Year 3? On to 2011.

[milestones13]

"once you get out of the top-20, you start getting a lot more students who, as those on here have noted, have complex autobiographies. some simply can't move outside the county/region (meaning they'll probably end up at a CC). some never intended to get a job with their ph.d. some will move out of country and never be heard from again. some are well into their 40's when they entered grad school."

So, you're saying that those with complex biographies ("mature students") are more likely to be discriminated against not only in the application process for Ph.D but also in searching for a job? If so, then, maybe this isn't discrimination per se but perhaps easily rationalized as "preference" for a certain age range...lol.

"the folks in my program who fit the model of the average top-20 grad (under 34 when they get the ph.d., published, willing to do a national search, etc.) tend to get pretty good jobs. those who don't have fewer options"

Horror upon horror: you're saying the top 20's tend to discriminate on age more than unranked schools who are less concerned about maintaining a high placement rate?

It may seem that way and you're probably hitting on some realities in your analysis, but these realities have to be evaluated more closely...I'll offer my analysis, which is by no means complete, and hopefully others more knowledgable can add to it.

I imagine that mature candidates who are close to publlishing level are just as a appealing (probably more appealing) than those younger candidates who are promising but still far off from publishing level. I imagine this is true no matter what the school's US News ranking may be (Yale or Some State U). However, given two candiates whose writing samples show a similar level of development, clearly it would make sense to invest in the 25 year old over the 45 year old. However, if the 45 year old shows evidence (in their sop/writing sample) that they're already producing great work, then it is easier to throw the 25 year old back in the water. I'm not arguing that schools have a special place in their heart for "mature students" but they all want to glorify their programs, and what better way to do that than admit someone who is polished over an applicant who needs to be nurtured?

Another thing to consider is this: A lot of universities, and this is probably even more true for the big name ivy league institutions, get a lot of application from people going through a mid life change, who now "want to go to graduate school at..." These applicants have a B.A.. from 20 years ago, maybe in English, maybe in Biochemistry, but they've always loved English. Let's say they've got great test scores and undergrad GPA's...but they don't have a writing sample, so they have to come up with one or rewrite a term paper on Wordsworth from eons ago. They get recs from professors who reply to their requests with a "Yes, of course I remember you fondly." The recs that get written by these profs are indeed fondly boilerplate -- the letter devised from template that sits in a folder titled "recommendation letter from students who I don't recall." So, this is a student with great GRE scores, great GPA's, maybe decent writing sample and very impersonal recs (whether from celebrity profs on unknown profs, doesn't matter). This candidate will struggle to get into a top 20. What they'll likely end up doing is cry age discrimination -- but really what killed their application is dreamy SOP's ("When I first read Tennyson at age 5, I knew that..."), or LOR's from profs who have lost excitement about them even if that student showed exceptional promise several decades ago.

Here I'm making a case for older applilcants with strong numbers, but then there are the mid lifers applying even without strong numbers in addition to all the problems associated with being out of academia for a long time while trying to get back in. It helps a lot to have some fairly recent rigorous work that can be shown in the sample' it's uphill unless this person has some professor guiding them...that is, it's harder for someone out of academia to put together a polished academic writing sample than it is for a younger applicant who is closer to the process of grinding out revisions.

It may be programs outside the top 20 will be more likely to absorb those candidates with strong numbers who have unfocused SOP'S and undeveloped samples...and the one's with poor numbers may not get in anywhere. The main advantage younger applicants have is that they are fresh in the minds of their professors, and ergo they get strong 'alive' LOR's. But then, if an older applicant has been active, has an MA or did other relevant course work, has a strong sample and specific idea about why they want to get a Doctorate in Engllish, then they're on equal footing with someone in their twenties and maybe even with a slight advantage, given accrual of wisdom and life experience. But the older applicant needs to show off their focus which might not happen if this older candidate mistakenly thinks that GPA/GRE's are what will make or break them -- a logical, but wrong assumption.

So, this is to say: I don't think top programs are akin to soap operas obsessed with casting for youth. Obviously, this was not what you meant to say, but wanted to look closer at some of the realities behind the numbers...this is a bit off topic, but relevant to the young and old applicants here (soul age, and number of earthly incarnations notwithstanding ;-).

[peppermint.beatnik]

How did your referees feel about you applying a third time?

[foppery]

I imagine that mature candidates who are close to publlishing level are just as a appealing (probably more appealing) than those younger candidates who are promising but still far off from publishing level. I imagine this is true no matter what the school's US News ranking may be (Yale or Some State U). However, given two candiates whose writing samples show a similar level of development, clearly it would make sense to invest in the 25 year old over the 45 year old. However, if the 45 year old shows evidence (in their sop/writing sample) that they're already producing great work, then it is easier to throw the 25 year old back in the water. I'm not arguing that schools have a special place in their heart for "mature students" but they all want to glorify their programs, and what better way to do that than admit someone who is polished over an applicant who needs to be nurtured?

I tend to disagree with this. I don't know how PhD programs view older applicants per se (I can't imagine they're opposed on principle), but I *do* know that many adcoms search applicants' dossiers for potential, not concrete accomplishment. A DGA of a top-20 program told me this in so many words. To a degree, every department wants Galateas, students it can mold into its vision of the perfect scholar. So it's not all that easy to "throw the 25-year-old back in the water."

[mudgean]

"Another thing to consider is this: A lot of universities, and this is probably even more true for the big name ivy league institutions, get a lot of application from people going through a mid life change, who now "want to go to graduate school at..." These applicants have a B.A.. from 20 years ago, maybe in English, maybe in Biochemistry, but they've always loved English. Let's say they've got great test scores and undergrad GPA's...but they don't have a writing sample, so they have to come up with one or rewrite a term paper on Wordsworth from eons ago. They get recs from professors who reply to their requests with a "Yes, of course I remember you fondly." The recs that get written by these profs are indeed fondly boilerplate -- the letter devised from template that sits in a folder titled "recommendation letter from students who I don't recall." So, this is a student with great GRE scores, great GPA's, maybe decent writing sample and very impersonal recs (whether from celebrity profs on unknown profs, doesn't matter). This candidate will struggle to get into a top 20. What they'll likely end up doing is cry age discrimination -- but really what killed their application is dreamy SOP's ("When I first read Tennyson at age 5, I knew that..."), or LOR's from profs who have lost excitement about them even if that student showed exceptional promise several decades ago."

You really seem to be making stuff up here. (I don't know if universities discriminate based on age or not, but that's another issue.) First of all, any halfway intelligent person knows that if they completed their undergraduate work more than ten years ago, they are going to need coursework and letters of recommendation that are recent. As a "mature"

person who applied this year to programs, I never once thought of asking my undergrad professors for letters.

Also, what makes you think that an older candidate would write a "dreamy" and cliched SOP about some childhood notion? I've been reading widely across disciplines for years. I imagine most older people applying to literature programs have a lot more to write about than their childhood dreams. I didn't even write about college. I've done a lot higher thinking and learning since then.

Mid life people who love learning and want to go back to school most likely have been reading in their areas of interest for a long time. For me, academic reading has provided a sense of what intelligent, rational, and interesting writing sounds like. I imagine I'm not alone. I mean, there may be some really deluded older people out there who for some strange reason suddenly want to go to grad school and have NO idea of how to go about it. Most of us have friends, colleagues, computers and a library card and can figure it out.

I realize that the paragraph I'm addressing was part of a longer post making a larger point, but the thinking in this section didn't make a lot of sense to me.

Edited May 12, 2010 by mudgean

[!anonscribe!]

@milestone13 - I didn't mean to imply, and don't think I did imply, that programs discriminate against older applications. I think older applicants have more complicated lives, often including children, spouses, and spouses' jobs (or jobs of their own that are paying for the program). hence, they sometimes end up at schools close to where they live (that may be more mid-tier schools) because uprooting their lives to travel across the country for a program is too difficult (though obviously plenty of folks do just this and continue doing it on the job market). and, of course, there are plenty of older applicants who get accepted to top knotch programs, go there, and end up with great jobs. my other point was that the older a person is when he/she completes the dissertation, the harder it often is (or perhaps the less they desire) to do a national search for jobs (for the reasons stated above). the 32 year-old with ph.d. in-hand and no family--or a spouse and no kids--often finds it much easier to drop everything for a tt job 1500 miles away from their ph.d. institution (where they presumably had their life for 7-10 years) than does a 40 or 45 year-old with ph.d. in-hand.

Many of your points seem perfectly reasonable. I just wanted to clarify what I was saying in my previous post. I think it's much less about discrimination than it is about the rational choices of older applicants (and certainly comments about departments preferring younger people for TT jobs seem to have some validity), who--in my experience--often have different and equally laudable goals than younger, mercenary careerists (which I sometimes consider myself to be). it's just that when we talk about placement statistics, we often assume a monolithic, homogeneous group in order to infer the "efficacy" of a program at placing applicants. that is: we assume everyone who gets a ph.d. wants a TT research job or prestigious LAC job. lots of folks don't (and for those just starting out grad school on here, many will probably find out in five years that they'd rather spend their time teaching than doing research). so, we sometimes perceive a department--like mine--where a good chunk work at CC's or M.A. institutions as somehow failing its grad students when the reality is that lots of people who come through my program had those goals when they came in. it seems like a placement survey comparing "desired position" versus "type of position obtained" would be valuable.

[eyeswideopen0]

I think that is a very good suggestion, especially for a person like me. I'm interested in Cultural Studies and New Media and have been pondering this suggestion for a long time. The problem is, interdisciplinary programs, while getting fewer applicants, also have less spots and way less funding (usually the TAships are in other departments are sparse and with low pay). Granted I haven't done nearly as much research as with English programs, but that has been my impression. I think that I've decided to do a mix; because the CS programs are still less competitive, while English departments have more spots and funding. Yet, another problem for me, is that CS or CL programs have a much bigger emphasis on languages. I have one proficiency in a language, and CL programs usually are expecting two. I might try and audit a course this summer, but I don't know if that's enough.

I, too, have been rejected this round, and am preparing for next years apps. I only applied to three programs so I am not surprised, and next round I'm going to do about 15, maybe three or four of those being CS/Interdisciplinary studies.

The main things I'm planning on doing to improve my application is 1.) I sent my writing sample to a professor (a recommender too) and asked him to give me an honest critique and his opinion on whether the sample is competitive. If the consensus is yes, I will furiously editing the paper until it is perfect, if not, that leads me to 2.) I am lucky to be near a top-ish tier school that I work for. I'm currently enrolled to audit two graduate courses. Hopefully I can get a new writing sample out of one of them, and maybe even a new recommender that has an in on the program. 3.) I think that for some people with good scores, retaking the GRE general might be a waste of time, but I had a 200 on the math (long story) so I'm studying furiously to retake that and then take the subject test too (haven't taken that, my programs didn't require it). 4.) I am doing much better research this year- I'm leaving no school unresearched (before I would have discounted, say, University of Nebraska) as I am discovering good, well funded programs that I hadn't known about before and making sure they are a the best fit in order to up my chances for acceptance. Also, for the lower tiered schools, I am making sure I am applying to schools that have funded terminal MAs, in case I want out and to reapply.

So far, I think that's a good start. If anyone else has any other advice on what to work on, please tell!

You got into a MA program with a 200 in math for the gre?? What did you get on your verbal?? I need some hope.. I got a 350 on the verbal and a 410 on the math and this is the 2nd time I have taken the test...

[Historiogaffe]

You got into a MA program with a 200 in math for the gre?? What did you get on your verbal?? I need some hope.. I got a 350 on the verbal and a 410 on the math and this is the 2nd time I have taken the test...

For what it's worth, a friend of mine got into Michigan with a 0 on the math. (And a 600-something on the verbal.)

[USTgrad]

Muffinlit,

I finished my masters while in this process of trying to get into a Phd I actually asked new letter writers and with the old ones took a new approach. I reminded them of particular projects I completed in their class and re-sent papers, etc. I asked them to highlight my potential as a future scholar instead of my total academic record. I asked them if they would mention some of my specific work in their classes because the competition was getting tougher. I also made a particular effort to stay involved with them through random other things (attending the reading here and there, offering help, etc.)

In your case, you might as a faculty member to mentor you on your personal statement or writing sample. That would give them more info and experience with you that you could ask them to mention in their letters. Another tactic, go visit them - let them know you are trying to improve your application and ask for their advice. Faculty love being able to help their students and to feel needed in that way. Also, be very clear with your letter writers about what you want to study and why - I think it helps if they can share your commitment to the discipline with the AdComms.

There is no magic one thing, but I think being as strong as possible in all areas is probably needed in this environment...

GOOD LUCK to everyone. It was tough on me getting rounds of rejections. I love it how proactive and energized everyone here is.

I will be on my second round of apps this year, and EKPhrase has some great advice. I would only add that each letter could/should be tailored to the specific school/department you are applying to and how you fit in that department. That request may be overwhelming for your letter writers, especially if you are applying to a double digit amount of schools, but it can't hurt to ask. Well... unless they punch you. But I am still going to ask.

Edited June 9, 2011 by USTgrad