Plans B and C

[bubawizwam]

I applied to three schools this year and was rejected from all three. While I'm bummed that I will not be going for my PhD this fall, I'm not sure that I really applied to the right schools for my interests. I'm looking for some guidance as I create a plan B and/or C. I know I want to get my PhD in sociology and I know I can do well in a PhD program. I have a 3.89 GPA in a strong liberal arts program, where I double majored in Sociology and Chinese Studies. I have no published works, but I did write an undergraduate thesis that involved creating and conducting interviews and engaging in qualititative data analysis. (My thesis was on Chinese mythical beings and the terminology we use to discuss these creatures affects our understanding of them.) However, I do love me some quantitative research! I have strong recommendations and good writing samples in the field, but my GRE score just hits 1200 when I combine my best quantitative and verbals scores.

Plan B is to apply to schools for spring admission, and plan C is to apply for fall 2012 admission. Plan B is certainly preferable, but I'll take what I can get! I'm interested in sociology of education and criminology and deviance, as well as the intersection of the two in U.S. elementary public schools. I guess I could be lumped under the topic of social stratification to some degree. I spent some time teaching elementary special education and noticed that there was no intervention for students engaging in deviant and unlawful behaviors until they became involved in the juvenille justive system. I'd like to study school intervention methods such as classroom discipline, school wide behavioral intervention systems, and nationwide suspension and expulsion regulations to examine the impact on elementary aged delinquency of minority students. I'm not sure how this idea fares as a research topic, and based on my rejections, I guess it didn't go over too well.

Additionally, my current job is way outside of the field and I haven't had any luck in securing a better fitting position that could allow me greater involvement in sociological research. In other words, I have no new experience coming my way to help bolster future applications. I feel like I have to really work on fit and perfecting my personal statement/letter of intent. I can always take the GRE again, but I've taken it twice and I'm not anticipating any miracles.

Can anyone suggest any graduate schools that may be a good match for my interests? I am also interested in any general feedback you may have concerning my situation.

Thanks!

[socialcomm]

First, I'm sorry you didn't get in anywhere this year! I'm glad you're not giving up though.

Can you talk a little more about the three schools to which you applied? Why you selected them? Rank? Specialization? Applying to a greater variety of schools may help depending on where you applied this round. I don't have any recommendations for specific schools; hopefully others will!

Do you live near any schools? You could try to see if you could do something like volunteer with a research group or something similar just to gain experience and make contacts.

Edited March 15, 2011 by socialcomm

[hoobers]

Work really hard on getting your GRE score up. 1200 is much too low for most top PhD programs to consider, unless you are seriously exceptional in other ways. If you don't have the luxury to treat GRE training as a full-time job, then at least treat it as a night job. Do at least 2 hours of GRE training every day.

Edited March 15, 2011 by hoobers

[barilicious]

I studied for the GREs for at least 2 hours a night for 5 months - excessive, yes, but I like you don't test well on the damn thing. In the end I only got a 1280 (620V/660Q/5.0W). Needless to say, you can obviously retake the test, but I would focus more on other aspects of your application. One route to consider is going to an MA program to hone in on your interests, build more research experience, and possibly publish as well. This isn't the route I chose, but it seems to work for a lot of people on here, and if you can get into a funded MA program, it definitely can't hurt. I for one am a firm believer that your SOP and research fit is pretty important. Writing a killer SOP will really make you stand out, and having a well defined research plan/interests I think helps too. Obviously LORs are important as well as the writing sample, so they need to be strong as well, but I think a great deal of the magic lies in your SOP. I say REALLY research schools/programs/faculty (I spent 4 months on just building an excel sheet about schools), and apply where there is a good research fit for you, then write a killer SOP conveying this message and make sure it makes you stand out. A lot of this is just a crapshoot process as well, as I got rejected from my "safety" school while I got into great programs, so having a little luck on your side never hurts as well!

[socme123]

I agree with barilicious. It's a crapshoot, but also the SOP and fit matter a LOT. I've had people at various schools basically tell me my SOP is what won the day for me ('cause I knew it sure as heck wasn't my undergrad GPA, which was quite a bit lower than yours.)

To write a great SOP, step back for a moment and think about what ties together all of the work you've done in the past and present. You mentioned that your thesis was on Chinese mythical beings, but you want to study deviance, school discipline policy and effects on minority students. This is all interesting stuff. Is there a thread that links your interest in Chinese mythical being with your interests in minority youth "beings" (or is there a colorable argument you can make that ties them together in a creative way)? What about the non-sociology-related things you've done, like your current job? Why did you take those steps? What made those things appeal to you?

Sure, all of us can be idiosyncratic at times but I suspect that underneath it all, there's a common motivation or common reason we do what we do, and I think it probably connects to why we want to pursue a PhD in sociology. Reflect on the trajectory of your life and find that common thread, and that will guide you as you rewrite your SOP. Once you rewrite it, feel free to PM it to me and I'd be happy to comment on it if that would be helpful. I am not an adcomm and don't know exactly what they are looking for, of course, but sometimes peers can be helpful too!

I also agree with social comm that more information about the schools you selected and why you selected them would help us figure out what kind of advice to give.

[lambspam]

It's a crapshoot, but also the SOP and fit matter a LOT. I've had people at various schools basically tell me my SOP is what won the day for me ('cause I knew it sure as heck wasn't my undergrad GPA, which was quite a bit lower than yours.)

I completely agree with this entire post. I didn't rock the GRE, but I got into some great programs because of my SOP, research experience, CV, and fit. Though I may be alone in this, I don't think schools really give much weight to GREs as long as they're past the 1200 mark. Anything far above that is just bonus.

I strongly recommend checking out Donald Asher's Graduate Admissions Essays: Write Your Way into the Graduate School of Your Choice. It provided invaluable advice on securing top-notch LORs, making great contacts, and writing an SOP that made me sound focused and mature but interesting. For help picking out schools in your subfields, you may want to order a copy of ASA's Guide to Graduate Departments (there may be a more recent version). It's like $10 for student members and provides comprehensive information about every sociology grad program in the US, including faculty interests, department specializations, funding, deadlines, contact info, number of grad students, etc. Those two books completely guided me through the application process.

According to the latter publication, some strong programs with emphases in both education and crim are UC-Irvine, Emory, NYU, Ohio State, Penn State, and UT-Austin. Those might be some good places to start.

If you can, try to get more research experience. Even if you've already graduated, consider talking to a professor about the possibility of helping with a project during your gap year. Even if you didn't get paid (which you probably won't), you'd get a great LOR, some research experience, and a CV booster. You may also find that you really like it. Any opportunities to gain quantitative experience would be a great thing, especially with your research interests.

Also, have you considered submitting your UG thesis for publication?

[barilicious]

I strongly recommend checking out Donald Asher's Graduate Admissions Essays: Write Your Way into the Graduate School of Your Choice. It provided invaluable advice on securing top-notch LORs, making great contacts, and writing an SOP that made me sound focused and mature but interesting. For help picking out schools in your subfields, you may want to order a copy of ASA's Guide to Graduate Departments (there may be a more recent version). It's like $10 for student members and provides comprehensive information about every sociology grad program in the US, including faculty interests, department specializations, funding, deadlines, contact info, number of grad students, etc. Those two books completely guided me through the application process.

I too recommend these books. I used both as well. Asher's book was rather invaluable to me.

[hoobers]

I don't think schools really give much weight to GREs as long as they're past the 1200 mark. Anything far above that is just bonus.

You definitely don't have to have very good GREs to get in, but they do matter a lot if you are applying to the top departments. I can only speak for my own department (which is top 15), but I know from a prof on our admissions committee that they give GREs more weight than any single other piece of information. A good friend in another soc program (also top 15) says that he heard the same from the faculty there. The admissions process is of course very qualitative, so there are no hard-and-fast rules, but it makes sense why GREs would come out as the top criterion: they are far easier to judge than either the quality of letters of rec or of statements of purpose, and are more reliable than undergrad GPAs (because of grade inflation and lack of standardization).

By the way, though the NRC rankings are pretty ridiculous, but I bet that the average departmental GRE scores they report are probably correct (hopefully, they got these scores directly from ETS?). Anyway, they only have the average quantitative score, but you can see what it is for any graduate program: http://tiny.cc/pzc6i .

To save you some clicks, here are some average quant GREs for the top 5 programs (top by US N&W ranking, that is):

726 for Berkeley, 706 for Wisconsin, 733 for Princeton, 724 for Michigan, 722 for Harvard.

Now, let's look at the 20th through 24th program:

668 for Penn State, 665 for Arizona, 654 for Maryland, 661 for Minnesota, 734 for Yale.

So, with the exception of Yale, it really looks pretty consistent with the programs sorting the applicants by GRE score. Of course, this single score isn't enough for a rigorous analysis of interactions among admissions criteria--but what's certain is that the top-5 programs don't take too many students with low quant GREs.

Edited March 19, 2011 by hoobers

[going crazy]

By the way, though the NRC rankings are pretty ridiculous, but I bet that the average departmental GRE scores they report are probably correct (hopefully, they got these scores directly from ETS?). Anyway, they only have the average quantitative score, but you can see what it is for any graduate program: http://tiny.cc/pzc6i .

First, I totally agree with the gist of your argument, hoobers. I bet that we would find a clear decline in average quantitative GRE scores between admits from programs 1-5 and admits from programs 20-24. No argument there. But can these numbers on the NRC website possibly be right? I'm just having a difficult time believing that for 2003-2005 the average quantitative GRE score for admits at Cornell was 623. The average for those at Ohio State was 619 And the average for those at Nebraska was 549.

Again, I agree with your point. But do these numbers sound a little sketch to you? Just wondering.

Edited March 19, 2011 by going crazy

[barilicious]

First, I totally agree with the gist of your argument, hoobers. I bet that we would find a clear decline in average quantitative GRE scores between admits from programs 1-5 and admits from programs 20-24. No argument there. But can these numbers on the NRC website possibly be right? I'm just having a difficult time believing that for 2003-2005 the average quantitative GRE score for admits at Cornell was 623. The average for those at Ohio State was 619 And the average for those at Nebraska was 549.

Again, I agree with your point. But do these numbers sound a little sketch to you? Just wondering.

UT-Austin puts on their website that the average GRE quant of admitted students is 647, and I'm sure back in 2003-2005 it was lower than this, so I'd say yea, possibly...

[hoobers]

First, I totally agree with the gist of your argument, hoobers. I bet that we would find a clear decline in average quantitative GRE scores between admits from programs 1-5 and admits from programs 20-24. No argument there. But can these numbers on the NRC website possibly be right? I'm just having a difficult time believing that for 2003-2005 the average quantitative GRE score for admits at Cornell was 623. The average for those at Ohio State was 619 And the average for those at Nebraska was 549.

Again, I agree with your point. But do these numbers sound a little sketch to you? Just wondering.

You are right, given how bad NRC scores are in general, the GRE scores are probably not that trustworthy either. Those particular numbers don't seem overly sketch to me, though. Do you think they are too low?

[bubawizwam]

Hello Everyone! Sorry I dropped off this site a bit, but I figured that I would step away from the whole thing for a week or so and come up with a new game plan. I've decided that I'm just going to aim for Fall 2012 admissions and hopefully come up with some sort of fun job for the year, perhaps abroad. My Chinese is getting a bit rusty, so maybe I'll try to teach English in China for a bit...

So here are the there schools I applied to: UMD-College Park, UT-Austin, and Stanford. I thought the programs looked good, the courses sounded interesting, and the locations were appealing. (I'm currently in Baltimore.)

I took the GRE twice, my verbal scores are 560 and 530. My quantitative scores are 590 ad 640. I graduated magna cum laude and have departmental honors in sociology and am a member of phi beta kappa and alpha kappa delta. I TA'ed social statistics my senior year of undergrad, and that professor is writing my a LOR. My undergraduate thesis was all qualitative research, however, and my two advisers on that project are my other two LORs. I was close with all three professors and know they're rooting for me. I've also kept in touch since graduating in 2009, and they all read and reread my SOP several times.

My undergraduate degree was in sociology and Chinese studies. My thesis is called "Examining the Cultural Transmission of Chinese Mythical Beings: A Lesson In Hermeneutics." I think it is just about the most interesting topic ever, but it's way too long and too abstract to have a shot at being published. My junior thesis is more likely publishable and has been my writing sample with my applications, but it is also fairly abstract. It examines the tripartite division of the Chinese spirit world (gods, ghosts, and ancestors) and argues that there should be a forth category, the demonic. Despite the fact that I get super excited about Chinese mythology and religion, I want my graduate work to be a bit/a lot more practical.

After I graduated, I started teaching elementary special ed. in the Baltimore City public school system. The kids were wonderful but the system was so corrupt that I left. I decided that I wanted my graduate work to have the potential to impact the public school system or the kids being left behind by it. I've been working a pretty lame 8-5 cubicle job this past year and hoping to get into grad school. Now here I am.

I feel like my interests are torn between sociology of education and criminology and deviance. Hell, throw in a more generalized social stratification. I do not want a straight up sociology of education program or just a criminology program. I want a program that is not afraid to be a bit interdepartmental. The world's problems aren't going to be solved by thinking inside the box, so why train students to do just that. I am not entirely sure if I would want to follow an academic track post-graduation and hope to work as a professor or if I'd like to do policy research. They both interest me.

I thought about writing up my specific research interests, but I'm actually going to paste my SOP below so you can see what sort of a mess you're working with here!

Please forgive my ramblings, but my week away from the site clearly wasn't quite long enough to fully organize my thoughts. Additionally, I really appreciate everyone's advice and contributions here. It makes me proud to be a (future?) sociologist to have so many like-minded people cheering me on and helping me out.

Getting Schooled

It was a typical fall afternoon, about 2:45pm. I remember the time, not because of any particular affinity for remembering fine details, but because school had just let out. I was several months into my first year of teaching elementary special education in a west Baltimore public school, and I was once again walking toward the corner where I would wait for the local bus to pick me up. As I turned from the school, James* called out to me.

“Ms. Desperate Grad School Applicant, where you headed? You takin’ the bus?” James was not my peer, but one of my fourth grade students.

“Hello James,” I responded cheerfully, “I am taking the bus. I take it to and from school every day.”

“Why you do that?” You too poor to afford a car? The school don’t pay you enough?” he asked me playfully, hoping to push my buttons. I spouted off a well-rehearsed story about my concern for the environment. After my environmentally-friendly spiel, James threw a candy wrapper on the sidewalk, cocked his head to one side, gave me a mischievous grin and responded, “Ms. Desperate Grad School Applicant, I’m gonna stick someone up and steal their car.”

“You’re going to stick someone up and steal their car?” I asked.

“Yeah, then I’m gonna give you the car,” he said smugly.

“You’re going to stick someone up, steal their car, and give it to me,” I repeated.

“Yeah, then I’m gonna call the po-lice and have you framed,” he said matter-of-factly, arms crossed over his chest, a big smile on his face. I cannot quite recall my response to his devious plot, but I remember thinking about it my entire bus ride home. I still think about it to this day, nearly one year after it happened.

As I recall that event, I cannot help but think about James’ future. I can vividly picture him attending juvenile court several years from now, perhaps resulting in probation, or even a detention facility. I would like to believe that my thoughts are ridiculous, and terribly off base. However, delinquent youth frequently exhibit many characteristics of their deviance and criminality within the school, often foreshadowing their futures. Studies have found that “many elementary school teachers report that they can tell who will eventually end up in the juvenile justice system by observing students as young as ten years old. And for the most part, their predictions are accurate.”[1]

Despite teachers’ ability to foresee a child’s journey into the juvenile justice system, they are surprisingly unprepared to prevent, or even reduce a child’s deviant or criminal tendencies. Why, I wonder, are we so poorly equipped to help children like James, with many visible risk factors for crime, from following down a criminal path? As a PhD student at The University of Maryland-College Park, I would use my sociological imagination to carefully deconstruct and analyze the public school system’s inability to address the needs of elementary school students with high risk factors for engaging in crime, and identify the skills schools need to teach these students.

While clearly an overwhelming subject, I am interested in three distinct elements of the public education system: school-based deviance prevention programs; classroom management systems and school behavioral plans; and school and government policy concerning behavior in schools. I believe that an examination of these three categories will provide a comprehensive view on the prevention of deviance and crime among elementary age students.

It is easy to view the social phenomenon of the school-to-prison pipeline using only one perspective or one methodology, but it is important to embrace a fusion of macro and micro perspectives, and employ a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, to fully grasp the depth and entanglement of deviancy within our schools, our government, and our culture. Juvenile delinquency is a complex issue, rooted deeply in our social structure, and cannot be fully grasped without looking at the many different structural elements creating and affecting child deviance.

By examining the three areas of the public school system proposed above, data can be gathered from both the individual, or micro-level, and the institutional, or macro-level presenting a full spectrum of the phenomena molding juvenile deviancy among America’s disadvantaged public school students. Specifically, data can be gleaned through meta-analysis of studies reviewing delinquency prevention programs, content analysis of interviews I would conduct with teachers and administrators, and statistical analysis of government-gathered survey data. Comparing and analyzing such a variety of information will provide a comprehensive view of what our society is doing within our public schools to keep elementary school students from ever reaching the justice system’s courtrooms.

Numerous studies have identified protective factors that can minimize the impact of a student’s inherited risk factors. However, many schools struggle to utilize these protective factors, such as teaching conflict resolution or creative problem solving skills. With teachers already overwhelmed with daily tasks and the concern of making “adequate yearly progress” (AYP), it becomes inconceivable in many teachers’ minds to add additional subject matter to the already packed curriculum. However, numerous school-based deviance prevention programs are available that teach valuable protective skills without adding any significant additional work to teachers’ busy schedules.

One program, Life Skills Training (LST), is a clear example of such a beneficial, manageable program. Materials include a teacher’s manual and detailed lesson-plans, which are designed to teach students “a variety of cognitive-behavioral skills for problem-solving and decision-making, resisting media influences, managing stress and anxiety, communicating effectively, developing healthy personal relationships, and asserting one’s rights.”[2] A 2006 study among 4,858 sixth-grade students in New York City found that students exposed to the LST program showed a marked decrease in delinquent behaviors over the span of one year. With reviews of LST programs showing such optimistic results, I believe that a meta-analysis of research conducted on the impact of such delinquency prevention programs would shed light on numerous options currently available to schools that can slow the school-to-prison pipeline, increase students’ protective factors, and teach them the skills they need to avoid involvement in present and future criminal activity.

The responsibility for teaching skills that reduce student delinquency cannot be placed solely on highly structured prevention programs. Small, often mundane aspects of public education, such as classroom and school-wide behavior programs, must also be examined. These address the very culture of schools, and their views and perceptions of students and student deviance. Through semi-structured interviews with elementary classroom teachers and school administrators, it is possible to understand the current methods in which schools attempt to address, punish, correct, and sometimes inadvertently foster students’ deviant behavior. Such interviews will also reveal how school personnel directly respond to and impact student (mis)behavior.

A wide spectrum of classroom management systems, ranging from physical punishment and shaming, to rewarding and addressing only positive behavior, flourish within America’s public schools. It is therefore important to talk to those who are responsible for administering these systems, such as teachers, guidance counselors, and principals, to identify their perceptions on student deviance, punishment versus rewards, what works and what does not, whether or not suspension is beneficial, and so forth. Without an awareness of current administrator and teacher views on addressing student deviance, it is impossible to truly understand what must happen for sustainable improvements to occur. After conducting numerous interviews among elementary, public school personnel, it will be possible to identify current trends already in place in schools, to assess whether or not these trends match proven best practices, and to determine what is missing that might help divert students from the path toward prison.

Understanding the behavioral practices being used in schools, however, will not provide a complete picture of our nation’s impact on juvenile delinquency in schools. It is also important to examine the state and national legislation regarding student behavior and punishment, as this provides the framework with which public school teachers and administrators work. Educational policy, such as Zero Tolerance policies and laws governing school suspension and expulsion play a critical role in how student deviance is viewed and treated. A statistical analysis of government-collected data examining such variables as juvenile crime rates, suspensions rates, and number of expulsions against a variety of demographic factors would allow for a clear picture of the correlation between government policies and student delinquency. Reviewing such data would paint a picture of the effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of educational policies on educational practices and, most importantly, student delinquency.

Through an examination of school-based deviation prevention programs, interviews with public school personnel regarding school and classroom behavior management systems, and statistical analysis of government data regarding educational policy, I hope to help students like James* avoid a seemingly predetermined path towards delinquency. Another part of me, however, simply wants to create a new way to reconnect with the Baltimore City public schools. While I spent my first year out of college teaching special education in a west side school, I eventually left the profession. Despite my love for the students and a passion for learning, I found the public schools, and my school in particular, to have an unexpected, and at times undesired, impact on students’ development. From man-handling the students, to disregarding federal law mandating special education, to even changing answers on the Maryland standardized tests, my school was not a place that fostered positive student growth. While it often pains me to think that I left my students in the current educational environment, I am certain that pursuing my PhD in Sociology will eventually allow me to make significant long-lasting change in the public school system.

As I now pass my days in my cubicle, holding a standard 8-5 office job, I can’t help but yearn for more. Selling electromagnetic components does not satisfy my intellectual curiosity and desire to improve the social conditions of disadvantaged youth. Furthermore, I miss my undergraduate days of hiding away in the campus library, researching Chinese mythical beings and typing away on my thesis, “Examining the Cultural Transmission of Chinese Mythical Beings: A Lesson in Hermeneutics.” I think thoughtfully to heated discussions over lunch, debating the merits of using the works of European social theorists to explain non-European social phenomena. I fondly recall staying after class with a friend just to talk to my professors about the class readings and questions that had been brewing in my head throughout the day’s lecture and discussion.

My co-workers joke about my insatiable curiosity, as I ask questions about capacitors and resistors that we sell for pennies each. What I want, in addition to researching the prevention of criminality and deviance among elementary school students, is to return to a place where asking questions is not a nuisance but a positive quality, where reading books is not just a diversion from the monotony of daily life, but a means to satisfy a hunger for new thoughts and new ways of viewing and impacting the world. I believe that the University of Maryland-College Park will help me to become a true student of sociology— a field researcher, a statistician, a social theorist, a writer, and a thinker. I believe that the University of Maryland-College Park’s sociology PhD program produces students who do not just know facts, but know how to think and learn and communicate ideas clearly and effectively. As a PhD candidate, I promise to bring integrity, energy, and an insatiable thirst for knowledge. I will be the type of student that I hoped to foster as a teacher. I am ready to feel once more at home.

<br clear="all"> [1] John Aarons and others, Dispatches from Juvenile Hall: Fixing a Failing System (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 152.

[2] Gilbert J. Botvin and others, “Preventing Youth Violence and Delinquency through a Universal School-Based Prevention Approach,” Prevention Science 7 (2006), 404.

[lambspam]

Hey there bubawizwam,

You're a very engaging writer, so most of the suggestions I have regarding your SOP pertain to content rather than style. I hope this doesn't come off too harsh -- you sound like you'd make a fantastic graduate student, and there are a few things I think you can do differently to convey that better.

- Your statement is way too long. All the schools to which I applied had limits of one page, and two of them had applicants keep it to 500 words. Yours is 3.5 pages, single-spaced. Even if schools left the page limit open-ended, that's still far too much.

- While your hook is interesting, it is too long and ultimately doesn't say much about you personally. It's mostly about James. I recommend limiting it to five sentences or fewer and using it to make a strong first impression about what you've done.

- You spend a lot of space describing the negative conditions of American schools and programs aimed at correcting them, citing data, studies, and standards. There's too much of this, especially because it doesn't say much about you.

- More active voice. Statements like "data can be gleaned through meta-analysis" aren't powerful. "I will conduct a meta-analysis of ..." is stronger.

- You don't really say much about their program at all. You say "I believe that UMD-CP will help me become a true student of sociology -- a field researcher, a statistician ... " etc., but you don't specifically state why Maryland stands out. Any sociology graduate program will teach you how to conduct research. What is it about Maryland/Stanford/UT-Austin that does it for you? For example, I really liked that one of my schools has a very strong record of graduate students co-authoring with faculty, and I'd like to get in on that.

- You don't mention any professors that you may want to work with. This is a really vital component of a successful application. Know who's there, who you may want to work with, what kind of research they're doing, and whether they might be willing to work with you. If no one can (or wants to) supervise your project, you can't do it there and won't get in. Contacting faculty and then mentioning them in your application materials is not pushy. It shows that you know their department.

- Ultimately, I think the biggest challenge with your SOP is that it sounds unfocused. You essentially propose three separate research projects, and that's just too much if you ever want to actually finish your Ph.D. Your best bet to a successful application is to focus focus focus. Just pick one and run with that. Once you're in grad school, you're not tied to that project. You can tweak it in small and large ways. Hell, you can throw it out and start all over, and the grad committee knows this might happen. In the SOP, they just want to see that you are capable of identifying an interesting research question and developing a solid methodological approach.

Anyway, that's what I suggest. Good luck!

[bubawizwam]

I didn't find your comments to be the least bit harsh. They were very helpful. So you think it's fine to focus on just one element of the research interest I listed, such as focusing on school-wide behavior management systems and how they impact juvenille delinquency? As for the length, so many people have trouble making papers, etc. long enough, but I always have the opposite problem! I guess I felt that by including more information, more detail, that I was showing my ability to do think through a research idea.

[ringo2009]

Hello Everyone! Sorry I dropped off this site a bit, but I figured that I would step away from the whole thing for a week or so and come up with a new game plan. I've decided that I'm just going to aim for Fall 2012 admissions and hopefully come up with some sort of fun job for the year, perhaps abroad. My Chinese is getting a bit rusty, so maybe I'll try to teach English in China for a bit...

So here are the there schools I applied to: UMD-College Park, UT-Austin, and Stanford. I thought the programs looked good, the courses sounded interesting, and the locations were appealing. (I'm currently in Baltimore.)

I took the GRE twice, my verbal scores are 560 and 530. My quantitative scores are 590 ad 640. I graduated magna cum laude and have departmental honors in sociology and am a member of phi beta kappa and alpha kappa delta. I TA'ed social statistics my senior year of undergrad, and that professor is writing my a LOR. My undergraduate thesis was all qualitative research, however, and my two advisers on that project are my other two LORs. I was close with all three professors and know they're rooting for me. I've also kept in touch since graduating in 2009, and they all read and reread my SOP several times.

My undergraduate degree was in sociology and Chinese studies. My thesis is called "Examining the Cultural Transmission of Chinese Mythical Beings: A Lesson In Hermeneutics." I think it is just about the most interesting topic ever, but it's way too long and too abstract to have a shot at being published. My junior thesis is more likely publishable and has been my writing sample with my applications, but it is also fairly abstract. It examines the tripartite division of the Chinese spirit world (gods, ghosts, and ancestors) and argues that there should be a forth category, the demonic. Despite the fact that I get super excited about Chinese mythology and religion, I want my graduate work to be a bit/a lot more practical.

After I graduated, I started teaching elementary special ed. in the Baltimore City public school system. The kids were wonderful but the system was so corrupt that I left. I decided that I wanted my graduate work to have the potential to impact the public school system or the kids being left behind by it. I've been working a pretty lame 8-5 cubicle job this past year and hoping to get into grad school. Now here I am.

I feel like my interests are torn between sociology of education and criminology and deviance. Hell, throw in a more generalized social stratification. I do not want a straight up sociology of education program or just a criminology program. I want a program that is not afraid to be a bit interdepartmental. The world's problems aren't going to be solved by thinking inside the box, so why train students to do just that. I am not entirely sure if I would want to follow an academic track post-graduation and hope to work as a professor or if I'd like to do policy research. They both interest me.

I thought about writing up my specific research interests, but I'm actually going to paste my SOP below so you can see what sort of a mess you're working with here!

Please forgive my ramblings, but my week away from the site clearly wasn't quite long enough to fully organize my thoughts. Additionally, I really appreciate everyone's advice and contributions here. It makes me proud to be a (future?) sociologist to have so many like-minded people cheering me on and helping me out.

Getting Schooled

It was a typical fall afternoon, about 2:45pm. I remember the time, not because of any particular affinity for remembering fine details, but because school had just let out. I was several months into my first year of teaching elementary special education in a west Baltimore public school, and I was once again walking toward the corner where I would wait for the local bus to pick me up. As I turned from the school, James* called out to me.

“Ms. Desperate Grad School Applicant, where you headed? You takin’ the bus?” James was not my peer, but one of my fourth grade students.

“Hello James,” I responded cheerfully, “I am taking the bus. I take it to and from school every day.”

“Why you do that?” You too poor to afford a car? The school don’t pay you enough?” he asked me playfully, hoping to push my buttons. I spouted off a well-rehearsed story about my concern for the environment. After my environmentally-friendly spiel, James threw a candy wrapper on the sidewalk, cocked his head to one side, gave me a mischievous grin and responded, “Ms. Desperate Grad School Applicant, I’m gonna stick someone up and steal their car.”

“You’re going to stick someone up and steal their car?” I asked.

“Yeah, then I’m gonna give you the car,” he said smugly.

“You’re going to stick someone up, steal their car, and give it to me,” I repeated.

“Yeah, then I’m gonna call the po-lice and have you framed,” he said matter-of-factly, arms crossed over his chest, a big smile on his face. I cannot quite recall my response to his devious plot, but I remember thinking about it my entire bus ride home. I still think about it to this day, nearly one year after it happened.

As I recall that event, I cannot help but think about James’ future. I can vividly picture him attending juvenile court several years from now, perhaps resulting in probation, or even a detention facility. I would like to believe that my thoughts are ridiculous, and terribly off base. However, delinquent youth frequently exhibit many characteristics of their deviance and criminality within the school, often foreshadowing their futures. Studies have found that “many elementary school teachers report that they can tell who will eventually end up in the juvenile justice system by observing students as young as ten years old. And for the most part, their predictions are accurate.”[1]

Despite teachers’ ability to foresee a child’s journey into the juvenile justice system, they are surprisingly unprepared to prevent, or even reduce a child’s deviant or criminal tendencies. Why, I wonder, are we so poorly equipped to help children like James, with many visible risk factors for crime, from following down a criminal path? As a PhD student at The University of Maryland-College Park, I would use my sociological imagination to carefully deconstruct and analyze the public school system’s inability to address the needs of elementary school students with high risk factors for engaging in crime, and identify the skills schools need to teach these students.

While clearly an overwhelming subject, I am interested in three distinct elements of the public education system: school-based deviance prevention programs; classroom management systems and school behavioral plans; and school and government policy concerning behavior in schools. I believe that an examination of these three categories will provide a comprehensive view on the prevention of deviance and crime among elementary age students.

It is easy to view the social phenomenon of the school-to-prison pipeline using only one perspective or one methodology, but it is important to embrace a fusion of macro and micro perspectives, and employ a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, to fully grasp the depth and entanglement of deviancy within our schools, our government, and our culture. Juvenile delinquency is a complex issue, rooted deeply in our social structure, and cannot be fully grasped without looking at the many different structural elements creating and affecting child deviance.

By examining the three areas of the public school system proposed above, data can be gathered from both the individual, or micro-level, and the institutional, or macro-level presenting a full spectrum of the phenomena molding juvenile deviancy among America’s disadvantaged public school students. Specifically, data can be gleaned through meta-analysis of studies reviewing delinquency prevention programs, content analysis of interviews I would conduct with teachers and administrators, and statistical analysis of government-gathered survey data. Comparing and analyzing such a variety of information will provide a comprehensive view of what our society is doing within our public schools to keep elementary school students from ever reaching the justice system’s courtrooms.

Numerous studies have identified protective factors that can minimize the impact of a student’s inherited risk factors. However, many schools struggle to utilize these protective factors, such as teaching conflict resolution or creative problem solving skills. With teachers already overwhelmed with daily tasks and the concern of making “adequate yearly progress” (AYP), it becomes inconceivable in many teachers’ minds to add additional subject matter to the already packed curriculum. However, numerous school-based deviance prevention programs are available that teach valuable protective skills without adding any significant additional work to teachers’ busy schedules.

One program, Life Skills Training (LST), is a clear example of such a beneficial, manageable program. Materials include a teacher’s manual and detailed lesson-plans, which are designed to teach students “a variety of cognitive-behavioral skills for problem-solving and decision-making, resisting media influences, managing stress and anxiety, communicating effectively, developing healthy personal relationships, and asserting one’s rights.”[2] A 2006 study among 4,858 sixth-grade students in New York City found that students exposed to the LST program showed a marked decrease in delinquent behaviors over the span of one year. With reviews of LST programs showing such optimistic results, I believe that a meta-analysis of research conducted on the impact of such delinquency prevention programs would shed light on numerous options currently available to schools that can slow the school-to-prison pipeline, increase students’ protective factors, and teach them the skills they need to avoid involvement in present and future criminal activity.

The responsibility for teaching skills that reduce student delinquency cannot be placed solely on highly structured prevention programs. Small, often mundane aspects of public education, such as classroom and school-wide behavior programs, must also be examined. These address the very culture of schools, and their views and perceptions of students and student deviance. Through semi-structured interviews with elementary classroom teachers and school administrators, it is possible to understand the current methods in which schools attempt to address, punish, correct, and sometimes inadvertently foster students’ deviant behavior. Such interviews will also reveal how school personnel directly respond to and impact student (mis)behavior.

A wide spectrum of classroom management systems, ranging from physical punishment and shaming, to rewarding and addressing only positive behavior, flourish within America’s public schools. It is therefore important to talk to those who are responsible for administering these systems, such as teachers, guidance counselors, and principals, to identify their perceptions on student deviance, punishment versus rewards, what works and what does not, whether or not suspension is beneficial, and so forth. Without an awareness of current administrator and teacher views on addressing student deviance, it is impossible to truly understand what must happen for sustainable improvements to occur. After conducting numerous interviews among elementary, public school personnel, it will be possible to identify current trends already in place in schools, to assess whether or not these trends match proven best practices, and to determine what is missing that might help divert students from the path toward prison.

Understanding the behavioral practices being used in schools, however, will not provide a complete picture of our nation’s impact on juvenile delinquency in schools. It is also important to examine the state and national legislation regarding student behavior and punishment, as this provides the framework with which public school teachers and administrators work. Educational policy, such as Zero Tolerance policies and laws governing school suspension and expulsion play a critical role in how student deviance is viewed and treated. A statistical analysis of government-collected data examining such variables as juvenile crime rates, suspensions rates, and number of expulsions against a variety of demographic factors would allow for a clear picture of the correlation between government policies and student delinquency. Reviewing such data would paint a picture of the effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) of educational policies on educational practices and, most importantly, student delinquency.

Through an examination of school-based deviation prevention programs, interviews with public school personnel regarding school and classroom behavior management systems, and statistical analysis of government data regarding educational policy, I hope to help students like James* avoid a seemingly predetermined path towards delinquency. Another part of me, however, simply wants to create a new way to reconnect with the Baltimore City public schools. While I spent my first year out of college teaching special education in a west side school, I eventually left the profession. Despite my love for the students and a passion for learning, I found the public schools, and my school in particular, to have an unexpected, and at times undesired, impact on students’ development. From man-handling the students, to disregarding federal law mandating special education, to even changing answers on the Maryland standardized tests, my school was not a place that fostered positive student growth. While it often pains me to think that I left my students in the current educational environment, I am certain that pursuing my PhD in Sociology will eventually allow me to make significant long-lasting change in the public school system.

As I now pass my days in my cubicle, holding a standard 8-5 office job, I can’t help but yearn for more. Selling electromagnetic components does not satisfy my intellectual curiosity and desire to improve the social conditions of disadvantaged youth. Furthermore, I miss my undergraduate days of hiding away in the campus library, researching Chinese mythical beings and typing away on my thesis, “Examining the Cultural Transmission of Chinese Mythical Beings: A Lesson in Hermeneutics.” I think thoughtfully to heated discussions over lunch, debating the merits of using the works of European social theorists to explain non-European social phenomena. I fondly recall staying after class with a friend just to talk to my professors about the class readings and questions that had been brewing in my head throughout the day’s lecture and discussion.

My co-workers joke about my insatiable curiosity, as I ask questions about capacitors and resistors that we sell for pennies each. What I want, in addition to researching the prevention of criminality and deviance among elementary school students, is to return to a place where asking questions is not a nuisance but a positive quality, where reading books is not just a diversion from the monotony of daily life, but a means to satisfy a hunger for new thoughts and new ways of viewing and impacting the world. I believe that the University of Maryland-College Park will help me to become a true student of sociology— a field researcher, a statistician, a social theorist, a writer, and a thinker. I believe that the University of Maryland-College Park’s sociology PhD program produces students who do not just know facts, but know how to think and learn and communicate ideas clearly and effectively. As a PhD candidate, I promise to bring integrity, energy, and an insatiable thirst for knowledge. I will be the type of student that I hoped to foster as a teacher. I am ready to feel once more at home.

<br clear="all"> [1] John Aarons and others, Dispatches from Juvenile Hall: Fixing a Failing System (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 152.

[2] Gilbert J. Botvin and others, “Preventing Youth Violence and Delinquency through a Universal School-Based Prevention Approach,” Prevention Science 7 (2006), 404.

HI Buba -

Sorry it didnt work out for you with your applications this year. I remember you from late Jan early Feb when we were both checking the UMD CP sight regularly. I agree with most of what was said previously. There is A LOT that can happen in the year. You should focus on revaluating the schools you applied to, making personal connections with the DGS and POI's and being able to present a new and refined application for next year.

Concerning your SOP, let me preface this by saying I did a quick skim, I think you do a great job in substantiating your interests and with the exception of the opening this may make a good NSF GRFP or other similarly project oriented essay. However the pupose/objective of the SOP is much different. You have a very limited amount of space (ranging from 1-2 pages) to essentially sell yourself to the university and clearly articulate why you are a good match for the school. Therefore the bulk of your essay should be about you. What you have done, wha lead you to sociology, how well do you learn, academic merits and research interests. Also, dont be afraid to leave your research interests a bit general . Speaking to a DGS at one of the schools I applied to, a lot of grad schools actually prefer that students not come into the program with a very fixed research project in mind. They want students who have a clear research agenda, but who are open to being trained and refining those interests while in school.

Your intro is important. Its the hook. Its what lures them into yet another long and potentially boring SOP, keep in mind committee members read hundreds of these things. However the intro should essentially lay the groundwork for who you are: a characteristic, life experience, etc that essentially spells out who you are as a person. I would avoid dialogue, unless it is really critical and somehow greatly improves the message you are tryiing to present.

Moving on to your body you can speak about things such as:

1. Notable life experiences that have prepared you for doctoral studies and why

2. Academic achievements which provide examples of your capacity to learn, research, etc.

3. Work/life experiences which shows your committment to the field of sociology

4. Why have you chosen school X to apply to

5. Briefly touch on your research interests

6. Mention a few (probably no more than 3) POIs you may like to work with

These are just some ideas.

Then you want to bring it home with a banging conclusion which removes any doubt that they may have up until that point that you are a good fit and a good investment for the program.

I hope this helps. Wishing you the best of luck next year. A year goes by fast!

[bubawizwam]

I have a quick question on some of the abbreviations you used. DGS=department of graduate studies? NSF GRFP=?

I guess I don't quite get how I talk about myself, my accomplishments, etc without simply spewing back my resume.

[barilicious]

I have a quick question on some of the abbreviations you used. DGS=department of graduate studies? NSF GRFP=?

I guess I don't quite get how I talk about myself, my accomplishments, etc without simply spewing back my resume.

DGS is director of graduate studies. NSF GRFP is the National Science Foundation's Graduate Research Fellowship Program.

Again, I'd recommend getting Asher's book as it really lays out how to write a successful SOP - highlighting and drawing on items from your resume by placing them in certain context. Plus there are over 100 examples of successful SOPs in the book. Also, not saying I have an amazing SOP, but if you would like to see mine, I can e-mail it to you or PM it to you, as I got into Texas and wait listed at UMD - two schools that were of interests to you.

[ringo2009]

I have a quick question on some of the abbreviations you used. DGS=department of graduate studies? NSF GRFP=?

I guess I don't quite get how I talk about myself, my accomplishments, etc without simply spewing back my resume.

Barilicious answered the acronym question for you. Sorry, when I stumbled on this forum it was so acronym heavy, I just assumed it was common "grad-speak" :-). You are right, you dont want to go down the chronological list of your CV and spew it back to them verbatum. Your aim is to make the sociological and academic connections between what is on your CV ( and more importantly what is not) on your CV for your reader. How has experience xyz impacted your interests (which is the line of thought you were already on with your teaching experience). Or. how did another experience or opportunity open up another line of inquiry. What does experience XYZ say about your capacities as a student? These are the things that are not usually on the typical CV.

I havent heard of the books being referred to, but its always good to get inspiration from others. It sounds like you have great substance to write about.

[bubawizwam]

DGS is director of graduate studies. NSF GRFP is the National Science Foundation's Graduate Research Fellowship Program.

Again, I'd recommend getting Asher's book as it really lays out how to write a successful SOP - highlighting and drawing on items from your resume by placing them in certain context. Plus there are over 100 examples of successful SOPs in the book. Also, not saying I have an amazing SOP, but if you would like to see mine, I can e-mail it to you or PM it to you, as I got into Texas and wait listed at UMD - two schools that were of interests to you.

I'd love to see your SOP. PM it on over! I just ordered the ASA's Guide to Graduate Studies in Sociology that someone mentioned above. (I think I just butchered the title some.) It was on back order on the ASA site, and the newest edition I could find on Amazon was from 2005. I'll have to order Asher's book next.

My next question is, do I need to scrap my entire SOP and start from scratch, or can I preserve certain sections? Also, does anyone have more school suggestions now that they've seen more of my interests?

[bubawizwam]

Oooh, another question. My current job is so far outside of the realm of sociology and is a real bore. In my SOP is it okay to completely ignore what I currently do and focus on my teaching experience and undergrad experiences, or do I somehow work in what I currently do? I have trouble talking about what I currently do in a positive light, so I was hoping to avoid the topic, but I also don't want it to look like I fell off of the face of the Earth after leaving my teaching position.

[barilicious]

Oooh, another question. My current job is so far outside of the realm of sociology and is a real bore. In my SOP is it okay to completely ignore what I currently do and focus on my teaching experience and undergrad experiences, or do I somehow work in what I currently do? I have trouble talking about what I currently do in a positive light, so I was hoping to avoid the topic, but I also don't want it to look like I fell off of the face of the Earth after leaving my teaching position.

I clean houses currently, and I did not talk about it in my SOP.

[goodmp]

I've been working in IT for several years, and I definitely included it in my SOP. Depending on the type of job, showing that you have some significant work experience can really only be a positive thing. I was actually pretty negative about my job in my SOP, since working in IT is what drove me to go back to school and finish up my degree. If you can frame things as relevant to the discipline and elaborate on some skills you gained from your employment, I would suggest at least mentioning it.

[lambspam]

I didn't find your comments to be the least bit harsh. They were very helpful. So you think it's fine to focus on just one element of the research interest I listed, such as focusing on school-wide behavior management systems and how they impact juvenille delinquency? As for the length, so many people have trouble making papers, etc. long enough, but I always have the opposite problem! I guess I felt that by including more information, more detail, that I was showing my ability to do think through a research idea.

You're not alone in your struggles with verbosity. Brevity has waged a heavy-handed battle against many social scientists, myself included.

But when it comes to your proposed research topic, just pick one and then talk about how you'll tackle it. Much of your SOP is preservable, especially since you're a very engaging writer. The problem is that you talk about so many things that you sound like you're all over the place. In my experience as a masters student, grad school is all about zooming in on one microscopic issue, using a very specific method for figuring out what it means, and then moving on to the next microscopic issue. Having broad interests is great, but we'll have our whole careers to save the world. Don't have to do it all in one paper.

Meanwhile, brag a little more. It can be hard, but there are ways of doing it without sounding like an asshole (which was my biggest fear). I was able to do this by talking about how I was "fortunate to have the opportunity" to work with certain professors, do certain kinds of research, publish, etc. Doing so makes people sound like they're doing great things and still aware that they didn't get there without a little help. You can also use your SOP to weave everything in your CV together. You were a teacher, you speak Chinese, you're interested in stratification: what's the common thread?

Another thing that works, if done carefully, is to talk about a time you didn't succeed and how that shaped you. Your teaching experience could be a great opportunity for this -- and a good hook. Just make sure you get a few pairs of eyes on it before submission to ensure that it doesn't come off wrong.

I'd be happy to send you my SOP if you'd like. I got into some really great programs after spending a lot of time figuring out how to tackle a lot of the same issues you're talking about (word count, lots of interests, focus, connecting the CV to the SOP, being uneasy about bragging, etc.). Just let me know.

[bubawizwam]

Sure, I'd love to see your SOP. I figure the more I see the better prepared I will be to edit mine.

I'm having a heck of a time trying to weave together my interests. The best thing I can come up with so far is an insatiable curiosity, perhaps to see things from a different point of view. Learning Chinese and studying Chinese history and culture allowed me to view a whole range of new thoughts and perspectives I was unable to see before. Teaching allowed me a view of a chaotic system that I had only been able to examine as a student. I'll have to ponder this more.

[Prospective Soc Student]

One thing that I don't think anyone else has mentioned so far: I think you come across as more of a practitioner than a researcher, i.e., you sound like someone who should be applying to MPP, MEd, MSW, etc. degrees versus a hard-core research degree. When you spend a lot of time talking about government programs and outcomes, it gives the SOP a focus that isn't totally applicable to the world of research. Many programs with FAQs specifically address the fact that they don't exist to create policy-makers--they exist to create researchers. Especially the part about how you hope to use your research to improve the public schools--I don't know if that's your role here. Others will disagree, but I think it makes you seem like you don't belong in a research program. Just a thought.