Jack Cade

An anecdotal tidbit. In looking over my app material, I have realized that the best offer I received was from a school in which the third sentence of my SOP was a fragment. It was an early application and I was in the middle of writing seminar papers, but I not only got accepted to this school, R1 competitive middle of the pack, but also was nominated for a fellowship. The reason given for the acceptance and nomination was my sample (which was far from perfect) and fit for their department. One of the other admittance offers I received from another R1, competitive had a horrible sample, but a finalized SOP that was in 'good' shape, but I also fit in there as well. Just an FYI.

Ditto, Semenza is a must read; although I would advise you to take him with slightly less salt then he and others have given his text. The picture has changed quite a bit in just the four years since this book came out--obviously it was written a year or two earlier. Also, his essentially meritocratic outlook obviously limits the book's validity. You could also start looking through the Chronicle of Higher Ed to kind of familiarize yourself with the world that you'll soon be landing in. And if you know what you are interested in working on, make sure you've read as many of the important texts as you can. For instance, early modern folks should read Greenblatt, everybody pretty much has to read Foucault (as in all of his major works)--although I hear tell that 17th cent folk don't, but I do not believe those rumors. But I repeat my earlier advice, repeated by others, enjoy this last period of freedom as much as possible, it will end.

Read, write, think, do what you love about the game as much as you can, as freely as you can. But do make sure that you are getting better at it. Because come August all of that will stop, except for the getting better. You'll get better, but in ever more specific, constricted, and ultimately directed ways. Enjoy the next four months of complete freedom. But don't not do the thing (I say fuck Webster, et al. I like double negatives, most everybody else has them), just do it on your terms while you can. This is the last chance you get until you're a full prof or maybe until you're a DP. To be clear though, I wouldn't trade being in the game for being out.

We did what many said was impossible. MSU in the Fall. One of my top choices since last fall.

All things being relatively equal I'd have to go with Ohio State University. [Edit] I totally have no idea if that was good or bad advice. Lets just say my advice was biased and leave it that. Ok, and dishonest. Glad you didn't take it.

Amen to that. It's cause we're trained to think. By definition of our training we reflexively think beyond boxes, while understanding those boxes, whatever they may be.

Seconded. And the rest seems right on as well.

But only the idiots, like all of us, are going into English...

But do we want to do that half-way through April?

exactement!

Ah well don't be loquacious, sometimes that is annoying when you're working with someone who likes you and you don't like them. And yes, that happens. Its not personal, it just is. If everybody liked you, what a dull person you'd have to be, or painfully, pathetically needy to try so hard to get them to like you. Recognize the situation and do your best to make it professional and painless for you both. THAT will reflect well on you. Second, double check what kind of work he does, see if maybe what you're doing is profoundly uninteresting to him; I do power, social theory, class identity sorts of stuff, gender, sexuality, or body studies stuff makes me want to brain myself after a shockingly short amount of time---this is tricky cause that is the exact kind of work my partner does, fortunately my stuff sends her looking for a way to change the conversation channel just as quickly. My MA advisor for instance, is not really even remotely interested in the way I do the thing, but for a variety of reasons we're stuck with each other for a few more months. I like her, I think she kind of likes me. So it works, but we don't get on all that well, we're just nice people working together. Third, you could summon up your courage, be forthright, and ask... Fourth, some people have a hard time being friendly when they are in the evaluating chair. Also, he may intimidated by your knowledge or something, or interprets your conversation as a boorish effort at self-promotion. Or perhaps there is some screwball attraction thing going on... Maybe you need to brush your teeth/tongue better or more often. Maybe you've done something that somehow was misinterpreted... Maybe you're a republican and he's a raging liberal or vice versa. Maybe your thesis project is weak, and he just hasn't had the heart to tell you---I honestly doubt this, if you are doing it, it has been filtered, and that process usually insures that even us dumb asses produce something reasonable. All in all, it is almost over, it is probably mostly in your imagination. And if it isn't who cares, he'll be in the rear view mirror by this time next year.

Seriously considered the unfunded year. Few people that I have known get funded in their second year. Very very few, like 1 versus about a dozen who did not end up getting funded for their masters despite hinted promises. Take the year break, unless you are older, there is no rush. And the debt just isn't worth it. The funded positions are fairly important. That said, I know folks who are successful who paid for their MA.

Ah interesting that you all think reapply. There are other things I'd might do, but a PhD ain't involved in any of them.

I hear tell that the aquarium has a wale shark... The airport is huge, and there seems to often be low lying cloud cover. It is a pretty part of the US. Sa'll I got.

Some have already begun that extrapolation. I said it to a friend today who is on the Job Market now, things are never intractable. If enough of us believe a fix must be made, then we can make it. Who I worry about are the folks coming out of the top programs with a vested interest in the status quo. Folks on top really like merit-based rationales. They are are a really stroke to the ego, if you happen to already be at the top. Its all so very early modern.

As your attorney I recommend repeated viewings of the movies Trainspotting, Factotum, and Fear and Loathing in Las Vagas, and then just let your life go from there. (I have never been to law school.)

Yes, do that. Other fun and good questions: PhD completion rate? What is the library like--I know UKy's is quite something and well funded. Teaching loads, I know UKy is basically 2/2 (12cr), although because freshman comp is 4cr hour it is 2/1. Recent hires or department lack of hires, has there been hiring freezes, are there faculty shortages in key areas (cough UK)? Course offerings, and the design of those courses. How about interdisciplinary opportunities (UK would be better for this, and the previous question, I suspect) Dis fellowship possibilities? Conference funding, sufficient insufficient? Ask the key faculty member(s) you are interested in working with if they are thinking of leaving--they will likely say no either way, but their answers might be revealing--and/or notice how long they have been there. Try to make contact with a grad student--maybe on here--take the temperature of their attitude towards the department, are MAs rolling over or taking off, etc.? But most importantly which is the place where you can do the best work? Where can you work with the best people? Oh, ask your adviser(s) at your current program what they think. All that said, I would be very leery about taking a position at a school that isn't on all of the big lists... Do it if it works for you and your ambitions. I.e. you want to teach lit and publishing is not really the main thing for you. However, if your goal is research prof at a tier one, perhaps a competitive tier one, then I suspect that Kentucky is your only choice. But, this is a sticky wicket. And no advice will be right, ultimately what you learn will resonate with how you feel and your choice will emerge, however tenuously, from that. BTW way to go, 4 acceptances!

Oh god people, maybe we all should just go to work in fast food. Instead of the pervasive emotional distress, we could have, the pervasive stink of deep-fried fish!

Correct me if I am wrong or overlooked something, but the deadline is only really for us. It is a concrete point at which we applicants are supposed to say, ok I am done, I am going to Y University. There is some legal hocus pocus about a contract to scare us into compliance, but I find it somewhat flimsy, contracts like that tend to be extremely difficult and expensive to enforce. Although, to my knowledge--limited and anecdotal--no one every gets sued or anything. Imagine the bad press for rich University X to be suing poor graduate student B. Its just not worth it. So, in theory, one accepts by the 15th, and doesn't entertain more offers. Of course, folks do. Depending on the size of the game your in though, you might make enemies. For departments the deadline only means that they can start counting their incomings with some confidence. Since many schools make offers after the deadline, then everyone must expect and accept that the whole thing is a bit... fuzzy...

Oh no, are we studying for the general test verbal again, or am I dreaming? :?

No I was being sincere, a touch silly, its 2:15am where I am. I think I agree with you. However, it seems the rare school that actually expects such responsible waitlist behavior. Hmm, good. I think that is settled. I think it is more than average conscientiousness (farg did I misspell that above? darn spell check), but not ridiculous.

I have absolutely never thought about that. The ethics of staying on a waitlist even though you know you will not accept the offer. Hmm, should we tell programs that we know we are waitlisted to, thanks for the almost offer but no thanks? Or are we starting to push polite conscientiousness to the extreme? No critique intended just a thought. As for keeping sanity, good luck!

(Emphasis mine) I didn't apply there but read that and thought, Icky!

I pick number 2. And I thank you; although I didn't notice either. However, as a frequent misspeller, I will steal your rationale. From this time forward, when corrected, I will reply with "you're welcome," and perhaps a pat of encouragement and/or an encouraging supportive smile. Misspelling is our gift to our fellows, our way of helping others to feel better about themselves, and hone their editing skills.

My quick advice (not detracting from the great advice already posted): I would play my cards closer to my vest with the pressuring department. You've asked for an extension because you have been waitlisted, they know that. They have refused and the are 'unethically' attempting to force you to make a decision by playing upon the basically insecure nature of your position. Therefore, should you, prior to 4/15, but after the date they have required, get a better offer. Take it. Do not tell the pressuring department that you plan to do this. Let them learn from their mistake. If they try to say that your acceptance is a legal obligation, then you should note in your acceptance some language that states that you are accepting this offer with the full intention of honoring it. However you recognize the Grad Council's deadline as a superior authority and only after 15th will you completely cease to entertain other offers--which is the rule, although some still do. I know people who have broken post 15th deadlines, like well into May, have heard tell of folks doing it in June, and they weren't vaporized by Academia--although most of these stories come from outside English and a few are a bit dated. So, you can do that, its just professionally risky, personally rude, and just bad academic karma. At the early deadline I would make sure to cc your note to the gradschool and the department. You could also, have a conversation with whoever is pressuring you and say that you are troubled by the deadline, or possibly talk to a member of the faculty with whom you have some connection. They do know what it is they are trying to do. So I guess you have sort of two paths: Forthright and above board or cagey and politically discrete. I think both are good policies and represent a personal choice that has more to do with character than relative efficacy. You know, they don't want to lose you either. They chose you, like you, and want you to come. You do have power here, probably more than you realize. {Edit was to fix slop; I glanced through the post and cringed.}