AhabsAdmissionLetter

I’m really grateful for all of your responses; they have been helpful to read. I hope many of you will continue in the discipline with the same collegial and thoughtful approaches to issues like this. There is a consensus building among some of these posts that fit is faculty/department driven and is measured by how they see an applicant fitting in with it. There is also an implication that the SOP and writing sample are the ways they measure fit and that since your stated interests in these artifacts can/will change, they are actually looking for form over substance; or, fit is more of a determination of if you can articulate an academic issue compellingly and in a form that they find appealing, within their guidelines of fit. As ComeBackZinc said, signaling. As others in this post have suggested, fit is something that can become indistinct when too many qualified candidates apply. If 20 could fit and only 10 can, then fit becomes a something halfway between a personality struggle and a who do you throw off the lifeboat thought experiment. So, if fit is a. something articulated externally by the adcom or department; and, b. something determined by measure externally by the adcom; and, c. something only measured, really at the end, in the comparative among equal, shortlisted applicants; and, d. measured from stated interests that will change, and in ways of stating that will change. e. something people who are asked to leave a Ph.D. program have Then fit is f. ultimately something used to disqualify applicants who do not approach it but cannot outright qualify candidates who do; and, g. genuinely useless as a predictive model if the process of training future professionals trains professionals to write better and exposes them to new research and ideas and new ways to research and new ways to convey ideas; and, h. suspect when many students who have “it” do not evidently have “it.” I’m just trying to think this through. DorindaAfterThyrsis said that there are no magic bullets and Stately Plump added that fit sucks—I agree. But fit is something or nothing, it can’t be both.

Imogene, a professor this week told me that since it was impossible for an adcom to read 400+ apps, at some schools a secretary or grad assistant makes initial cuts on something quantifiable, like GRE or GPA. So, while working on a SOP is a great idea, there is a likelihood that it will not be reviewed if the school does not approach candidate review holistically. Many rejection letters say something about careful consideration of everything you presented, but it could very well be the case that they only carefully reviewed 100 of 700 candidates and never looked at your file. I do not have an answer for you other than get your scores up, but then if that's what everyone else is doing too, then what becomes sufficient? Probably the personal statement and writing sample, since LORs are going to be compelling for the majority of applicants. I've been tempted to call programs and ask what metric they use to make their first cut. If you uncover that they only want someone with a 3.8 GPA or above and you have a 3.7, then you know not to bother wasting the time or money to apply. If I were to give you a recommendation it would be to try your best and revise what you can when you can, because then you can look at yourself in the mirror and have no regrets.

Imogene, thank you for helping to ground the ideas back to reality. My idealism often neglects attention to such details. I echo your thoughts about there being a better system. I agree that if schools were to post unique opportunities like job descriptions, applying for them would be easier for many of us. Statements such as “School X is looking for 3 theory students, 3 Victorians, and 3 Postmodernists” would certainly be enough to dissuade someone from spending almost $100 in application fees. Readwritenap, thank you for detailing this from another perspective. I appreciate it and your willingness to share details from your experiences. It certainly does help to hear what you (as someone else) have been doing. Although, I must say that your conference efforts are both inspiring and exhausting to think about! (but if that’s what it takes, that’s what it takes).

Over the last few months as I have read posts here, I have become concerned with how many of us have struggled with the notion of fit and whether or not it is, essentially, meaningless. It is distressing to read that many of you have been rejected from programs where you would be a perfect fit. What does fit-ness mean under such a scenario? All things marginally equal (good GPA, good scores, good letters of rec), if fit is the sufficient quality to obtain an offer, then what is the operative utility of fit in a system that alters it after the fact of initial consideration? If I say in my statement of purpose that I would like to investigate Little Dorrit and Bentham, but then take a seminar on African American Literature and have a spark of inspiration greater than my original one and wish to pursue it, on say, Clotel and Cixous, but then my dissertation committee changes it to Slave Narratives and Hypocrisy, and even adds a chapter on Hegelian dialects, what function did my original statement of purpose serve? A bribe to the gatekeeper? I have two friends who are in a Ph.D. program at a top 5 school who have told me that what they said in their personal statements became irrelevant after two years of research and exposure to theories and texts previously unstudied. And, on top of it all, their dissertation committees significantly changed the focus of their studies. If fit is about the potential to recycle ideas of people you study under, then what is the point of emphasizing originality? If original research is conducted in solitude, then what good is fit with people who will only read your dissertation once, if only pages of it? I think fit needs to be reimagined under broader categories; otherwise, it prompts people to lie on their statement of purpose. “Oh, yeah, I love Transcendentalism and theory. Theory transcendentalism theory. Scholar’s name, Institution’s name.” Especially if you’ve had nothing but rejections the first year, why not try misrepresenting yourself the second year? I’m just not convinced that fit-ness means anything significant if what you wish to study can be self-altered and externally-modified. I do not disagree with polishing ideas while working with experts, but words on a piece of paper could never capture fit if there is no such thing beyond the moment of consideration.

I have a MA in English and am the secretary to a department on my campus. Department secretarial jobs typically require a high school diploma or BA/S, so applying with an MA is a plus not only for credential-based interview opportunities but also because you get to offer higher levels of service, like manuscript prep and finding articles for your faculty. The best part, however, is that you stay in the academic world, where you have unfettered access to faculty. Also, as a department secretary, you could (as is the case with my institution) earn more than a Ph.D. in hand or ABD lecturer teaching 4 courses.

Give me the acceptance. Through LORs untold and applications unnumbered, I have fought my way here to the status page beyond the unmanageable website to take back the time that you have stolen. For my subject area is as strong as yours, and my statement of purpose is great. For my subject area is as strong as yours and my statement of purpose is great…Damn, I can never remember that line! … … … (wait for it) (stop trying to make fetch happen, it's never gonna happen ... ?)

Rupert, it's always been my dream program. I was even born on their campus, grew-up wanting to go there, and have endured 4 rejections from them over the last 10 years. It's devastating.

I would hope that schools that post that they're looking for a general undergrad GPA would be willing to listen to an explanation, or intuit one of it's been a 5-10 years since coursework. I had a horrible semester once (long story) and failed without withdrawing, which left me with an unrecoverable GPA. I did a GPA recalc and it indicated that 4 courses of Es would take 50 courses of As to overcome for a senior. So, I have a undergrad below a 3 and a grad of 3.95, and I do not know how it will be construed. The other problem is when they say they're looking for an undergrad GPA in English courses. As a French major, I do not know how seriously they take that stance.

Received mine in the mail today: Unfortunately and regret in the same sentence? Really? That must be overwhelming. Is the regret concurrently unfortunate for you? Do you really regret to say? I mean, you could just inform, instead. In fact, informing might take away some of the regret in saying. Hell, it even might make it less unfortunate and more circumstantial. Did you really give my application very careful attention? Or, was it given an otherwise ordinary level of careful attention? What does careful even mean, anyway if you likely ignored the application in a first cut based on a number? You will not be able to make me an offer. When? Moving forward? Now? Based on this application? This application cycle? Ever? Make me an offer...who wrote that, Mario Puzo? No, I'm not bitter. At all. ([just to ruin someone else's day, because that seems fair, right?] "my dream school broke my heart for the second time, and I was like...UMich UMich UMich, NO!")