What else can I do?

[kelly315]

I'm not really sure how I could possibly make myself a better applicant, yet I'm still rejected while I find out that those who got in were far less qualified than me.

I mean, 3.96 gpa (4.0 major), summa cum laude, graduation with research distinction, GRE 670, 670, 5,

Research assistant for 2 different professors, 2 professional publications, full research funding awarded as undergrad,

undergraduate honors thesis, and excellent recommendations.

Anyone have any ideas about what I can do when I apply next year (Michigan, Virginia Anthropology) or why I wasn't selected over people far less qualified (worse grades/scores, no research experience or publications?)

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[Strangefox]

The most obvious reason is that there was not enough fit between your research interests and those of the professors in the program.

Had you contacted them prior to applying?

Also you can ask the schools directly what are you app's weaknesses.

[kelly315]

Strangefox- Yes, I'd been in contact with 3 different professors, and they all said nice things.

[Strangefox]

Strangefox- Yes, I'd been in contact with 3 different professors, and they all said nice things.

Then all I can suggest is contacting the schools (may be even these professors) and asking them what is wrong with your application.

[newms]

I think fit might be the biggest issue, and remember that even though profs might like your app, there might have been others that fit what they're doing better. I would suggest that you also re-do the GRE if you think you can score higher- even though your scores are good enough, getting into grad school is really competitive and so you should try to improve your profile even if it's on something like the GRE.

What I did last year when I didn't get in, was to do a complete evaluation of about 60 schools - looking at things like what's their admission rates, and how well my interests fit that school, among other things. I came up with a final list of schools that I thought I'd be a pretty good fit at as well as that didn't have a ridiculously low admission rate.

I would also suggest you really re-consider your statement of purpose. Did it focus on your research interests and show how well they match with the schools you applied to? Did it portray you as an applicant that the adcomm or your POIs would really want at their school? I think this was probably the most important thing I did from last year to improve my applications for this year.

Edited February 19, 2011 by newms

[grinsngiggles]

You will hear this everywhere in the forums, and I hate to echo it again, but it really is all about fit with the department.

For Michigan, you have to write both a personal statement and a statement of purpose - that's a lot of room to talk about yourself and your research. Most likely the people who got in were better able to communicate how their research interests and past experience fit with the department and the specific professors with whom they would like to work.

I don't know what your undergrad institution was, so it's difficult to put that 3.96 in perspective. Your GRE score is fine, but won't distinguish you - and it's not a very good indicator of success in graduate school. Low GREs will hurt, but good ones do not matter that much.

Additionally, in corresponding with a number of Michigan faculty, there were several professors who are leaving. If you asked to work with someone who is leaving, will be on sabbatical soon or simply cannot take any students this year, then you're out of luck - no matter how "well-qualified."

I don't know if you contacted any professors beforehand, but you could do that the next time around and see who's taking students and is interested in your work. Your LORs, research and publications will continue to make you a strong candidate, but you should work on making sure your SOP and Personal Statement align with the department and are engaging with major currents of thought in the academy.

Without knowing your project and those of your POIs, it's difficult to say how qualified you were for the position.

[TMP]

The other thing is... if they write back to you along the lines of "You were very, very qualified and there was nothing wrong with your application." Maybe they would go as far as to suggest that fit is an issue. But what they WON'T say is department politics. This type of rejection hurts the applicant the most of all because department politics are completely out of the applicant's control and that also cost the applicant $.

So if you cannot find a satisfactory answer, assume department politics.

Also, sometimes even contacting faculty beforehand to see if they'd be interested in taking students don't necessarily correlate to finding out about their sabbaticals. I honestly did not even know that two of my PAs were going to be on sabbatical this year when I contacted them in the fall. Now I have to twiddle my thumbs and just hope that my applicant will be strong enough to get through the process. I swear, professors never tell you about their sabbatical plans.

[neuropsych76]

I'm not really sure how I could possibly make myself a better applicant, yet I'm still rejected while I find out that those who got in were far less qualified than me.

I mean, 3.96 gpa (4.0 major), summa cum laude, graduation with research distinction, GRE 670, 670, 5,

Research assistant for 2 different professors, 2 professional publications, full research funding awarded as undergrad,

undergraduate honors thesis, and excellent recommendations.

Anyone have any ideas about what I can do when I apply next year (Michigan, Virginia Anthropology) or why I wasn't selected over people far less qualified (worse grades/scores, no research experience or publications?)

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Did you only apply to two programs? Like everyone said, fit is a big component, and as competitive as grad school is, you need to apply to more programs even if you are a strong applicant.

[Strangefox]

I swear, professors never tell you about their sabbatical plans.

Are you sure? Two professors I talked with were honest when I asked them about their sabbatical plans and even said that asking that is very wise and cool

[ZeChocMoose]

I agree with the above posters I.e. research fit and talking with professors before you apply. One thing that was not mentioned is your LOR. Are they from professors in the field? Are they well known or semi-well known individuals? When I sat on my admissions committee as a master's student, applicants with LORs from professors in the field were more likely to gain admission than applicants without those type of LORs. Also LORs from professors that the adcom knew personally did ever better.

It also could be because (as other people have suggested) there were too many qualified applicants and not enough spots. Unfortunately there is not much you can do in that case except applying again and working on further strengthening your application.

I'm a second time PhD applicant so I can definitely understand your frustration. Thankfully, this year I was more successful and have received funded offers. Good luck!

Edited February 19, 2011 by ZeChocMoose

[space-cat]

First off, to my knowledge, anthropology programs tend to weight your essays and writing samples much more than your scores and pedigree. GPA is important, but like Blur said, your 3.9 may or may not be comparable to a 3.9 from another institution. Basically, it's impossible to tell whether you are in fact "far more qualified" than someone else based on those stats alone. You're confused and upset, and that's completely understandable, but I don't think you meant to imply that two top tier programs admitted classes of raging idiots.

In addition to others' excellent points about fit and the specificity of your SOP, you might also want to think about your proposed research areas/project in the context of your field as a whole. Is it something that's already been done to death in your sub-field (not sure what your sub-field is, but I assume sociocultural)? Is it an area that's going out of vogue, or that those schools are no longer really pushing? Or, conversely, is it something that's very trendy right now and thus very competitive (medical anthro comes to mind)? Did you convey an understanding of how your interests fit in with work that's being done in your field - citing relevant publications or theorists, etc.?

Beyond that...you applied to two ridiculously, insanely competitive schools. Statistically, there was always a strong chance you'd be rejected from both, and quite possibly for reasons that had nothing to do with you. Maybe your essays were indeed not as strong as other applicants', but maybe someone else with an identical profile spoke one more language, had one more interesting side project, was from another country that they wanted represented, etc. Only the ad coms know for sure.

Edited February 19, 2011 by space-cat

[anthropologygeek]

In anthropology the schools are flooded with applications. I would cast a wider net next year.

[wtncffts]

I'm not in anthropology, but I agree with all the above. I also want to echo space-cat's comment about "imply[ing] that two top tier programs admitted classes of raging idiots." Obviously, the people they did admit weren't "far less qualified" in the eyes of the adcomm; the way you phrased it sounded very entitled, which is a major pet peeve of mine. I trust that you didn't mean to convey that impression.

[ZeeMore21]

Just because someone's GPA or GRE is lower than yours doesn't make them less qualified for a PhD program. It is that type of attitude that you have to change to get accepted to a program. Relying on scores and grades alone is not going to get you far. Just my two cents.

[beanbagchairs]

Sorry about those rejections.

I seconded all of the above posters said. I want to add that you may try to get some of your researches published. I dont know how hard it is to get into a conference in your field; it is doable in mine.

[psycholinguist]

The other thing is... if they write back to you along the lines of "You were very, very qualified and there was nothing wrong with your application." Maybe they would go as far as to suggest that fit is an issue. But what they WON'T say is department politics. This type of rejection hurts the applicant the most of all because department politics are completely out of the applicant's control and that also cost the applicant $.

So if you cannot find a satisfactory answer, assume department politics.

Also, sometimes even contacting faculty beforehand to see if they'd be interested in taking students don't necessarily correlate to finding out about their sabbaticals. I honestly did not even know that two of my PAs were going to be on sabbatical this year when I contacted them in the fall. Now I have to twiddle my thumbs and just hope that my applicant will be strong enough to get through the process. I swear, professors never tell you about their sabbatical plans.

Agreed. This may or may not have been the issue with one of my applications one time...and honestly? Either way, the whole experience was so confusing and contradictory that I'm glad I didn't end up there.