runonsentence

LOL. Ah. I grew up in Pennsylvania, so I understand. The state stores have awful selection. You might want to stick with sherry (and incidentally, not cream sherry, which is very sweet; you're going to want something drier): http://chowhound.cho...m/topics/619627 I've even just used cheap white wine before.

Glad we've helped so far! I'm not sure that one "type" of school will your best fit; I think you should look around for lit MAs that have rhet comp offerings and teacher training as well as schools that offer an MA in rhet comp and might allow you to take lit classes as well. The degree to which the program allows your to be interdisciplinary (or take on a secondary interest) is going to vary widely by individual program. If you do want to feel out both subfields, the only thing you might avoid are programs where the two are housed in different departments (e.g., Syracuse, MSU), as I'd imagine this would make it much more difficult to test out both your interests in your MA. (But I could be wrong—some of these programs might have "minor" options that would allow you to work with both departments.) The power dynamic between lit and rhet comp is a bit interesting; peruse some of that Bullock and Trimbauer anthology I suggested once (Politics of Writing Instruction) if you want to know a bit more....

About UNC: UNC used to award MAs "along the way," preferring not to admit students with MAs so they could train them from the ground up. (This was their practice when I applied, BA in hand, for the 2009 app season.) As of last application season (when I applied again, MA in progress!) they announced the end of the MA>PhD route. They probably still admit some BAs, but I think that they're now weighted more-in-favor of MAs. I get the impression that funding played a part in that decision, but it's an inference made through outside observation. About OSU: I've only applied to OSU for rhet comp —so I've no idea what it's like on the lit side—but I know that it's incredibly competitive for rhet comp. I had it on my list of "reach" schools last season. It's a great program with good support and tons of faculty. For rhet comp (and possibly also for the rest of their English programs) it's much easier to get into the PhD program if you apply to the MA out of undergrad. It's not formal "MA-along-the-way," but applicants from the MA program are at an advantage if they decide to stay on for the PhD—which a fair number of their MA students choose to do. I don't know much about Temple, apart from the fact that Eli Goldbenblatt directs comp there (though I grew up north of Philly and can tell you about the area). UT-Austin is insanely competitive for rhet comp, but I know nothing about the lit program. About MA vs. PhD: I faced similar uncertainties as an applicant three years ago—am I competitive enough or ready for a PhD?—and decided to both apply to PhDs that were BA-friendly and MA programs. I ended up only getting admitted to my MA program, and going to my MA program it turned out to be the best thing I could have done at the time. It helped me quell the doubts as to whether or not I truly wanted (or was ready for) a PhD, helped me find my subfield, and gave me the experience I needed to be a more competitive applicant. But in the interest of full disclosure, I was funded, so that made my decision easier. So my advice is to try for some PhD programs, but throw a couple of terminal MAs in there, too; if nothing else, your MA schools can be your "safety" schools, where you'll have a better chance of being admitted. EDIT/P.S.: If you play your cards right, also note that an MA need not slow down your progress to degree. Though I took two years to do my master's, the exposure I got to ideas and even some of the reading I did has given me a leg-up on my PhD and made it more likely that I'll actually finish in 4 years. Something else to chew on.

You could definitely use sake and get good results, but I actually meant cooking wine. It's easier to find, cheaper and has a lower alcohol content, so it's easier to use; you can buy it at the grocery store, in the same aisle as vinegar, often right next to it. Or at least, this is where I've found it whenever shopping for it in the States and in the UK...sounds like you're currently somewhere more exotic. I don't usually measure it (as with most ingredients up above, hah), but I probably use a few tablespoons. I'd start with maybe 2 tablespoons, and see how that tastes. Just make sure you give the wine a little time to burn off and mellow out in the dish—that is, if you decide to add more, don't do it the second before you take the pan off the heat.

Don't they also run some of the more complex equipment? I remember my partner getting calls from techs at his lab occasionally when he was running an experiment.

No, no: technicians are Chuck Norris.

Well, on one hand, Bartholomae is pretty influential in discourse, community, and literacy studies (I read his "Inventing the University" in my Teaching College Writing course). On the other hand, remember that he's just one researcher (make an analogy and ask if you can think of any literary scholars that would make or break another entire subfield or school of thought for you). Maybe it's a sign you won't like the rhet/comp field. Maybe it's a sign you just don't like his work or that portion of the field in particular. In either case, I'd suggest you keep reading, both inside and outside of rhet/comp: knowing what you definitely don't like is still one step closer to finding out what you do like. And remember, there's no rush to find out, either! Taking a break after undergrad to let ideas simmer and gain some perspective is a really good idea, I think. (A friend of mine who didn't is now burnt out after Year 1 of her PhD and contemplating a leave of absence.) And you might also find some generalist MA programs that have a variety of offerings, or lit programs with options for secondary interests, that would help you solidify a subfield interest. Don't get discouraged!

While YMMV, I'd be cautious to equate "no one brought up the fact that the candidate went to different schools as a good thing" with "no one would mind seeing two or more degrees from the same school." And again, I speak from the perspective of someone who is pursuing a PhD at the same institution where she completed an MA. Edited to add: There are certain cons I had to weigh and carefully consider, in my own case. One was that I'd have to do more work to expand my exposure to the field and stretch my current ways of thinking, by staying in the same program and working with the same faculty. The other is that it can be easy, when one is staying at the same school, to fall into the trap of thinking that X, Y, and Z aspects of one's program (really, even what is valued in one's program or the way one has been taught to think by one's program) are indicative of the field at large. Hiring committees aside, I recommend the OP also think through these cons as well once acceptances come out.

Yes--but I'd wager that few (if any) of these people have done their bachelor's (or another master's) degree at the same institution.

I can definitely understand the frustration with subfields within literature--it's rather an outdated model to ask PhDs to land neatly within a square marked "contemporary American literature," for instance. If idle chatter is to be believed, I've heard that the trend is for more programs to move away from this model (we're working to do that in our program, I know).

I think you've got it right when you say that you probably would need to contact people to find out about specific professors (their style of advising, what kinds of students they work with, whether or not they often work with grads, etc.). Find a current student or two, or even better, just ask faculty directly; it has the added bonus of making you memorable and engaged-looking when you apply. You'll probably have a better chance of getting a response, as well, when you ask more concrete questions like, "Hi, my name is so-and-so, and I'm interested in X school and in some of the work you do in particular. Do you work with many of the grad students doing work in Y area?" If you narrow down your pool enough and some of your schools are within driving distance, you could also consider visiting in person. I did this with two of my schools the first time around (the round in which I got into my MA program). I don't think this is a must, mind you, and some schools are more open to applicant visits than others. (Some prefer to only have accepted students visit, and that's when most will help defray some of the costs.) As to your CV question, I say go for it. I have a section at the end of my CV called "relevant work experience" where I list things like my freelance editing and my experience working for a publishing company. I've never heard much talk about honors theses, though this could be because I was an MA-holding applicant this last application cycle. They probably fall into the category of "things that can be talked up as evidence of an aptitude for graduate-level study and the kind of research one does in graduate school, but that aren't absolutely crucial to getting in."

I wonder, too, if this might be an easier conversation to have in person? You could take the tack, in that case, of approaching this from the role of an advisee seeking advice. Telling your DGS what you're facing, how tired you are, and how unsure you are that you'll be abe to work well when feeling this way, and then asking her/him what s/he thinks of time off, would make it less of an "I resign, I can't do this" request and more of a mutually agreed on best course of action.

Probably depends on several factors. The "time suck" component will depend on how active your school's committee is, and the worthwhile-ness will probably depend on what kinds of things your committee accomplishes. This might also depend on whether you're talking about a governance group for your program or university-wide. The latter will be more heavily lined with beauracratic red tape and probably require a greater time commitment. In the case of the former, I've found the grad student governance member group for my own department to be very worthwhile, though it has occasionally been a time suck. But I've really enjoyed being a part of a group with the power to make positive changes for the department—in the past two years, for instance, our group has proposed (and had faculty approve) a new advisor/mentorship system and successfully lobbied for having the entire year's (tentative) course schedule released every summer so that PhDs can carefully plan their coursework and maintain a good time to degree. It's been a good chance to get to know faculty better, as well. The university-wide governance at my school has also had some successes in the same span of time, but they're much harder fought for. (Think of comparing a small-town council to a state governance, for instance.) But it would, as you mention, provide even better chances to network with grad peers and with university administration.

KitKat is right, your schools will see all of your scores. The only way to "cancel" your scores is to elect not to have your scores recorded when you are finished taking the exam. (But again, you don't get to know what your score is before you decide to cancel it.) I wasn't quite sure from your post whether you've taken the exam before or not... But, if you have and you thought your scores were low—and thought you could do better retaking it—it's still worth it to try retaking the exam. Although schools will see all of your scores on the ETS report, they'll use your best scores when calculating whether you meet any university admission minimums or cutoffs for funding. Preparation isn't the only reason people have trouble with the exam, and adcoms know how capricious the experience of taking the GRE can be.

(I'm away from my cookbook at the moment, but here's some general advice.) Fried rice is easy to prepare, but the key to giving it that authentic flavor you're looking for is the kind oil and flavoring you use. Sesame oil and rice wine are a must if you're looking to replicate a Chinese restaurant/takeout. (Though I also get good results using sesame oil and sherry cooking wine instead of rice wine.) Fresh ginger also adds wonders. I use refried rice like I do soups: it's a great way to use up leftover vegetables. So the ingredients I use varies, but if I usually always include 1 onion, some bell pepper, and broccoli. I also often use those frozen vegetable packs of "mixed vegetables" (green beans, carrots, peas, corn); just rinse them so they're not clumped together or icy and set aside before you start cooking. Sometimes I use shrimp as well. Also, important for anyone who hasn't made this before: your rice MUST be leftover rice! Otherwise it will have too much moisture and stick to the pan. You'll want about 2 or 3 cups of rice. Here's what I roughly do when I prepare my fried rice: - Heat about 1 TB of neutral oil (veg, canola, or grapeseed) over medium-high heat - Sautee onion and any other veggies that need more time (like bell peppers and broccoli) - Add about 2 cloves or garlic (or more/less to taste) and about 1TB fresh ginger (also more/less to taste); let sautee for 1 min--too much longer and it loses flavor! - Add more oil to the pan (1-2 TB), then start adding your rice, a little at a time. I usually unclump it by hand as I'm adding it in. - Add 1-2 eggs. (You can either scramble and then add to pan, or just make a well in the middle and beat them right in the pan.) It's up to you whether you want your eggs to stay separated, or whether you want them to get incorporated into the rice (I prefer the latter). - Add soy sauce and rice wine (ideally, or use cooking sherry). If I'm using frozen vegetables, I add them in now. Salt and pepper to taste. Cook and stir/toss for another few minutes. - Add about 1TB sesame oil

Since the thread's been bumped.... My main issue with recording instead of taking notes is that recording is a passive method of listening. Knowing that one has the tape of the session (even though one will never actually have the time to back and listen through it) doesn't encourage one to pay attention and listen as actively as someone who is taking notes. (There are lots of journalists out there who don't record interviews for this very reason.) It's the act of listening, appropriating the knowledge into one's own words, and writing it down that helps reinforce information. You lose that if you rely on recording.

Yes, contacting current students is a must! Speaking as a current student, I know I'm always happy to help guide a prospective student who contacts me. And I'd even go so far as to say, once acceptances start coming out, you shouldn't consider attending a school unless you've had a chance to speak with current grads. Especially ones you contact on your own (not ones asked to contact you and talk up the program)—they can give you the nitty gritty.

Do not feed the troll.

The only thing you need to worry about with your quant scores is whether or not you meet any university-wide minimums/cut-offs. As long as you can do that, you shouldn't waste time studying algebra and geometry, since adcoms will only be interested in the verbal section. So yes, I'd recommend you only pay for a class on the verbal section. You could perhaps spend a bit of time studying for the math section on your own, but I wouldn't waste money prepping for it through Kaplan.

Not sure, PhDPharmacist; in our field, both the GRE and GPA are likely the least important part of the applicant's package. The writing sample, SoP and LoRs are most important. I'd tentatively suggest that the same might go for you. Perhaps a low GPA could be balanced by a high GRE, but really it's probably other components of your package that would outweigh both.

There are practice tests in some of the print study books published out there, though I'm not sure how accurate they are at indicating your score.

From what I understand (having a partner in the lab sciences), it's a bit different from the sciences in that faculty use grant money they've earned for the lab to take on new graduate students. Contacting POIs in the sciences is about finding out if they have the money, available projects, space, etc. to take on a new student. Whereas in the humanities, it's not so much "can you take on a grad student" as much as it is seeing if s/he is interested in the work you do (and might one day want to advise you and work with you on your dissertation).

More then three letters: you'll find differing opinions on this, I think. There are people who will tell you that even though schools ask for three, they would read four if you sent them. There are others who will tell you that sending extra materials that the committee didn't ask for is a great way to piss them off when they're trying to read stacks and stacks of applications. I went with the latter advice, even though I was in a tough spot—I found out that one of my letter writers had done a last-minute, less than stellar job on her LoRs for me (and of course, I only discovered this after I'd had them all mailed out). I didn't want to risk annoying a committee, and my other two writers assured me that their letters were good and the rest of my packet was solid. It's possible that some of my adcoms wouldn't have minded a fourth letter, but sending three letters was, I thought, the better thing to do.

If you've done two degrees at SC already, I'd definitely lean towards NJIT. Two degrees at the same place can be debated (I'm doing that myself), but three is too much.

Ah thank you for posting, I'd completely forgotten about the RSA review! (Which, incidentally, they need to update soon!)