Stately Plump

This may be true, but one of the problems facing many departments in the humanities is an *extreme* lack of funding. They literally cannot afford to make offers to 20-30 people initially, even if they "know" only 5-10 of those 20-30 will eventually accept. Departments also differ. I'm pretty sure some schools accept more than they can fund fully. Others will only accept students to whom they can offer full funding; in this case, they will probably only make 10-ish offers, wait-list others, and then accept off the wait-list as their initial offers decline. The worst thing they could do would be to extend 20 offers, guarantee full funding, have 20 people accept, and then tell 8-10 of them they won't receive funding. Please do be careful about rankings. Don't ignore them completely, but don't place too much value on them either. Is there really a difference between a school ranked 45 and one ranked 55? Or even 45 and 65? Of course, most students want to/will attend the most prestigious program they can, but with how competitive these programs are, it would be silly to think that really fantastic work isn't being done in schools outside the "top 50." Also, it will vary from field to field. I know Notre Dame, for example, is ranked in the 40s by US News, but is in the top 10 for Medieval studies. I mentioned this in an earlier post, but there was a student last year who was accepted to one program, which is ranked in the top 5. Obviously, all the other programs--from which she was rejected--were not ranked higher. So did those lower-ranked programs accept "better" students, and the top 5 school take what was left? Of course not! It just happened to work out that way. There is zero "scholarly" or "professional" explanation for that. It just happened. Please don't take this the wrong way. I'm not trying to offend anyone. I just want to point out that the system is more arbitrary than many people would like, and sometimes the very best students end up programs ranked lower than they thought they would have liked. Remember: every program is somebody's dream program.

I was actually referring more to the U.S. News rankings (found here). Don't take these things too seriously; in the final analysis, they really don't matter all that much. But I do think they are helpful, at least as a preliminary tool to try to sort out some potential schools. It is really easy to get caught up in rankings; please resist this temptation. Also remember that just about every program is getting about 300 applicants; maybe some are "only" getting 150, but when there are only 8-15 spots, that is wildly competitive. Harvard's undergrad acceptance rate is (I believe) about 8%; most PhD programs in Literature accept about 5% or less. So getting a spot in a PhD program is essentially more difficult than getting into Harvard. I don't say that to scare people, but to point out the insignificance of the rankings. Even schools with "low" rankings are exceptional programs, and getting accepted is a phenomenal accomplishment. Not trying to scare people. But do be prepared to wear your "I'm not scared (but really I'm scared shitless)" sunglasses, featured here --->

I got a negative 300 on the subject test--at LEAST 100 points below the "minimum," had there been one--but was still accepted. I guarantee that my subject test score was lower than many applicants who were not accepted. And I'm sure that my scores were lower than the "average" of what they normally take. And yes, the programs to which I was accepted required the subject test I echo what was said about applying to a range of programs. Pick a few top 20s, a few top 40s, a few top 60s, a few top 80s, etc. See where you come out. This quote used to be in someone's signature, and I think it's great advice: "Every program is somebody's dream program."

I won't be using SPSS, but my plan is to keep my current laptop (Macbook Pro, 2+ years old) and buy an iPad and bluetooth keyboard for traveling, writing on the go, and basic "computer" needs. As as side note, I just completed an Honor's thesis is Sociology which required I run SPSS on my Mac. I didn't have any problems with it.

If I were applying for this upcoming application year, I would print out this post and hang it above my desk. And I would do exactly as it says. Write a draft following these instructions. Then write a completely new draft following these instructions. Then write a third and a fourth. Then combine the best features of all drafts, whether that be one paragraph, one sentence, or one word.

The short answer is that you don't gauge. They aren't going to take students with the highest GPA or GRE scores; they are taking students who they feel are best going to complement the strengths of their program; they are taking students who will fill out the "needs" of past/future cohorts; they are taking students who will "get along" with professors/students; they are taking students who they feel have the best chance of landing a tenure-track job at the end if it, which in turn helps the reputation of their program. These students don't always have the best "numbers". Sometimes, it's something as simple as, "here's a male student interested in women's studies, which we don't have," or "this student mentioned such-and-such theorist in her writing sample, and I like such-and-such theorist." I promise, there is no formula to figure out where you may or may not get in. Last application season (correct me if I'm wrong), someone on here got into one school: Columbia. She (he?) was rejected from all others, which, needless to say, were ranked far lower than Columbia. Figure that one out. All you can do is submit the strongest application you can produce, pray to the old gods and the new, and wait. (<--- sunglasses to hide PTSD from last year's app season)

I definitely agree. The purpose of mentioning profs at all is to try to draw some link between your interests and the strengths of the program.

I think I averaged mentioning two professors per statement. In some I might have mentioned three, but I really tried to avoid talking too much about them, like Trip said. I kept all that to one paragraph towards the bottom; the rest was more about my research interests and how I got there.

I think this is absolutely brilliant advice. Keep in mind that the program you will be attending will, at some point, hope to teach you something. You can have some "specific" research interests, but the professors understand that you will continue to explore even after you begin. If your interests are too specific, you might come across as egotistical and unwilling to learn what they have to offer you. Ultimately, they are looking for students that they think will contribute positively to their program. I wouldn't say anything like, "I want to study the Great Gatsby." It would probably come off as naive and unprofessional. Mention broader topics, like sex/gender roles in early 20th American lit, and perhaps mention Gatsby as an example of a text you might be interested in studying.

SPSS is compatible with Mac. I have SPSS on my Mac right now.

Just wanted to say that I'll be starting the PhD program in English in the fall. I currently live in the Boston area, so I'm not really "relocating," but I second everything said in the post above. Apartment hunting can be tricky, but if you're diligent, you should be able to find a nice place. Good luck!

I just had a course in Ecocriticism and I thought this was fantastic.

Check with your program. They will probably tell you no, but it's worth asking, if it's something you really want to pursue. They will probably tell you that you should complete one first and then begin on the other.

I've been dabbling in journals in my field. And very much enjoying the access to my new school's library's online resources

Three of the four programs to which I was accepted asked for my subject test scores. Best of luck to you! And to everyone applying! Seriously, put more time into your writing sample. Good GRE scores and bad writing samples/personal statements is--literally--a definite rejection. I promise. Good writing samples/personal statements and bad GREs are, at least, a maybe. Exceptional writing samples negate GRE scores. You have to remember that everyone applying, or 90% of people applying, have perfect GPAs (at least in the major), exceptional letters of recommendation, and top GREs. What makes you stand out is your writing ability. I can guarantee that every PhD program will have at least a dozen applicants who have 90-95% GRE, 4.0 GPA, etc. If your writing sample outweighs theirs, you WILL be selected over them. Good luck to everyone!

I took the test twice. The first time, taking the old test, I scored in the 79% verbal (!). The second time I scored in the 90% percentile, which was obviously better, but I definitely didn't ace it. I was accepted to four programs, and two of them with full funding. I scored in the 39% on the subject test. Don't give the GRE--be it the general or the subject--too much power. If a school sees potential in your writing sample and personal statement, they won't care about your GREs.

Yes!

Funding > no funding.

Like Trip said, many schools offer a course that is designed specifically to help grad students pass translation exams. The department has no interest in "flunking" you for not passing a foreign language requirement; you will likely find that they are much more accommodating than their website makes them seem.

You may find you will have trouble getting into a program where you can study Scandinavian literatures if you do not speak the language. Remember that graduate programs are training you to become an expert in your field; it would be difficult to become an expert in an area of a literature whose language you didn't speak. Very, very few programs will accept that you want to study literature in translation, at least as one of your main foci. The other problem is that if a program does have a Scandinavian studies department, they are probably going to accept only 1 (or zero) applicants to that area of study. Schools are not going to accept a student in an unusual area of study just to diversify their cohort of incoming students; they are only going to accept students who they feel are on the verge of becoming experts in their field. My suggestion would be to stick to your other interests and make your Scandinavian interests secondary. You may find, when you get to graduate school, that there are some other faculty/students who have similar interests, and perhaps you can pursue it from there. However, I worry that mentioning that you want to study Scandinavian lit in translation could end up being detrimental to your application, because it might be perceived as academically naive and unprofessional. I only say all of this because I would hate to see you diminish your chances of success in applying If you do end up learning the language fluently (i.e., enough to take a graduate course in the language), then by all means apply with that as your main focus! If you can study a Scandinavian language in the original, and can link those interests in a comparative way with interests in American literature, you can probably create a really unique and interesting application. Good luck!

This is wildly funny.

I would be glad to read some SOPs

Yes please.

I've heard, and I could be wrong, that establishing a personal relationship/connection with a POI before applying is more common in some of the hard sciences. Personally, I was not in touch anywhere, and I was accepted to two PhD programs, wait-listed at a third, and also accepted to two MA programs. If you are going to try to establish a connection, I would strongly advise against sending emails to "superstar" professors. My first step would be to make sure your POI is still teaching, at least at the graduate level. Look at course listings; a lot of departments at larger schools have 50-60 faculty members, but only offer 12-15 (or less) graduate seminars per semester. That means a good 35 faculty members are just doing research, they are not even teaching. Some of them might not even be on campus, they might just be "honorary" faculty members who get a paycheck from the university. Don't waste your time sending those people emails; it will come off as naive, which is never good. Also, perhaps try contacting some current grad students and see which professors are advisors, which aren't, etc. If one of your POIs already has 6-7 advisees, she might not want to take on another. I wouldn't say it's a bad idea to contact them beforehand, but make sure you do so tactfully. You'll be better off making no impression than making a bad one.

I have no idea what is or is not on Netflix... I think The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is better as a movie than book. The English version (i.e., the translation) is awful; I thought the movie was fantastic. I think Game of Thrones is faaaaaar better as a T.V. show than it was a book. The book is so poorly written it is literally laughable. The story is good and the characters are entertaining, but the writing itself--bah! I suppose part of the reason for my hatred of the book is that I both feel and believe that I could do better, which is never a good feeling to have while reading a book. The T.V. series, however, is fascinating. Finally, the T.V. show Sherlock. All time favorite. Done.