Jump to content

surefire

Members
  • Posts

    274
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by surefire

  1. Variance is definitely more the rule, than the exeption. From what I can understand, the composition of admissions committees differs widely, not just from school to school, but program to program. Some will give you hints on their "Admissions" webpages, but by and large the number/identity of readers will be obscured. I've mentioned elsewhere that I've been ON an admissions committee, as a student rep for my MA program. Speaking from that experience, there were about 6 profs, myself and a PhD student on the actual committee. Before we sat down with the apps, the Graduate Director and the Graduate Secretary went through all of them and removed the ones from the pool that were incomplete and/or didn't meet minimum admission requirements (and had no "good" - i.e., substantiated and appropriate - explanation of mitigating circumstances). So that's two sets of eyes looking at everyone, I think around 30 applicants (of 200-ish) were bounced at that stage. We split the committee into two, each side took half of the apps. We read the ENTIRE contents of these apps and (with the aid of department admin guidelines) each came up with a top ten (we were aiming to fill around 10 spots; ultimately, we made 15 offers and took 12 students). We came together, each with our top ten, and compared notes. We ranked, discussed, justified our choices and cut; then we repeated this process until we had an acceptance and wait list that we (mostly) agreed upon. Again, this experience is context-specific, but if you were to break it down for MY program: Sets of eyes looking at your app: between 2 and 10, depending on how far you get. WHO is looking: Department and/or Graduate Head(s) and Secretary, profs (all from the department, though not all were on the faculty for the program), current student(s) from program All that being said... ...I think that your anxiety is beyond the how-many-and-what-kind-of-people-am-I-prospectively-exposing-my-inadeqaute-asshattery-to?! nerves. I hope that knowing some of the details that I provided above puts you at ease, but I have a feeling that it won't; partly because everything is context-specific - accordingly, I would advise you to take my experience with a grain of salt - and partly because your question doesn't get to the heart of your doubt. Everyone gets cold feet about their SOPs (although, for sanity's sake, I couldn't say whether or not it is better to be struck down by this doubt before or after app submission...). I'd caution against directing this concern to a excessive preoccupation with WHO will be reading your app, because you can't really find out nor can you control this element. Focus instead, on what you can control and generally take care of. That is: create an SOP that displays competency without resorting to jargon (remember when I said that adcomm profs were in my department but NOT neccessarily faculty members in my program? keep that in mind, don't alienate anyone). As well, you would do well to convey FIT, ability to FINISH and capacity to CONTRIBUTE and to do this in a way that appeals to those who might not only work OVER you, but also alongside you. Finally, you should have some more people read it before you submit it. And I mean different kinds of people. Those with an academic backround and otherwise. Not everyone is going to totally "get" it, but they should be able to tell you things like whether or not you are being clear, compelling and if your passion is shining through (the latter of these being a possible issue for you, I think, based on your post). Good luck!
  2. Hey there fellow prospective Yorkie! I'm applying to two York PhD programs (Sociology and Socio-Legal Studies) for Fall 2012. My deadlines aren't until mid-January, so I'm still putting it all together. LORs and transcripts are in, but I'm still messing with the online submission stuff. I did my MA at York, and can tell you that my timeline for that MA app was prompt! I think that my app deadline for that session was the first or second week of February and I got a phone call in the beginning of March with an offer (online verification was later that day, application package was received in the mail a week after). The timing probably varies - it might be pretty department/program-specific and the experience might be different if it was a waitlist/rejection decision (and even when the process is fast, it's never fast enough!) Congrats on getting yours in! Feel free to PM me if you have any other questions re: York. My experience was limited to my MA and my department, but my time there was very positive! I've applied elsewhere, but York is my first choice! Best of luck to you AlyaLeka!
  3. I had to do something like this for a grant application. I interpreted the "keywords" to resemble the type that you might see at the forefront of an academic article (you know, after the abstract but before the article itself?). I assumed that the purposes of the keywords are the same: to orient the reader regarding your approach and to summate your place in the current literature. I was able to do more than 5 words, so I was pretty specific. You might want to go more mid-range, though the options at your disposal depend on your discipline. I think that the words should be focused enough to show what you're doing, but not so specific that they are jargon-y or potentially alienating to someone reading the app. For example, my fields are sociology and law, but I wouldn't write those as my keywords. Instead, I wrote socio-legal studies and sociology of knowledge, as these are more specific and relevant to the research that I want to undertake. Alternatively, I used the term "critical discourse analysis" to cover my approach, but didn't go so far as to identify "speech act analysis" (the specific framework that I'm using, but is a little too hyper-specialized for a keyword). I think my keyword breakdown was something like: 3 to identify discipline/field, one for methodology, 2 for theoretical approach, 1 to identify the structure under scrutiny, 1 to identify vested interest population. It sometimes hurts to have to self-categorize in this glib way, I wish you the best of luck!
  4. I feel compelled to reply, because I remember the feeling of trying to hyper-specialize my interests, and the task of articulating these interests to others always felt like a test that I was failing. I'm not in History. My academic backround is Sociology, so my experience will differ from yours; but I will take your solicitation of experience from our "academic lives" as an invite to share. Hopefully some of this will help you out. It is true that articulating your specific research interests is important in grad school. But there are some rationales/explanations behind this that I think are worth stressing. When you do an MA/PhD, you're likely to do some form of a thesis/dissertation - a thorough, sustained conversation with the material coupled with some of your contributive insights. To produce and finish a good piece, you need to have specialized interests because you need to tackle a topic that hasn't been under academic purview/scrutiny OR you need to tackle an old topic in a new way (new theory/framwork/approach)- otherwise, why are you bothering? Consider as well, you will be taking coursework/comprehensives (depending on your program) that lend themselves to your interest area. So, you will be living with the research area/topic you pick for YEARS, you need to be focused enough to know most of the angles of your interests before you begin, so you can decide if this is an area that you would be happy to be immersed in for long periods of time, through setbacks, rewrites and frustration. As well as convincing yourself that you can have a long-term relationship with your interests, you must convince (1) the school that will admit you (2) funding bodies (where applicable) and (3) your presumptive supervisor/graduate advisor/thesis committee that you have a feasible plan to study in an academic area that you are qualified in, on a topic that is worthy of scrutiny; to inspire this confidence, you need to be specific, in order to anticipate the contributions of your research as well as the set-backs that might befall it. That being said, you can change your mind. In fact, you are likely to change your mind. Profs and program heads know this. Part of the purpose of the specified planning is to show that you have the capacity to venture contributive research topics and back them up with feasible plans. You can switch/tweak areas/topics of interest, but forethought and early attempts to articulate your specialty will help to ensure that if/when you feel compelled to shift, you can leave your topic planet without abandoning your discipline/area orbit. Are there some people that undertake/complete the research that they propose in their grad school applications? Yes, in fact, my MA topic remained quite intact (though my theoretical approach shifted wildly and I totally revamped my writing style for an interdisciplinary crowd). However, I don't think that this is the norm (unless you've got funding that obligates you to undertake the research that you proposed in your funding app, but that's a whole different kettle of fish). Here's how it went for me. I began my undergad CONVINCED that I wanted to eventually be a prof in English Lit. I loved my coursework and started talking to profs early about my ambitions. I remember the day I decided to switch majors was the day that I asked my favourite prof what his dissertation topic was, and he said: the use of the semi-colon in Moby Dick. The use. of the semi-colon. in Moby Dick. That's an oversimplification, but the point is that it made me realize what the reality of English Lit grad studies was, and I didn't want that. Advice #1: Speak to profs about their grad school experience. What is the academic climate like? Are there trends in topic areas with regards to writing/funding certain areas? Let them ask you about your interests and try to articulate these to them. The questions they ask will help to clarify what angles you haven't thought through yet and these conversations are always good for obtaining literature/faculty referrals to help you figure out where to go next. I switched to Sociology and took a wide variety of courses. Of these, I enjoyed Sociology of Health, Sociology of Law and Advanced Policy. I also took advanced methods/theory/stats in anticipation of applying to grad school. It was a slow process, but I began to knit together a picture of what I wanted (or didn't want!) to do in grad school based on what I liked from these courses. As well, when it came time to articulate a topic, I had a great practical backround to draw on to distinguish what research I could feasibly carry out (for example, I found a definite preference for qualitative over quanitative methods, so that was something to keep in mind that would affect the effectiveness of my research). Advice #2: Take many and varied and challenging courses. Don't just keep taking stuff that you already know. Take things with the word "advanced" in the course title. Avoid bird courses. Take inventory of what topics/writers really ignite your interest, and then look into the backround of these (who wrote the foundational book? is there a common analytical framework that is utilized to approach the area? is it one that you could picture yourself using?) Take inventory of the topics/writers that you just can't stand, there is something to be learned in those spaces as well as you articulate the type of researcher that you want to become. For my MA topic, I looked at blood donation policy in Canada and the exclusion of men who have sex with men. The topic was a great marriage of health, law and policy interests, knitted together and exemplified by a very specific set of circumstances. I was inspired when I heard about the experiences of friends of mine who were excluded from the process, and then was convinced to write about it when I found myself discussing it with other people and learned that few people knew about it. Advice #3: While keeping some of your areas of interest in mind, consider how specific events could be seen as microcosmic exemplifications of broader forces. Again, this thinking is kind of a product of Sociology, but trying to see the strange in the familiar, the general in the particular, serves to help me pick topics. You will be frustrated if you commit to an approach (or a method or a theory) and then try to force these on a topic. You will be better served (and will produce better research), if you look at an event that interests you and try to figure out why it interests you (does the event serve as an example of some of your areas of interest in action? how did/do these work together to produce the event and/or form current interpretation(s) of it?) I think that you've made a really great start here! Give yourself some credit! And you've started early! Always good! My biggest piece of advice is to keep talking to people, all kinds of people, about your research interests. This will help you to articulate potential areas of specialization and will assist you in visualizing what kind of academic you want to be. The day it clicked for me was the day that I realized, that I can just take my interets/passions and impose them on topics, people and essays. It's better to see a gap in academic scrutiny, a topic that needs attention, and then ask yourself WHY you saw that gap (what is it about the event/circumstances that stirs your interests and allows you to see a gap at all) and HOW can you contribute to addressing this gap. The worst and best day of a research project is the day that you admit what its limits are; once you've managed your expectations and determined what can (and cannot) be accomplished with your investigation, it helps to make peace with your specialization and exacting focus. I feel as though it's better to do a managed topic in an in-depth way than a broad topic superficially. Good luck! I'm excited for you! If your experience is anything like mine, you can look back in a few years on this crisis of specialization and say: "how silly in retrospect! OF COURSE I ended up in the realm of specialization that I'm currently in; looking back on my academic backround and developing interests, it totally makes sense! HOW did I EVER think that I'd end up anywhere else!"
  5. I'm hoping that the anxiety/worst nightmare dreams hold off for at least a few more weeks while I finish all my submissions... In the meantime, I had a kind of funny funding-related dream a few weeks ago, wherein my graduate advisor called me on the phone. The conversation went like this: Advisor: You won all of the funding! Me: That's amazing! Which ones?! (Some of the funding bodies I applied to have multiple categories of awards and won't let you hold some in tandem with others) Advisor: All of them!! Me: Wait...what?... Advisor: ALL OF THE MONEYS!!! And then I realized I was dreaming. My partner poked me and asked who I was talking to. I told him about the dream and now it's like a running joke: Me: My advisor e-mailed me... Loving partner: Is it about the moneys? ... Me: I'm considering this project for one of the university's research centres, I'll have time for it if I have funding... Funny partner: Don't worry! You're getting ALL OF THE FUNDING! ... Yeah, I'm choosing to pretend that that dream was a good omen. That, or I'm dwelling on funding prospects too much while reading the Hyperbole and a Half blog.
  6. I'd go standard 1 inch for your bottom/left/right margins. My reasoning has to do with my experience on an MA admissions committee (disclaimer: this experience was for incoming MA students, in a specialized social science program, at a Canadian University... everything is context-specific). When I was flipping through writing samples and I came across ones with tweaked margins, an overbearing, uninvited thought would pop into my head: "Who IS THIS person that thinks that their thoughts are SO SPECIAL that everything needed to be included at the expense of my eyesight/sanity?!" That's not a nice thought. But after the twentieth or so application, these types of thoughts emerge unbidden. Let's be clear: I read ALL components of EVERY application, regardless of formatting and would not have considered whether or not someone messed with margins a make-or-break element of a decision. But... there are reasons for standardized formatting. Ideally, everyone gets equal space to shine and time for consideration. When you mess with margins, you are demanding more space and more of the reviewer's time. Even if they don't conciously fault you for it (and how could they if, in your case, only the top margin space is explicitely specified), taking liberties with the margins (considering that 1 inch is the generally expected/accepted format) might put them in a foul mood. That's not the mood that you want while under their purview. Tweaking with the margins isn't worth it. Where possible/appropriate, footnote thoughts that you can edit out but don't want to do without and go with your 20-pager.
  7. I like the itty-bitty extra credit idea; I can imagine that a little gesture like that really helps! I've been known to do exam review "Bingo" or "Jeopardy" for the last class. Sometimes when I tell colleagues that, their reaction is like, "Seriously?! These students are supposed to be ADULTS in UNIVERSITY!" But you know what, it works, for both the mood AND their marks. It requires some extra prep, to ensure that the students get something out of it, but I've found it to be worth it. Also, I put this picture in my last slide right before I dismiss them: http://verydemotivational.memebase.com/2010/03/28/demotivational-posters-you-dont-study/ My best strategy for marking, if the essay/exam submission schedule permits, is to do ALL of my TA grading before tackling my own end-of-term graduate papers. To have it done REALLY promptly makes me feel like a superstar and ensures that my focus is intact for my own work.
  8. I agree with ladybug3 that it depends on the program. Look into how they calculate and check their stats sheet for previous admits, if they have one, to compare. Where there are some shaky points on a GPA, an upward trend is optimal, so you're in an advantageous position in that respect. Program applications sometimes have sections specifically for explanations of circumstance; if they do, they will identify it accordingly. If not, your only option might be to squeeze it into the personal statement; in that case, you'll have to have a good think on how much space you want to take up with such explanations. Regardless, if you decide to address it, remember to frame it in an advantageous way. Avoid explanations that sound like pedantic excuses wherein you blame unfair circumstances. Instead, approach it honestly and highlight what situation arose, how you dealt with it, what you learned and what skills you developed as a result. I've said this elsewhere: with situational stuff, adcomm interest and consideration is divided thus, 10% "what happened" and 90% "how did you deal".
  9. Holy smokes! 5-6?! I've never scoped out a school that wanted more than 4! My first choice school takes 3 references, and even with that number, I'm planning to make one of them a non-academic. I finished my MA last October and am applying for the PhD next September. In the meantime, I've been working a couple of gigs in research (not specifically tied to my specialization, but in the social science field at least). I'm kind of hoping that this will "flesh out" my app a bit by showing that I functioned as a "real-world" researcher, in a position where I was PAID to draw on my scholarly skills. I want to show that my time away from academia was well spent and that I've cultivated some experience to BRING BACK to the academic table. So, yeah, if you've got that many references to play with, I think that one of 'em could be non-academic. I'm still a little thrown by that large number though, and would caution quality over quantity. I would put my money on a handful of thoughtful, comprehensive letters over 5-6 short and/or repetitive ones. Just make sure that every one that you include is actually going to add to your app, rather than belabour the same points.
  10. I'm not sure if I can answer all of those questions, but I'll have a go at some of them. 1) LORs - Trawl the LOR section of this forum; there are people looking for advice on whom to approach that are in a litany of special/unique/frustrating circumstances, you can probably find something that parallels your experience. What I would suggest is that you hit up whoever is presiding over your RA-ship AND, if possible, a prof that is familiar with your academic experience/trajectory. To the latter of these, if you can, take a class with a prof who taught you a year or two ago; get them acquainted with your history, future plans and self-learning and try and get a letter from them that speaks to where you have been, how you have recommitted and the great strides that you've made. 2) Faculty/departments at other schools: Do some more research on possible programs. Some schools, in their graduate handbook and/or admissions website, will boast about having a "holistic" approach to admissions, meaning that they give great consideration to each part of your application and will be open to students that have taken non-traditional, character/life experience-building paths through academia (as opposed to cookie-cutter students with near perfect GPAs/GREs who have sailed through their undergrad with no challenges). If a student appears to have no experience navigating challenges, how will they be expected to react to the new pressures of graduate school? It's almost like that credit rating conundrum, where it is worse to have no credit then bad credit, because overseerers can't predict how you'll handle the challenges and obligations that come with fiscal dealings (see later point on extenuating circumstances). Also, in looking up potential supervisors for your research, have a good look at the biographies provided; you'll likely find profs who have also taken alternative routes through academia that will appreciate the value of the challenges you've faced. Prof that have had an uniterrupted couple of decades in higher education won't be as likely to understand why you couldn't "just get it together". 3) DO NOT DO NOT DO NOT switch interests just to try to get into an easier program. This is not a good mindset. If you don't have interest in the subject, this will likely be detectable to admissions, who would rather give the spot to someone with a passion for the work. Even if you do get in, expectations of performance at the graduate school level are high and all of your peers will be wicked smart and intimidating; difficulties associated with this will be compounded if your interest is lacking - the liklihood of failing/quitting is much higher. When you are feeling completely exhausted/stupid/overwhelmed by grad school, passion for the topic is sometimes the only thing to get you through a rough patch; you will be at a serious disadvantage if you don't have this to fall back on. EVEN if you do get in and EVEN if you are able to tough it out, you're looking at 4-7 years at grad school, that's a LONG TIME to study something you're not into. You will be unhappy. This does not mean, however, that I wouldn't recommend being OPEN to other fields (have you considered biomedical ethics?). Sometimes an interdisciplinary program allows you to amalgamate your interests into one passionate platform. What I'm saying is, do NOT switch topics to something "easier" just to "get in". Grad school is not a "just get in and then figure it out as I go" endeavour in the way that an undergrad is. Sometimes you feel like you're an imposter or master improvisor to get through some days, but you NEED a grounded interest/passion to THRIVE and FINISH. 4) Letter re: extenuating circumstances: You will have to consider this on a school-by-school basis. Some apps have seperate components that give you space to plead your case, some will make you fit it in the personal statement. Figure out how the schools accept such elaborations and confine yourself to that space; DO NOT take it upon yourself to go outside of these boundaries and send them a long detailed e-mail. In all honesty, this looks pedantic and gives the impression that you think you are special enough to monopolize the admission space outside of formal channels. As to the content of whatever space you have to discuss your experience: in grad applications, as in life, importance is 10% what happened to you and 90% how you react/deal with/utilize the events. Admissions committee members are people to, they understand that life happens, but there is nothing compelling about a list of tragic events bolstered as excuses. You need to explain to them how you are a stronger academic for the experience and detail the tools that developed to ensure that, if presented with similar challenges in the future, you WILL successfully navigate. You have an upward trend, which is helpful. I'm not saying that it's about how you "spin" it, it's honestly about knowing yourself and having developed strategies for success. The adcomms need to know that you will FIT, CONTRIBUTE, THRIVE and FINISH: so frame your experience to answer to these stipulations. NOTE: This will ONLY work if you HAVE IN FACT learned something about yourself, your capacity and your potential through these trials. 5) I can't think of a good reason why you would try to go straight to the PhD. I would recommend an MA first, just based on your info above. An MA will give you the opportunity to perform at a grad school level, negotiate your passions and make the academic connections that you have not been able to cultivate at the undergrad level. Maybe even some more undergrad stuff first, as emmm suggested. An undergraduate honours thesis, advanced theory/methods courses or a reading course are all good options for showing your committment and potential for heavy research (but they are not "easy As"). This route would definitely allow you to take my advice from 2) re: establishing a relationship with a prof. that is aware of your journey and progress (all they need to remember and substantiate from an earlier course is that your performance was not great, then they can speak to your challenges, vast improvement and where you're at now). Keep at your graduate advisor and stress that you want HONEST feedback on your options. Good luck!
  11. I'd recommend contacting them. They need to have your signature to peruse some of the information in the package. I submitted without any major issues, but a colleague of mine neglected the application checklist sheet. The department caught the error and were able to call him and get him back up to campus with the sheet before the end of the business day, but it was close. It's a shame that your department didn't catch the mistake before they sent it off. I know that you can authorize a couple of changes to your app post-submission, but these are usually personal info type things... but you never know, maybe they'll allow you to courier them a signed sheet and will attach it to your file for you, you should try. When you contact OGS, don't throw your department under the bus. Explain the error and hope that it's minor enough and you get a sympathetic ear who will work with you to solve the discrepency. If they tell you that they cull ALL incomplete packages without exception, then at least you'll know. I totally feel for you. My deepest sympathies on this. The OGS is a substantial amount of work and it would be truly sucky to miss out on the opportunity to compete based on that mistake. It might not draw anyone's attention, applications are supposed to be forwarded by departments only if they are complete/eligible, so the selection committee might just operate under the assumption that it is complete without too much scrutiny... but I can't imagine waiting until MAY to know for sure, so if I were you I'd ask. Best of luck, seriously. I hope that you get a good result on this!
  12. You could also try: A very research/essay heavy course that allows for quick and quality acquaintanceship with your work (4th-year undergraduate honours thesis, avanced methods/theory course, directed reading class). Joining a committee/club/group that has some potential referees (English Major? You'll find some department reps. on the Board of Directors for the University newspaper). Joining a committee/club/group that is representative of your discipline/department and students therein. Lead the study groups for the compulsory classes, be part of a collective/society that organizes guest speakers/movie nights ect; Referees notice when you become the go-to person to consult to assess the student climate. It really depends what level you are currently at (BA/MA/PhD) and where you are looking to ascend.
  13. I just finished the SSHRC app for first year Doctoral studies (my deadline was Monday; yours, apparently, is a little more than a month away... if, as I'm given to understand, you are not currently enrolled in a program/convocated more than a year ago and need to apply directly to SSHRC). You have some work to do. If you haven't already, start by trawling the SSHRC website. Specifically the SSHRC Resource Centre is helpful. Below is a link to the Resources for MA scholarships: http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/apply-demande/masters_scholarships-bourses_de_maitrise-eng.aspx The "What's in an application?" piece will let you know what they expect in a proposal from a student who's planning to enter an MA program and is applying straight to SSHRC. BEFORE you check that out, confirm your subject matter eligibility here: http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/apply-demande/background-renseignements/selecting_agency-choisir_organisme_subventionnaire-eng.aspx You are kind of vague regarding your current status. Do you still have connections with your undergrad institution? (where are your letters coming from? - SSHRC letters should be academic, employer letters don't mean as much) Are you planning on returning to that institution for the MA? Or are you going elsewhere? Depending on your answer, I would say that the next move might be to contact your undergrad university and see if they've got any resources for you. Some institutions hold SSHRC workshops, keep past successful proposals on file for students to view or can refer you accordingly (writing resources, academic directors with good advice ect;). For myself, I am planning to enter the first year of doctoral studies. I want to return to the same program where I did my MA, but I was away from the department for JUST long enough that I needed to apply to SSHRC directly. However, my previous profs and academic advisor were very forthcoming with support and encouragement (I was able to get in on a workshop/proposal drafting session).... I also contacted them in June to give them a good heads up... you might be a bit more pressed for time. I put A LOT of emphasis on WHAT program I specifically wanted to attend, in both my MA SSHRC app and my PhD one. I mentioned profs who would serve as thesis advisors (I contacted them first to get their agreement, obviously), courses I wanted to take and specific resources that the department/program/university had that would be of benefit to my research. I know people that have had success with SHHRC without mentioning all of this, but not many. The school at which you will hold the award is accountable to getting a portion of it paid to you, so it matters that you give them some thought. Spelling out the program/institution at which you want to conduct research will show that you've given this some thought and are prepared to articulate how these choices will (I) allow your research to THRIVE (II) provide opportunities for you to CONTRIBUTE and (III) provide resources to ensure that you will FINISH. Because, these are the things that SSHRC wants you demonstrate before they can justify funding you. Your proposal should be engaging, but the components I just listed should be prioritized over the topic you pick; you can change your mind on your topic, you WILL likely change your mind, but the elements above should be things that you are unwavering about. Plan to do many drafts. Ideally, you should have at least one go-to prof or academic professional who will read at least 2 drafts and make comments. Then, get everyone else who is willing to read it and hand it off to them. The SSHRC proposal should be free from jargon (it will be read by an interdisciplinary committee) and should demonstrate the elements above; the presence of these components should be clear, to non-academics or otherwise, so anyone reading it has the potential to give you feedback on whether or not you are coming across clearly and competently. It's hard to do the application stuff when you're not enrolled (I had a break between the BA and MA, and now have another between the MA and PhD). I've worked during these, and it's hard to set aside the time and get in the right headspace. If you have any specific questions, feel free to PM me. But, yeah, get on this!
  14. I just found out that the NGO that I'm conducting policy research/analysis for, as an employee, has a broad organizational mandate which forbids supervisors from writing reference/recommendation letters. I'm kind of baffled and bummed (bammed, if you will). I've got two great academic referees (MA thesis supervisor and a MA theory/methods prof. who has agreed to supervise my PhD research). These two will certainly suffice for current grant apps; however, a few actual program apps need 3 letters. I've been away from graduate studies for a year, doing some awesome research work in my field. I was REALLY hoping to show off some of that experience via a reference letter from a supervisor. I was hoping to leverage the experience to demonstrate some relevant, transferable, "real-world" research capacity and prove that my time away was well-spent... I thought that this would help to distinguish my app. Now I'm kind of bammed. I had an earlier contract involving similar work with a different NGO (that supervisor would be thrilled to write a letter for me). But that earlier contract was part-time, short-term (4 months), and in a smaller organization; while the current one is full-time, longer-term (will be 10 months when my contract is up) and in a very established, respectable organization. (I think that the "established" thing is part of the letter-writing hesitancy; my sense is that, they don't write letters because they usually employ people for many years and like to protect themself from any negative association with a previous employee who doesn't ultimately stand up under scrutiny. They are a very large organization with a lot of accountability and a highly-valued brand, I guess I appreciate the motive...) Anyway, I'm wondering if anyone has had a similar experience or is packing any advice. I'm concerned that admission committees might think it's odd that I don't have a letter from the most recent, relevant and prestigious work experience that I will have had on my CV leading up to application deadlines. Is there a way to pre-empt this? Could I notify the program director of the organization's policy or does that just seem pedantic? Thanks in advance for feedback!
  15. While my experience doesn't directly map on to yours, I wanted to kick in some commentary with regards to the "whys" of rejection. When I applied for my MA, I was DEAD SET on a particular institution. I really went with my heart when I chose my undergrad university (small, liberal ect;) and I figured that, for the MA, I was going to go with something prestigious, with ivy on the wall and everything dammit! While working on my applications, the first red flag emerged when one of my referees said, "I'm happy to write a litany of personalized letters for you, but you don't want one from me for this [prestigious/ivy-covered] school". It turned out that my referee had had a professional disagreement with someone who was likely to be on the admissions committee. The incident was years ago, but the ivy-shrouded prof was apparently still passive-aggressive at conferences and the like. I couldn't believe that something like that could affect the reception of my app, was I seriously expected to anticipate this?! Second red-flag came when I visited the ivy-laden school and met with the department head who (a.) discounted my stellar grades and extracurriculars because, apparently, my undergrad university is TOO tiny/liberal (b.)made it clear that, for their program, they liked to "pick from their own" crop of undergrads. She said, "I don't know what an "A" from [tiny, liberal undergrad] means, I know what an "A" from [ivy-strangled school] means". Further discussion about my research aims and the expectations of their MA program reiterated the insular, conservative nature of the department. Don't get me wrong, insular and conservative can be cool if that's what you're into, but the environment/faculty were clearly NOT conducive to the kind of work that I wanted to do/the scholar I wanted to be. It was a BAD FIT! And yet, I applied anyway. I just, had to know I guess. I had a major crisis, because suddenly my first choice wasn't really my first choice and OMIGAWD what if they accept me?! Towards the end of the application process, I found another program at a different instituton (great reputation, no damn ivy) that seemed to suit my interests. I visited the department and it was a cinderella-glass-slipper kind of moment. Perfect fit. They thought so too. Because they accepted me. This might not seem like an apt anecdote, but the reality is that I entered the app process convinced that I was meant for the ivy and intended to ONLY apply there. Fortunately, I was gifted with some warning signs that indicated impending rejection and a bad fit. The ivy institute ultimately rejected me, and I almost didn't apply anywhere else! I know it's emphasized elsewhere in this forum, but "fit" is so important. And it sucks when you are trying to re-launch applications and you need to look at whether or not you've been off-base in that area... it's easier to conclude that the set-back was steeped in something quantifiable, like a test score. I got to see this from the other side last year, when I sat on an admissions committee for my graduate program. The committee really does consider EVERYTHING, but there are some near-intangibles that affect the decision. We went through a lot of amazing candidates, and we bounced a large majority due to concerns regarding "fit". Often, this was ascertained via the personal statement/plan of study where, after reading so many, committee members become adept at figuring out whether or not the program is an applicant's first choice. We all know that applicants hedge their bets, and no one is going to reject an applicant based on ego, but it's hard to read an app and think "Wow, this person clearly wants to go to law school" and give THEM the offer when the opportunity could go to someone who, after reading their app, I can PICTURE as a colleague. I guess I'm advocating re-visiting your notion of how you fit in the potential programs. All applications you do should read like that institution is your first choice and your experience thus far should be framed in such a way that an addmissions committee member says "of course this person wants this program specifically, it just makes sense!" afterwards. If you're able, I'd recommend contacting current students in the programs you want; they are all very busy, but they can give you the skinny on what the department environment/faculty are like, these aspects are worth integrating, or at least keeping in mind, when you are applying. A final anecdote: A colleague of mine recently sat on an admissions committee for a law program. One applicant, with near perfect LSAT and GPA, was rejected based on the content of one of his referree letters. The prof had written that the applicant was highly intelligent, studious and would no doubt complete a JD with exceptional standing. However, the prof was fairly certain that the applicant was a socio-path; while he got excellent grades, he showed little empathy for other students and near-contempt for marginalized populations in discussions of social justice. The prof maintained that the applicant would likely excel, but she was reluctant to recommend that he be granted the opportunity or power that comes with a JD. My colleague rejected this applicant, and had no doubt that he would find a place at another institution (likely one with ivy). So take heart, while it's difficult to gather yourself up again and discern the short-comings of your app, at least be thankful that your hang-up is likely not "being a socio-path"... because then you've definitely got more pressing issues than acceptance to graduate school.
  16. If you're still pretty fresh off the degree, I'd recommend visiting your university's career center for a consultation or some advisement. When I finished my MA, I was fairly certain that I wanted the PhD as well. However, I didn't want to apply straight-away. I didn't want to start a PhD just because I didn't know what else to do. As well, though I wasn't feeling TOO fatigued mentally, I was a little worried that my social skills (and accompanying ability to get a non-academic job) had atrophied. I was a little uppity about approaching the career center (I didn't want to attend seminars to learn how to shake hands properly), but once I acknowledged that a huge bulk of the work is learning to articulate your academic experience and tailoring resumes and cover letters, I really gleaned a lot from one-on-one meetings and job panels. Managing expectations was a huge part of the game. Like you, I wasn't necessarily looking for a career route, but I wanted to be stimulated, learn some real-world skills and have enough money for rent and some loan repayment. I've had 6 jobs in the last year, mostly 3/4 month. part-time contracts, everything from menial to unpaid to somewhat-in-my-field. It quickly became apparent that I wasn't getting a 50k (or even 20), full-time with benefits kind of thing, but it was an adjustment to realize that part time, short term and even unpaid work was hyper-competitive and hard to come by. I'm actually a chef by trade (which is what I did to make money during my undergrad), so I had that to fall back on; but I wanted to challenge myself to look elsewhere first. I thought about a government gig, but departments kind of like to recruit for the long-haul and I didn't want to fib about my intention to return for the PhD. I did some of the standardized placement testing anyway (and did well!) but affirmed that that wasn't the route that I wanted. In the second month of full-time job seeking (and not a single call-back)I walked into a bookstore and struck up a conversation with the owner about Oscar Wilde. He offerred me a part-time gig (I told him about my BA, in which I had a second major in English, but didn't bother to mention my legal-ish MA). I'm still working there! To supplement, I worked as a co-instructor at my undergrad university. It was a 3 hour commute twice a week, but worth it, because it led to a short-term research position and some conference attendence - I loved the instructor post and it confirmed my desire to do a PhD. At the same time, I held an unpaid internship at a non-profit that a friend had recommended (25 hrs/week, unpaid, money was tight for those months). Totally worth it! Their recommendation secured for me an interview at a large NGO and I've been consulting here for 4 months (I plan to be here until I start the PhD next fall). I'm sorry that this is so long, but I actually really like sharing my experience with others on the job-front stuff! I was really conflicted about the job hunt. I was happy to take the bookstore post but felt guilty for not wanting "more"; I was eager to try a "grown-up" job but was dismayed to learn that the MA didn't always give me the edge over those with just BAs; I was very committed to the job search and felt that I was doing the "right" things in my applications, but I had no (non-academic) network in the city and no one was calling me ect; Anyway, I'm always happy to share because I felt like such a schmuck at the beginning of the hunt, and now I'm refreshed and I'll never wonder "what if I left and tried to hack it in the "real world"?" because I'm out here, doing it and surviving. I tried a litany of new things in different sectors (private, governement, non-profit, academia) and now I feel confident in my decision to return for the PhD (I want to work in academia, hopefull as a prof., something I NEED the PhD for). TLDR (My advice in brevity) 1. Know thyself: This sounds glib but it's actually a lot of work. A career center can help you articulate this stuff. You won't be able to convince other people that you want a position if you can't orient yourself and explain how it actually makes sense to you. When I sat with someone and boiled down what I excelled in and enjoyed during the MA (TA-ing, research), I suddenly had great focus and was able to turn this traits into workable resume points (without any fibbing!) 2. Know others: certain parts of networking (like coldcalling) totally sucks; but it's so important, even for "menial" posts. Talk to everyone. Tell everyone that you are looking. Talk to people who have, or have had, the positions you want (they will be the best resources to answer the "cite the degree on the CV or not" question). I heard about the internship through a friend, my supervisor at the internship introduced my to a NGO HR person who gave me a line on the consulting gig, I leveraged my litany of contracts to get the current one and here I am. Opportunities will lead to other opportunities. Cosider this analogy: Harrison Ford worked as a pretty face in Hollywood for YEARS doing no-name, pretty-face stuff. He became disillusioned and took up work as a carpenter for sets, where he met George Lucas, who liked the cut of his jib and cast him. And then he was freakin' HAN SOLO!.... Moral? Keep your eyes peeled for your George Lucas! Everyone downplays the "luck" element that comes from networking and how this contributes to success, but it's important (even for "just menial" stuff, it's important to being in a happy place with a job that fulfills you/suits your needs, "menial" or otherwise)! Finally: If you ARE planning to return to academia, consider what a "time-off" period of JUST "menial" (or non-relevant) experience is going to look like on your apps. I know that the economy sucks and few of us have the luxury of having something paid, and in our field, fall into our laps; but if you are committed to your work vision as articulated above, please also consider dedicating some of your time to something that will build skills that you can transfer BACK to academia, even if this just takes the form of unpaid work or volunteering! And good luck!
  17. Not too bad so far. I've only paid for the grant app stuff as of right now (>$100). Also, no associated GRE costs as schools in the greater true-north-strong-and-free area don't need 'em. I'm gunning for an interdisciplinary PhD and am pretty committed to Toronto, so I'll likely only be applying to 3 schools, but at least 2 or 3 departments within each of these. This wouldn't be so bad, except each departmet needs its own app fee/transcripts ect; (I'm looking at YOU University of Toronto and your $110 (plus transcript/postage fee) a pop!) My MA apps ran up to about $520 CND, I'm anticipating that the PhD will set me back a similar amount.
  18. Definitely a good point. I was a student representative on the admissions committee for my MA program and I have to say, none of us doing the ranking laid eyes on the apps until a week after the deadline (generally, that gave a grace period for incoming transcripts/reference letters; you know, stuff that might be beyond the student's control). There was nothing to indicate whether an app was submitted early or close to the deadline, we only knew which ones came in late/incomplete (these were generally substantiated by a student's explanation). What WAS apparent, was how much time was spent on an app. The first ones we culled, after non-competitive stats (that had no explanation) were often ones that were obvious lazy form applications (no tailoring to program/discipline or attempt to articulate "fit") or obviously rushed (that, by turn, contained glaring mistakes, nonsensical SOPs, conflicting information and straight-up carelessness). My advice, then, is to balance considerations of the way in which you work best with a need to spend an adequate amount of time committed to writing and reflecting and editing your app. For myself, I like to hang on to applications until the deadline is looming, but not urgent. This means that I do the major drafting early on, so I'm usually just fussing with small things towards the end; this helps me keep my sanity and reflects the way that I work best. If I submitted early, I would spend the rest of the time before the deadline wishing that I hadn't as I would think of a million things that I might've done differently. I don't really get the "big sigh of relief" when I submit, I get it when the deadline passes and I know that now, certainly, it is all totally out of my hands. With all that in mind, two things: (1) This is just a reflection of my experience. I'm not familiar with the admission committees of other disciplines (indeed, it would certainly be different if acceptances were "on a rolling basis", I've just never encountered this.) (2) If you "work best" when you need to be in a particular mood, and that mood is "last-minute panic", I would suggest rethinking your strategy. To clarify my previous point, I like to come in close to the deadline, but not last minute. If you're going to hang-on-to-it-for-as-long-as-humanely-possible (like me), you should always aim for a submission of a week-ish prior to the deadline in case something goes wrong. I promise you, the one time you try to come in under the wire, murphy's law will strike you down with a postal strike or something equally calamitous!
  19. I'm with starmaker re: the benefits of getting acquainted. When I was applying for my MA, I ended up doing a couple of extra applications to other departments after I met with this potential-supervisor-that-I'd-idealized and realized that they were definitely NOT a good fit! An added bonus (if you haven't done all school/grant apps yet): you can mention on your applications that you have touched base with potential supervisors that share your research interests and it will (1) show that you've done some homework on that particular department (2) display that you are planning and initiating and (3)help the admissions committee to picture you in the department. HOWEVER, do NOT (1) lie and say that you touched base with a POI if you haven't or (2) overstate the POI's response (don't say that they agreed to supervise you if the did not extend this offer, if you've just been corresponding then just say that). Mentioning this mutual interest/correspondene does not mean that you're committed/obligated to this make this person your supervisor (or even take their class), it just shows good "fit" potential and planning. Contacting current/past grad students is a good idea too. I did this after I confirmed an offer and this helped me to pick classes and profs that I really enjoyed (as well, I was able to avoid a nightmarish prof who had extended a TA offer to me; after talking to some students who said that she was a great, capable prof, but treacherous to TA for, I took another TA-ship offer).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use