practical cat

Congrats UCLA-ers!

Please, please, please don't worry about that.

Congrats on the good news, whatever it is! I hope you get some good admissions-related news soon too. I think I have still got another good cycle left in me if this one doesn't work out (please let it I do not want to do this again) but I'm taking steps toward a realistic Plan B that doesn't necessarily involve teaching. I'm going into this because of the love of research and I know it's a gamble even if I DO get in but I REALLY don't want to end up teaching high school. That's what I am doing right now and I don't think this particular institution is for me long term.

Am I in? ;-)

The thing though, is that no one in my years of reading these boards has ever argued that having an MA produces a weaker candidate. There may be some nasty talk (yes, I have seen that) but it's not quite the same as the accusations of immaturity and unacceptability that those of us without face. I actually honestly don't understand the need to defend that choice -- you don't need to defend the choice, it is clearly the privileged position. And there needs to be some understanding of the fact that it is not necessarily a choice for everyone (not here so much but throughout academia).

Thank you so much for this.

I'm certainly not denying that some are funded, but most are not fully and I can't realistically justify adding to my student debt in any way. It is not a viable option for everyone and it has unfortunately been treated as such in this thread. Is a funded MA something I will consider if I strike out this year? Yes but it was also something I weighed this year and I decided to gamble on my undergrad record. I think most of us who are applying with just the BA have at least thought about it. This is not at all directed at you, asleepawake, but I don't always appreciate the excessive concern over the lack of the MA that is often exhibited here. Again, disheartening.

Stay gold, dazedandbemused, stay gold.

This is precisely why it is not helpful to use terms with potentially negative connotations without clarifying bounds of meaning. Obviously not everyone was working from those assumptions. You guys, I am obviously really bored.

A guess. I think it'll be earlier than the 20th though.

Can we not post implied rejections on the results board? It gets confusing and, well, it might not even be true. I was kind of thinking we'd hear from UPenn tomorrow but maybe not with the snow?

I don't believe it was just directed at you. Reading these last couple of pages has been like reading two totally different conversations mashed together. I don't think anyone was portraying anyone else fairly. That said, anything short of fully funded is just not an option for me financially so the privileging of the MA is disheartening to say the least.

I bet they're doing wait list tomorrow! No more assuming rejection! Edit: also, congrats to all of today's admits!

YES, I know. Anyway, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you!

Imma pm you. Feel free to ignore if you'd rather have less gossip than more.

Vanderbilt. It's hellish but I guess also kind, depending on perspective. Good luck!

I honestly think it's the wait list coming but. Eh. I'm not optimistic about funding for those coming off of their wait list.

It's only 130 in California. That statement makes me want to weep but there it is. Also: Wisconsin, where's my rejection?

Um, yeah. About that...

Not necessarily. It looks like last year they notified over the course of a couple of days, did the wait list, and then rejections. It's not necessarily over for you until you're rejected. Good luck!

Yay! That is AMAZING! Congrats!

I had that same thought about my future, haha. But keep it positive, I think you have at least a couple firm yeses coming.

I know, I know. BUT this does make me feel better that 1) my application wasn't, in fact, lost and 2) I might make it actually IN somewhere. VANDERBILT sort of liked me.

CONGRATULATIONS ME TOO THAT WAS THE NICEST EMAIL EVER TOO

I hope you do! My negativity be damned.