nervous about applying again

[hollenbe]

Hi!

It's my first time posting here. I'm four years out of college, applying for a PhD in developmental psychology.

I'm posting here because I'm curious to see if anyone is in a similar situation. I applied to several programs last year and had four phone interviews and three actual interviews. In the end, I was not admitted to any of the programs, and this hurt enormously. One professor attributed my rejection to a cut in funding and another professor said I was her second choice (ouch!) Still, a rejection's a rejection, and I'm even more nervous about the process this time around. To increase my chances of getting in, I'm taking the GRE again and am working with my undergrad thesis adviser to publish a paper based on my thesis. We expect the paper to be ready for submission by December so I can include a draft with my grad school materials.

So, are any of you bouncing back from having been rejected in the past? If so, how do you cope with the anxiety and fear inherent in the process of re-applying?

I've also written a couple of really polite and open e-mails to professors to find out what I could do to strengthen my application, but I haven't heard back from any of them yet. Has anybody else successfully found out why they were rejected? Do you think this might be helpful for the second time around?

[contretemps]

I was also rejected last year (well, admitted and then rejected). But if you never try, you'll never know. Hah. that was a song.

[BlueRose]

I was in that situation (see my sig). It sucks like a warehouse full of Hoovers, no way around it. I tried to think of it as training - in science, we're all going to be rejected / failing / etc more often than not. I also knew someone in one of the departments I applied to, which helped enormously in getting a straight answer for what happened. Besides that, other key factors were a liberal application of rum and a black-hearted desire to get even. I'm not going to say it was pretty, only that I made it through to the other side and am very happy with how it turned out.

It sounds like you may have just missed the cut - which happens. Nothing to be done but get a bit more experience, maybe some stronger letters, and maybe apply to more schools, and go after it again.

[surefire]

While my experience doesn't directly map on to yours, I wanted to kick in some commentary with regards to the "whys" of rejection.

When I applied for my MA, I was DEAD SET on a particular institution. I really went with my heart when I chose my undergrad university (small, liberal ect;) and I figured that, for the MA, I was going to go with something prestigious, with ivy on the wall and everything dammit! While working on my applications, the first red flag emerged when one of my referees said, "I'm happy to write a litany of personalized letters for you, but you don't want one from me for this [prestigious/ivy-covered] school". It turned out that my referee had had a professional disagreement with someone who was likely to be on the admissions committee. The incident was years ago, but the ivy-shrouded prof was apparently still passive-aggressive at conferences and the like. I couldn't believe that something like that could affect the reception of my app, was I seriously expected to anticipate this?!

Second red-flag came when I visited the ivy-laden school and met with the department head who (a.) discounted my stellar grades and extracurriculars because, apparently, my undergrad university is TOO tiny/liberal (b.)made it clear that, for their program, they liked to "pick from their own" crop of undergrads. She said, "I don't know what an "A" from [tiny, liberal undergrad] means, I know what an "A" from [ivy-strangled school] means". Further discussion about my research aims and the expectations of their MA program reiterated the insular, conservative nature of the department. Don't get me wrong, insular and conservative can be cool if that's what you're into, but the environment/faculty were clearly NOT conducive to the kind of work that I wanted to do/the scholar I wanted to be. It was a BAD FIT!

And yet, I applied anyway. I just, had to know I guess. I had a major crisis, because suddenly my first choice wasn't really my first choice and OMIGAWD what if they accept me?! Towards the end of the application process, I found another program at a different instituton (great reputation, no damn ivy) that seemed to suit my interests. I visited the department and it was a cinderella-glass-slipper kind of moment. Perfect fit. They thought so too. Because they accepted me. This might not seem like an apt anecdote, but the reality is that I entered the app process convinced that I was meant for the ivy and intended to ONLY apply there. Fortunately, I was gifted with some warning signs that indicated impending rejection and a bad fit. The ivy institute ultimately rejected me, and I almost didn't apply anywhere else!

I know it's emphasized elsewhere in this forum, but "fit" is so important. And it sucks when you are trying to re-launch applications and you need to look at whether or not you've been off-base in that area... it's easier to conclude that the set-back was steeped in something quantifiable, like a test score.

I got to see this from the other side last year, when I sat on an admissions committee for my graduate program. The committee really does consider EVERYTHING, but there are some near-intangibles that affect the decision. We went through a lot of amazing candidates, and we bounced a large majority due to concerns regarding "fit". Often, this was ascertained via the personal statement/plan of study where, after reading so many, committee members become adept at figuring out whether or not the program is an applicant's first choice. We all know that applicants hedge their bets, and no one is going to reject an applicant based on ego, but it's hard to read an app and think "Wow, this person clearly wants to go to law school" and give THEM the offer when the opportunity could go to someone who, after reading their app, I can PICTURE as a colleague.

I guess I'm advocating re-visiting your notion of how you fit in the potential programs. All applications you do should read like that institution is your first choice and your experience thus far should be framed in such a way that an addmissions committee member says "of course this person wants this program specifically, it just makes sense!" afterwards. If you're able, I'd recommend contacting current students in the programs you want; they are all very busy, but they can give you the skinny on what the department environment/faculty are like, these aspects are worth integrating, or at least keeping in mind, when you are applying.

A final anecdote: A colleague of mine recently sat on an admissions committee for a law program. One applicant, with near perfect LSAT and GPA, was rejected based on the content of one of his referree letters. The prof had written that the applicant was highly intelligent, studious and would no doubt complete a JD with exceptional standing. However, the prof was fairly certain that the applicant was a socio-path; while he got excellent grades, he showed little empathy for other students and near-contempt for marginalized populations in discussions of social justice. The prof maintained that the applicant would likely excel, but she was reluctant to recommend that he be granted the opportunity or power that comes with a JD. My colleague rejected this applicant, and had no doubt that he would find a place at another institution (likely one with ivy).

So take heart, while it's difficult to gather yourself up again and discern the short-comings of your app, at least be thankful that your hang-up is likely not "being a socio-path"... because then you've definitely got more pressing issues than acceptance to graduate school.

Edited October 31, 2011 by surefire

[hollenbe]

Thanks to all three of you for your helpful comments. Wow.

Edited October 31, 2011 by hollenbe

[NoMoreABD]

I am also re-applying this year. Last year I applied for 3 schools. One of them said I was a very close second place. thanks... very helpful... At least it gave me some hope for this year and affirmation that I do know what I'm doing, more or less.

This time I'm applying to 11 programs, hoping to get better results...

I'd like to take this opportunity and wish everyone good luck! Let's hope this year is our year, we sure worked hard enough for it!

[tt503]

Second red-flag came when I visited the ivy-laden school and met with the department head who (a.) discounted my stellar grades and extracurriculars because, apparently, my undergrad university is TOO tiny/liberal (b.)made it clear that, for their program, they liked to "pick from their own" crop of undergrads. She said, "I don't know what an "A" from [tiny, liberal undergrad] means, I know what an "A" from [ivy-strangled school] means".

Based on this description, I'm 99% sure I know what institution you're talking about...

I was rejected twice for what I thought I wanted. I had a ridiculously horrible undergraduate GPA, because I got sick (e.g. diagnosed with an auto-immune disease) during a semester (at a school without grade forgiveness) that dropped my 3.4 GPA down to a 2.7. I went to an accredited small college (in a metropolitan area with professors with ties to many prestigious universities), and had a 3.7+ graduate GPA, including teaching my own college courses (2 of them, one particularly in my field), learning the requisite languages, overseas fieldwork experience, publishing an article and presenting at an international conference. I thought that I had sufficiently proven that I was not my GPA. I applied for another master's program that feeds into the PhD program I ultimately wanted (and provides funding for the Masters), but was rejected, twice. And these rejections stung because I knew undergraduates were admitted with significantly less experience or language work. This was when it became evident to me that fit matters and admissions decisions are not necessarily based on merit.

I met with the leading professor in the field and was told "if you're interested in doing ANYTHING else, do it"...I ended up auditing a course (at super-prestigious) university, and having an altogether bad experience (actually, multiple bad experiences with the post-doc professor and colleagues). I lost my drive and passion for what I thought I wanted to do (and I didn't have the background to do it on my own), so I took time off (not necessarily by my own choice, but time off nonetheless).

I thought of different things I could do, involving working overseas or in a different field of study. I applied to an interdisciplinary field (at an Ivy, no less) and was accepted. I've worked really hard here and have the highest GPA I've ever had, produced some work that was included for a poster presentation, found what I really enjoy doing (it's very social theory-driven), and I'm even a TA for classes in a variety of disciplines (engineering and humanities). I'm applying for PhDs this round not based on "what I think I want to do" but rather "what I'm doing and trying to develop" and know more about the programs that I'm applying to and the scholars I want to work with (rather than just school prestige). I'm not only applying for top-tier programs, but a variety of places (top programs, 10-50 ranking. 50+ ranking), and one of my letter writers has been the supervisor of two of my prospective POIs at these colleges. I feel that I'm in a much more secure place this time around and I have a much more cohesive project to propose and have an idea of where I fit in the academic spectrum. None of this has come remotely easily, and I'm still terrified that the five years I've spent in graduate school "proving" myself still won't result in being in a program where I can pursue my intellectual questions. I'm quite neurotic about it.

I think the feeling from internet boards like these generates a sense of fear, that if you don't have perfect GPAs or GREs, you don't have a shot. Although quantitative measures like these are certainly important if you want the best of the best programs, they don't define your happiness, mental health or how successful you can be in the "right" department, regardless if its high-ranking.