behind when it comes to fields beyond your standard Anglo-Euro-American canons. Of course, there will be exceptions to this. But in my research (and I'm facing a similar choice between one of the big three and another school that is best known for cutting edge work in my field) it does seem to hold up to a great extent.

Garrulous post alert in response to so many of the comments and thoughts here. What a time to be alive and contemplating the ivory tower! I've been torn between three of my offers for the last two weeks, but I've achieved some clarity of late. It's disappointing that the visits have been cancelled, but I think I have come to a (tentative) decision without them. Maybe my thought process will be helpful to some of you. Of the three (similarly ranked) schools, I eliminated one just based on location. There was nothing wrong with the location per se (in fact many people speak highly of it), it's just that it would have been a slightly more arduous move for me and ultimately the merits of the program did not outweigh the other two enough to justify the move. Down to two, both of which were tempting me enough to want to pull a James Franco so I could attend both at once (jk). Of the two programs, school 1 is very well known in my field, has an excellent placement record, has lots of young faculty doing cutting edge work, and is known to be extremely rigorous. School 2 is also very well known and prestigious. But while it has excellent faculty in my field, it isn't quite as well known for producing scholars in my field as school 1. It's also older, whiter, and somewhat more old fashioned than school 1. On the flipside, school 2 is offering me more money (in fact it is throwing money and fellowships at me). Attending it would be the more comfortable experience overall (they also require less coursework of you and leave you alone more). BUT I've decided on school 1 because I think it will make me the better scholar. It will be tougher to survive (though I'm lucky enough that it's still very well funded, so I'm definitely not making a case for anyone to choose financial hardship for the sake of excellence or whatever), I will be challenged more, and I will be more tired, but I do think that I will get better engagement overall from the scholars I want to work with. I've determined this by Skyping/calling with the professors in question at both schools and asking them how they would mentor my specific research project. I have also talked to other graduate students who are currently dissertating at both schools to learn more about the mentorship styles of both institutions. In response to what we're all wondering about (how involved will faculty actually be in your work once you've committed to attend), I am finding that some schools have clear positions vis a vis mentoring such that it's not even really a question of the style of individual professors so much as it is of the school’s overall ethos. In my case, school 1 clearly takes a very hands on approach (sometimes to the extent that it can become a problem) whereas school 2 is much more handsoff. So I'm wondering less about individual professors (though so many have reputations for being either too checked out or too invested) than departmental ethos (to which most professors ultimately subscribe). I'm probably going with school 1 because I ultimately think more engagement is better than less. I have a few friends in departments where their advisors are checked out, and they're struggling with their dissertations (and looking job market prospects). All of this is to say, thinking about where my intellectual interests would be best served has helped me make this decision. I know my project will change, but I'm choosing the place that I think will hold me to a higher standard. Other (more minor) things that have helped: looking at coursework from this academic year as well as for the upcoming fall term (if it's listed) to see which school had more interesting/exciting/cutting edge offerings. There's such a wide range. Also imagining myself in these courses and trying to think about which seemed like a better fit for me. Also convenience of location and money. Even though I'm (probably) declining the school giving me more money, the difference is not all that significant given that school 1 is located in a city with a lower cost of living. Also pleasantness of location (school 1 is in a city, school 2 is near some cities but I wouldn't actually be able to live there until later). Also thinking about job placement statistics. Ok, I'll stop now.

These are good questions that I hope Columbia can answer for you. I’m wondering similar things about Princeton tbh.

Fwiw I just took myself off the UVA waitlist today. And CUNY. I’m sure there are others.

Just declined my offer from Emory. Hope it's good news for someone!

From what I hear, Columbia’s placement rate (or lack thereof) is egregious even by the declining standard of the ivies. There's something going on over there. As one of my professors put it, “It's certainly not the students that are the problem.”

Agree 100%. Adding something urgently new to a field in terms of both theory and literary archives/texts.

This. I'm also a non-traditional student for more than one reason that I was positive would sink my apps. Instead, I got in to six schools that I would be thrilled to attend, three of which are ivies (one of which is offering me a generous merit fellowship to boot). I certainly don't mean to claim that prestige doesn't matter, I'm cynical and continue to think that schools are largely conservative. But my own experience has surprised me. I too think that having a close and involved mentor makes a big difference in ways that cannot be quantified. But my biggest takeaway from this season has been that it's better to err on the side of a well-defined project than some nebulous sense of interests. This seems to get debated a lot: how specific to be in your SoP. I can only speak to what worked for me. I applied with a very defined project. Of course, I was careful to make it clear that the project would evolve with time and that it needed the mentorship/support of the program in question to actually take shape. Accordingly, my language was more speculative than declarative. But even so, I wasn't shy about pitching the project. I think it allows a department to get to know you as a thinker and critic in ways that go well beyond a list of interests.

That is a *lot* of teaching. I’d suggest finding out which faculty excite you the most and maybe even setting up phone calls with them about your work. See who responds most enthusiastically. Also I’m going to PM you with some info.

Really helpful, and probably exactly what I’m going to do. Thank you! And yes, the two schools are very close in ranking and I’m very keen to at least talk to my potential advisor at the far school.

It’s not about numbered rankings, but rather how recognizable the school’s name is and, most importantly, the renown of professors in your field in particular. What is your field? I know a little about some of these schools.

So two of my top three schools have visit days on the exact same days. What in the world am I supposed to do? I have a sense of which one I favour between the two, but I really want to visit the other one because I don’t know it well and I’d like to make an informed decision. A possibly mitigating factor is that I live in the same city as the school I prefer, so I suppose I could theoretically skip out on the official visit and instead schedule meetings with professors and the DGS for when I’m back from the other school. But I would still be missing out on so much. Plus I would not get to meet the cohort, which I think is important. Also, I don’t really want to tell the DGS I’m prioritising the other school (especially because I’m much more likely to choose this one). Schools! Get it together! Any advice is appreciated.

I feel this. I’m lucky enough to be choosing between three brilliant programs, each of which is a perfect fit and has *excellent* faculty in my field who seem to be enthusiastic about my work. How do you say no to your heroes? I can hardly say no to a sandwich.

Congrats on coming this far! As a former international student myself, I think these are really pertinent questions. I want to say there is no single, right way of doing this. I've had a fairly unconventional journey myself, and am seeing some successes with PhD applications. My BA is from the Global South and my MA is from a non-fancy US university. There are pros and cons to worrying about prestige. On the one hand, it does count for a lot, and can certainly help you get in to a well ranked PhD program. On the other hand, it really isn't everything and there are ways to overcome the lack of prestige. Re: the cons of pursuing prestige, keep in mind that MA students at the ivies often get short shrift. The programs are known to be cash cows for the university, and thereby students don't always get taken seriously by faculty. They are sometimes ignored for PhD students. This means that research suffers, recommendations suffer, and ultimately PhD applications suffer. I also have known students from ivies who are so used to getting in everywhere that they get complacent when it really matters. I also am finding (based on feedback I'm getting from professors at the schools I've been admitted to) that (at least some) schools are more appreciative of strong candidates from less elite backgrounds, because it shows that you can work hard and fight even when things are not handed to you on a platter (a quality that counts for a lot in a bleak academic job market). That said, I don't want to claim that prestige doesn't matter, it most certainly makes things a lot easier. Those of us without prestige have to work twice as hard and often for half the reward. Anyway, all of this is to say that there's no one right way to do this, and you can work with whatever you choose. As to your specific dilemma, I do strongly favour funded terminal MA programs over shelling out tens of thousands of dollars for the ivies. They can be rigorous even as they are less fancy than the ivies. Worth looking into if you go the MA route. On the question of UCR, I will just say that I know an international student who began a PhD at a small, low-ranked PhD in the midwest and then re-applied to PhDs two years in. The second time around, they were accepted to several programs including a top three. They did not plan things this way, it just so happened that the program they first entered fell apart a year or so in, and they felt the need to move. But in retrospect they were able to spend two years doing coursework in a lesser known (but still substantive) PhD program before moving to a fancy one. If this is too rambly and incoherent, forgive me. It's late at night and I'm procrastinating on writing my thesis ?.

I know someone who is finishing up her dissertation at Tufts English and is generally happy* there. I don't think the job market is treating her well, but it's also worth remembering that the job market isn't treating anyone well. She also loves reading and writing in the snowy New England atmosphere. *One BIG caveat is that Tufts is notorious for its whiteness. They've failed to retain faculty of colour of the last few years (there is lots of press on this). That said, they're also trying to course correct and fix the problem. If it's relevant, there's a new interdisciplinary department on race/ethnicity/globalization that you could also avail of.

Mine came at 5:59pm EST.

Thank you. Hoping for the best for you! Thanks a ton!