Am I Totally Screwed or What?

[rinneron]

(Disclaimer: This is yet another plea -- as I see there are many already on this board! -- to those who know better than I whether or not I even have a chance at getting into grad school. I apologize very, very much for this, but I figure since we're all in the same field, you guys must understand how terribly stressful and anxiety-provoking this whole process is. And there's no harm in trying, right?)

Like many people on this site, I just went through my second round of PhD applications for English programs. I felt much better prepared this time around, but I got my GRE English test scores back about a week ago, and somehow managed an abysmal 560. Better than my first performance (520), but still...

So here's my situation: I went to a prestigious small college for undergrad and walked out with a 3.74 overall (.01 away from summa cum laude! sigh), 3.85 in my English major, a high honors thesis, and a few departmental awards. I went to (technically am still at) an equally prestigious university for my MA in English, and am walking out with a 3.91 GPA, a theoretically good thesis (my school is a little odd in that it's only a semester long project, so I technically haven't begun it yet), and a couple of conference presentations/papers. I can read and translate French very well, and Latin to a fair extent. My recommendations are very good (and from pretty to very well known profs in my field), my statement of purpose is very specific as to what I have studied/what I want to study/theoretical questions I want to ask (basically, I used my SoP to outline my previous work, how it's informed my theoretical slant, present the theories/ideas I've come up with, and present an outline of where I would like my work to go/what interests I want to study/how I would like to frame my future research), I have teaching experience as an adjunct at a local community college (they took me on before I finished my MA cause I interviewed pretty well), as well as TA/writing center tutor experience there and at my undergrad, and my writing sample is awesome (if I can pat my back for suffering over that thing for the last four months). I did well on my GRE general -- 690V, 700Q, 6.0W -- but this GRE Subject is killing me.

(Specifically, for those who are interested/to whom it matters, my focus is 20th century American and British lit/postmodern -- isn't everyone's -- with my theoretical interests lying in the aesthetics of postmodern thought, minority/marginal nostalgia in literature, how memory is aestheticized through lit and used to usurp history as a primary vehicle of past recollection, post-structuralist theory as it applies to those ideas, and regional literature inhabiting memory -- ie Southern lit, expat American modern lit, post-genocidal Armenian lit.)

I don't just love lit/have a passion for lit, I genuinely want to research and teach. So, how fucked am I? I'm applying to 11 schools : (Brown, Berkeley, UCLA -- absolute top choice!, -- Rutgers, BC, WashU, CUNY, Indiana, U of Michigan, U of Delaware, Northwestern), all of which I researched and figured out fit my academic slants/had profs I'd want to study with (who I mentioned in my SoP). But this GRE lit score, combined with the fact that EVERYONE is 20th century these days, is making me panic. So, from you experienced on this site, should I start looking for garbage man (or woman, as my case would make it) jobs, or hold out for potential acceptances?

[lotf629]

Hey, no, I don't think you're f*ed at all. I think that there's a lot of variation from school to school as to just how much weight is given to the subject test. Lots of programs understand that the subject score is a shaky measure of your background. It sounds as if you've got everything else in place...great teaching, great writing sample, good test scores in other areas. Sure, it would be better if you had a perfect subject score, but almost everybody has at least one area that *could* be better. As to the twentieth-century thing...well, there are a lot of Ph.D.s in that area, yes, but the flip side is that there's a lot of demand for teachers of twentieth-century lit, so the job market is better on the other side, meaning that at least you don't have to cope with committees wondering whether your research interests will set you up for a job.

I'm not saying, "Oh, yeah, for sure, you'll get in everywhere..." Who knows? I'm just saying that you shouldn't despair. I certainly don't think that any program will give more weight to the GRE Lit score than to the writing sample, for instance. If you have a rocking sample and a so-so subject score, well, hey. So you're not a generalist. That seems to be all the Lit test really demonstrates: a survey-level knowledge of the tradition.

Lastly...I don't know if this is a good idea or not, I'm just putting it out there...you might add one forthright, unapologetic sentence to your SOP about your need to develop a broader knowledge of the tradition as part of your Ph.D. program. Often, you have a chance to talk about future coursework, right? When you're talking about the classes you want to take, you might add a sentence about how you plan to take seminars in [fill in major gaps in your knowledge]. That's if and only if your programs care a lot about your knowledge of the tradition as a whole. You could write something like, "Throughout my undergraduate and graduate coursework to date, I have taken advantage of many opportunities to specialize, a decision which has led to [x and y research accomplishment]. However, as a Ph.D. candidate, I intend to broaden my knowledge of the tradition as a whole in order to equip myself to teach more effectively and contextualize my own work yadda yadda..." That way, if the GRE score does raise a red flag re: your knowledge of the canon, the committees will know that you are prepared to deal with it.

[rising_star]

Lastly...I don't know if this is a good idea or not, I'm just putting it out there...you might add one forthright, unapologetic sentence to your SOP about your need to develop a broader knowledge of the tradition as part of your Ph.D. program. Often, you have a chance to talk about future coursework, right? When you're talking about the classes you want to take, you might add a sentence about how you plan to take seminars in [fill in major gaps in your knowledge]. That's if and only if your programs care a lot about your knowledge of the tradition as a whole. You could write something like, "Throughout my undergraduate and graduate coursework to date, I have taken advantage of many opportunities to specialize, a decision which has led to [x and y research accomplishment]. However, as a Ph.D. candidate, I intend to broaden my knowledge of the tradition as a whole in order to equip myself to teach more effectively and contextualize my own work yadda yadda..." That way, if the GRE score does raise a red flag re: your knowledge of the canon, the committees will know that you are prepared to deal with it.

I think this is a really good idea.

[Minnesotan]

The only problem is that you might turn off people who think you are working backward. That is, most people study a broad curriculum in undergrad and during the MA, then specialize during the PhD. Most grad schools don't want to train generalists, unless they are preparing you solely for teaching, not research.

[frankdux]

i'm getting really sick of these "i probably don't even have a shot with my abysmal 3.8 gpa, previous graduate work, work experience, and only 3 publications" threads.

get off your high horse!

[Minnesotan]

i'm getting really sick of these "i probably don't even have a shot with my abysmal 3.8 gpa, previous graduate work, work experience, and only 3 publications" threads.

get off your high horse!

You forgot to mention that most of these posts come from Ivy Leaguers.

Anyway, while I sympathize with both parties, do try to be a little more forgiving. This process makes everyone sweat.

[t_ruth]

i'm getting really sick of these "i probably don't even have a shot with my abysmal 3.8 gpa, previous graduate work, work experience, and only 3 publications" threads.

while the above is probably a bit harsh, I kind of agree. I'm hoping this board isn't representative of the real pool of applicants and I actually stand a chance (because right now it is pretty depressing to be at the bottom of the majority of the stats posted here)

[uberskooper]

while the above is probably a bit harsh, I kind of agree. I'm hoping this board isn't representative of the real pool of applicants and I actually stand a chance (because right now it is pretty depressing to be at the bottom of the majority of the stats posted here)

I don't think that this forum as a whole is representative of grad applicants in general. We are the bare few who are pedantic enough to register and post in this grad community, let alone find it on the swathes of crap available on the internet.

From my reading, most grad school applicants are people who don't even bother to research the schools they are applying to outside of some basic rankings information (Hey! Newsweek says that this school is good for Psychology! Clinical is the same as Cognitive Neuroscience isn't it? Hurrr.), let alone bother looking at faculty they want to work with and putting in effort to contact them. In some ways I don't blame them. It's hard to put together a good application while trying to deal with finals, research, and other undergrad stuff.

I'm not too intimidated because I did my research and I know the averages for the schools I'm applying to. I made sure I was close to or above what they usually accepted. I made sure I had faculty who shared my research interests and took the time to contact them in advance.

If this website was representative of grad applicants, then I only have one person applying to schools in my sub field, and there are only two overlapping schools.

[Dreams]

it is pretty depressing to be at the bottom of the majority of the stats posted here

Join the club. And my "stats" are lower than yours so imagine how I feel.

[t_ruth]

FSIA, my stats aren't that great - I have to overcome a 3.4 GPA from a very eh state school.

[Minnesotan]

If your SoP, WS, and LoRs are strong, you can overcome almost anything.

[seunghwane]

ZOMG.

Give up everything right now and go become a farmer.

[t_ruth]

I keep hearing that strong LORs are key, but as a returning student, completely changing fields, I don't think my LORs will be what are considered really strong (from people at the top of my intended field, etc.), so I'm hoping that will still be ok.

[linden]

We have all heard that LORs/the SOP/your undergrad GPA/[fill in the blank] is the key to admission. Everyone has a different--and passionate opinion--on this subject. And, in the moments when my insanity over applications reaches new heights, I am convinced that my LORs (from unknown individuals), my SOP (which does not include any stories about how I saved African orphans from a rebel army or how I can communicate with baby seals), my GPA (which includes a few Bs and is from a state school), and a million other factors that I am not even aware of yet will sink my application.

But, then I come back to reality. Face it: most of us are not going to have perfect applications. Maybe like t_ruth and me, you graduated from college in the 90s. It's hard to get LORs from professors, let alone leading academics, when they don't even remember your face. Or, maybe, it's the less-than-stellar GPA. Or, maybe, a snooty professor won't like the fact that your name is Billy Bob. Who knows? I think many of us have done everything we can. We have crafted the best applications we could. And, sometimes, it just comes down to luck or random factors we cannot control. I do think that all the above factors--GPA, GRE, LORs, SOPs, and all the other acronyms--do matter. But, I think so does luck. I am also aware that when I have had to evaluate resumes, I am sometimes drawn, for trivial reasons, to some applicants who others would not waste time on, and I sometimes pass up applicants who appear to be perfect. Who knows what each of those schools, what each of the individuals on the admissions committee, are looking for or respond to? Maybe a professor will like your application, despite your 3.1 GPA, because you come from the same small town in Montana where she grew up. Or, maybe an admissions committee member will place your application, and your 540 quantitative GRE, on top because you are a tuba player, and he also plays the tuba. I think schools also genuinely do not want an incoming class where every student has the same profile, where every student has the same story to share, where every student has the same outlook.

I often take solace in the class profile posted by Georgetown for their MPP program; it

[purplepepper]

hey, i must be really out of the loop or living in a cave....what does ZOMG stand for?

[rokxal]

hey, i must be really out of the loop or living in a cave....what does ZOMG stand for?

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/ZOMG

enjoy;0

[rinneron]

Thanks everyone for the advice! I did have some sentence to that extent in my SoP -- I think it was along the lines of: "Although my focus is 20th century British and American, especially the novel, situation these literatures within a broader theoretical and literary context, both globally and chronologically, will help me contexutalize my interests within a larger critical and textual lineage blah blah academic jargon 2.0 blah blah..."

And yeah, though I can sort of externally recognize that I am one of "those" who are in a fairly good position going into all this (but I ain't gone to no Ivies! lol), it's still very nerve racking! I just figure everyone is as well/better qualified than I am, and all my faults/holes (especially that damn GRE subject score...) stick out like a sore thumb to me. I suppose now all I have to do is make sure all my materials are into the schools I applied to and then wait until April-ish (I sent off all my apps two weeks ago cause I am the picture of neurotic behavior, as I'm sure most of you can tell) to find out if I have a future in this crazy literary world.

Maybe I will consider becoming a farmer. I worked in Germany for awhile running a horse barn, and I do have three ponies to start already...

[Minnesotan]

" blah blah academic jargon 2.0 blah blah..."

I realize you were having a laugh here, but if you insert much academic jargon, this is exactly how it will read to an adcom, too.

[rinneron]

Yeah, I tried to stay away from ridiculous lingo in my SoP -- one of my profs and I actually had a "jargon free" meeting to groom my SoP of all empty-sounding phrases and words! It was fun, if a little painful ("So you don't actually know what you mean by x...?" "Well, ya know, let's just cross that baby out...").

[dowjonesindustrial]

I have one particular professor who has been a living BS-detector for me since day 1. Painful at times, but oh so helpful with a 500 word essay.