fuzzylogician

I don't take offense to your question the way some people do; my advice is very practical. Start writing your SOP yourself. You should at least have a draft ready before you can go out and seek professional help. Several people have already said this in this thread, and you'll find many others who have had the same experience if you read through old posts on the GradCafe: writing the SOP is one of the most important ways you grow intellectually. It's how you refine your interests and find out what truly motivates you. Only by investing the time and effort in doing this can you truly know your needs and desires. After you know exactly what you want, then you can turn to a consultant who can help you present it in the best possible way. I don't think it's objectionable, or that you should be a great writer right off the bat; it's one of the things grad school trains you for, and some people can be incredible researchers but never develop strong writing skills. However, you should be very aware that consultants and editors may be very good at their job, but you know yourself the best. If you can present your passion, attributes and interests to an editor, even in a half-baked way, they can help you formulate them convincingly. But you have to know yourself what you want your essay to say. Consultants can't know it for you. You have to do the work yourself. All this said, at the point when you have worked on the SOP for weeks on end, I'd strongly suggest having professors, friends and successful applicants read your essay and critique it, before using a payed service. You can get great free advice on websites like this one and from your friends and professors, which might just be all you need to writing a compelling essay.

Beside generally not knowing how my credentials will be viewed by American schools, I was worried about two things. The last semester of undergrad my grades took a significant turn for the worse: I got one 22, which I later improved to a 69, and one 60 (out of 100; 22 is a glaring F, 60-69 is a D, I think). These were both in Math courses that I did for extra credit. I also had to withdraw from a third course, which was a graduate course in my concentration (graduate Advanced Semantics); it was the only linguistics course I took that semester. I was later diagnosed with a medical condition that is now under control, but you know how these things go, I only found out after the semester was over and it was too late to do anything about the grades. The week before my first application submission deadline, my thesis advisor, who I was TAing two classes for, informed me that while she could write me a "good" letter, it wouldn't be great. I had spent the previous year abroad, and even though I gave her all my stuff to read during the summer (I had written 4 large papers, presented a paper at a conference and worked on two projects at a research institute), she never read any of it and said she couldn't vouch for any of my recent work--including the paper I was going to expand into my thesis, which she was supposed to be supervising(!)*. My last semester before I left was, as I mentioned above, pretty poor, and so it looked like I would have a bad third letter. AHHHH. I looked into it, but it was too late to change writers; I immediately contacted a fourth writer from the university I studied at abroad, who had previously offered to write me a letter, and got an extra LOR to send to all the schools last minute. This means I had three letters from professors at the university where I spent one year as an exchange student, but only the one weak letter from the university where I did my BA and would get my MA from; I was very worried about that. I also spent about a week so upset I couldn't even enter my advisor's classes. We never patched things up after that, which resulted in a few other problems that aren't relevant here. But, obviously all of this didn't hurt me all that much, because I got into all of my top choices * I might add, this person was my advisor only because the other relevant faculty were on sabbatical. I would never choose to work with her, I just had no choice.

Glad to hear you're enjoying yourself I haven't made plans beyond March yet. Anyway, I'm not sure I'll have anything to present this summer. The two papers I am writing this year are the result of work done last year; so far I haven't done any real research this year. I'm going to start doing independent study next semester, but even if there are significant results (not a sure thing by any means), I doubt I'll be able to present them before next fall. I don't know what other people in my year are doing, but I'll be sure to keep my ears open and let you know if I hear anything. Good luck to you, if you're applying to those conferences! OP: sorry for hijacking your thread

I have the flu. I should be working on an article but I don't feel concentrated enough. I figured I'd put the time to good use. Classes begin in February. We have a whole month and a half off for winter break, which is great. I've already finished one article (submitted on Friday) and I'm working on a conference presentation and the article, which are due in late February. But if I didn't have those, I could relax for about 6 weeks and really do nothing. It's great!

Thanks

I guess it's possible. I actually haven't been in Cambridge for a few weeks so I don't really know what's going on, except what they tell us in emails. Will know more when I get back there next week. But at least last year everyone I talked to said they were notified around the same time - the last few days of February. I met those people on the school-tour in March, so I guess it's possible that someone who was admitted much earlier also visited much earlier.

They call if you're accepted. According to the results search they either mail or email if you're rejected. They do all this in late February or March.

Sounds like general mailing. MIT ling announce admissions via phone, not mail. Anyway, as far as I know, the adcomm still hasn't finished making its decisions (at least as of Jan 7).

This is much much better, well done! I'm not going to comment on your intro right now, since you say you're still working on it. Structurally, your SOP right now looks like this: 25% intro + research interests 25% research experience 25% language preparation 25% fit I think you would be well served to enlarge the fit section and mention at least one other professor you would like to work with, preferably two. Also, add a sentence or two about your goals/plans for the future, and maybe spend less space talking about your language preparation. I'm also missing details about the first project you mentioned in the second paragraph; say something more beside just mentioning doing the research -- what did you learn? During the course of my work, I have learned to be patient in the face of deadends, and the value of time management. This is something you want your recommenders to say about you, saying it yourself is less convincing. There is some repetitiveness in your SOP. For example, in the first and second sentences of the intro you mention taking graduate courses; one of those could be cut. If you still want to ease into your research interests instead of leading with them, try this: As an undergraduate I challenged myself in my senior year by undertaking graduate coursework at the [university of Rock]. It was here that I was first introduced to the crusades, in a graduate seminar on the subject by Professor [bob Dylan] that I took in my senior year as an undergraduate. The Crusades fascinate me not ... Note: The adcomm can find your UG institution, the course name and (possibly) the instructor in your transcripts. I'm not sure that all this name dropping is helpful here, especially if this instructor is also writing you a LOR, where they will surely mention all of these details. In the second-to-last and last sentence of the third paragraph you mention a French course. Are those the same? You still use some convoluted language: P2: I had an opportunity to begin began to explore these questions in my undergraduate research... P2: his history has a crusade propagandist P3: This past summer I succeeded in completing completed [Dos Equis]’s Latin Institute, a grueling ten-week immersion course P3: Having attained such proficiency, I have been sure not to let these skills go unexercised and ... To exercise my language skills ... P4: Professor [Generic]’s expertise on the medieval family and the influences its traditions may have wielded upon those choosing to participate in crusade would help guide my own research. -- I find this hard to read. Maybe reword to bring the verb closer to its subject? P4: All of these factors lead me to believe that [The School of Rock] would will be able to provide me with the rigorous training necessary to explore my interests. -- you only mention three factors: atmosphere, faculty (generally), one specific professor. Can you say more about why the school is a good fit for you? other faculty members that interest you, resources, courses, reading groups, etc.?

Ask someone for a backup letter so your application is complete, and keep pestering your advisor until he does his job!

Unlike expressionista, I think you need less of an introductory transition. I would start directly with your main interest, e.g.: Crusades fascinate not only because of their massive scope, but also because of their ability to inspire so many to traverse thousands of miles to fight, and often die, under an alien sun. I'm also not a huge fan of the "alien sun", but you get the general idea. Next, cut out the passive and negative speak, e.g.: Although I have a strong basis in medieval history, it was not until I After reading Jonathan Riley-Smith’s What Were the Crusades?, that (in a graduate seminar at University?) I began to move away from my simplistic notions that the crusaders were motivated by greed and monetary gain. His Riley-Smith’s careful analysis of the increasingly high economic costs of crusading in order to refute the “profit motive” argument allowed me to reconsider the penitential aspects of crusading. This interdisciplinary approach to history provided me with a new framework in which to situate my interests, and I am eager to explore what further factors, societal or otherwise, may have influenced men to take up the cross. "in which to situate my interests" - two problems: first "situate" is also not my favorite choice of word; more importantly, what interests? I would consider revising to something less wordy, e.g. (replacing the entire last sentence): I am eager to use the framework that this interdisciplinary approach to history provides in order to explore what further factors, societal or otherwise, may have influenced men to participate in crusades. Overall, this is looking much better than your last post!

AFAIK you're first accepted by your department, then the graduate school has to approve it. I've never heard of a grad school recommending a student to a department, only the other way around. There were some worried threads last year about "can the grad school reject me if the department decided to admit me?" -- I don't remember any thread by anyone who actually had this happen to them. I think the grad school is more lenient and checks that you meet the minimum criteria to qualify as a student at the school (e.g., that you have a BA, or will have one by the time you start the program), and in some cases it decides on funding.

I want to know that too! It's so creepy, as well as annoying that old/irrelevant posts are needlessly brought back to life. I bet a lot of people read some/all of this thread before realizing it's from last year. And I bet that's why the post you quoted has a bad reputation. ETA: Ugh. I wish I didn't know this forum allowed so much creepy stalking. I think I might sign in anonymously from now on.

I think you're completely off. The "ever since I was a child" approach doesn't tell the adcom anything relevant about who you are as an applicant or what you want to study. The highschool stuff has to go too. Skimming through your SOP, you have 5 very long-winded paragraphs about your past, one about your present work, and only one about your goals+fit+research interests (in fact, I couldn't find any specific interests or questions you want to study in grad school). That's not a good distribution at all; you want the bulk of the SOP to address your current/future interests and goals. You also need to expand on fit. Read the advice here, especially the 6th bullet point: http://rateyourstudents.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-do-we-want-students-to-say-in.html

Yes! I hated it last year!

Haha, that's sadly true. People are just now starting to use presentations, but I'm afraid it'll be a while before it becomes the norm

Mostly schools want to know who their competition is. I assume they use this info to make themselves more attractive to applicants in the following years.

You might want to wait until you see where you're accepted. Most of the programs that accepted me provide students with desktop computers. Also, they tend to use handouts (which of course they finish preparing the morning-of, so it's not online prior to class), and with this teaching style you really don't need a laptop in class either. Other schools don't provide computers, but give students considerable discounts. Really, it's all about personality, and what fits your needs and habits. Personally, I prefer a laptop. I don't like working at home, I prefer working outside - if the weather is nice then in a garden or square, otherwise in the library or in cafes. A laptop is obviously very convenient for that kind of studying.

AFAIK most programs don't have interviews. Brown has an open-day/interview in late February. Notifications went out in late January (=the 29th). I had a phone interview with UPenn; I don't know if they interview all applicants or just those who, while interesting, have no business applying there. The main question they asked me was "why here", to which I had no good answer. The professor I was interested in working with had just left, and the remaining faculty weren't a strong fit. I had an interview with UCSC; this is probably only because I'm international and Cali funding is terrible. That was the main issue: they could only afford to accept one international, and could not reoffer the spot if that person declined. So basically they danced around asking "if we offered, would you accept?", which of course they can't flat out ask. UMass, MIT, UCLA, NYU, Rutgers all accepted me without interview. I posted a timeline Also, the results from previous years were accurate almost to the day when I checked last year, and I'll bet it stays the same this year. It's probably too early to expect answers just yet.

I'd edit this entire paragraph out. The quote has nothing to do with the rest of your SOP; further, I doubt it's a good (or even original) idea to mention 9/11 as a hook. Seriously consider editing for less fluff: fewer phrases like "enraptured", "my nights became filled", and fewer (no) adjectives. This advice holds for the entire essay. It's the main thing that bothered me while reading it. Additionally, don't retell history. The adcomm already knows the historical facts. The last sentence begins to tell the reader something about you as an applicant, but it's too general to be effective. You could almost start here and cut everything above it, but add details about (1) why/how this interest came about (2) any scholarly work you've done on the subject. Since the next paragraph deals with your future interests, I am missing information about your past/current preparation for grad school. What specific topics did you study? Did you write any papers? Do independent study? Write a thesis? Take advance courses? The Latin sentence should go here. Edit out the first half of the first sentence. You don't want to say anything negative in your SOP. Instead of saying you don't know what you want to study, say you're looking forward to opening up to new ideas through the diverse course offerings at Uni X (or some such). Expand on that synthesis. What did you find, what were your conclusions? Don't just give general information that's not unique to your research. The part about the synthesis seems to belong in the previous paragraph, where you talk about your preparation and previous work. Cut "eminent", "rudimentary". interdisciplinary approach -- how is that important for your research? This is odd and sticks out. "Resolved to become a Professor of History" - I think it's worded too strongly for someone who professes to only have rudimentary ideas about their research interests. "I have devoted myself to the study of Latin, and I am exploring local colleges in my area for an opportunity to formalize that education" - this is out of place. It shouldn't be part of the closing. "I have devoted myself" - again, too strongly worded. "I hope to one day disseminate my studies to a wider audience, in an effort to combat the rampant misconceptions of history in today’s world" - "disseminate" sounds too fluffy to me. "rampant misconceptions" - what misconceptions? This has nothing to do with the content of your essay, nor as far as I understand, with your interests. If you think studying medieval history can change modern thinking, maybe you should elaborate on that and say how?

I don't really have any experience with this type of essay but I imagine the field/degree you're seeking could have a bearing on the answer.

I've posted enough information on the GradCafe that if you really wanted to, you could find out who I am in less than 5 minutes. Still, I assume most people won't bother and I like the false sense of anonymity. But yeah, like socialpsych, I don't post things I wouldn't want people reading with my full name on them. As for my undergrad institution, well, it's foreign. Most people on this website won't be able to reliably use this data point, and on the other hand it'd give out more private information about myself. Posting the people I worked with is tantamount to simply posting my name, so I'd rather not do that either.

It's still not quite right. This opening sentence tells us all the wrong things about your volunteer experience; tell us what you did, not how long it took you to get there. Why not the simpler: This volunteer experience refocused... Again, I'm missing the details. What have you learned? Why/how did that project influence your interests? Do you elaborate on that research project later on in the essay? From reading this, it seems that the project and your new interest have something in common, but you don't say what. Overall I feel that you're giving us too many details in one paragraph, but you're not going into depth on any of them and it creates a cluttered feeling. Try making it more cohesive by telling us more about your volunteer experience - where you volunteered, what you did there, *specific* things it taught you. Then refine your interest to working with students with emotional and behavioral disabilities -- explain why/how your research project got you interested in that.

To both of you guys: could you get a fourth professor to write you a letter? Don't even ask the schools for permission if you're worried that one of your original 3 won't submit theirs. Add them electronically if you can; if not, you can either contact the DGS and ask if your writer can email the letter directly to them (usually departments are very helpful and will allow you to do that); or simply have your writers write a paper letter and mail it to the department. Either way, don't just give up because of one unreliable LOR! @digits: Don't worry about making your other writer look dumb. Leave the original writer as one of your 3 writers, and schools will know that she was supposed to write you a letter. That way it's clear who the "dumb" one is.

Try to find websites of current grad students at your school and look at how they write their CVs. Find a format you like and copy it; that's basically what the school wants to see.