fuzzylogician

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1047

From an outside perspective: you had the whole summer to prep, plus the whole fall + half of spring semester, and there is no way you spent the whole time writing. You could have (and perhaps should have) prioritized studying for your exam more. To me, the story you're telling sounds like an excuse. You're always going to have more than one thing on your plate as an academic, and if you can't handle that, you won't succeed in academia. Now, beyond that, there's a question of whether you prepared correctly, which it sounds like you may not have. You say that there were concerns about your ability to recall your readings and express yourself orally, which isn't so much a problem of having time to do the reading but of doing the extra work to digest, integrate, and actually speak about these topics out loud. I don't know if you did that, but that would be something I would think about. Short version: I don't see anything unfair here. 
Now when it comes to the letter, not knowing your program it's a little hard to know what to say. For one, no one outside your program ever needs to know it exists. These "files" students have won't follow you around after you graduate. So I guess the question is what it does program-internally, and that is something you'd know better than us. The good news is you passed! A pass is a pass. A high pass or a low pass are both just the same a pass, meaning you've been approved to move on to the next level in your program. It sounds like your program isn't shy about letting you know what they think, so if they thought you should leave, they would tell you. Nonetheless, I think it's wise to have a frank conversation with your advisor about this question and get their opinion. If they say you could/should stay, you should ask explicitly how to fix whatever was lacking in your exam. But assuming you stay, you will need to put this unpleasant experience behind you. As I said, a pass is a pass. Impress your committee with your next steps, and they will assume that you've taken their advice in the letter to heart and improved. They won't hold older offenses against you if you're doing well later on. And again, the letter is internal (as is the exam for that matter) and doesn't matter to anyone but your program. You'll be successful in academia on independent grounds that have nothing to do with this exam or letter, so all is most definitely not lost, and you still have a path to success directly ahead of you. 

No offense but you are talking about an unfunded professional Masters, the kind where you pay the school to attend if you are accepted, where financial support is limited, and where there are quite large cohorts and not a lot of research going on. The kind of program that is an investment in a future career that you take out loans for because you think and hope that it'll be worth it once you have a practice going. Schools have a clear financial incentive to admit as many students to their Masters programs as possible, because these tuition-paying students contribute a significant portion of the school's income. That is quite different from funded, research-based PhD programs, where students essentially get paid to study and do research for ~5 years. 

Oh I do hope you do not intend to pursue an academic career. Life gets significantly more difficult after you graduate. There are fewer jobs than PhD graduates so getting that postdoc won't be easy, not to mention that first TT job. And once you're on the TT, it's publish or perish (and teaching and service) for 7 years until you're up for tenure. Maybe then you could start having a life, assuming you're not particularly rushed to get that Full Professor rank?  Assuming you're one of the truly lucky ones who gets the perfect job straight out of school and can fast-track the TT, we're looking at a minimum of 10 years of everything on hold. If you're one of us mere mortals, you're probably looking at closer to 15 years of school-postdoc-TT job celibacy. I don't know about you, but I value the rest of my life just as much as my career. Being successful but completely alone for over a decade does not sound appealing at all. You need to start learning how to have a full and balanced life now, because it will not get easier later. 

These look like homework questions, which is not what this forum is about. If they’re not, you should explain what they are and what you’ve already done to try to pursue the answers. 

I tried several hooks that were built on how I first discovered my field and when I knew I wanted to pursue a career in it; when I tell them in person people usually find them unusual and exciting, but in writing they didn't really flow without being overly long or trite. I ended up opening with several research questions I wanted to address in my future work and jumped right into why and how my past education prepared me for to do it. I ended up liking this intro better than any anecdote, because a) it gave my statement a professional feel right from the beginning, b ) it saved me space that I could use to talk more about my goals. I think a good research question will hook researchers much more than an anecdote -- especially since the anecdotes I had to tell weren't even half as exciting as the i-climbed-mt-everest-when-i-was-8 anecdotes you find in Asher's book.
I wrote the introduction paragraph after most of my statement was already written, and I spent more time working on it than on any other single paragraph. My statements had different lengths, and what finally helped things come together for me was working on the one with the strictest word limit - 500 words. When I started stripping down everything I'd written to the bare essentials, the "hooks" were the first thing to go and I had to be smart about using my space in order to cover everything in the prompt. When I got back to writing the longer statements (1000+ word limits), I found that even though I had more space now, I didn't need all of it. I was able to say everything I wanted very neatly and concisely in the shorter 500 words version and I liked how it looked. I ended up beefing up the description of my current projects and current/future interests, but I didn't touch the intro+past parts.
So I guess my point is, the intro is hard to write. Once you have a working version of your statement, step back and evaluate it critically. What does each word/sentence/paragraph contribute to your statement? If you can start reading the statement from the 2nd paragraph and not miss out on anything, then your intro isn't contributing enough. Conversely, you might find after you've written and re-written everything many times, that you have a good angle to begin with that forwards your plot. Give it time, it'll come to you in the end..

You're describing a fairly standard situation: you have some strengths and some deficiencies in your application. Play to your strengths. Define your research interests, as they have developed based on [course X, work experience Y, volunteer activity Z, etc] and support your readiness to pursue them by expanding on the experience(s) you have, regardless of where they came from. Choose schools that are a good fit for those interests and explain why that is the case. Pick about 2-3 such interests/experiences to discuss to show breadth but also focus. There is no reason to play down experiences that come from unusual sources (if that's actually true, I'd bet that lots of applicants have such volunteer/other experiences that shape their grad school choices). If you wrote/will write a thesis, that goes under "research experience", too, and should be discussed as well. Remember that experience is different from publications or presentations; at this stage, the former matters much more. It's about showing your potential and convincing the school that you're a good investment. The rest can come later. 

I did something similar to SocPhDStudent:
Paragraph 1: My research interests, and the broader question that the specific interests are a derivative of.
Paragraph 2: Past research experience #1.
Paragraph 3: Past research experience #2 and related teaching experience.
Paragraph 4: How these past research experiences are connected, and how they inform my current research interests and plans for what I will study in grad school.
Paragraph 5: Why University X is a good fit for my interests, focusing mainly on faculty and resources within the department.
Paragraph 6: If necessary, an additional paragraph for resources outside the department, such as researchers at other departments, special diplomas, access to lab resources, etc. If there wasn't much, this would get folded into P5. 
Conclusion: Plans beyond the PhD, short statement about how Uni X will get me there.

In that case, your dissertation project might not define the researcher you'll become, but it will certainly influence the way you present yourself when you go on the job market your first few years out of grad school. You'll find yourself saying things like "I am broadly interested in XYZ; in my dissertation, I specifically study ABC and conclude that [blah]" fairly often when introducing yourself to people. Your dissertation topic will obviously change how the ensuing conversation goes and how people then perceive you. It might change what jobs you're perceived as most qualified for. Now, that said, it's also not the be-all end-all of your career. There's something to be said for picking the more promising project, especially if the other project is in a similar area so it doesn't change your academic profile as much. Another important factor is who you'll end up working with. A wonderful topic with a difficult advisor might not be worth it. But also keep in mind that the dissertation writing process is hard, even when you're very passionate about your project, so you should be at least somewhat enthusiastic about whatever you choose now. Something my advisors said to me that I came to appreciate a lot was not to put everything in my dissertation, and instead to have a project that's in earlier stages that could become my first post-PhD project. This was important because it removed a lot of the struggles that I saw some peers go through trying to figure out what to do next, now that this huge project they invested a few years of their lives in was suddenly over. So even if you don't pick a project to run with now, it doesn't mean you can't work on it later. This is an important decision, but it doesn't have to solely define who you become as an academic. 
I hope you're noticing from this that I'm not going to tell you what to do. There are pros and cons to either decision and you need to make your own. 

In that case, your dissertation project might not define the researcher you'll become, but it will certainly influence the way you present yourself when you go on the job market your first few years out of grad school. You'll find yourself saying things like "I am broadly interested in XYZ; in my dissertation, I specifically study ABC and conclude that [blah]" fairly often when introducing yourself to people. Your dissertation topic will obviously change how the ensuing conversation goes and how people then perceive you. It might change what jobs you're perceived as most qualified for. Now, that said, it's also not the be-all end-all of your career. There's something to be said for picking the more promising project, especially if the other project is in a similar area so it doesn't change your academic profile as much. Another important factor is who you'll end up working with. A wonderful topic with a difficult advisor might not be worth it. But also keep in mind that the dissertation writing process is hard, even when you're very passionate about your project, so you should be at least somewhat enthusiastic about whatever you choose now. Something my advisors said to me that I came to appreciate a lot was not to put everything in my dissertation, and instead to have a project that's in earlier stages that could become my first post-PhD project. This was important because it removed a lot of the struggles that I saw some peers go through trying to figure out what to do next, now that this huge project they invested a few years of their lives in was suddenly over. So even if you don't pick a project to run with now, it doesn't mean you can't work on it later. This is an important decision, but it doesn't have to solely define who you become as an academic. 
I hope you're noticing from this that I'm not going to tell you what to do. There are pros and cons to either decision and you need to make your own. 

@AstroMason Thanks for coming back to update us, and congrats on your successful interview! 

I sort of felt that way the first year of my MA (eons ago now). Then, I got some good advice from more senior grad students: your experience will be as challenging as you want it to be. If you seek out opportunities to go beyond the coursework, get involved in more research, learn to be a better teacher, etc., then your master's can and will challenge you. But if you don't do that and complain about the program, you really only have yourself to blame. Instead of saying you feel pigeonholed, seek out the things you think are cool, new, or interesting. Go to office hours to talk to profs about them. Read up on them on your own. See if anyone will take you on as a RA to focus on one of those topics. Your education in grad school is driven by you so make the most of it while you can.

In that case, your dissertation project might not define the researcher you'll become, but it will certainly influence the way you present yourself when you go on the job market your first few years out of grad school. You'll find yourself saying things like "I am broadly interested in XYZ; in my dissertation, I specifically study ABC and conclude that [blah]" fairly often when introducing yourself to people. Your dissertation topic will obviously change how the ensuing conversation goes and how people then perceive you. It might change what jobs you're perceived as most qualified for. Now, that said, it's also not the be-all end-all of your career. There's something to be said for picking the more promising project, especially if the other project is in a similar area so it doesn't change your academic profile as much. Another important factor is who you'll end up working with. A wonderful topic with a difficult advisor might not be worth it. But also keep in mind that the dissertation writing process is hard, even when you're very passionate about your project, so you should be at least somewhat enthusiastic about whatever you choose now. Something my advisors said to me that I came to appreciate a lot was not to put everything in my dissertation, and instead to have a project that's in earlier stages that could become my first post-PhD project. This was important because it removed a lot of the struggles that I saw some peers go through trying to figure out what to do next, now that this huge project they invested a few years of their lives in was suddenly over. So even if you don't pick a project to run with now, it doesn't mean you can't work on it later. This is an important decision, but it doesn't have to solely define who you become as an academic. 
I hope you're noticing from this that I'm not going to tell you what to do. There are pros and cons to either decision and you need to make your own. 

I assume you mean whether you should put the paper with your name on it on your CV, obviously you can't put the other one there however much you think you deserve to. It's your choice what to put on your CV; you're not obligated to put all of your papers on there. If you do put a paper on there, though, I think it's fair game in the sense that you might get asked about it (e.g. in any interviews, or just in casual conversation), and you're signaling that you stand behind the results. If it's a paper stemming from undergrad work where you're a middle author and you're not even sure how your name got on it, personally I would leave it out. I don't think it'll help your career any, and frankly I would prefer not to have my name associated with something like that. 
And on a broader note, this practice of putting people's names on papers without their knowledge sounds just crazy to me. Also of not giving junior staff their due credit, but geez. How does a paper go through an entire review process when there are authors who aren't even aware of the paper? I would think at the very least there'd be an email and an opportunity to read a draft and comment/withdraw. I hope this isn't common. 

^ I agree that McGill doesn't sound like a good choice. UCLA's linguistics department also isn't applied, but at least it's large and fairly broad in terms of faculty and interests (though I don't think it's what you're looking for). UMich is also fairly diverse. CUNY has more people on the applied side, as does Rochester, but your interests are so vague that I can't begin to guess who would be a good advisor for you at any of these institutions. I think you need to spend some time narrowing down and better-defining what it is that you are looking for. 
For your questions, 
I started studying for the GRE over the spring before the application season, took it in early summer. Wrote a draft of my SOP early in the summer and had probably about a dozen drafts before I had the first finished product, which I then tweaked to fit different applications (in terms of content, word count, fit). I asked for letters around October. I spent a *lot* of time researching programs over the summer and early fall, and iteratively over time better defining my own goals and interests -- as I read online and wrote my essays. I basically used an existing paper as my writing sample, and integrated comments I got on it in the fall. I got transcripts early in the fall, as well. I had a spreadsheet to keep track of all the different requirements of all my applications. You can find other posts on the board about timelines and strategies for keeping track of everything you need to do, there is nothing special about linguistics.  As long as you tie it into your other interests, it could be used to establish fit with the department. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're asking.  I wouldn't fluff anything anywhere, and I wouldn't lie. It's fine to be open minded. Yeah, this is not a question anyone can sit down and answer. Read more on the board, and come back with more detailed questions. 

I assume you mean whether you should put the paper with your name on it on your CV, obviously you can't put the other one there however much you think you deserve to. It's your choice what to put on your CV; you're not obligated to put all of your papers on there. If you do put a paper on there, though, I think it's fair game in the sense that you might get asked about it (e.g. in any interviews, or just in casual conversation), and you're signaling that you stand behind the results. If it's a paper stemming from undergrad work where you're a middle author and you're not even sure how your name got on it, personally I would leave it out. I don't think it'll help your career any, and frankly I would prefer not to have my name associated with something like that. 
And on a broader note, this practice of putting people's names on papers without their knowledge sounds just crazy to me. Also of not giving junior staff their due credit, but geez. How does a paper go through an entire review process when there are authors who aren't even aware of the paper? I would think at the very least there'd be an email and an opportunity to read a draft and comment/withdraw. I hope this isn't common. 

It sort of depends on where your strengths and weaknesses are. If you are lacking strong letters, a writing sample, or more experience to clearly define your interests, this might be a good idea. If you need to make up for low UG scores, that might be another reason. But keep in mind that MAs are often not funded, so you may be taking on a lot of debt, and that's not necessarily worth it. You might also look into post-bacc programs, or working as a lab manager somewhere. 

Oh well that sounds a little different. That doesn't sound like an offer yet, but more like a "would you be interested" preliminary step. Given your response and the fact that you visited only 4 business days ago, I'm not too surprised that things aren't finalized yet. It doesn't actually sound like you got a "congratulations! You've been accepted" email yet. I hope you followed up with whoever wrote you and expressed your enthusiasm for the program after your visit. Writing the admissions person might have been skipping a step. 

If you search "impostor syndrome" you'll find that it starts early and stays with people throughout their career. You are not alone, this is completely normal. 

I passed y'all! I'm convinced my success is at least in part due to good vibes from friends and family, so thank you thank you!

I think if it were me I'd let the editors know just so everything is out in the open, with all the information as you specify here. I don't think this is a big deal at all or that it would change the outcome for this paper, but in all fairness I think the editor should know just in case that might affect how they value the reviewer's opinion. For example, if there ends up being any disagreement between reviewers, knowing that one of them identified (or might have identified) the author might be relevant information. 
I'm also always fascinated by how different fields work. In mine, it's the author's responsibility to remove identifying information before submitting. It's also frankly not all that hard to have an informed guess as to who wrote any particular paper I might be reviewing since my subfield/topic isn't huge, but that's a separate issue. 

This is normal; don't submit to another journal without hearing back from this journal one way or the other. At this point, withdrawing without getting feedback would be in poor taste. If you decide to give up on this journal, make sure you withdraw first and get someone to acknowledge you've done so. Never have the same paper submitted to more than one venue at a time. You could follow up again soon (once every two weeks sounds reasonable). Talk to your advisor about what to expect in terms of turnover times. 

As someone with a non-western name, I would agree, but sadly that’s not how life works right now. (And of course we could have a longer conversation about many other forms of discrimination.)

It’s common in some parts of Europe but it’s never done in North America.   

Indeed. It’s also the reason you’re not supposed to put your age, marital status, etc on there.