teaganc

There is no ethical dilemma in leaving after two years if, in their offer, they tell you this is an option! I say, go for it. This year was a tough one for PhD applications, and all signs point towards next year being even harder. Who knows what the 2011-2012 application season holds? You can always apply for PhD programs while you are still at your MS program, and if you get a better offer, leave--otherwise, stay.

Truly, I owe my success to decision monkey. ...but seriously, I don't know how that even happened. I guess I should really stop spending so much time on the internet.

fuzzylogician- Do you feel like a total old person sometimes? Because I wanted to sigh, then say exactly what you just said, and in my mind it was immediately followed with, "And you kids get off my lawn!"

This. I've also had professors who were seriously anti-theory, and taken courses on very non-canonical texts outside of my research interests. For both cases, if I'm not doing anything with the text other than a class discussion, I will never read it multiple times. It's just not necessary. In fact, for classes like this, I've read the books the summer before and not read them in class, and had no trouble with it. Even books that I am writing a paper on, I will often take notes during the first read and then go back and refer to passages that I noted, but not re-read the entire book again.

Ok, so at first I was confused, and then annoyed, but now I get it. There is no way that mintageofman is a real person. There just isn't. They are so unbelievably ridiculous and moronic to exist in real life. It's a really, really weird way to troll a forum, but it explains the low post count, lashing out at people for giving advice, calling everyone else a troll (HA at calm but somewhat critical advice being called "internet flame war style retorts"), and freaking out like crazy (and then complaining that it's impossible to have a humane and calm discussion!). No one could actually get into top colleges being so irrational or so completely lacking in interpersonal skills. I'm just going to laugh at the fact that, in the same sentence, I was thanked for my thoughtful advice and also called a forum troll tirade, and then place this user on my "foe" list so I don't have to read his troll-y posts anymore.

If it's a one-year program, and you are completely set against staying at BU for your PhD (I'm not really sure why, if you are willing to do your MA there?), I would take a year off between your MA and your PhD. Use that year to apply AFTER your MA is finished with, and really put together kickass PhD applications. Get recs from your MA program (though I'm sure some could be from your BA, people in your MA will be able to say how you actually did in graduate school). I don't know why you can't "handle" another gap year, but if you go straight through, you are putting yourself at a serious disadvantage. You will essentially have the same application profile as you did this year, but you will be judged to a higher standard as an applicant with an MA. You get the negatives of having an MA (some programs prefer you not do this, all programs expect your work to be at a higher level and basically perfect grades in your MA), without any of the positives.

Umm, hello attitude. Mintageofman, meet mouthofgifthorse. You've apparently posted this thread (or a slight variation of it) three times over 2 months. Each time, you want someone to choose not only your future school, but your future field. You obfuscate an understandable question (which program should I choose?) with a series of questions that you should not only know the answers of, but provide a general pro-con (in your opinion) if you want advice. Have you read any of the other posts on this website asking for advice like this? They usually go like this: I was accepted to [school A] and [school B]. School A is higher ranked, but School B is really nice [or whatever]. Here are the rest of what I think about each program. Also, here is the funding situation at each school. I want to have [this career], but the degrees are in two separate fields; which program should I attend to have that career? Can you see how you've not only left out all sorts of vital information? And what's worse, you've made it seem like you applied to a bunch of random schools based on who knows what and then, having somehow garnered offers, want the internet to do the research you should have done before you ever hit "submit" on those applications? And then, when people suggest the kind of information we would need, and even how to get the information necessary to make such decisions, you go all ungrateful-jerk-face on us? No, it's not a crime to do so... but it is damn annoying.

While this is potentially true, I've always found that the second (or even third) reading of a book is much more useful than the first. Now maybe you just want to get through your courses with the minimal amount of reading (and honestly, I'm not saying this is bad, as long as you succeed in the course and it's not in your area of concentration), in which case a second reading is just a waste of time.

The complaints seem like they are directed towards the arts and humanities, but essentially all of the solutions seem to be directed towards involving the sciences, which aren't the ones with the problems he describes, and eliminating the arts and humanities, which are. Creating a problem-solving based system (like the idiotic "Water" as a doctoral concentration) eliminates the need for all arts and humanities, as generally these programs do not solve problems (except maybe the ones they create). What am I going to do, study the literature of water? I mean, sure, I could, but it wouldn't help solve water-based problems. Furthermore, if "Water" is dissolved as a concentration in 7 years, it is presumably because it has been solved. If it's been solved, what will all the "Water" majors do? They won't be able to find jobs in academia OR industry; there aren't "water" problems any more, and they aren't specialized enough to start focusing on other issues. Presumably, enacting the "water" solutions involve a lot more manual labor/manufacturing/farming/chemical processing etc. etc. than big, overarching thinking about "water."

Why would you apply to schools without being aware of their quality? Why would you apply in fields you are unfamiliar with or that you can't decide between? And if you want other opinions, you should really put what you want to do with the degree, or no one can offer useful advice. Personally, I would go with CMU; the tuition isn't much cheaper, but COL is.

This is certainly true; however, to study at an American university, you need a baseline level of English competency. While that baseline may or may not be lower for Comp Lit v. English, it is certainly higher for Comp Lit than for just about any other non-Literature degree you can study. Here, I think you are confusing what is necessary for what is sufficient; it is necessary that international students score a 30 on the TOEFL, but that does not mean it is sufficient for either admission or success in the program. Most universities also require a 3.0 for admission, but that does not mean that all students with higher than a 3.0 will be admitted, nor that all students who were capable of earning a 3.0 in undergrad are capable of succeeding in an academically rigorous grad program. Furthermore, I don't know what a score of 30 even means, since it's out of 120. Do they mean a 30 on each section--a perfect score? They can't mean just a 30, because that would be such a terrible score as to be essentially meaningless (the lowest category of scores for each section). I generally agree with sonofcioran that, from what you've presented, you do not make an ideal candidate. Furthermore, if you do not intend to study in English, nor publish in English, perhaps getting a PhD in Turkey makes a lot more sense than applying to US programs. (If you do intend to study/publish in English, the various comments about necessary English skills in this thread obviously apply). Either way, I think that you are not currently in any position to apply to Comp Lit PhD programs, in any country. However, should you gain admissions to a MA program, and succeed in that program well beyond the average student (i.e. stand out in the top 5% at least of your class), this would be sufficient to increase your GPA and secure you appropriate LORs for applying to PhD programs in Turkey or the US (or somewhere else). Outside of that, I think you shouldn't concentrate on anything else (like learning more languages) but improving your English to the level of near-native fluency.

B, hands down. Just because you will spend a lot of time on campus doesn't mean you should freeze your ass off on the way to school every winter at school A, or be bored on the nights you want to take off from school work and doing something fun. All PhD work and no fun burns out students.

This. Though I would try to talk to a few of the current students and see if they really all "always able to secure funding." If current students agree that securing funding after a year is essentially a formality, go for it.

I don't understand what is pessimist about that email, to begin with. Your grades would have to be excellent, and you would need great LORs, and obviously you need more research experience than enthusiasm for literature. It also didn't mention anything about you wanted to study in Turkey, so I don't know where you got the idea that your intentions confused this person. A lot of international students apply to US PhD programs with a MA from their country, so that doesn't seem that odd. As far as learning more languages, while it probably wouldn't hurt to have more languages, chances are you could be spending that time actually learning about literature, theory, etc. Most people get a BA in lit before they even enter a MA program, so you are starting at a disadvantage. GPA-wise, 3.5 is way too low to be your goal for graduate school. In many graduate programs (in the US) less than an A in a course denotes that you've seriously done something wrong or failed to grasp the material.

Nothing. Just like there is nothing arrogant about wanting to win the Nobel Peace Prize. But saying, "Why do people even bother to get a PhD if they aren't going to fulfill my personal dreams" is off-putting, at a minimum. Personally, I would love to teach at a medium to large state school with a focus on teaching because I loved that experience and the department as an undergrad. It's insulting to hear someone ask why I would even bother getting a PhD if that was all I wanted to do with my life. It was good enough for my professors, and they made a genuine impact on me as a student while publishing their own research. I'm sorry if that goal is too lowly for you to understand. I mean, this. Come on! I'm not saying I want to get a PhD and work at Walmart, for godsake. And there are lots of non-Ivy/R1 schools that are in great locations, (and some great schools in crappy locations) so I'm not sure what location has to do with anything. No one is trying to "make [you] feel" arrogant--believe me, you don't need us for that! So don't try to belittle others for wanting what they want.

This situation sucks, undoubtedly, but a few things jumped out: I'm not saying that you wouldn't be an excellent candidate for this program, but I do wonder at how much emphasis you put on other people as part of your application. Why should it matter if someone who was related to you taught at this school? You're not that person, and generally, "being a good PhD student/scholar" isn't a proven genetic trait, right? And while bad LORs might keep you out, I'm not sure good LORs give you more than a boost in general--that is to say, they don't get you in. Maybe the program understands your pedigree, so to speak, but wonders if you can stand on your own feet? I'm not saying you can't! Not even a little. But if I were on an adcom, and your packet emphasized your connections rather than your abilities, I would wonder.

For academia, I think they range from "mostly pointless but maybe cool" to "completely and utterly pointless," but for business, I think they make more sense. A grad certificate in the area you want to work really helps a MBA stand out, in my opinion, though probably work experience means more still. As far as distance learning, as long as your certificate is from a brick-and-mortar school, I don't see why you would ever need to tell anyone/put on your resume that your certificate was from the online part of the school.

I second this; linux generally runs well on desktops, but a lot of the drivers for laptops are much more difficult to set up, if they even exist. Dell and HP both sell a few laps pre-installed with linux (and so does ASUS, ACER, and a number of other places), and I would say to never, ever run linux on a laptop unless the laptop came with linux/drivers or you are a serious computer enthusiast/programmer. This is doubly true of tablets or anything else with crazy driver requirements. I also love the dual-boot option (works much better than wine, in my opinion) but again, really only on a desktop or a laptop that came with linux already. Also seconded for anything that came with a windows OS; a nice clean fresh install does wonders, even for a monster like vista.

You've already had personal contact with professors at each school. Why not ask them?

I don't know anything about the funding situation at Drexel, but I just wanted to say that Philadelphia is probably one of the cheapest cities in America. Obviously you will pay less if you live somewhere very rural, but rent in Philly is very cheap, food is cheap, gas is reasonably cheap, etc. It's cheaper than NYC, Boston, Washington DC, Chicago, just about every single place in California, and lots of other comparably sized cities.

Stop freaking out. Take a vacation or something.

See, so few scientists these days are willing to sit in a high-backed chair behind a giant desk, stroking a fluffy white cat and manically laughing about the destruction of humanity.

I vote Purdue.

I took a few classes at a local community college to be able to pass a second language requirement (though for the first, I had minored in a language in undergrad, and just went into the test assuming I'd pass). The classes were cheap and though they were reasonably boring, at least I was able to finish 8 credits in one summer.

I have an iMac, and am not a "mac snob" (my other computer is an XPS running Ubuntu, and my laptop runs Vista). Honestly, my mac is my favorite computer. Yes, they are generally more expensive, but OS X is a very intuitive OS, and I really like the video/photo editing options. I have one of the newer mac keyboards, which is essentially a notebook keyboard without the notebook, and I've found it perfectly study and comfortable. The keys are small height-wise, so you don't have to push them down as far as you might with an older keyboard, but they still have a nice amount of resistance and a pleasant, muted keystroke sound.