Reapplying Success?

[wiry_air]

Not that it's all said and done, but I've started to think through my plans for reapplication to help soothe the (very likely) rejections heading my way soon. I've poked around the forum archives and found some good info about good ways to spend the time (honing SOP and writing sample), but I'm curious to hear more from any folks (or folks who know folks) who had better luck after reapplying. What do you feel made the big difference? How did you tackle the time?

I know there's no magic solution, since everyone's different, but I imagine there might be some ideas on what you changed that made the difference. I have a few ideas, but it can be daunting to figure out how to improve without feedback from the programs on what worked and what didn't.

[intextrovert]

Not that it's all said and done, but I've started to think through my plans for reapplication to help soothe the (very likely) rejections heading my way soon. I've poked around the forum archives and found some good info about good ways to spend the time (honing SOP and writing sample), but I'm curious to hear more from any folks (or folks who know folks) who had better luck after reapplying. What do you feel made the big difference? How did you tackle the time?

I know there's no magic solution, since everyone's different, but I imagine there might be some ideas on what you changed that made the difference. I have a few ideas, but it can be daunting to figure out how to improve without feedback from the programs on what worked and what didn't.

Hi there! I put in seven applications two years ago and got straight rejections (with one a waitlist and then rejection). This season has been much more successful - I mean, it's not like I've gotten into every school I wanted, but I've gotten into two I'm really excited about (one of which rejected me last time), waitlisted at another sort of dream program (where I was also rejected last time) and five haven't notified.

One big thing I did before was post a question to this forum, very much like the one you just posted! I was soliciting advice, putting out theories about why I did poorly to be either confirmed or refuted. I didn't find any grad school communities until after my first round of applications, and I really attribute a lot of my success to the advice I've gotten. I was so completely overwhelmed by some of the responses I got from very knowledgable people willing to offer support and extensive, nuanced advice to a stranger on the internet. These forums and others have been completely invaluable, and also make you feel warm and fuzzy about the potential of collegiality. After that first post, I suddenly felt I had direction. Obviously, you have to do the work, and be open to the fact that it might involve real work, but people here can tell you what that work is. So I'll tell you what I did, in accordance with the advice I got:

I think the big thing for me was my statement of purpose. But it wasn't just a matter of writing a better essay, but the focus and perspective I've gained in the two years that made it into the essay. Two years ago, I couldn't have written the SoP I wrote this year. Not that it was amazing, but just that it had clarity, consistency, and showed that I had specific things I wanted to research. I figured out more about exactly what I wanted to study, the direction of my research. I read up a bit on the work being done in my subfield so I'm aware of general directions people are taking it in, which I started doing by browsing journals related to my subfield, and scanning through a few books that seemed to reappear. I read other successful SoPs, both on this and related communities, as well as ones I solicited from friends in grad school. That was huge in figuring out possible ways to structure, what to include, what the goals should be.

I had retaken the GRE before my first round, and realized that was a ridiculous rookie mistake. I had scores that were plenty good enough the first time, but I thought bringing them up to perfect would make the difference (ah, the college admissions model). Well, my resulting pretty "perfect" scores got me rejected everywhere, and as I used the same scores this time around with very different results, I know that's not what it's about. Unless you're around or below 600 Verbal, don't waste your time/money.

I had planned to really work on my writing sample, because I was really worried it was too much of a close reading and didn't have enough theory. I did read some theory I thought would be relevant and worked it in, though it wasn't quite the overhaul I expected (I travelled this summer and just didn't have the time - and I'm a high school English teacher). I think what I did manage to do, though, made it a stronger sample.

I applied a litte more broadly, less married to the US News list (all my first-round schools were in the top 20, whereas this time they ranged from 1 to 50). I went for "fit" - which schools are strong in your subfield? I did my research in terms of fit this time, not just applying to schools and then scrounging up reasons (forcing faculty interest alignment, etc.), but really going through some schools I hadn't thought of before and looking closely. I ended up applying to half of the same schools, but I had half new, and one is an acceptance I am very seriously considering. Ask your advisors about what schools, based on your interests, they would recommend, and really look into it.

I did contact people at my three top choices - so far, I'm waitlisted at one, rejected at another, and haven't heard from the third. So I'm not sure how important that is, except that at one of them (where I'm waitlisted), I've learned a lot about the program and had some lovely conversations, which is valuable in and of itself.

Hope that helps - just a few basic things, I know. But really, it looks like your'e doing the right thing by seeking out people who have gained some insight! I hope it works out for you this round (there really is still hope!) but if not, good luck!!

[hadunc]

Hi there! I put in seven applications two years ago and got straight rejections (with one a waitlist and then rejection). This season has been much more successful - I mean, it's not like I've gotten into every school I wanted, but I've gotten into two I'm really excited about (one of which rejected me last time), waitlisted at another sort of dream program (where I was also rejected last time) and five haven't notified.

One big thing I did before was post a question to this forum, very much like the one you just posted! I was soliciting advice, putting out theories about why I did poorly to be either confirmed or refuted. I didn't find any grad school communities until after my first round of applications, and I really attribute a lot of my success to the advice I've gotten. I was so completely overwhelmed by some of the responses I got from very knowledgable people willing to offer support and extensive, nuanced advice to a stranger on the internet. These forums and others have been completely invaluable, and also make you feel warm and fuzzy about the potential of collegiality. After that first post, I suddenly felt I had direction. Obviously, you have to do the work, and be open to the fact that it might involve real work, but people here can tell you what that work is. So I'll tell you what I did, in accordance with the advice I got:

I think the big thing for me was my statement of purpose. But it wasn't just a matter of writing a better essay, but the focus and perspective I've gained in the two years that made it into the essay. Two years ago, I couldn't have written the SoP I wrote this year. Not that it was amazing, but just that it had clarity, consistency, and showed that I had specific things I wanted to research. I figured out more about exactly what I wanted to study, the direction of my research. I read up a bit on the work being done in my subfield so I'm aware of general directions people are taking it in, which I started doing by browsing journals related to my subfield, and scanning through a few books that seemed to reappear. I read other successful SoPs, both on this and related communities, as well as ones I solicited from friends in grad school. That was huge in figuring out possible ways to structure, what to include, what the goals should be.

I had retaken the GRE before my first round, and realized that was a ridiculous rookie mistake. I had scores that were plenty good enough the first time, but I thought bringing them up to perfect would make the difference (ah, the college admissions model). Well, my resulting pretty "perfect" scores got me rejected everywhere, and as I used the same scores this time around with very different results, I know that's not what it's about. Unless you're around or below 600 Verbal, don't waste your time/money.

I had planned to really work on my writing sample, because I was really worried it was too much of a close reading and didn't have enough theory. I did read some theory I thought would be relevant and worked it in, though it wasn't quite the overhaul I expected (I travelled this summer and just didn't have the time - and I'm a high school English teacher). I think what I did manage to do, though, made it a stronger sample.

I applied a litte more broadly, less married to the US News list (all my first-round schools were in the top 20, whereas this time they ranged from 1 to 50). I went for "fit" - which schools are strong in your subfield? I did my research in terms of fit this time, not just applying to schools and then scrounging up reasons (forcing faculty interest alignment, etc.), but really going through some schools I hadn't thought of before and looking closely. I ended up applying to half of the same schools, but I had half new, and one is an acceptance I am very seriously considering. Ask your advisors about what schools, based on your interests, they would recommend, and really look into it.

I did contact people at my three top choices - so far, I'm waitlisted at one, rejected at another, and haven't heard from the third. So I'm not sure how important that is, except that at one of them (where I'm waitlisted), I've learned a lot about the program and had some lovely conversations, which is valuable in and of itself.

Hope that helps - just a few basic things, I know. But really, it looks like your'e doing the right thing by seeking out people who have gained some insight! I hope it works out for you this round (there really is still hope!) but if not, good luck!!

This is an excellent response, and I would second everything in it. Aside from polishing the SoP and writing sample, I think it's really good to have something to show for the year off. As in, do some independent research, present at a conference, teach, or try to get an article published. This will demonstrate that you have the motivation to engage in scholarly work whether or not you have the backing of an institution. Grad schools invest a fair amount of money in their students, so if you can prove that you're a "safe investment" (I hate to put it in those terms, but I think it's true nonetheless), in that you really can/will do the work, that goes a long way.

I have to agree with intextrovert regarding test scores. Unless you're applying only to schools that are likely to have a high minimum score requirement, I don't think it's worth the time and money. Better to focus on developing your research interests and improving the SoP and writing sample.

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

On 2/25/2010 at 1:19 PM, intextrovert said:

Hi there! I put in seven applications two years ago and got straight rejections (with one a waitlist and then rejection). This season has been much more successful - I mean, it's not like I've gotten into every school I wanted, but I've gotten into two I'm really excited about (one of which rejected me last time), waitlisted at another sort of dream program (where I was also rejected last time) and five haven't notified.

One big thing I did before was post a question to this forum, very much like the one you just posted! I was soliciting advice, putting out theories about why I did poorly to be either confirmed or refuted. I didn't find any grad school communities until after my first round of applications, and I really attribute a lot of my success to the advice I've gotten. I was so completely overwhelmed by some of the responses I got from very knowledgable people willing to offer support and extensive, nuanced advice to a stranger on the internet. These forums and others have been completely invaluable, and also make you feel warm and fuzzy about the potential of collegiality. After that first post, I suddenly felt I had direction. Obviously, you have to do the work, and be open to the fact that it might involve real work, but people here can tell you what that work is. So I'll tell you what I did, in accordance with the advice I got:

I think the big thing for me was my statement of purpose. But it wasn't just a matter of writing a better essay, but the focus and perspective I've gained in the two years that made it into the essay. Two years ago, I couldn't have written the SoP I wrote this year. Not that it was amazing, but just that it had clarity, consistency, and showed that I had specific things I wanted to research. I figured out more about exactly what I wanted to study, the direction of my research. I read up a bit on the work being done in my subfield so I'm aware of general directions people are taking it in, which I started doing by browsing journals related to my subfield, and scanning through a few books that seemed to reappear. I read other successful SoPs, both on this and related communities, as well as ones I solicited from friends in grad school. That was huge in figuring out possible ways to structure, what to include, what the goals should be.

I had retaken the GRE before my first round, and realized that was a ridiculous rookie mistake. I had scores that were plenty good enough the first time, but I thought bringing them up to perfect would make the difference (ah, the college admissions model). Well, my resulting pretty "perfect" scores got me rejected everywhere, and as I used the same scores this time around with very different results, I know that's not what it's about. Unless you're around or below 600 Verbal, don't waste your time/money.

I had planned to really work on my writing sample, because I was really worried it was too much of a close reading and didn't have enough theory. I did read some theory I thought would be relevant and worked it in, though it wasn't quite the overhaul I expected (I travelled this summer and just didn't have the time - and I'm a high school English teacher). I think what I did manage to do, though, made it a stronger sample.

I applied a litte more broadly, less married to the US News list (all my first-round schools were in the top 20, whereas this time they ranged from 1 to 50). I went for "fit" - which schools are strong in your subfield? I did my research in terms of fit this time, not just applying to schools and then scrounging up reasons (forcing faculty interest alignment, etc.), but really going through some schools I hadn't thought of before and looking closely. I ended up applying to half of the same schools, but I had half new, and one is an acceptance I am very seriously considering. Ask your advisors about what schools, based on your interests, they would recommend, and really look into it.

I did contact people at my three top choices - so far, I'm waitlisted at one, rejected at another, and haven't heard from the third. So I'm not sure how important that is, except that at one of them (where I'm waitlisted), I've learned a lot about the program and had some lovely conversations, which is valuable in and of itself.

Hope that helps - just a few basic things, I know. But really, it looks like your'e doing the right thing by seeking out people who have gained some insight! I hope it works out for you this round (there really is still hope!) but if not, good luck!!

Thanks for that - It sounds like I've planned to do the right things. My ideas for the SOP are already much more focused than they were in November, I've chosen a writing sample to turn into a dazzling piece of academic work over the summer that touches quite strongly on my research interests, and I'm broadening the scope of schools I'm looking into from the top 20 to the top 50. Found some really interesting programs along the way that I'm super excited about - Michigan, Illinois. Also eliminated one top twenty that I applied to this year since it's not a terrific fit.

Thank god for GradCafe... seriously !!

Oh, and re test scores - this is how much they don't count - I applied to 4 top-twenty schools this year with a 600V, and NO SUBJECT SCORE AT ALL (I'm only registered for the April exam). The fact that I wasn't summarily rejected in the first round is super-amazing, and they MUST have liked something I sent.

[wiry_air]

This is an excellent response, and I would second everything in it. Aside from polishing the SoP and writing sample, I think it's really good to have something to show for the year off. As in, do some independent research, present at a conference, teach, or try to get an article published. This will demonstrate that you have the motivation to engage in scholarly work whether or not you have the backing of an institution. Grad schools invest a fair amount of money in their students, so if you can prove that you're a "safe investment" (I hate to put it in those terms, but I think it's true nonetheless), in that you really can/will do the work, that goes a long way.

I have to agree with intextrovert regarding test scores. Unless you're applying only to schools that are likely to have a high minimum score requirement, I don't think it's worth the time and money. Better to focus on developing your research interests and improving the SoP and writing sample.

Thanks both hadunc and intextrovert! I've been lurking around these boards for a few weeks, so I shouldn't REALLY be surprised by the thoroughness and graciousness of responses... but still! Truly amazing and very helpful. I think you're right-on with regard to focus... I was all about GRE and top-tier schools this year, but really I need to be spending more time with my subfield both in terms of what's going on and the places where it's happening.

To poke a little further... you mentioned you had been in touch with folks at your top three. How'd you get those conversations started without coming off too "I'm going to bother you in hopes you remember my name on the application"? I'd also be curious to hear if there are any posts or places you found helpful SOPs... I had a handful of samples from my advisers, but more is always nice and some I had were pretty old. Last, but not least, I'd be curious about some of the things you sought in terms of fit. Was it mostly just courses taught and faculty interests? I got a bit discouraged when hunting through faculty and courses, only to find some great places pretty lacking in Restoration and 18th century opportunities.

Fingers still crossed I won't have to march down the application trail again... but at least if I do I'll be better equipped!

[intextrovert]

To poke a little further... you mentioned you had been in touch with folks at your top three. How'd you get those conversations started without coming off too "I'm going to bother you in hopes you remember my name on the application"? I'd also be curious to hear if there are any posts or places you found helpful SOPs... I had a handful of samples from my advisers, but more is always nice and some I had were pretty old. Last, but not least, I'd be curious about some of the things you sought in terms of fit. Was it mostly just courses taught and faculty interests? I got a bit discouraged when hunting through faculty and courses, only to find some great places pretty lacking in Restoration and 18th century opportunities.

Glad to help.

Well, when I emailed profs I had some questions about the program - for example, at one place I said I admired the prof's work, especially the interdisciplinary approach she used in her last book, and then I asked about opportunities for interdisciplinary study while in the program. I generally told them that I was very interested in their research, told them my own interests very briefly, and asked about how well that sort of research would be supported by the department, including other faculty whose work I might want to look into. One place was very responsive, the prof offered to speak on the phone and forwarded my email to the DGS, and we corresponded throughout the fall. I got a much better sense of the program through that interaction. Another was cordial and said she'd love to work with me, gave me a little info about a book, a symposium, and one of their interdisciplinary departments, and wished me luck, so that was that. Yet another told me in so many words that I wasn't really a good fit and that they were cutting back on the number of 20th century people they were admitting, so I ended up not applying there.

Still, though, all three acceptances are from places where I contacted no one at all. I felt at the time like I really should contact people beforehand, but it's just not the case - it's not like the sciences where you're applying to work with an advisor. If you don't genuinely have questions, I really don't think it will hurt you at all not to contact anyone. And some cranky profs may find it irritating if you don't have truly relevant questions.

As far as fit, yes, I mostly scoured websites and C.V.s, then got my hands on a few publications that interested me the most by who seemed like the best fits. But you should also look for things like special collections in the library, groups and programs within the department, affiliated departments...faculty fit is the big thing, though.

[intextrovert]

To poke a little further... you mentioned you had been in touch with folks at your top three. How'd you get those conversations started without coming off too "I'm going to bother you in hopes you remember my name on the application"? I'd also be curious to hear if there are any posts or places you found helpful SOPs... I had a handful of samples from my advisers, but more is always nice and some I had were pretty old. Last, but not least, I'd be curious about some of the things you sought in terms of fit. Was it mostly just courses taught and faculty interests? I got a bit discouraged when hunting through faculty and courses, only to find some great places pretty lacking in Restoration and 18th century opportunities.

Glad to help.

Well, when I emailed profs I had some questions about the program - for example, at one place I said I admired the prof's work, especially the interdisciplinary approach she used in her last book, and then I asked about opportunities for interdisciplinary study while in the program. I generally told them that I was very interested in their research, told them my own interests very briefly, and asked about how well that sort of research would be supported by the department, including other faculty whose work I might want to look into. One place was very responsive, the prof offered to speak on the phone and forwarded my email to the DGS, and we corresponded throughout the fall. I got a much better sense of the program through that interaction. Another was cordial and said she'd love to work with me, gave me a little info about a book, a symposium, and one of their interdisciplinary departments, and wished me luck, so that was that. Yet another told me in so many words that I wasn't really a good fit and that they were cutting back on the number of 20th century people they were admitting, so I ended up not applying there.

Still, though, all three acceptances are from places where I contacted no one at all. I felt at the time like I really should contact people beforehand, but it's just not the case - it's not like the sciences where you're applying to work with an advisor. If you don't genuinely have questions, I really don't think it will hurt you at all not to contact anyone. And some cranky profs may find it irritating if you don't have truly relevant questions.

As far as fit, yes, I mostly scoured websites and C.V.s, then got my hands on a few publications that interested me the most by faculty who seemed like the best fits. But you should also look for things like special collections in the library, groups and programs within the department, affiliated departments...faculty fit is the big thing, though.

[hadunc]

Still, though, all three acceptances are from places where I contacted no one at all. I felt at the time like I really should contact people beforehand, but it's just not the case - it's not like the sciences where you're applying to work with an advisor. If you don't genuinely have questions, I really don't think it will hurt you at all not to contact anyone. And some cranky profs may find it irritating if you don't have truly relevant questions.

I had a similar experience. I really thought I screwed myself over by not contacting many profs beforehand, but so far I have an implicit rejection from the one school where I actually did contact a faculty member. I didn't contact anyone at the schools I got accepted to, and didn't even mention any faculty in my SoPs. So I don't think it matters that much. However, if you're really familiar with a faculty member's work and you think you could start a meaningful conversation about it, I don't think it can hurt.

[cleisthenes]

...all three acceptances are from places where I contacted no one at all. I felt at the time like I really should contact people beforehand, but it's just not the case - it's not like the sciences where you're applying to work with an advisor. If you don't genuinely have questions, I really don't think it will hurt you at all not to contact anyone. And some cranky profs may find it irritating if you don't have truly relevant questions.

Bingo. I'm not in English, but when I was accepted to a PhD program at an Ivy+ this year, I actually asked the DGS about this very issue. She chuckled and told me that, in fact, it was something she had recently been discussing with her "colleagues at Ivy institutions," and she conveyed that the general consensus is that what you present of yourself, you should present in your application packet. Humanities departments are not looking to make their decision based on you as a person. They are looking to make it based on you as a scholar. Your application is your representation of yourself as such. Any contact on top of that, I was made to understand, is not only superfluous, but runs the risk of creating precisely the impression that the above poster was worried it might--that of an irritating, under-confident candidate who doesn't believe their application is strong enough and feels the need to supplement it in some way.

Moral of the story: if you do not come to a situation where you feel you have an ORGANIC reason to contact a particular professor in a department to which you plan to apply, then don't. It won't help you, and it could hurt.

[Caved]

I would second cleisthenes's comment. I asked the head of the PhD program at my undergrad institution about this, and though he didn't come right out and say that it would hurt your chances, he said that it was unnecessary and in his recent memory, none of the people who contacted faculty members had been the ones who received offers.

[strokeofmidnight]

Thanks both hadunc and intextrovert! I've been lurking around these boards for a few weeks, so I shouldn't REALLY be surprised by the thoroughness and graciousness of responses... but still! Truly amazing and very helpful. I think you're right-on with regard to focus... I was all about GRE and top-tier schools this year, but really I need to be spending more time with my subfield both in terms of what's going on and the places where it's happening.

To poke a little further... you mentioned you had been in touch with folks at your top three. How'd you get those conversations started without coming off too "I'm going to bother you in hopes you remember my name on the application"? I'd also be curious to hear if there are any posts or places you found helpful SOPs... I had a handful of samples from my advisers, but more is always nice and some I had were pretty old. Last, but not least, I'd be curious about some of the things you sought in terms of fit. Was it mostly just courses taught and faculty interests? I got a bit discouraged when hunting through faculty and courses, only to find some great places pretty lacking in Restoration and 18th century opportunities.

Fingers still crossed I won't have to march down the application trail again... but at least if I do I'll be better equipped!

Are you applying as an 18th centuryist? If you wouldn't mind mentioning a bit more about your specific interests, I might be able to recommend programs/people. (I'm also an 18th centuryist, though I focus on the later half and spill into the 19th century/romanticism). Briefly, NYU and Michigan should definitely be on your list, especially if historicism is your cup of tea. My sense is that they're both very good at that entire century.

I have very specific research interests, and basically looked for the professors who are asking similar questions, or are interested in a similar configuration of topics. Most of them are in my field...but quite a few are actually not. (My topic pushes field boundaries, though I restrained myself to the 18th century for the sake of presenting a coherent SoP). I did look at classes and professor's recent publications...but also their book reviews, scanned through the top journals for my field(s), asked my professors (in the field) for recommendations.

I did not contact any professors and still had a pretty successful season. I'm not very comfortable writing those emails/making calls, and would prefer to let my application do the talking. I think that unless you have a specific (organic is a good word for it) reason for making contact...don't. An awkward or unfruitful email might actually leave a negative impression. There are tons of exceptions to this rule, of course (if you adviser tells you to write emails, and recommends that you use his/her name, for example)...but I don't think one should feel compelled to do so.

[wiry_air]

Are you applying as an 18th centuryist? If you wouldn't mind mentioning a bit more about your specific interests, I might be able to recommend programs/people. (I'm also an 18th centuryist, though I focus on the later half and spill into the 19th century/romanticism). Briefly, NYU and Michigan should definitely be on your list, especially if historicism is your cup of tea. My sense is that they're both very good at that entire century.

I have very specific research interests, and basically looked for the professors who are asking similar questions, or are interested in a similar configuration of topics. Most of them are in my field...but quite a few are actually not. (My topic pushes field boundaries, though I restrained myself to the 18th century for the sake of presenting a coherent SoP). I did look at classes and professor's recent publications...but also their book reviews, scanned through the top journals for my field(s), asked my professors (in the field) for recommendations.

I did not contact any professors and still had a pretty successful season. I'm not very comfortable writing those emails/making calls, and would prefer to let my application do the talking. I think that unless you have a specific (organic is a good word for it) reason for making contact...don't. An awkward or unfruitful email might actually leave a negative impression. There are tons of exceptions to this rule, of course (if you adviser tells you to write emails, and recommends that you use his/her name, for example)...but I don't think one should feel compelled to do so.

Thanks as well! I think I've gotten a good sense on the whole "to contact or not" thing from this thread and others on the board... working at a school myself, I definitely can see it from a (very busy) admin's point of view that contacting for the sake of contacting is a lot of trouble for little benefit.

With regard to my interests, they're mostly focused around Restoration plays and 18th century satire, especially at intersections with gender studies. If that area sets off any bells and whistles in terms of programs or people... I'd appreciate the advice!