hadunc

Yeah no offense but, seriously, you have absolutely nothing to be worried about. I'm sitting here praying I get in off a wait list, then spending the rest of my time fruitlessly mailing out resumes. I've heard nothing back from any possible employers, and with the economy the way it is, I'll be lucky if I spend the next year waiting tables even though I have a BA. While I'm not saying that my situation is terrible, you should be glad you were able to get into ANY program at all, let alone a great one. A lot of very qualified people were not as lucky as you this year.

LOLhedgefunds, I don't disagree with your point either. Perhaps I should have been more clear. I don't think that academic writing should be geared toward the masses, if you will, I just really dislike language that's specifically meant to be exclusive. I don't mean that there shouldn't be technical terms in a professional field, because that would be virtually impossible. What I'm specifically referring to is academic writing (in all fields, not necessarily literature alone) that is blatantly and purposefully exclusive, meaning that the author uses technical language to a point where their meaning becomes totally obscured. I think there were some excellent examples posted on the board earlier of such writing. There's a difference between writing for an educated audience and specifically writing so that only a select few can actually determine its meaning. Such writing is egotistical and pointless, in my opinion.

Wow, my feelings exactly. What I get frustrated with regarding the world of academia is that even though the majority are very intellectually driven, they have the exact same tendency to put their collective minds in a box as everyone else does. Some get so bogged down in theory that they can't even see the big picture anymore, or consider any alternatives. This kind of close-mindedness is extremely disappointing in a field where you'd think everyone would be so open to new perspectives. Also, a lot of academics tend to forget that when they are studying a text they are essentially studying the culture in order to pass that knowledge along to society. Our culture is composed of everyday, ordinary people engaged in ordinary endeavors. Therefore the study of culture should not be relegated solely to the realm of the intellectual elite, it should be something in which we all participate. My personal philosophy is to never forget that even though I may one day find myself in the Ivory Tower, the work I do should be for everyone, and for the purpose of helping others to understand themselves and their culture. In my opinion, an academic essay should be just as accessible to a waitress or a window washer as it is to another academic. Mind you, I'm not saying that the average person reads an academic essay for fun, but essays should be written with the intent of sharing knowledge with everyone, not just a select few. I'm also not saying that academic work should be dumbed down at all. I just find academic jargon irritating because it's purpose is to show the writer's status as a member of an elite group, not to contribute to human knowledge. I don't mean to make myself sound naive and idealistic, nor do I expect to enter academia and then totally change the system or anything like that. I have no such illusions. I am not anti-academic in the least bit, I'm only pointing out the major flaws that I see.

I received my notification in the mail. From what I understand, that's how they usually do it. The fact that you haven't heard is probably a good thing. You might very well be on their "pending" list, the list of people they will accept immediately if others turn down their offers. I realize this sounds like a wait list, but apparently it's not. Go figure.

Spritely, Are you also wait listed at Loyola? If you replied to my original post, I apologize, I just didn't feel like going back and looking for it. If so, feel free to PM me and we can agonize over our chances of getting in!

This is great advice, thanks! I never thought of just reading the intros in the Norton Anthology, but that's a really good idea!

Thank you all for the replies! I'd like to clarify that I really do want to do the PhD work--I am not just an "inveterate reader"--it is analysis and interpretation that I am interested in, not just the act of reading itself. It is not that I think I'm not capable of carrying on graduate research, in fact I am already tossing around some ideas in my head about what to write my dissertation on, I was simply pointing out the fact that I think most undergrads are not prepared to make this choice. I mean, yeah, I'm interested in gender theory now, but will I be as interested in it in 5 years? I don't know. I did not want to put off graduate study because this is the career path that I want to take, there is literally nothing else I could see myself doing with my life. But I think (like someone above said) that it is hard for some students to gauge exactly what they want to do until they are actually doing the grad level work, and of course you need to be accepted to grad school first! If it doesn't happen for me this year, then I will see it as an opportunity to figure out exactly what I do want to study. But as for waiting 5 years until i have something specific to contribute, I greatly admire Sibilance7 for her/his motivation and drive, but I couldn't imagine putting this off just because I don't have a crystal clear idea of what I want to study. And I'm shocked by YagglesSnaggles' post, I think that's just ridiculous, how could someone applying straight out of an undergrad degree possibly be prepared to write their dissertation?! I'm sorry, but there is just not enough time in a day for an undergrad to outline their dissertation in any meaningful way, and I would call bs on anyone who claims they knew exactly what they were going to write it on straight out of college. Unless they were truly were a prodigy of some sort. That said, I guess maybe pretending to be confident in what I want to study until I actually get to that point might be the best way to go. Hey, it works in dating, why shouldn't it work here?

I was told way back in january that they would be sending out results all through march, so I guess they do it on some sort of rolling basis. I got my lovely rejection by email in mid-february. I'm sure you'll be hearing soon! Good luck!

marvel, None of my schools specifically demanded that I commit to a certain focus and not change it, but it seems that there is a certain expectation in academia that you know what you want to do when you enter the PhD program. For instance, a couple of my schools required that I designate which sub-field I was applying to on the app, and were so specific that I had a hard time deciding which box to check off. Upon further discussion with one of my recommendation writers, I think a big part of the problem with my app (rejected at 6, wait listed at 1) was that I specifically stated in my SOP that I had multiple interests and wasn't set on one yet. Compared to a lot of people on this site, I can see why schools would have chosen more focused candidates over me. If I don't get in to grad school off of the wait list, I will definitely be taking time this year to hone my interests. Still, it seems like a crappy system, doesn't it? Glad to know someone else feels this way too and that there is at least some flexibility with changing your focus once you get in. But it seems like it's a bit backwards, and that's what frustrates me.

I also got my rejection letter as well, and, oddly enough, someone else's too! (though I didn't open it, it was the same size and shape as mine, so i can only assume) Somehow a guy with the same last name as me got his letter sent to my house, even though the address on the envelope is addressed to an apartment in a different state! I called Cornell today to let them know, and whoever answered couldn't have been more apathetic. I told her what had happened and she just said "uh ok, well I'll pass it on." She didn't even ask for his name and address!!! Grrr, the apathy of some of these people really gets me going. So anyway, if you happen to check this website and haven't gotten a letter yet, PM me and I'll let you know if it's yours or not!

This is interesting--my profs all have told me that reapplying is actually a really good bet, even if you were outright rejected the first time. Several of them know colleagues that got themselves in the door to some great schools by applying twice. They told me that it shows perseverance and lets the schools know that you are very serious about their program. But maybe this isn't always the case? I've never heard anyone say that reapplying was a waste of time though.

Perhaps this topic has been explored already, but I would like to know, is there anyone out there like me who feels it's a bit unfair to ask rising grad students to have a focus of study picked out already at the point at which they are doing their applications? I know a lot of people in this forum already have a masters degree, and I consider that a different situation since obviously their interests have been honed quite a bit. But coming directly out of an undergrad program, it just seems unfair that you kind of already have to know the direction you want your career to go in. Although I have narrowed down my focus quite a bit, even since submitting my applications, I still feel like it could very well change in the next few years. It just seems unfair that we have to choose so soon. Maybe it is a sign that I am too intellectually immature to pursue grad school right now (and I may very well end up taking a year off), but I really can't imagine that very many college seniors already know exactly what they want to pursue for the rest of their academic careers. I mean, it seems like a big decision and I just wish I didn't have to pick right now. Anyone else feeling this way, or am I just way too unfocused in my studies?

Wow--some of these methods are pretty intense! My research method usually involves coming up with an idea after mulling over a text for a while, then doing lots and lots of searching in the MLA database. Usually it ends there as I've found that internet research usually is the best way of doing things with just about everything being online these days (though my focus is in the 20th century, so that probably makes it a lot easier). I also use bibliographies when I find a very relevant article. Someone above mentioned contacting the authors--I never thought of that, but that's a good idea! I guess I just never had the guts.

Since you are interested in staying in the Chicago area, Elmhurst College is still accepting applications until June 1st I believe. I did my undergrad there and I was considering applying for an MA since I ended up only making one wait list and rejected everywhere else, but since they don't offer funding I don't think I could justify it. Still, the tuition is pretty reasonable and they offer tons of financial aid, so you would probably end up paying very little for it, but still no stipend and EC doesn't do TAs. I personally wouldn't look down on doing an MA there, even though I know it's not a school whose name would be recognized outside of Illinois. It's a great little college with outstanding faculty. There's my little plug for my school!

Thanks Ranger123, that is really helpful information. Like many who have posted on this thread, I was also encouraged to apply to only the highest ranking departments. My profs really thought I had a good chance at getting into an Ivy, or at least a program ranked within the top 20. I feel a bit slighted now--not that I think they gave me bad advice, because I don't think anyone could have guessed how competitive this year would be, but because they sort of gave me the impression that it wasn't worth applying to lower-ranked programs. Now that I have been through this whole process, my outlook is very different. In a field where there are no guarantees, I think anyone's best bet is to choose a program that they like, no matter how high or low it is ranked. If you're in a prestigious program but you are miserable, then you're not going to get anything out of it. I learned this the hard way with my undergrad degree and I think the same is true once you get to grad school. Apply to programs that you would feel the most comfortable in and where you really feel you would excel, don't simply choose the one with the most name recognition.

Wait till those kids find out that not only does it not matter where your undergrad degree comes from, but having a degree is no guarantee that you will find a job, even you go to an ivy. The let the REAL nail-biting begin.

It's definitely a bad year. But I've heard rumors that the stimulus package that was just passed may in fact make next year a much easier one. And my friend, who's an IR major and has had to take tons of econ, told me that some economists think that things will turn around by the end of next year. But even if she's right, that still leaves me looking for a job with a BA in English this summer in a climate where people with MBAs are not able to find work, assuming of course I don't get in off of the wait list at Loyola (which seems to be a strong possibility). I just hope things do turn around because I don't think I could handle another year of rejections :cry:

Yes, I totally agree. I get the exact same reaction, even from my peers within my department. The whole "what's the point?" argument drives me insane. See, it's called "humanities" for a reason, because it is the study of the things that make us human! How could our discipline not be held in the highest regard by society? Not to get too political here, but I blame capitalism for the general lack of respect for the humanities and intellectual pursuits.

I too will play along.... I've been rejected from 5 out of 7 schools I applied to and have been wait listed at one (Loyola Chicago). Still waiting to hear from one more school but I am already 99.999% certain that I was rejected there too (it's an ivy). It was my first time around though, and I think the major problem with my app was that I am not yet focused enough in what I want to study (I'm still finishing up my undergrad degree). I know that I want to concentrate on 20th century American lit and that I have a lot of interest in Feminist/Gender Theory, but I'm also interested in Post-colonial theory. My writing sample drew comparisons between a 20th century non-American short story and a story from the Old Testament and investigated the thematic similarities between the two, specifically violent images related to gender. As you can see, I'm kind of all over the place I prefer MLA, but I'm really not a fan of any of them. Such a pain, so many pointless, arbitrary rules.

As far as I know, I don't think the idea of a safety school has changed much. They still tend to be lower-ranked schools with less prestige. I don't know how anyone could consider Stanford a "safety", unless there is some grad program at Stanford that is absolutely crap, which is hard to imagine. But you do have to remember that not all prestigious universities are equal in their grad programs. I'm pretty sure the ivies are all-around solid, but schools that are ranked in the top 20 or 50 may have great English programs, for example, but have only third rate Computer Science departments. Every school is different. But I think the fundamental definition of a "safety school" is one that you apply to because you feel you would be very likely to be accepted but is definitely not a top choice for various reasons.

Thanks Adverbially--what is your focus of study? Would you be doing the modern lit and culture PhD? I was informed that they determine who is accepted off of the wait list by who doesn't accept the offer, i.e., if someone doesn't accept who is going for the modern program then I am more likely to be accepted since that is my concentration. Also, if you wouldn't mind telling, what kind of funding package did you receive? Their website says that they give $14,000 stipends, which seems really low for Chicago. You can pm me if you don't want to post it.

Has anyone here been accepted to Loyola Chicago that knows they are not going to accept the offer? I have been wait listed there and so far that's all I've got :cry:

UW-Madison has a very large and prestigious program. I believed it's ranked 16th by US News, tied with 3 or 4 other schools. No one would ever look down on you for going there! Congrats on your acceptance, I still haven't heard from them but I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

Yeah, I'm still waiting to hear from U Wisc and every day that I don't hear I get a little more positive but also a little more crazy if that makes sense...doesn't help that I've been rejected from 4 schools and wait listed at one, so my options are getting more and more limited...

First of all, what great offers! You are really lucky to have two awesome options on the table. Congrats! Personally, I would take the UVA offer. 30,000 a year should go a very long way in Charlottesville and UVA is an excellent school. My mom actually got her masters there (speech pathology, not english) and absolutely loved it. But more importantly, I believe U Chicago does not offer any teaching assistantships. Although technically U Chicago is ranked higher (though they are so close, I don't think there is any real meaning in this), you might find it more difficult to find a job post PhD if you go there and don't get any teaching experience. Although prestige helps, I have been told that once you get into the job market it is experience that they are looking for, not the name of your school. Also, it seems your interests would probably not fit with U Chicago as well. Apparently it has a reputation for being a bit too traditional in the way that they approach theory. But then, maybe they are trying to turn that around since they are obviously encouraging interdisciplinary work. Still, I would go with UVA.