wtncffts

So noone yet has claimed any of the Toronto acceptances? I'm really anxious to hear because it'll be the de facto end, and will allow me to move on.

Most of these topics in this forum seem to be about life in grad school in general. I'd like to know what differences there are, in your experience, between being in an MA program and a PhD? I'm not talking about the obvious stuff, like having to do a dissertation, comp exams, etc., but more how it feels: your sense of self within the department and academia, your relationships with faculty, intellectual life, your perceptions and attitudes towards undergrads as a TA, and so on. I've done an MA and will be starting a PhD in the fall, and I'm thinking that it will essentially be a continuation of the MA rather than something qualitatively different. Is that your experience? Any thoughts would be great.

I'd suggest looking at the placement records. I don't know anything about English, specifically, but a quick glance tells me that Rutgers' placement is probably better than, or at least equal to, U of T's in terms of US institutions (I couldn't find GWU's). Toronto is definitely more prestigious in that it's in the highest echelon of Canadian universities (usually with UBC and McGill), whereas Rutgers and GWU are comparatively lower ranked, but there's definitely something working against Canadian PhDs on average in terms of US placement. It's a topic which has come up many times on these forums, and I'm still not sure in my own mind of the causes, but it's obvious that, in most fields, it seems uncommon for Canadian PhDs to obtain tenure-track positions at 'comparable' universities. It's pretty evident if you look at U of T's English placement: http://www.english.u...d/placement.htm . Perhaps the record shows that most of the PhDs are Canadian and thus choose to work in Canada, or that US perceptions of Toronto's (and other Canadian schools') 'actual' rank is much lower, i.e., that were it a US school, it would only be mid-ranked, say, top 50. That's not to say that a Toronto PhD will be an 'obstacle' to job prospects in the US; the placement record shows that it probably isn't. But it seems to be the case that, if you're looking at 'prestige', U of T's prestige and reputation within Canada don't translate favorably (depending on your expectations) to the US context. EDIT: Sorry, my original post mistakenly thought the OP and andromeda were different people. Stupid me. If I could add one more thing: would it be unusual or seen as odd to study American literature in Canada? I'm not in your field, so I don't know, but it seems like it might be an issue.

Well, I don`t hate them (it?), but they're definitely off my christmas card list...

The former. Each program or department has its own admissions committee. From what I gather, it's usually five faculty members, sometimes a grad student, often 'headed' by the graduate program director, and representatives from each subfield (I guess this depends on the discipline).

Just checked my e-mail; rejection from NYU. Seems like they're doing a round of rejects now. Re: the age debate, I guess I'm kind of in the middle here. I'm 26 (turning 27 this year) but have pretty much been in school continuously since high school (well, I guess since kindergarten, really). I took 6 years to get my undergrad degree, two and a half to get my MA. Although I'm older, I don't feel like I have the work or life experience that an 'older' student starting a PhD has. I do think I'm quite mature and focused intellectually, but it's less a function of my age than of my personality and temperament (granted, age has something to do with the latter, but I think I'm essentially the same person in this regard than I was five or six years ago). I think it's doing an MA that has really prepared me for a PhD.

OK, that's great. I didn't want to discourage you or make you feel bad about your offers. If you're happy, all the best to you.

Well, I don't want to pile on to The Realist for information, but can I just ask a general question. You talk about faculties which are split methodologically. In your experience, to what extent do these conflicts get personal? Because there would be a big difference, I would think, in the entire departmental atmosphere depending on whether these are 'agreeable disagreements' or devolve to the point of, say, colleagues not speaking to each other. I know this varies by dept. and you can only speak for some, but any thoughts would be great. I don't think this'll be an issue in the programs I'm considering, but it may be for others.

I wasn't expecting such a detailed reply, but it's appreciated. This is the opposite advice from what I've mostly said on these forums, but I would consider applying again next year to higher ranked schools or trying to transfer at some point. I guess it depends on what your future plans are, but, unfortunately, you're likely going to be limited in your job prospects with a PhD from those universities (again, not trying to insult them). Obviously, I don't know you, but the paper sounds impressive, the GRE is quite good, and I'm sure you would have a reasonably good shot at a highly-ranked school. Just my .02, take it as you like.

I don't understand. Have you already been admitted to a PhD program and starting in September? If so, I think it's relatively common for people to spend the few months before matriculation 'chilling', just getting mentally prepared for grad school and such, or even travelling and whatnot. You're already admitted; that can't be taken away. If not, I'm kind of confused as to what you're asking. Why are you quitting your job?

Sure, I don't see why not, as long as you do it professionally and without sounding like you're begging. I guess it also depends on your field and whether or not funding is primarily through professors or through the department/faculty. $70k, though? Really? I don't know your personal circumstances so I assume you have reason, but that's an awful lot to ask for funding. I don't think I've ever seen anyone offered that much.

Not saying it's an inappropriate comparison, but there is one big difference: you don't pay to apply for a job. If people had to pay $100 every time they applied for a job, it damn well better be the case that they notify you.

Yes, UNBC is in Prince George which is nowhere near Vancouver. I haven't been there either, but the city's website says it's about 9 hours driving time between the two. I guess it depends on what you compare it to, but I'd say it's much more 'small town': the population is around 80,000 but it's also quite isolated, I think. Whether that's negative depends on your preferences, and I'm sure it's quite beautiful and obviously has a lot of opportunities for recreation and 'communing' with nature.

Congrats! With your great record of acceptances, can I just ask why you didn't reach 'higher', so to speak? I'm not trying to offend any of the schools you did apply to, but your being accepted to every single one suggests, to me, that you had an excellent chance at higher ranked schools.

I'm not sure in what sense you mean 'right', but I'd say of course you're 'allowed' to be angry. I can't and don't want to constrain your emotions; I'm only suggesting the reasoning for your anger is flawed. People may be responsible for their own advice; that doesn't make them responsible for actions taken, as a result of that advice, by consenting, autonomous, and informed individuals. And I'm sorry, but unless your profs somehow coerced you forcibly to apply to grad school, it was solely your decision. You're not a child: you can't make the 'they made me do it' excuse any more. I'm not trying to be personal here, only responding to what you've presented.

I know this was meant as a ray of hope for someone, but it's really a zero-sum game, no? The fact that you turned down Brown, increasing the chances of someone on that waitlist, is counterbalanced by the fact that, I presume, you're going to accept a position somewhere else, thus diminishing the chances of someone else being accepted from the waitlist at that school.

In response to the 'length of time' argument, I'd also suggest that it doesn't matter when you, specifically, submitted your application. Again, that was your choice. The deadline is what matters; I assume that, in general, schools don't even begin the application review process until the deadline has passed, and, as someone else said, they do have other duties besides. God knows I've made my frustrations with the process clear in other various threads on this forum, but I don't buy some of the justification for the 'anger' here.

I'm sorry that you feel this way, but I think this anger is misplaced. Yes, they gave you advice, encouraged you, etc., but it was solely your decision to pursue graduate study. You're an adult and are responsible for your own decisions.

Don't over think this. Obviously it's going to be 'braggy' if you write it like that. Just keep it simple, straightforward, and measured. "Dear [x], I'm writing to let you know that I have received offers of admission from x,y,z. I am very excited about these opportunities, and sincerely appreciate your support through the process". You could also ask for advice re: your final decision, and whatever other details you want to add.

I don't know what you expected, but 10% is a pretty standard acceptance rate. Also, if you're going to do a Poli Sci PhD in the US, you're going to have to confront math and statistics at some level.

Well, I agree that there is value in a standardized test. I have issues with the GRE in particular, both its content and its process. This isn't self-serving; I scored quite well on it (which so far hasn't seemed to help much with applications, but that's a different story). Mostly, I think the GRE should place much more emphasis on critical thinking and reasoning skills, reading comprehension, argument construction, and other essential skills to graduate study, not testing knowledge of arcane and obscure vocabulary or mathematical skills which will never be used, particularly in political science. Actually, I don't know why they don't use the GRE subject test for Political Science anymore; I have no idea what was actually on it but I would think that a test measuring knowledge of basic political and social science concepts and methods would be much better than the current setup. I also take issue with the fact that ETS has a monopoly on the entire process, such that we are required to subject ourselves to a private corporation's testing centres, rules, fees, and evaluations.

Hey, top ten! I'm not sure if that's an accomplishment or not... EDIT: By the way, is it possible to see one's own month-by-month stats somewhere? Just curious.

Yes, it really depends on the school/department. Where I TAed, there were occasional e-mails about TA positions in other areas, mostly ones which didn't have its own grad students. I also had the strange experience, one time, of encountering someone in our grad students lounge who I had never met and had never seen around the department. I talked with him a bit, and apparently he was a geography/urban planning grad student TAing a poli sci course! So, I guess it was possible in my own department, though I think he was the only one.

Absolutely. It's only common courtesy; they helped you out, you should let them know how it's going. I haven't been doing it after every single decision, but after two or three, it's up to you. They may not respond every time, but I think they'd still like to know.

I would say so. You got waitlisted at LSE, so you must have a quality application; I'm sure you'll receive good news shortly, and then all the agony will be worth it.