Stately Plump

This applies to all the queries about writing sample size (etc.): I would submit the tightest piece of writing you have. I wouldn't worry about length; if you absolutely need to bring it up, do it, but I would sooner submit a paper that is below the page limit than one that meets the limit but is weak. They want to see your ability to spread an argument over several pages, and they can glean that from a 12-15 page sample, even if they "formally" request 20-25. If they want 20 pages but are impressed with your 14, I can almost guarantee you won't be denied simply because your sample was a few pages "short." I would focus on producing the tightest paper you can, rather than on meeting length standards. Just my 2¢

Got my rejection in the mail. Already accepted elsewhere. Congrats to everyone who got in! It was a top choice of mine for a while.

So excited for everyone on here! I've been away for a few days so I just got to read through four pages of acceptances! So exciting and congrats everyone :)

Everything I've heard has said that an MA from a school with no PhD is more valuable than one from a school with a PhD. My advisor mentioned to me that adcomms will be suspicious of getting your MA from a school with no PhD because they will suspect you applied there knowing that most will to the PhD, and that you might be "slipping in" via the MA program. I don't want to argue about whether certain programs are "cash cows," but adcomms will definitely be aware that schools with PhD programs have a very large self-interest in accepting many MA students (because they can give that money to the PhD students). Schools that only have an MA, on the other hand, will be viewed as more competitive. I've never heard it said that adcomms look down on them because they don't have the faculty or the resources to have a PhD program; some schools don't have one by choice. One of the major scholars in my field is at Villanova. Adcomms won't know why you've attended at MA program; perhaps you weren't sure you wanted the PhD at first. If you get your MA from a school that offers a PhD, they very well may think, "why didn't she attend their PhD program? She wasn't good enough for them? Maybe she's not good enough for us." One final thought: schools like knowing what type of funding you've received, and funding begets funding. An adcomm will be very impressed with a funded MA, because that is very rare and it is a huge achievement (remember that for a school to offer funding, that is a huge commitment on their part). If you apply to PhD programs via an unfunded MA, the adcomms will know that you didn't receive any funding and that you "bought" your MA. If you've been funded, they will be impressed by that, because they understand how significant it is for a university to "give" money to a humanities student. Take all this with a grain of salt. It's what I've learned from my conversations with my advisors, and I don't have experience going from MA to PhD. I know someone who went from Columbia's unfunded MA on to Cornell's PhD program (they would advise strongly against making that decision, because the risk was far too great and a lot of their friends from the MA were crippled with debt afterwards), I know someone who went from UVa's unfunded MA to Amherst's PhD, and I know someone who's gone from Georgetown's funded MA to UPenn's PhD. Either route can be good, depending on how you prepare yourself for the next step.

I just officially removed myself from the wait-list. I hope it helps someone on here! However, I was never offered a spot as a TA. I was offered an assistantship as the assistant to the editor of The Sidney Journal, which has the same benefits as the TAship. I don't know if that option is available to non-Renaissance people, but it's something to consider. If you are potentially going, or really want to go, I would talk to them and say something like, "I really want to go, but am struggling with the financial options. Are there any RAships available for me, or any other assistance I might be eligible for?" When I was there, I mentioned to the students I met with that I was worried about the financial aid. They said that if you have any doubts, you should mention it to Steven Clingman and Joseph Black, because they might be able to work something out. So that's an option, for anyone who wants it.

See you there!

Haha don't be scared! We'll be good It will be a lot, I'm sure, but I think it will be exciting (<--- sunglasses to hide fear)

I started with location. Weak, I know, but I had strong personal reasons to stay on the east coast. It was a cheap and easy way to eliminate a lot of schools. From there I started thinking about where I would actually want to attend. I didn't apply anywhere I wouldn't want to go. From there I started looking at places that might actually support the work I wanted to do. Then I totally ignored this information and applied where ever I wanted to apply anyway. I did limit the number of really, really top schools to which I applied. I did that by thinking about where I'd rather be; if A and B are both top 15ish, and I could pick, which one would it be? I applied to that one and cut the other from the list. If I could do it again, I would have payed more attention to the schools that would have been good fits. I didn't pay enough attention to that, and it was probably a waste of money in the long run. But oh well. Good luck!

I think it's definitely very possible to establish relationships in one year. Go to office hours, attend the special events, get to know the faculty; you'll make some impressions, if that's what you set out to do. One of my professors who wrote me a letter for application season knew me for less than a year; I was in the middle of my second course with him, but I had really impressed him during the first course, and I spoke with him whenever I got the chance. I'm not sure how the thesis would be perceived professionally. To be honest, I don't know that PhD programs would know whether or not you had completed a thesis (you could put it on your CV, of course, but I don't think that would really make a difference in getting admitted). If you produce a good writing sample, which you can definitely do via seminar, I think you'd be fine. One other consideration is that BU is also 8 courses, which are spread over two semesters. I'll be attending BU in the fall, and when I visited, I spoke with some students who said that the workload was impossible to manage. I'm actually a bit excited about it, but just know that four graduate classes per semester will a TON of work. (Though it will be good preparation!) Just my 2¢.

I don't believe age has any bearing whatever on admission to PhD programs. Many people "start late." And if you are talking about "late 20s," that's not actually "late" at all (I'm pretty sure the average age for someone in a humanities PhD program is early 30s, but I could be wrong).

+1

NYU has reigned supreme in Philosophy for a number of years now. They consistently attract the most influential philosophers to speak and have a top-notch faculty.

I second what's been said. Go and be courteous, interested, professional. Make relationships; you never know how valuable they might be in the future.

My advice, which should be obvious from my last post, is to spend little time on the Lit GRE and more time on your writing sample and SOP. I promise you, you will fare better with strong SOPs and writing samples than you will with high GREs. I would be willing to bet that my GREs, particularly my subject test scores, were among the lowest of the students admitted, and I would also be willing to bet that the majority of students who applied and were not accepted also scored higher than I did. I admit that most of it was just luck, and that's just how the cards were dealt this round, but I also believe that it was because I spent several months (like, eleven) working on my writing sample and five months working on my SOP. By contrast, I spent about a month studying for the general test.

Go to Rutgers, no question, no discussion. (<--- sunglasses hoping you make the right choice)

I saw an acceptance go up today, so perhaps it did indeed! I removed myself from the wait-list. That probably doesn't help anyone, but you never know!

Oh no! I'm so sorry! I was looking forward to getting to know all of you. Best of luck with your other applications!!!

I got a 520, which translates to 39% percentile, on the Lit GRE. I got into two PhD programs and two MA programs, as well as getting wait-listed at a third PhD. So my guess is that it really isn't that important, as long as the rest of your file is good.

Most schools are probably looking for something that is much more interest and research driven rather than personal. They already know that "I've always loved to read" and they already know that "I've always had a passion for learning and researching and teaching and etc. etc. etc...." They know that because if you didn't love those things, you wouldn't be applying for PhD programs in literature. What will stand out for departments is a personal statement that is able to include a bit of personal narrative (it is, for many programs, the closest they'll get to an interview), but is mostly focused on your research interests and why you would be a good fit for their school. If you can include some personal narrative in your research interests (I mentioned an undergrad trip to the British Library, where I saw manuscripts from Philip Sidney, which sparked my interests in early modern lit), then that's probably the way to go. But like you said, it varies from school to school. My best advice is to draft early and often. Write a personal statement, edit it, then write a completely new one, using none of the same material. It's easy to get attached to something you've written, but just because you're attached doesn't mean it's as good as it can be. Play around and experiment. It can be fun if you make it so EDIT: (sunglasses to hide fact that writing personal statement is never fun)

Ahh, I missed this in the OP's post . Sorry, for some reason I thought we were talking about post-PhD. Lol. Wouldn't even have had this discussion. I would absolutely look for a real job post-MA. I don't think adjunct teaching will help one getting into a PhD program. Sorry everybody

I'm talking about stopping after completing the PhD, not stopping in between undergrad/MA/PhD. Sorry if that wasn't clear I don't think that stopping between BA and MA or even MA and PhD will put you at any disadvantage whatever. I do think, however, that stopping after the PhD for several years could potentially be a mark against you in the job market. It won't necessarily cripple your chances, but I would be willing to bet that, if it came down to a student who had taken time off after her PhD and one who had taken no time off, the one who had taken no time off would be hired. When faculty hire new faculty, they want to hire the person who they think will bring the most to their department. Taking a few years off, as many on here can attest, makes it difficult for you to stay current with the literature, keep up on what's being published, and maintain an understanding of the most current publications. Job search committees know this, and when searching for a new faculty member, they are often looking for someone who will bring some area of expertise to the department. If they think you might be behind in your field, or are not current with the research being done, you might have a tough time overcoming that. Also, this probably holds true mainly for larger, research oriented universities. Smaller schools that have more of a teaching bent will understandably have less rigorous standards. Still, I don't want anything about my application to count against me, given the nature of the job market.

I have two points to make. The first is that I am not necessarily recommending that, after graduating, we take adjunct positions over any and all other positions. I am merely suggesting that adjunct teaching might land you in a better spot than getting work outside academia, especially when you enter into competition with other job applicants who have not taken time off. I wish this weren't the case, but unfortunately, it probably is. Getting a job in academia isn't about being qualified; it's mostly luck, but beyond that it's fit with the department, publications, how interesting the work you are doing is, your past experience, etc. Pretty much everyone graduating from a PhD program will be "qualified" for academic work, in terms of research/work load and teaching experience, but not everyone will get a job. That's just reality of academia. Ask some of your current professors who've graduated in the past 10-15 years to tell you about all the students they went to grad school with who didn't get jobs and are now bitter about academia. And if you don't believe me, look at MLA's job postings; it will take you about 40 minutes to review every job in the entire country, and that includes those for which you would not be eligible (such as positions for an Americanist if you are an early modernist or post-colonialist). Again, I don't mean this to be harsh, I'm just trying to uncover some truth about our future professions. My second point is that graduate students often unionize. There are graduate student unions at both the PhD programs to which I was accepted. Just food for thought Hope this didn't hurt any feelings Again, that was never my intent. Like I said, the internet is a hard place to get across the tone in which you are speaking, and I assure you, my tone is colloquial and friendly

No. I know plenty of people who don't have one. There is also ZipCar (is that what it's called?), if you ever do need one.