Strength of Application?

[booktobook]

I am at the beginning of the process putting together myapplication to PhD in Literature programs. I will be applying to begin study in Fall 2012 for a number of reasons. And yes, I'm an idiot who wants to study 20th-21st Century Literature. I'm extremely interested in programs with a Women's Studies or Sociology cross-over, though I anticipate several years of intensive course work may shape my interests in a different direction.

But reading through this website has me scared stiff, making mewonder if I'm up to snuff. I was hoping I could give you a bit of background onmy academic and working experience and hear your input on what areas I can strengthen over the next year and a half to improve my chances of acceptance. The path to academia has not been a straight one for me, so I worry that my choice of undergraduate and graduate programs will come back to haunt me. Here's a brief history:

• 2007 graduate of Washington State University, magna cum laude, BA English with a minor in Sociology. This school does not have a prestigious English program and the professors I bonded with were mostly associate professors or truly fantastic grad students. They are not people who are going to have any impact on admissions committees.
• 2009 graduate of Portland State University, GPA 3.94, MS in Writing/Book Publishing. I decided I would try to get trained in an “industry,” but publishing are extremely few and far between. This program was enjoyable, but a giant waste of time. If I was smart I’d at least have brushed up on my German and attempted an MA, but alas, I was looking at it as a terminal degree. PSU actually has a number of faculty members who are reasonably well published, but they’re in the English department, which is separate from the Writing program, so they were not teaching in the classes I was taking.
• Currently employed full-time in a Document Production Managerposition at an energy development company; working part-time for an onlineuniversity grading undergraduate papers.

I took a preliminary GRE and after dedicating time to studying, I feel like I could reasonably anticipate a score in the 700s for the verbal portion, but my quantitative score will be abysmal (my husband, an engineer, is doing his best to tutor me, but it’s not going well). I am not worried in anyway about the analytical writing portion.

What does worry me is the Literature subject exam. I took a number of fabulous classes in undergrad, but am wholly unprepared to take this exam. I will have over a year to prepare, but I am afraid that the attempt to teach myself literature will not be as effective as learning it in a classroom environment.

It seems like my only hope is to write an extremely persuasive SOP and bulk up my writing sample. Any other suggestions on how I can over come what can only be interpreted as my academic failures? Do I even stand a chance against those who seem to have tailored their careers in academia from the day they set foot on their undergraduate campus?

I appreciate any suggestions or advice.

[diehtc0ke]

As the person above me said, I'm having a hard time picking out these obvious academic failures. For what it's worth, I'm from one of those schools that, in the grand scheme of things, make the schools that you've graduated from look like R1 universities. I'll be attending a top 20 doctoral program in the fall. As many around these parts have said, it is definitely the SOP and writing sample that are the most important aspects of an admissions profile by far. Keep doing what you're doing to study for the GRE verbal, do what you can to study for the GRE Lit (which I'm still convinced is damn near impossible to study for totally and damn well meant nothing for my acceptances/rejections) and take this year to polish your statement of purpose and writing sample. I'm sure this doesn't have to be said but keep in contact with not only the professors who will be writing you letters of recommendation, but other people in the department so that they will be willing to help you revise and edit the work you'll be submitting. If I could change one thing about the way I went about applying to graduate school, it would be that I should have probably given my (5!) professors more than just the two drafts I was able to muster up before my first application deadline. That actually sounded slightly disingenuous when I read it back to myself because I did work on those drafts for about three months prior to handing them in but everything felt slightly rushed towards the end and that panic is definitely the reason I got rejected from one of my schools (for reasons that are so embarrassing that I won't repeat them haha). You truly look like you're on the right path and it's almost disheartening to see you so beaten up by the process already. If you keep looking through the fora, I'm sure you'll find many many pieces of advice that will help you along the way. Plus, you have a ridiculous amount of time to focus on all of this; use it wisely.

As an addendum, I want to assure you that you don't have to look like someone who has been gearing up for this next step for the past 4-6 years. What you should be concerned about is coming off as someone who is passionate about the work that you will be doing and is able to be a productive contributor to whatever field you're going into. When I did my rounds amongst the schools that accepted me a few months ago, the impression that I got was that not only were my writing sample and statement of purpose strong, they showed an attention to nuanced work that hadn't really been done before or, at least, wasn't being done to the extent that they wanted to see it being done. They wanted their name to be attached to work that was new and refreshing and I was able to convince them that these are projects on which I'm willing to spend a lot of time.

[strokeofmidnight]

d-c0ke and futurelife are right on about the wide variety of candidates who are accepted into top PhD programs, so I won't repeat their comments.

One small thing that jumped out at me: "This school does not have a prestigious English program and the professors I bonded with were mostly associate professors or truly fantastic grad students. They are not people who are going to have any impact on admissions committees."

1. Associate Profs are tenured. It's perfectly fine to ask them (or assistant profs, who are tenure-track but not yet tenured) for LoR's. In some circumstances, it would even make sense to ask a lecturer. In short, the "name recognition" of your LoR's is perhaps less important than you think. I had not-well-known profs from not-well-known schools writing for me for 2 rounds. I did just fine. While it is a nice bonus to have an uber-famous prof write for you, it is never a guarantee that you'll get in...and the lack of "name recognition" (for either your school or your profs) alone won't keep you out. This isn't to say that students from more rigorous programs don't have an advantage--but the bulk of that advantage is the level of expertise, sophistication of their thoughts, the guidance on both their work and through this process. Very little of it is the actual name on their diploma, or signed on their LoR's. If your program is indeed less rigorous, you may have some catching up to do--but it's entirely possible, even on your own.

[foppery]

<br style="text-shadow: none;">d-c0ke and futurelife are right on about the wide variety of candidates who are accepted into top PhD programs, so I won't repeat their comments. <br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">One small thing that jumped out at me: "This school does not have a prestigious English program and the professors I bonded with were mostly associate professors or truly fantastic grad students. They are not people who are going to have any impact on admissions committees."<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">1. Associate Profs are tenured. It's perfectly fine to ask them (or assistant profs, who are tenure-track but not yet tenured) for LoR's. In some circumstances, it would even make sense to ask a lecturer. In short, the "name recognition" of your LoR's is perhaps less important than you think. I had not-well-known profs from not-well-known schools writing for me for 2 rounds. I did just fine. While it is a nice bonus to have an uber-famous prof write for you, it is never a guarantee that you'll get in...and the lack of "name recognition" (for either your school or your profs) alone won't keep you out. This isn't to say that students from more rigorous programs don't have an advantage--but the bulk of that advantage is the level of expertise, sophistication of their thoughts, the guidance on both their work and through this process. Very little of it is the actual name on their diploma, or signed on their LoR's. If your program is indeed less rigorous, you may have some catching up to do--but it's entirely possible, even on your own.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

<br style="text-shadow: none;"><br style="text-shadow: none;">Agree completely. I do know of one mediocre student who was admitted to a program largely because she had a big-name adviser. However, I'd say that while famous advisers can help you, unknown advisers will NOT hurt you. Frankly, I think the PhD admissions system is more meritocratic than most systems in the country.<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[Branwen daughter of Llyr]

Most of the posters above me have already responded to most of the things you were worried about, but here's my two cents:

I'm not from a prestigious program either - and I'm really not too worried about that part of it in my applications. I did well in my classes, I have a high GPA in English, and my profs remembered me after 9 years (the advantage of being a super-star student in a small, undistinguished program!).

The subject test - you don't have to teach yourself "literature". You have to teach yourself "cocktail party literature" - i.e. recognition. If you have a year to prepare, do the following: Read through Norton's British literature anthology, Norton's American literature anthology, and Norton's anthology of criticism and theory (Blackwell's anthology of criticism and theory works well as an addition). Make index cards and revisit them every few weeks. Make sure you can identify a writer's particular style (i.e. be able to differentiate between a poem by Pound to a poem by Williams). Make sure you can identify "catchphrases" in criticism, i.e. "imagination" for Coleridge, "signifier" for Structuralism, etc. It's a horrible test, but it's doable. Also, many top-twenty PhD programs don't require it anymore (Duke is one), and many of the other schools just want you to get a reasonable score in it (i.e. pass the 550-600 range).

I'll join in and say that you should definitely take a grad English seminar next year - I'm doing that this summer - it's providing me with the basis of a new writing sample, as well as a current recommendation (since I graduated from my BA in 2001). I'm taking an online course through UMass since I don't even currently live in the US - so it's possible.

If you want to improve your languages, do so! If you're applying for 2012, you have PLENTY of time to beef up your German (I'm squeezing in a year of Latin and maybe French for 2011 - it IS possible to do, even when working full time!).

I don't see any "failures" in your academic history - you are working part time grading UG papers - that's pretty decent!

Good luck

[Riotbeard]

You don't have to have star LOR writers, but you do want to have productive and published academics writing for you. Where I am going, my grad advisor taught at my undergrad program about 10-15 years ago (way before I went), and I didn't realize what mine field my LOR selection was until after I got accepted and had lunch with my grad advisor. He was talking about how useless a lot of the old guard my school was (this school was almost exclusively a teaching college in the 70s with no focus on publication, so some of the dinosaurs in the dept hired in the 70s were full professors but had never published a book [which you have to do in history to get tenure these days, and I know Lit is becoming more article oriented than books but the point]). I luckily bonded and worked with the people who had good cv's but my advisors knowledge of the department could have been a disaster instead of a blessing. In short, your LOR writers don't have be super heros but they should be productive scholars with easily findable articles through JSTOR or an equivilently accessable database when possible.

[booktobook]

Thank you all for your comments. This website is wonderful and I appreciate your help and encouragement. I'm discovering that perhaps my interests are more compatible with cultural studies through literature rather than a traditional English Literature program. Are there any Cultural Studies folks on this board?