RockDenali

Thanks for the ego boost Nice to know I got better GRE scores than a Yale admit . . . (Editied out something that sounded meaner than I meant it to.)

I think he was just making a point . . . look at in context of "the prick teacher you had." And you certainly must be going through a readjustment to make such an egregious grammar error in that sentence. Even in an online forum, I don't expect that from a Vandy admit!!

Depends on the type of PhD program . . . If it's geared toward technical communication, do an analysis of a technical or scientific document. I'm pretty sure I got into Minnesota (Rhetoric and Scientific/Technical Communication) because of my writing sample: social semiotic analysis of BP.com during the clusterfuck in the Gulf, analyzing structures of photographs, videos, website design, and press releases. However, if it's a program geared more toward composition, do a paper on composition theory. If it's geared toward cultural rhetoric, do a paper like Snappysorbet's. For Syracuse (Composition and Cultural Rhetoric), I submitted the aforementioned paper and a shorter paper I had delivered at a conference: a critique of the Sophistic, postmodern view of "the rhetorical community" with help from Chantal Mouffe (political theory), and Kenneth Burke and Richard Weaver (20th century rhetorical theory). In other words . . . it'd better be rhet/comp related! But draw on your strengths as a science major, too. Some type of rhetorical analysis of a scientific text is always fascinating.

Ah, got it. It does seem that a lot of the complaints I hear are from first-years or recent admits (probably because that's the group I'm in, too). I'm sure jumping into doctorate work AND teaching at the same time can be pretty scary. I'm glad I got my feet wet teaching at the MA level . . .

Lol. Just lookin out. And I'm probably biased against So Cal because I'm sick of living here. So also get the opinions of current students when you come visit. They will probably be less doom and gloom

This question is not meant to be rude. It's an honest question from someone who has never done literature work . . . Why are so many lit folk adverse to teaching? Many I talk to are up-front about not enjoying teaching. I understand this attitude from chemical engineering students who just want to get back to their patent-potential research. But I thought we in the humanities receive most of our passion from human interaction . . . The best part of academia, in my opinion, is teaching.

UCs, like Cal States, are constantly trying to figure out what they can afford and what they cannot. Our state is in a financial mess. Each year, universities are wondering "What can we keep, and what can we shrink, and what must we cut?" Undergraduate costs for a UC are at around 11,000/year. That's up more than 50 percent in the past 5 years or so. Not sure of the exact statistics, but it's bad. Sorry to harp on this, and if UCLA is a top choice, then by all means, go for it! But I know very few people from California who are staying in California for academic study. Brown is cutting across the board, including more cuts to higher ed, and there is very little popular support for the humanities in higher education. (At the Cal State nearest me, the art and philosophy programs were just chopped.) Like Sarandipity said, the cost of living alone makes it exceedingly difficult to live alone; whoever tells you otherwise is either very lucky, knows a landlord, or lived here 10 years ago. Leaves very little room for unexpected expenses, like traffic tickets from our over-zealous Nazi cops. I did a master's at a Cal State because only they offer full rhetoric programs. Accepted with 2 years as a TA, full tuition waiver, small stipend. In year 2, budget crisis reached a crux, and they pulled out tuition waiver and lowered our stipend to the point where half of it went back to the school for tuition and fees. Many Cal States have now taken away tuition waivers for TAs, GAs, and RAs. Of course, Cal States and UCs are a world apart, but the budget crisis they are dealing with is the same. I know I would not feel comfortable pursuing my PhD at UC Irvine even though they have some great rhetoric faculty. Just a word of warning. I'm sure some people on here will defend L.A.. Don't get me wrong, it's a great place to live. Where else can you ski, surf, and rock climb all in the same day? But it comes at a price, and it's a price I know I personally don't want to pay anymore. (Girlfriend lost her job this year as a K-12 teacher. This just underscores what I mean.) At best, Cali is in for some rough years. At worst, it's on its way to being a failed state. (Think I'm kidding? Drive east from L.A. for about an hour into the Inland Empire and visit the sprawling foreclosure signs.) Just some things to consider before you commit yourself to the good will of the state for pay.

True, true. But, as far as I've seen, Enos' rhetoric survery included those schools that offer an English PhD with a rhet/comp concentration: still not a lot of departments compared to literature departments. And even at those departments that offer a concentration, I would imagine the number of students pursuing said concentration would be under 25%. But we shall see what the next 5-7 years brings . . . Let me be optimistic! And I doubt hiring committees care much about the differences between a rhet/comp concentration and a straight rhet/comp degree. Both programs, like you mentioned, can be quite strong.

Congratulations, Lyoness!! Go Gophers!

Mos def. Good advice across the board. To the UCLA-bound: it's more than doable as long as you budget accordingly!

This is always a possibility, but from what I've researched, the number of applicants to rhetoric programs is still MUCH MUCH MUCH lower than the number of literature or education applicants. Check out Richard Enos's 2007 survey of the field. There are only, what, 30 or so rhet/comp doctoral programs in the nation? And most of these programs have been good about not upping the number of acceptances along with the number of applications. Hopefully it stays that way!

Minnesota's program is (in my opinion) one of the best for rhetoric and scientific communication . . . As far as I know, the program is the only one that will actually give you a degree that has "Rhetoric and Scientific and Technical Communication" printed on it And, in my experience in the rhetoric field (accepted to Minnesota's RSTC program), having a background in science is by no-means a bad thing. It can even be a plus! If you can take a few rhetoric or writing classes to supplement a B.S., you'll be golden for getting into a rhetoric program. At last year's Rhetoric Society of America conference, I met several people who had come from a science background and been accepted into a PhD program without much experience in rhetoric/composition. One woman had actually switched from a PhD in biology to a PhD in rhetoric! Check out Minnesota, Purdue, U of Washington, and Penn State. Also, check out work by Alan Gross, Michael Halliday, and Jeanne Fahnestock. Oh, and re: job market? As of now (could always change), most rhetoric programs have a near 100% placement rate for PhDs . . . and yes, that's tenure-track placement! By far, the rhet/comp route is more lucrative than literature . . . But you gotta really love rhetoric/composition! So if you're truly interested in how writing is used and how to use writing in all aspects of the modern world, you'll be a great candidate regardless of background.

Seconded. Don't even think about living in L.A. on your own as a graduate student. But Sarandipity, you're also forgetting cost of gas! More expensive than most places in the nation, and, unless you don't mind staying put near campus, everywhere in L.A. requires driving. Gah. This is why I applied out of state . . . Can't wait to say goodbye to the mid-city drive forever . . .

Perennially beautiful weather, eh . . . ? I guess I lived in a different San Francisco . . . But congrats on the acceptance!!

For what it's worth . . . my friend got into King's College London this year as a medievalist (MA, taught programme) with a mediocre GPA (3.3), one decent recommendation (from a prof who I'm sure is unknown in the field) and one super solid recommendation. But this is King's, not UCL, and I think he would admit, as the poster above said, that UK universities love charging American students ZU VIEL GELD $$$ . . .

Guilty as charged. I didn't see that the poster was from the UK; however, given the handle, I probably should have caught that! My apologies. So I'd say my two cents just applies to us Yanks Are British professors famously reserved or something?

If you don't trust a professor to write a letter that makes you look like Jesus Christ on a bullet, then you probably should not have asked that professor in the first place. Just my two cents.

I couldn't find the offending posts. What did they say against Duke? . . . Looking at their current grad students, it seems like 75% from elite schools, 25% from smaller schools. About right for a top-10 literature program, no? I mean, remember, most of the profs there are from elite schools, too. They take care of their own. Not really elitism, in my opinion; just the way things work. But I think the most valuable lesson we all learned was that GPA, GRE, and CV-decoration doesn't mean a whole lot!

Nice job on the Kilimanjaro ascent! No, I have not climbed Denali. I'm from Los Angeles. It's going down this summer, though! Climbed Shasta and Hood two summers ago. Climbed the east face of Whitney last summer. All in preparation for this Alaska trip. Always nice to meet a fellow climber. I've met several through my academic studies. Something about climbing and research must go hand-in-hand . . . Good luck on your apps! Still hope for you for Duke . . . . But remember, you don't need 10 acceptances, just 1! And, of course, just remember that many Duke PhDs now work alongside PhDs from . . . well, you get the idea

Bah. Spoke too soon. See, this is why you don't speculate . . . ! Rejected via form email. Oh well, it was expected. My background is rhet/comp, and all my lit apps were written from that angle. Mostly applied out of curiosity, to see if literature and rhetoric aren't compatible after all . . . . Good luck to the rest of you!!! Oh, and stats just for those of you still wondering: 720 Verbal 560 Quant 5.5 Analytic BA and MA from top-10 Western regional univs (USNWR) 3 national conferences 6 publications, including a short story alongside David Foster Wallace, published post-death But again, rhet/comp guy, not lit guy.

My last name starts with "L" and, like I said, I still have heard nothing. So, unless they are very, very slow, I think we are beyond the name-order stage. But who the hell knows? I just asked a prof and she said a long wait after the first round of acceptances and rejections means waitlisted or waitlisted for funding . . .

I've started checking my spam folder just in case . . . but too many of those emails begin with the word "dick" which looks like "duke" every time, so I've stopped doing this.

I haven't heard anything from Duke either . . . and now you just got my hopes up, darn you But yes, that sounds like good advice you got. The first two acceptances I've received, I was VERY careful to present myself in a particular light. SOP, letters, writing sample . . . all matched in regard to interests and goals. I assume that if you say you want to study X and you send in a writing sample about Y and your recs say you are good at Z, then it's difficult to see what kind of potential you have as a scholar. I suppose we should take what they say at face value: "fit" is much more important than GRE and GPA.

After watching how acceptances and rejections get posted on here, I've decided that Adcomms function the same way a literary magazine does. I worked on one a few years back, and basically we would do rounds. After even a brief read-through, we knew which stories we would DEFINITELY accept and which stories we would DEFINITELY reject. So we would notify those people early, for better or worse. Then it was a matter of further reading, debate, and more and more rounds. So small batches of acceptances and rejections would get sent out every few days. This seems to correspond to how most graduate programs send out their acceptances and rejections: in short bursts of good and bad news. Kinda like getting picked for dodge ball, too. So, if you haven't been officially rejected or accepted, it means you weren't a SHOE-IN but nor were you a HELL NO. You're in the next round is all . . . Of course, I could be way off base about all of this

Twin Cities is awesome. All the cultural perks of a big city but with plenty of Minnesota-nice to keep things friendly. Great public transportation, great restaurants, great football. The campus itself is gorgeous and relatively easy to navigate. Hmm . . . maybe I'll go on Visitation Day after all . . . (I'm from L.A., so the cost of living is way LESS than what I'm used to . . .) From what I've researched, Minnesota is more 'rhetoric' and Syracuse is more 'composition.' I'd love to pursue a dissertation in the rhetoric of science, so Minnesota's program is obviously better suited for that. However, Syracuse has a new prof who does work in transnational writing practices, which I'd also love to pursue. Syracuse's program is housed in the writing center and its SOLE focus is the PhD program. On one hand, that means an excellent student/faculty ratio and a small, tight community of scholars; on the other hand, it means I won't really get training in how to navigate the kind of complex department politics I'll likely confront in the future. So we'll see . . . What are your research interests? Who is your advisor at Minnesota? Is Minnesota one of your top choices? It's one of mine for sure. Glad we got the acceptances so early. Now if I get 8 rejections in a row, I won't be so sad!