hepkath

Hi, sorry, in case you've read the above and now think I was trying, somehow, to advise you in a poor direction, I *did* say I was being entirely subjective. Also, within the context of applying to top programs from an institution without tons of clout in the academic world, I do think GRE scores can be a big factor in validating your file. I *don't* think it's an ideal indicator of any sort, but it can help balance out a lack of name-recognition. And again, this is specific to *top* programs (many of which clearly specify preferred scores in the FAQ sections of their websites and will also say that the *vast majority* of their successful candidates scored a good deal higher than their preferred minimum). I do think they *expect* to see scores in the high 700s; whether said scores are the final deciding factor is another issue entirely ('expect' being different from 'require' or 'demand'). I don't know what sort of school you've got your heart set on

With the caveat that I really feel for your situation and do think this process is horribly unpredictable (not to mention unavoidably unfair to who we are as *people*)... Might you consider the following? Your GRE scores. Without reading your essays (and especially, without reading the 'fit' paragraphs of your SoPs), your scores stick out as the biggest (but also most easily addressed) weakness. If you're not applying from a recognizably prestigious school (and therefore suffer from a lack of connections through your recommenders), you really need to offset any perceived lack of rigor in your undergraduate education with stellar standardized testing scores. I know there's a whole heated debate over how much the GRE counts, but I think in your case it might count for an awful lot. Especially your Verbal score, which is quite low for an applicant in English Lit. The majority of the schools you applied to will only very rarely admit someone with a Verbal score below 700, and that's actually the bare minimum. The bare minimum for the Subject Test is generally 650 (although I do think lower scores on this test are more easily overlooked). If it comes down to your file and a very similar file from someone with a higher score (or a similar score but greater undergraduate prestige), the higher score/prestige will translate into the better bet. (We're setting aside, for the moment, the issues with computer-adaptive testing and standardized testing in general; I mostly think it's bull, but that doesn't change its current relevance. The Verbal section is undoubtedly the hardest section for most GRE takers, which is why it's easy to get a nice percentage with a so-so score, but top English grad programs definitely expect to see Verbal scores in the high 700s.) Another thing to consider: unless your recommenders are very prominent in their field (offsetting the lack of prominence of your institution), their letters will unfortunately carry less weight with admissions committees, no matter how glowing. Clearly, you have no control over this and should stick to the people who know you well for the strongest letters possible, but the best way to counter a lack of connection through recommenders is to just go out and do the leg-work yourself. You really do need to contact professors at potential programs (*especially* at the Ivys, where positive, pre-existing relations are particularly important in the admissions process). So. Just my drive-by, entirely subjective analysis. Study up and ace the GREs. As you say, you took them early on, so they really don't reflect what you're capable of. Don't let that false impression mess with your chances! And contact, contact, contact. Read articles by profs you'd like to work with, get to know their current pet projects, and then don't be afraid to start up some dialogues. (This sort of cold-contact scares the crap out of me, by the way, but I've come to acknowledge that it's the best way to approach this process; if I were doing this again, I'd be far more proactive as well). Might I ask what factors informed your choice of schools? Also potentially useful: do you know what the record for admission to grad school is like for the English department at your institution? Do students from your university regularly get into the sorts of programs you've been applying to? By way of reassurance, it really does sound like you're in a fantastic position to do excellent graduate work, and that your lack of acceptances is in large part the result of things beyond your immediate control. Fix the things you can and recognize that this application year in particular has been utterly miserable for many. (Across-the-board rejections are *not* uncommon, no matter how inherently talented the applicant!) Beyond that, try and remember all the things you do well (one of which is most definitely working with and teaching English Lit) and don't let the process define you. I'll be wishing you the very best!

Liz, unless you've got some uncontrollable spending addiction that needs to be accounted for, you'll be fine! There seems to be a slight dip in overall funding when we switch from Graduate Division fellowship to department-sponsored TA-ship in the third year, but I don't think this will put too much of a dent in our ability to survive. (Also, there are all sorts of external fellowships and internal grants to apply for over the course of the next few years.) Your adviser is right: this is as good as funding gets from a state school, especially given the current economic climate in California. It rivals most private funding packages and is a veritable boon. I also suspect that, after those two fantastic Chancellor's Fellowship years, you'll know some people you'd be happy to room with. You'll also know the area a lot better and have a sense of what sort of living situation would suit you. This will make finding good, cheap housing much, much easier.

Saw this pop up in the search results and had to post what I know. I received my official packet from Berkeley today and it included a sheet from the Council of Graduate Schools, specifically their "Resolution Regarding Graduate Scholars, Fellows, Trainees and Assistants." The sheet states the following: 'Acceptance of an offer of financial support (such as a graduate scholarship, fellowship, traineeship, or assistantship) for the next academic year by a prospective or enrolled graduate student completes an agreement that both student and graduate school expect to honor. In that context, the conditions affecting such offers and their acceptance must be defined carefully and understood by all parties. Students are under no obligation to respond to offers of financial support prior to April 15; earlier deadlines for acceptance of such offers violate the intent of this Resolution. [...] It is further agreed by the institutions and organizations subscribing to the above Resolution that a copy of this Resolution should accompany every scholarship, fellowship, traineeship, and assistantship offer.' I checked the list of schools indicating their support of the Resolution (also included on the sheet) and yup. The University of Rhode Island is listed right there (right before the University of Rochester). So something's fishy. The only loophole I can see is if their offer of a TA-ship and/or support doesn't apply to next year (ie. they will support you starting your second year or something like that). But even then, it seems highly devious and wholly against the spirit of the resolution. The bit of text I excised above pertains to a student's ability to withdraw an acceptance of admission before April 15 (you can simply 'submit in writing a resignation of appointment'), so we should technically have complete agency over the pace of our decision-making (providing financial support is involved) up through that date. Okay. Good luck figuring this whole thing out! (I should also note that this doesn't seem legally binding for the institutions involved; it makes them look good to be on that sheet, but maybe some of them are playing fast-and-loose with the resolution anyway. It's possible the only penalty for a violation is loss of respect.)

As a total close-reading sympathizer whose advisor (admittedly a bit tipsy from drinks over seminar dinner) told her she would be miserable in grad school because it's so theory-heavy, but that she should definitely, definitely go because things will eventually skew in her favor (*someone* has to get on the opposite end of the see-saw), this is my advice: Don't look for close-reading programs, so to speak. Look for professors. There are professors at every school (often a bit older, maybe grey of hair and wistful for the days of yore) who work primarily from the text. Compile a list of schools you like for various other important reasons (location, teaching and placement opportunities, overall educational outlook, interdisciplinary tendencies, et cetera), and then really dig into their faculty profiles. Look up articles on JSTOR or ProQuest. Pick up books from the library. Find people who write about literature the way *you* want to write about literature, and apply to whichever schools have more than one such person (ideally, three or four such people) on staff. The only way to tell if your approach to text will be welcome at a particular institution is to acquire an intimate understanding of how select members of said institution's faculty approach text. In this day and age, you're not going to find institutions broadcasting their emphases on close-reading. The young generation is overwhelmingly theory-obsessed at present, and even the most loyal close-reader needs a solid background in theory to stay afloat. This does not mean, however, that you need to change the way you look at literature or that you're out of luck finding somewhere to study. Broaden your capacity for approach, but don't lose your core (I need allies for this revolution, yo!). It's a lot of research, but the results, I think, will surprise you. Professors who appear to do theory-based research (or advertise themselves as such) might end up appealing to your close-reader sensibilities through their writing. Some scholars can make theory appear inhuman and incomprehensible (and it's easy to generalize this as the norm), while others simply use theory to augment or amplify their close-reading work (and can be surprisingly artful at it!). These latter sorts of scholars can pop up anywhere, so I really encourage you *not* to limit your search needlessly. Speaking to current grad students at institutions you might be interested in should also help; they'll know more specifically what a faculty member is like in lecture or in response to papers. And keep in mind, too, that schools with larger faculties will be less likely to have a single, unified approach to text. (Chances are, a school with widely varying approaches will provide you with a more enriching education overall; you never know what you might grow to love... Six years is a long time!)

My fellowship (for a program in the humanities at a state school) comes packaged as a $20,000 stipend for the academic year plus a $4,000 stipend for the summer. It's a two-year fellowship, followed by TA-ships and dissertation-year fellowships (both of which are paid in terms of academic year and are accompanied by additional summer stipends). Not sure how it's disbursed, but I do know that this sort of patch-work funding is typical of state schools, and that I am encouraged to apply for supplemental funding both through internal competition (department and university-wide) and through external organizations. Many private universities (like Yale) have done away with stipends designated separately for academic year and summer (as well as separate budgeting for TA-ships). Instead, they provide all-inclusive five or six-year fellowships wherein the amount stated is expected to cover 12-month periods and account for shifts toward teaching and research down the line. No mention of summer funding suggests that your package works according to the all-inclusive model, so you should think about budgeting your stipend over 12 months. Similarly, an amount listed as the total of a 'combined package' (as in the above sample break-down) should be read as all-inclusive. Although you can expect to receive funding in a variety of categories (which they helpfully list in an effort to make it all seem bigger and more impressive), the sum total of those awards will more or less amount to what they've quoted. However, there will likely be a variety of more specific summer grants you can apply for once you've arrived on campus that will provide you will additional funding. (Of course, I claim no actual knowledge of any package but the one I've been offered; I'd check with the fellowship/financial aid office at your school or with the Director of Graduate Studies in your department for the real specifics.)

Ah! I was doubtful including it next to Harvard (which, last I checked, required its own "Statement of Financial Resources"). Good to know and thanks for amending!

I was never asked to *rank* my list of schools, but I did provide the names of all the other schools I applied to. A possible explanation for how ranking would not affect admission, but *would* affect number of students admitted: If you are a *highly desirable* applicant, clearly you will also be highly desirable to better programs. However, a lesser program would never deny you admission for that reason alone! New programs are especially interested in attracting top talent, so if they see that they are ranked fourth on your list, they won't be dissuaded from admitting you. They will, however, recognize that there is a strong possibility you will refuse their offer of admission in favor of a better school. So your honest ranking allows them to prepare for this possibility either by admitting students further down their list or by maintaining a larger waitlist to account for the likelihood of your decision not to enroll in their program. Yes, it seems horrible and unfair, but ultimately I think it's always best to be honest in these situations. State schools especially realize they need to compete for top students, and if they think there are other contenders for your affection, they can approach the circumstances of your admission with that in mind (they might, for instance, offer you a better funding package upfront, notify you of admission at an earlier date, or make sure they have extra candidates, who are perhaps less thoroughly brilliant but also more likely to come, lined up to fill your spot). If they want you, they want you and will cling to every possibility of having you. They are well aware of their "rank" in academia and expect you to be equally aware. On the off-chance that all your better programs reject you, they would be stupid *not* to be waiting in the wings with an offer of admission. (In fact, telling them dishonestly that they are your one and only is a bit mean! If they want to accept you, they'll accept you either way, but if you lied to them about your preferences and later reject them, they'll feel burned by the process. Any connections you might have made to faculty there

Don't toss the recommender; for all the reasons given above and something that you yourself suggested (other professors might be inclined to say similar things about you), the letter is a keeper. Especially if the professor is well-respected at his institution and/or in his field. Brilliant is one of those words that professors (especially in the humanities and social sciences) use very sparingly and as a way of ear-marking the students they feel will one day become superstars in their field. (Another superlative in the "used sparingly" bin: stunning.) The distinction between "very, very good" and "brilliant" is an important one, however much we might resent and/or quibble over semantics. Yes, admissions committees will look for "brilliant" students over "very, very good" ones, but the truth is that, as long as you're applying to programs well-suited to your qualifications, you'll be okay. If a superstar professor (or even one who is well-respected at his institution) says a student is "very, very good" though "not brilliant," this likely means that professor has saved the "brilliant" superlative for someone either applying at the same time as you or in the past few years. He can't over-use it because then his recommendations will hold less weight overall (committees will start to suspect that nothing he writes can be trusted). This is similar to what was stated above about LORs needing to include some weaknesses. About the grades you received: do not ever assume that top marks in a class equal recognition of utter brilliance, or that slightly lower marks mean a less strong recommendation. Often, professors will assign grades within the context of their class that year; you were likely the best student in your class. Recommendation superlatives, however, are given within the context of a professor's entire career. You have no idea what kinds of students might have won him over in the past, nor how your work compares to theirs. Only he knows, and he is merely doing his part and being honest about that. Another way that professors determine grades is within the context of what they feel is a student's full potential. If your professor awarded you an A+, it may also have been because he felt you were working as hard as you could work and performing as best as you could perform. (This seems to hold up in light of what you've said about his comments; your *best* work was "very, very good," which implies that he thinks he's seen your best work, whether or not this is actually true.) Conversely, professors may dock the grades of a favorite student because, no matter how brilliant the work produced, they feel the student hasn't yet reached full potential. (This is, oddly enough, the best sort of recommendation to receive toward grad school.) In a friend's case, for instance, the professor whose recommendation is likely being weighed heaviest by grad schools never gave her anything higher than an A- in his courses. However, there is no question he went to bat for her with every superlative in his arsenal. She received A-'s because she was under-performing with regard to how he felt she might, give more time/less stress, perform (he explicitly told her this!), and because she definitely hasn't got everything figured out (not by a long shot). This doesn't mean she didn't also produce the best work he's seen in years.

Can't say for sure, but I highly doubt it. There are a lot of different kinds of fellowships and grants, some of which are awarded by a campus-wide fellowship committee and some of which are purely department-based. From what I've read, the English department can only nominate a few students (possibly only one or two) for each of the campus-wide fellowships, but they also receive money from the University (Departmental Block Grant) to spend as they see fit. Depending on how many students they admit and how much money they receive, they divvy up the funding among the students they want the very, very most (who have not already been nominated for a University fellowship or who aren't receiving grant money from other sources). It's the only way they can compete for top talent against the Ivies which, apart from Harvard and Cornell (I think?), guarantee full funding to all admitted students. So when I suggested that they've only gotten around to notifying fellowship nominees, I meant campus-wide fellowship nominees. They likely have to meet an early internal deadline for those nominations, and therefore would make those decisions first. (Pure speculation, of course, but I think it makes sense.) Then they can sit back and decide on department-controlled funding. They'll find out which campus-wide nominations have turned into which awards in a couple weeks; according to the website(s), Departmental Block Grant decisions take longer. I also suspect that if any of their nominations fall through, they replace them with Block Grants, which means they might refrain from awarding all of their funding until they can make sure all their top choices are covered. (If the nominations all turn into awards, for example, they can then go ahead and offer funding to admitted students further down their list.) (Their website says they can typically offer fellowship-type funding to about half of the students they admit; slightly more than their expected entering class. I assume this applies even if they cut their cohort, because this year they have less money overall to spend.) HOWEVER, you also have to fill out the FAFSA, which may help you qualify for need-based funding (fellowships, as far as I can tell, are merit-based; there are also plenty of need-based options) and loans; also, TA-ships and Readerships (which include tuition/fee remission) become readily available to all non-funded students starting in the third year. Still a raw deal if you've been offered full funding for all years by another top program, but you also have to allow for the possibility of a fellowship-nominated/awarded student deciding not to attend Berkeley, which would free up those funds for the next person in line. I suppose, in the case of zero funding offered, it comes down to how much you love Berkeley's program (which, from your response, seems to be "not as much as you need guaranteed funding"). (I suppose you've realized that Duke and WUSTL aren't exactly second-rate options! Congrats on the acceptances!)

The Stanford interview request came via e-mail, mentioned that the department had read the applicant's file "with pleasure," and requested a twenty-minute interview with the Department Chair, Director of Graduate Admissions, and/or Director of Graduate Studies on either Monday, Tuesday, or Thursday of this coming week (February 16, 17, and 19, respectively). My (completely uninformed) guess for why Stanford is interviewing for the first time: they're cutting their cohort size this year and are struggling to whittle down acceptances/determine waitlist. Since they guarantee full funding to all admitted students and are hurting from blows to their endowment, they can't afford to make more offers than they can actually *afford*. Their initial "Your Application Is Complete" e-mail stated that they were hoping to have decisions made by early February, so clearly they've run into more of a snag with decision-making than they anticipated, at least with regard to this application season. They're likely using interviews to rank everyone on their shortlist and make final cuts. Regarding Berkeley, only phone calls have gone out, starting on Wednesday of last week. The tangible letters of admission likely haven't been mailed and, as was mentioned, the prospective student weekend isn't until mid-March (14-16 to be exact). My (somewhat informed) guess is that the calls that went out last week were to students nominated for fellowships. I suspect there will be a slew of acceptances early this week, followed shortly after by rejections. Don't hold me to that, of course... It could also be that they're cutting their cohort (California is in a serious, serious economic crisis

Rachel Yamagata's sophomore album ('Elephants... Teeth Sinking Into Heart'), which is... Heart-breaking. Absolutely genius in so many ways, but definitely not good optimistic fare. Also: PJ Harvey's 'White Chalk' (even more depressing) and The Smiths' 'Strangeways Here We Come', which is an old favorite and therefore mostly reassuring... :roll: I've also been playing through slow movements of solo Bach when feeling contemplative and/or fearful (but I like the Mahler suggestion).

Oh dear. My policy is to confirm with a prof well in advance of a program's deadline (usually right when I decide to apply) that he/she will be writing a letter, send an official notification/reminder one month before the deadline, and send a 'one week left' e-mail a week before. Lying to profs about a program's due dates is inadvisable because they can easily look up the official information for themselves (and often come across it through online recommendation set-ups or the recommendation forms they have to fill out). They will then hold themselves to the last possible date unless you've made a serious case for why they need to turn things in earlier. Professors are capable of just as much procrastination as their students, so unless a recommendation is still missing the day before a program's official deadline (if submitted online), you run the risk of needlessly souring a prof's goodwill toward you. Snail mail recs are more difficult to monitor because it takes schools so long to process their paper, but you have to trust in your professor's desire to aid your process. If that trust isn't there on your end (as mentioned in the above post), there's a good chance you've picked the wrong person. Ideally, you should be able to believe, beyond a doubt, in your professor's ability/willingness to come through, no matter how rocky things seem (you're likely not the first person he/she has written for, not by a long shot). Also, if you know your profs well (ie. you care as much about them as you're hoping they care about you), you should probably also know how they respond to deadlines. One of my absolute favorite profs either turns things in the instant they're due or well after. This is true of everything she does, both in her own work and in her work for students. The reason for this is that she's a crazy perfectionist and will hang on to things until the last possible minute, obsessively trying to make them better. Added external pressure makes her frustrated and angsty, so I was especially careful not to prod her, telling her simply when I planned to have my apps in and what the final deadlines were. She wrote me of her own volition to assure me that things would be submitted in time (she knows I know we're both procrastinators; it's one of the things we roll our eyes about when it comes to each other). And they were! Just barely, but that's just how she operates. Some parts of this fiasco are clearly beyond salvaging, but I'm glad you have other people to turn to who may be able to serve as pinch hitters. I can definitely sympathize with the panic and worry of waiting on scattered materials... (We all can!) Good luck with this. Just as professors shouldn't feel pressure to write for students they're uninterested in, you shouldn't feel pressured to ask a prof for a rec out of 'pure courtesy.' Go with your gut instinct next time.

In my experience, if a professor really cares about you, believes in your academic trajectory, and wants you to succeed, he or she will write a recommendation at the last minute if need be. Other requests might be refused if you're cutting it super close (requests for advice on your SOP or writing sample, for example), and the letter might not be as brilliant/perfect as it would be given more time, but a recommendation will be written. Professors (especially in the humanities...) understand things like procrastination (they are often extreme procrastinators themselves), and are able to separate their annoyance at having to do something last-minute from their endorsement of your work. 'Too busy' is almost definitely a polite way of saying 'my recommendation would hurt more than help' unless the procrastination has gotten well and truly out of hand (ie. you're making your request mere hours before a deadline). Even then, devoted profs will likely sacrifice their lunch/dinner/prep time in favor of letter-writing if they think you have no one else to turn to. No one wants to see a beloved student rejected from a program on the basis of a missing recommendation.