surefire

This belongs in the "Sh*t people say when you're applying to grad school" thread. All of my closest family and friends have just started defaulting to this phrase.

I hope that this research proves that more research is needed. (Voice inside: "Can I have money to keep researching this?")

I've got two apps pending with a prestigious Canadian school. I had myself pretty convinced that I was probably going to get rejected and ppfft! whatever, I don't want to go there anyway. Then I had a REALLLY positive phone interview with a POI from one department... and I thought, well what if...? Then I got an e-mail from the OTHER department with the subject line "Welcome to the Department of _______..." When I opened it, the full subject line read: "Welcome to the Department of ______'s Seminar Series Listserv", which I applied to be added to recently on the advice of the department head that I met last month. Yeah, had a heart attack in spite of myself. I am actually flummoxed by these feelings, I really thought that I'd put the prospect of this school out of my mind.

I actually took a gap year and worked in an industrial kitchen before going to do my MA; it was one of the best years of my life and I would make the decision again in a heartbeat. There are a litany of reasons why this was the best decision for me. I was on a merit-based scholarship through my undergrad that covered my tuition. This was clearly awesome, but I still needed to get a job to cover the living expenses. I picked up work at a local cajun/french restaurant and worked there through the entirety of my BA. I attended classes by day and worked nights; there was little procrastination because there was simply no margin for dicking around. The job helped me to feel connected to both my academic and local communities and I discovered a treasure trove of artists and musicians and activists and thinkers in both camps. I articuated theory and stretched my mental faculties in class and then went to the kitchen dressed like a pirate, swearing like a sailor and completing the purposeful, stressful, satisfying task of just FEEDING people. I felt like a total bad ass. In the last year of my BA, I knew that I wanted grad school, but I also knew that my undergrad didn't have a lot of graduate level offerings, so I would have to leave the institution and the city. I really didn't have time to do the research and applications and the plotting that would be required to make an informed decision about where I wanted to go. So I stayed for a year. And it was awesome. I spent more time in the kitchen, where I started dating one of my co-workers (we're engaged now). I had grown close to a lot of the chefs, we had sweat and bled and screamed in the kitchens together and that kind of proves a quick catalyst for bonding. Now that I wasn't in school, we could hang out after hours and I spent many nights getting to know the unique backrounds of these kitchen mercenaries (it's all very Down and Out in Paris, and very Kitchen Confidential, if anyone gets those references). I spent more time at ALL of the things that I didn't have time for in my undergrad; if my friend had a gallery opening/rock show/poetry slam I was THERE, cheerleading and soaking it in. I read ALL of the fun things I had never gotten around to. I stayed up late. I savoured cups of coffee and tried to cycle everywhere because, hey, I wasn't in a hurry. I got caught up on all the movies and music. I accepted all invitations for outings and engagements. I made people care packages just because. I grew an herb garden and learned how to play chess. I volunteered EVERYWHERE; where before I had always made small offerings of support to organizations, now I had actual TIME to give (these activities doubled as great CV-builders). I was able to spend the appropriate amount of time researching and applying to graduate school, the kind of time that the process demands that I wasn't in a place to spare during the last year of my BA. I found a program that I adored, and I got in. I have to say, even though I had a great time during that gap year, I missed school pretty quickly (which, to me, served as an affirmation that I was meant to return). Regardless, because the application process is so lengthy, the prospect of grad school never seemed far from my mind, and the year went quickly. I was able to leave the city for a new educational endeavour, refreshed and satisfied that I had squeezed every ounce of fun out of my job and undergrad community. That's my experience! I'm actually on, what I guess you would call, an additional gap period. I finished the MA and decided to work a "grown up" job for a little while before applying for the PhD. The decision this time around was largely about getting familiar with my options and capacities - I wanted to explore my avenues so that I could never say that I didn't try those routes. I didn't go back to the kitchen, though i was tempted. I've since held contracts with the private sector, government and the non-profit realm. This has led me to a discovery that resembles the one I made during the first gap year: that academia is where I want to be. I hope that you figure out what's right for you, and that the road that gets you there treats you kindly.

AH! That is sublime! SO funny! I did nearly the same thing with a next-to-last draft of my MA thesis, where I had a footnote that read "YOU HAVE A CITATION FOR THIS RIGHT?!" And my supervisor highlighted it and wrote: "You had better". Three cheers for professor humour!

Toooootally depends. Not just on a school by school basis, but program by program. For my MA application cycle: The deadline for the program I applied to at York was February 1st, I got the acceptance call the 1st week of March (online status changed that day, got the app package in the mail the next week). Though the decison was rendered in March, I thought that was a pretty impressive turn-around. I mean, I didn't hear back from U of T until mid-April (and their deadline had been in early January... AND it was a rejection!) My experience on a Canadian admission commttee went like this (for a program that did not do rolling admits): - 2 weeks after the deadline: apps are done being assembled and are placed in front of committee - 2 weeks later: addcomm has come up with a ranked list of applicants, makes recommendation for admits. - 1 week later: after conferring with available funding/spots available, offers start rolling out. Again, context varies all over the place. It stands to reason that the speedier replies would take the form of offers of admission; but as illustrated by my experience with U of T, I wouldn't hold to that as a rule.

What is the phrasing pertaining to the SOP? Does it say 1000 words? 1000 is generally thought to be about two pages. Edit that thing until it is two pages WITH SIZE 12 FONT! I understand that you've made the font size 11 so it doesn't look longer, but you need to trust what that apprehension indicates... that is, that it's too long. General formatting is 1" margins all around, size 12 font, double-space. You should default to that where there are no alternative stipulations. I've mentioned this elsewhere. I've been on an admissions committee. finknottle is right to point out that words are not counted by the adcomm; so if the guidelines said 1000 words and a paper was 1027, but still on two pages AND within the general formatting guidelines I've stipulated above, I wouldn't notice. However, I DID notice if someone had done any of the following: -messed with the margins - messed with the line spacing - messed with the font Here's the thing, adcomms look at hundreds of these things, when there are a few that diverge, it's noticeable. I did not bounce anyone outright for going over the limit, there wasn't a "over the limit SOP - reject!" application pile. However, ones that were over the limit (and worse, those over the limit that tries to hide it in a sneaky way) were irritating (also, hard on the eyes). After reading SO MANY other SOPs, when you get to an over-limit one, you CAN'T HELP but think: who is this applicant who can't follow instructions, who thinks that they deserve more space and more of my time than other applicants. That was the biggest part for me: the committee takes great pains with guidelines to try and ensure that EVERY applicant gets a fair shake, when someone tries to alter the parameters of the application, it feels like they don't respect the committee, the process, or other applicants. It annoyed me, and WHY would you want an adcomm to be annoyed when reading your SOP, it's not a good introduction and it's just not worth it. Edit the SOP. Every one else is performing in the alotted space, you can as well. Good news for you here. Every line counts right? If you need that first line, (and IF there are no specific stipulations as to format) then just inbed the title/your name/page number in a header. That's what I did for mine. It ensures that your info is there, within generally acceptable formatting, but saves you space and is not obnoxious/hard to read. I know that this was kind of a bad news/good news post, and probably not what you wanted to hear. But it's honest. You can totally do this, and when you get it within the 1000-word range, it's going to feel awesome; and when you send it in, you won't give yourself an ulcer worrying that you've miffed the committee. Good luck!

Thanks for the feedback fuzzylogician! To the question of whether or not I'm overthinking this... Yes, I would concede that that is certainly a possibility! The program's application webpage specifies that the contents of the application include transcripts/GRE/SoP and "Writing Sample: A paper (12-25 pages, including summary) which the student feels represents his or her best work must be uploaded." Not a lot of detail... I spoke with a friend of mine applying for the same program, and she said that she just wrote a page on the content of the sample; she admitted that she liked my idea better to use my abstract as a thesis summary and then just a sentence or two on the role of the chapters that i picked to represent the wider work. So I think I'll go with a harmonized, cover all bases approach: keep the title page intact (as you recommend), and use the "summary" page for summation of both the big project and the chapters that appear in the sample; and I'll edit out a page from the biblio (i'll just rip some sources that don't make any sense as a stand alone; i.e. ones that don't add anything to someone's understanding of the project without the context of the chapter in which they appear). And I'll try to freakin' relax! Thanks!

Okay, I'm having an "app requirement that broke the camel's back" moment, but I thought that I'd put this out there to see if anyone has input... I'm finishing online submissions for a program this weekend (all online documents are to be uploaded by 11:59 p.m. Monday, January 23rd). This was supposed to just consist of double checking ALL format requests, reading everything over again a few more times, and then submitting. However, I just read some fine print that stipulates that the writing sample is to be "12-25 pages, including summary". That's the first time that I've laid eyes on the "including summary" qualifier. What would you include in a summary? The sample is comprised of a few sections of my MA thesis. The thesis was 100+ pages, so I was sure to include the intro, as well as a content note on the cover page, table of contents and bibliography to contextualize the piece. I'm at a 25-page limit right now, so I guess I'll start with weaning out a page from somewhere... I was considering, for the summary page, my thesis abstract and then a little paragraph describing the chapters that I've included and their role in the project. The "Introduction" chapter contains an in-depth description of how the thesis unfolds and what each chapter accomplishes, so I could also make reference to this on the summary sheet (for example: "for further elaboration on the contents and role of each chapter, see "Introduction", pages 9-12 of this writing sample") Or is that too much? I'm kind of low on steam, your insight would be very much appreciated!

Hi Looking4letters! I shared my "thank-you e-mail" template in another thread not too long ago: I wrote this in response to an informal interview that the prof. granted me right before the holiday season, so the gratitude is amplified. Even though the context is different, the format might help, feel free to use any of the phrasing at your leisure. I'm a big proponent of "thank you" letters. My partner, who's from the UK, read the post I've linked above and said: "You are the most Canadian thing I've ever seen", referring I suppose to my tendancy to err on the side of excessive politeness. Regardless, I maintain that, as long as you're genuine, the "thank you" sentiment is never wasted! Good on you for maintaining decorum in the face of the hectic application season and making time to be considerate; good luck!

Gellert! I feel obliged to inform you that a little gremlin of self-doubt seems to have taken up residence on your back. I think that he has been writing on your behalf of late... I always read your posts and think that you sound very clever and self-possessed; you'd make a great addition to a grad program! Let yourself have a little bit of whimsy and daydreams, don't let the little gremlin live there rent-free!

Thanks for the update! I hope that it all shakes out nicely for you!

I've never known anyone to get the May start date. This is probably because you need to be registered/attending for the duration of the award, and I've never known anyone who started a program year in May.

I've got a few pieces of advice re: places to start when considering law apps, and I've got some personal context to back it up. I'm going to do my best to be honest while still being encouraging. I think that the fact that you're leaving yourself ample time for the 2013 cycle is a good sign. Also, don't discount your "squishy" factors (multiple languages ect;), some schools (like Osgoode) are more holistic in their application process and appreciate well-rounded students. That being said, a few of the things that you wrote above are glaring red flags to me... but we'll get to that. For now, I'd ask that you honestly evaluate two things while you read the rest of my response: 1. your candidacy and 2. your intentions. First, the "Law" section of this forum is not terribly active. You should go here: http://lawstudents.ca/forums/ Next, to determine your GPA as it applies to law school, you need to use the Ontario Law School Application System (OLSAS) grade conversion table, which considers not only your numerical/letter grade, but also which institution issued it. Find it here: http://www.ouac.on.ca/docs/olsas/c_olsas_b.pdf When discussing your law school candidacy with others, articulate your GPA according to the above 4-point scale. Each institution is different re: what they look at concerning GPA: some look at cumulative, some look at "last two years", some look at "best two years", you need to look up each school specifically to determine what they're after. Some university websites will also include information re: minimum GPA standards and will make successful applicant stats publicly available, so you can see how you match up competitively. You can find the one for Osgoode in their brochure: http://www.osgoode.yorku.ca/sites/default/files/attachments/JD-Brochure.pdf There is a brief U of T one on their Faculty of Law Fact Sheet, just click on "The J.D. Student Body": http://www.law.utoronto.ca/prosp_stdn_content.asp?itemPath=3/4/14/0/0&contentId=465&cType=webpages#Body Next, it is very difficult to assess your candidacy without an LSAT mark. The LSAT, though not as prioritized in Canada as it is in the States, is still a big deal. I only know of one notable school that given markedly less consideration to the LSAT than GPA, and that's U of Ottawa. It's a stressful, competitive ordeal. Also, it's not a measure of your intelligence as much as it is a test of your discipline. You need to spend money on, at minimum, application fees (study materials/courses can quickly run up the investment) You need to study in a particular way and adopt a particular method of logical thinking, and you NEED to follow the obtuse instructions. Your mark only has meaning relative to everyone else's; so it's not about how objectively well YOU did, only how much better you did than everyone else. Think about how you have worked as an academic up until this point, how you have ascertained the value of your work, and think about what this shift REALLY means for how your worth and potential is measured... and think, honestly, about whether or not you are comfortable with that. Finally, to achieve a reasonable mark, you'll likely have to take the LSAT twice. Next, I want to give you some context: I applied for law school in the 2010 cycle. I applied to both Osgoode and U of T. Here are my stats: Undergrad cGPA: 86% According to the OLSAS scale: 3.9 LSAT: 160 (80th percentile) Master's cGPA: A+ Accroding to the OLSAS scale: 4.0 I didn't get in. Again, I'm not saying that to be discouraging. But I want to utilize these stats (keep in mind, it hurts the 'ol ego to lay those details and rejections bare like that) to highlight a few of the things that you said that worry me. - "My GPA is all that concerns me" - You've got quite a few other things to worry about. The LSAT for one. You should also know that the economic downturn is prompting many professionals to apply to law school to concretize their place in the market. This means that there are more applicants than ever, and many of these have compelling, varied life experiences and collateral (like kids), which means that they're not screwing around on these apps, they have a lot at stake. - "I can handle the academic demands of law school since I do well in history and rhetoric". That's not enough. For my part, I specialized in policy in my undergrad and went on to do a Master's in law and policy development. My love of legal verbatim did not translate into an amicable relationship with the realties of law school. You may very well have other skills and resources that would contribute to success at law school, but you need to identify them, articulate them, and be honest with yourself about how and in what capacity they will help you. A love of rhetoric will not save you. - "My point is that although there are plenty of unemployed law graduates, there are even more unemployed history graduates." This comment bums me out for several reasons. First, I know that you stated that law school isn't a career safety net, but, I guess you're saying that the odds are better than with other routes. Consider this: the job market for legal scholars is facing similar trends as other markets, that is, a move towards more temporary, insecure, part-time, contract work. That's not to say that grad school academics won't face similar issues and markets, but they won't be shouldering a law school debt. Think about it. I admire your pragmatism, but I think that going the law school route because it superficially appears to be at the top of the "job prospects: pros/cons" list is a mistake. I cite my experience because, I honestly think, that law school was not a good fit for me, given my goals and the type of scholar that I wanted to be. Even though I had competitive stats, I think that I betrayed myself in my SoP, wherein it became clear that this route wasn't a good fit, and the spot should go to someone who IS. It's not that I don't think that you're right for it. But YOU need to articulate your reasons for wanting it and what you're going to proactively achieve with it that you couldn't by going another route. You need to have a passion for this, and you need to articulate this true passion in a way that makes sense. You can't count on just finding a love for law at some point while you do the degree. If you don't have the dedication and do not FIT, you're unlikely to even get in, IF you get in you'll be less likely to finish, IF you finish you will have a tougher time using the degree, IF you manage to use the degree you are tremondously more likely to be UNHAPPY. After scoping out the resources above, I'd recommend that you start talking to people. People that know you and care about you, Profs that are familiar with your capacity and (maybe most importantly) current law students and lawyers. I'd also recommend reading "One L" by Scott Turow. Best of luck, really!

I know that you didn't ask me specifically, but I can give insight on my program at York. MA level (Which I completed: 1 year, 3 terms back-to back): 14 k guaranteed funding (tied to high academic standing); supplemented with guaranteed TA-ship and a litany of bursaries (additional 6-ish k). PhD level (to which I am currently applying): guaranteed 20 k funding; I'm not sure what the funding package frills consist of; this, of course, will totally vary if I get a SSHRC/OGS. I lived in downtown-ish Toronto; though the cost of living in the city is high, I actually found that I was able to function on the MA package without too much financial tension. Between the funding and some modest savings, I was able to pay my tuition without racking up additional debt. I found York to be very supportive of its grad students. There were lots of bursaries available, you just had to be proactive in applying for them. As well, I found that there was ample development funding to encourage and support students' attendance at conferences or participation in calls for papers. The union representing TAs ensures generous benefits (I had ample dental/vision/med coverage for myself AND my common-law partner). My experience was quite positive; I'd be happy to return to York at the PhD level!

Submitted two apps for York yesterday. PhD - Sociology PhD - Socio-Legal Studies I'm enjoying the post-immediate-submission-fuzzyness that is excitement and relief. I expect this feeling to last through the weekend and come to an abrupt halt when I begin to second-guess the reliability of the post office or discover an errant comma in my SoP. OH! ME TOO! ME TOO! I'm applying for the PhD program (submitting next week)! We seem to have a similar interdisciplinary backround! The very best of luck to you, U of T is a tough nut to crack!

For my program (Socio-Legal Studies, less than 15 people/cohort, 200-ish eligible apps, Canada), the admissions committee got to sit and read the apps 3 weeks after the deadline. There was no "rolling admits", we just sat with everything at once. Justification for this time-line: The program had a two-week window after the deadline for incoming, 3rd party documents (transcripts, LORs and test scores). After that, the department secretary took a week to match all of the files with the material, chase individuals with incomplete files and then exclude the incomplete/inadequate apps that had no reasonable, documented, mediating circumstances. The admissions committee had been determined in the early fall, but it wasn't until 3 weeks after the deadline that we sat in a room together with our timelines, guidelines and the massive stacks of paper. As always, I would stress that this arrangement is specific to my program and isn't necessarily representative of ANY other departmental procedures. Those who DO go the "rolling admits" route, for example, would likely have a process that looks quite different. I hope that you don't use this info to ruminate to the point of high-stress (i.e. are they looking at it RIGHT NOW?! what about NOW?!)... Don't do that!

I'm confused by your question. Are you talking about "upgrading" or "downgrading" (why would you WANT the latter)? I haven't read last year's thread, but in my experience, the amount of control that you have re: up/downgrading is minimal. While I HAVE heard about students who LEVERAGED an award with a university to positively change an admission offer/package, I don't often here about the onus for negotiating being on SSHRC. There are rules to holding a SSHRC award. A lot of rules. Having a SSHRC will affect your university's funding package (you will get less, remember that the attended institution issues part of the award), your ability to work (should be less than 450 hours for a 12-month period; you have to keep this in mind when looking at RA/TA offers) and your elegibility for other awards (including, most notably, OGS). I suggest that you start with the SSHRC Award Holder's Guide http://www.sshrc-crs...ements-eng.aspx Next, take advantage of the fact that you're still attending your undergrad institution and start making contact with the career centre (they often have grad school planning documents and can point you in the direction of departmental advisers). If you apply for a SSHRC while you are still registered in your undergrad ( or, less than 13 months after your degree is conferred), then you HAVE to apply through your undergrad. Your undergrad has quotas and, often, will keep successful copies of SSHRC applications on file. Take advantage! I applied for a SSHRC when entering the MA level and didn't get one (fingers crossed for this year!) One of the benefits of doing an application is that it forces you to specifically articulate a program plan and quantify your research interests in an uncomfortable verbatim and inadequate space. It's a great test of your mettle. It helps you determine IF you actually want to go this route (and WHY) and it makes ACTUAL grad applications down the road easier. When students/friends ask me how they can know if this is the right path for them, I encourage them to apply. If you get through the process and are STILL eager to attend, then that's a good indication (this is further affirmed when you get an acceptance with minimal funding, no SSHRC/OGS money and are still able to smile broadly and say "whatever, i'll make it work I'm going to grad school WHEEEEE!")

A little something from the Books of Adam blog to capture that emotion in cartoon form for you! Also, I have joined the waiting crew today! Two apps in for York University! I've got two more due for February, but it feels really good to finally hit this topic thread, incomplete capacity or otherwise!

If it is at all encouraging: my program has a two-week grace period for third party submissions (LORs, transcripts and tests). Not a universal practice, but I would encourage you to remain hopeful!

An enthusiastic +1! I e-mailed a prospective supervisor in late november and she enthusiastically squeezed me in for a meeting by mid-December. It was a very productive conversation that generated a lot of great leads and application edits! Regarding the "thank-you": I sent an e-mail 3 days after the meeting and got very positive results from this! These things can be tricky to write, so I'll copy the gist of it below, feel free to appropriate! Professor________, I just wanted to write a quick e-mail to thank you for taking the time to meet with me last Friday. As I mentioned, I was thrilled to have the opportunity to discuss my potential academic prospects and research in ___(field of interest)___. As well, I'm always happy to speak to my positive undergraduate experience at __(undergrad institution)___. At your suggestion, I have e-mailed Professer __(referral #1)____ and __(referral #2)__ in order to explore potential research interest alignment and the prospect of working together at __(prospective graduate university)__. While I don't expect an immediate response (as we've entered the holiday season), I do hope that this correspondence will be fruitful and I appreciate that you lent your name to these referrals! I hope that you have a pleasent holiday season. I'd be more than happy to keep you abreast of developments, as your time and interest dictates. At the very least, I will let you know the outcome of my applications. Thank you again for your insight and encouragement! Warm regards, ___(Surefire)___ ___(contact info)___ A few points: I was sure to mention the meeting date and to re-iterate my research interests, to re-acquaint her with our meeting (I assumed that she had met with a variety of prospective and current students, it WAS the pre-holiday crunch!). As well, I alluded to a bit of conversation that we had regarding my undergraduate institution and some specific professors. This part of our conversation was light-hearted and likely unique (my undergrad uni department was small, but we were both connected to it), so I figured that that might be a good mental cue for which I could be remembered. I was sure to follow-up promptly on her suggested leads (profs in similar fields who might serve on my dissertation committee or vouch for me on adcomms) and made note of this in the e-mail. This has the dual benefit of showing her my initiative and letting her know that her advice was being utilized (so she can be prepared to confirm with the recommended profs that she had in fact referred me). I thanked her specifically for "lending her name" as she encouraged me to let these other professors know that SHE had referred me (for me, this is above and beyond the realm of friendly suggestion). I ended with a suggestion for future contact and left options on the table, so she could chose to contact me again or, at minimum, she would hear from me again with an application outcome. This part was particularly important for me; as someone who has instructed university students and written reference letters and/or offered referrals and guidance, I always like to know what the outcome is. This allows me to tailor my approach accordingly and substantiates the advice I put forth. Even if this prof doesn't particularly NEED this feedback, as she is established, I want to volunteer the closure. What happened next was interesting. I was off briefly for the holiday season and checked my e-mail infrequently, as I had managed expectations regarding any feedback at all, let alone prompt responses. I got three e-mails last week. One from the Prof that I'd met with that said, and I quote, "You are a rare student under 30 who can write a great thank-you note"; she also invited me to attend the next departmental seminar series, to get a feel for the current faculty/cohort/resources. The other two e-mails were from the profs that I had been referred to. Each had their own advice, but they had this in common: they were both positive and they both iterated some variation of, I kid you not, "oh, you're the polite __(research field)__ student that __(referring prof)__ mentioned". So, yeah, thank-you notes! Go forth and DO them! These exchanges have some other substance to them (the actual interview went well, I was prepared, there is some great departmental fit that is apparent), but I also have no problem being known as that "polite one". I am known in a positive capacity, and this is a good start!

Over here! Applied directly to OGS and SSHRC. I'm a little jealous of the people who had to apply to/be nominated by their universities. The positive affirmation would be nice. Instead, first correspondence will be when a final decision comes down... bah, greener grass ect;.

If anyone is curious, this is the status update that I've got as well, even though I submitted my app directly to the competition. The update is just to placate I think, I wouldn't assume that it's representative of reality. This is the first time that I've checked the status since submission (just to satisfy my curiosity concerning this thread), and I won't check again until the end of March, at the earliest.

joega, I'd go with lolpixie and Eigen on the GRE stuff specifically. I'm a Canuck. I don't have to do the GRE stuff. I didn't toss the apps myself, so I wouldn't commit to a firm definition of "incomplete". A few things though, applicants are generally responsible for ensuring that all of your stuff gets there (i.e. confirmation on sent transcripts, keeping an eye on online updates, staying on top of your referees, paying the extra money to get a tracking number on anything going through the post, sending stuff BEFORE the deadline so as to avoid getting bit in the butt by Murphy's Law). You should take all measures to ensure that stuff is getting there and be accountable to that end. However, it's not all heartless bureaucracy. As I said, stuff was exempted for being below admin requirements/incomplete if they lacked a good explanation (reasonable, and where possible, substantiated). There is an understanding that things happen; and considerations are easier to come by if the missing component is something that has to be submitted by a third party - thus, there is a grace period, TO A POINT (for example: if a transcript is late because you didn't look into the process and realize that some schools take WEEKS to process transcript requests, then that's YOUR bad; if the transcript is late because the registrar's office staff are on strike, then that IS NOT your bad). As well, (and I can't stress this enough, this is from my experience only), it was my understanding that the office tried to reach out right after the deadline to those with incomplete applications (especially those with well-put together apps that were missing one third-party component) and left a two-week window in which to receive whatever was lacking - it was two weeks after the deadline that the adcomm committee assembled and had their first look at the apps. I say this, NOT so that anyone assumes a grace period or seeks a loophole, but so that the keeners (who likely comprise a large chunk of this forum) will RELAX. Stay on top of your app progress (be proactive in tracking stuff and after the deadline, keep an eye out for any "you're missing stuff" e-mails/phone calls and respond PROMPTLY) and keep a record of all exchanges/notifications of delay/evidence of mitigating circumstances (don't have an organized "sent" mail folder containing correspondence with referees/registrar's office ect;? MAKE ONE) and then, if something goes awry, you can show that you took all the right steps to prevent delays and appeal for reasonable consideration. That's seriously ALL THAT YOU CAN DO. You're welcome h.s.! My pleasure! That bit about SOP sharing is a little messed up. In my experience, Profs usually ask if they can keep your SOP on file, anonymize it and divulge it to inquiring students. I'm usually pretty free and easy with my SOPs and writing samples, but I would feel weird about having these circulated, with my name on them, to people that I had not directly agreed to divulge to. However, maybe that feeling is misplaced. After all, it's a common practice in Canada for Universities to keep successful grant proposals (like SSHRC) in a file for potential applicants to peruse (even though these are anonymized). As well, Sparky and bigdgp have a point: some components of these apps are going to get tossed about (if you mention that a prof. in the program has preemptively agreed to supervise you, you better believe that someone on the committee will try to seek them out to confirm). Maybe this is a topic for another thread eh? In any case, I'm happy to try and clarify. The process that I was a part of was measured, fair, reasonable and resulted in a great crop of students. I think that most universities have an honourable process, but the fact that it is obfuscated and hidden from us brings out the worst anxieties.

My MA thesis was very interdisciplinary in nature (though it doesn't trespass into any of your stated fields of interest). The project drew upon Sociology, Law, Epidemiology, Public Policy and Health Studies. Expectations: I think that it's very promising and important that you're asking about expectations. One of the greatest favours that you can do for yourself with an interdisciplinary project is to manage your expectations. You should ascertain early on what this project CAN and CANNOT accomplish. For my part, the topic that I chose was very important to me, so I decided early on to be rigorous and to do justice to all the fields that I was drawing upon; this means, not just cherry-picking what you like from each, but also being obligated to the foundational theorists/frameworks and ongoing developments of EACH discipline. This can be exhausting. I expected the backround reading to be extensive, what I didn't realize is the amount of UPKEEP that is required to stay ahead of developments in the field. Challenges: Other than the upkeep thing... The most challenging aspect was my writing. I secured an amazing, tough-as-nails supervisor early on, and when I brought her my 1st draft, 20-page proposal, she said that my ideas/data/direction were all great, but I was going to have to re-write the entire thing because my style/vocabulary was NOT accessible considering that the project was interdisciplinary (and thus had an audience with varied backrounds and underdstandings). I was crushed; I turned in 6 drafts of that proposal before she accepted it... Other possible challenges: While this wasn't a requirement for me, I had colleagues doing interdisciplinary work who faced the additional challenge of securing ethics committee clearence. Requirements/submission guidelines can differ depending on your program and the aims/parameters of your project. If you're doing work that requires this type of clearence, and the project is interdisciplinary in nature, you would be wise to figure out your obligations early. This challenge also applies to some funding/conference/journal applications. Outcomes vs. Expectations: When I started the project, I was afraid that some of the aims of my research would be mis/re-directed by well-meaning but stong-willed thesis committee members who - depending on their disciplinary loyalties - would try to exert control over the project's priorities. It can be tough to draft something that is true to your interests while also being open to new theoretical contributions and diplomatic concerning the advice of committee members. I was pleased with how I negotiated this terrain. The end result was a thesis that answered the questions that I had initially started out with, but also posed new ones that I hadn't considered at the beginning of the endeavour which brought depth and scope to the research. Bottom line: The best things that you can do when undertaking interdisciplinary research is: 1.) to be hyper-conscious of the intent, purpose and direction of your project; be true to these principles, but also be aware of your obligations to the fields that you are playing in and the advice of your committee and/or profs. 2.) Secure a kick-ass supervisor who will appreciate the interdisciplinary nature of your work, be receptive to your research aims and be relentless and helpful regarding the intricacies of straddling more than one field. Good luck!