SoP Surprise Criteria!

[TripWillis]

I thought you guys should know that, in my experience, some of the schools I applied to were vague about SoP criteria on their website, leaving it mostly open as to what they wanted. Then, halfway through the app submission process, after I had drafted the SoP 7000 times, a page would come up saying what they were looking for.

For the most part, these criteria were very standard and nothing was very surprising. HOWEVER, if some of you have not gone through the online app to see what it looks like, it couldn't hurt to check the SoP upload page and see if your school lays down any particular criteria they don't list on the department website.

Also, there had been some debate on this forum as to whether or not you should "name drop," and I must say that more than a few of the applications I sent mentioned that in the SoP they wanted me to highlight potential faculty members to work with.

Hope some of this helps.

[TripWillis]

Wait, hold on! I'm not supposed to help you! Competition!

Um... the SoP criteria uhhh... it said that you should write about dragons. And then you should make sure you sign it in your own blood and send it in an envelope with some powdered sugar. Also, they said that most people should list their favorite hobbies, who their personal heroes are, and they asked me to answer this question in detail: "If you could meet any person living or dead, who would it be?"

I said Jesus, so that's taken. The Dalai Lama is probably still available.

[Timshel]

Well, here is the thing about listing people. In some of the disciplines, like the sciences, you HAVE to list people because of funding to take on students, so their criteria is different. However, we all fill out the same application, so some of the things on the applications, like listing potential advisors, do not apply to us in English, which is why they tell you to go by what the department's webpage says.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Timshel

[TripWillis]

Well, here is the thing about listing people. In some of the disciplines, like the sciences, you HAVE to list people because of funding to take on students, so their criteria is different. However, we all fill out the same application, so some of the things on the applications, like listing potential advisers, do not apply to us in English, which is why they tell you to go by what the department's webpage says.

Yes, but I'm saying that department issued SoP criteria asked me to highlight advisors I'd like to work with. I mean, it wasn't like a huge part of my SoP -- a few lines at the most -- but I did have it.

[lolopixie]

I'm all for the name drop. DROP. DROP. DROP.

[TripWillis]

Drop it like it's hot.

[xfgdfrmgpo332]

Some of the apps I've looked at want me to list up to 3 professors I'd be interested in working with on the online app (Berkeley, for example). I wonder if I should also name drop these same people in the SOP? Or should I avoid it since I've already indicated the profs in the app (as requested by the school)?

[TripWillis]

Some of the apps I've looked at want me to list up to 3 professors I'd be interested in working with on the online app (Berkeley, for example). I wonder if I should also name drop these same people in the SOP? Or should I avoid it since I've already indicated the profs in the app (as requested by the school)?

I would also mention it in the SoP, because the app has no space to say why or how you want to work with them and on what.

[0000000000AAA]

It sounds like a test to make sure you can navigate JSTOR!

[TripWillis]

It sounds like a test to make sure you can navigate JSTOR!

I don't think it has to be. If you applied to most programs, like I did, initially because of your familiarity with and desire to work with certain of their faculty, it's probably worth mentioning.

[0000000000AAA]

I know, TripWillis, I wasn't trying to sound too cynical. But my fear is that in the 3-4 sentences that we include in our statements, it won't be easy for the adcomms to tell who is genuinely compelled to be there and who is merely faking it. And really, would the programs unilaterally prefer one over the other? At this level we are all motivated, smart, and willing. What's the advantage for the school for "perfect fit"?

I've even heard from upper level PhDs in the program I'm in now that if the fit between adviser and advisee is too close it causes problems. Better to do something slightly outside of the range of the adviser's publications, so they can guide you, advise you with their more expansive reading, but generally be hands off. The trick is, I think, that you should write something they wouldn't (and vice versa).

Edited November 26, 2011 by WellSpring

[0000000000AAA]

That last post of mine makes me realize how much harder this would be if I wasn't already in a graduate level program. Something about doing the work, soaking up the atmosphere, and knowing what profs want/expect I think is helpful. Not that it seems impossible to do from an undergrad, obviously they get close to professors as well. Props to everyone.

[lolopixie]

Drop it like it's hot.

BAHA!

[Grunty DaGnome]

Wait, hold on! I'm not supposed to help you! Competition!

Um... the SoP criteria uhhh... it said that you should write about dragons. And then you should make sure you sign it in your own blood and send it in an envelope with some powdered sugar. Also, they said that most people should list their favorite hobbies, who their personal heroes are, and they asked me to answer this question in detail: "If you could meet any person living or dead, who would it be?"

I said Jesus, so that's taken. The Dalai Lama is probably still available.

Thanks for the tip! I wrote 2 pages of my 3 page SOP all about dragons. Then, on page 3, I listed the department faculty and their specialties. I copied it directly from the website, to avoid making any mistakes.

[lolopixie]

Thanks for the tip! I wrote 2 pages of my 3 page SOP all about dragons. Then, on page 3, I listed the department faculty and their specialties. I copied it directly from the website, to avoid making any mistakes.

You are a shoe-in! I'm jealous!!!

[TripWillis]

I know, TripWillis, I wasn't trying to sound too cynical. But my fear is that in the 3-4 sentences that we include in our statements, it won't be easy for the adcomms to tell who is genuinely compelled to be there and who is merely faking it. And really, would the programs unilaterally prefer one over the other? At this level we are all motivated, smart, and willing. What's the advantage for the school for "perfect fit"?

I've even heard from upper level PhDs in the program I'm in now that if the fit between adviser and advisee is too close it causes problems. Better to do something slightly outside of the range of the adviser's publications, so they can guide you, advise you with their more expansive reading, but generally be hands off. The trick is, I think, that you should write something they wouldn't (and vice versa).

I understand what you're saying -- I think if one is going to mention faculty, he/she shouldn't do it under the sign of, "Oh, my work is just like yours! I agree with everything you say! Your scholarship is an influence on me!" It should be done entirely in the active voice and with a bent toward the originality of your own work. I've sort of modeled this thinking off of a friend of mine's SoP (she got into Duke and probably mentioned like 12 professors in her SoP). Example: I mentioned in one of my SoPs that I wanted to work with Robert Reid-Pharr, who has done some work on the intersection of queer theory and af-am lit theory. His work isn't a "perfect fit" with mine (I'm much more drawn to the activism angle and I take a more Marxist approach), but it's an interesting analog to it, and I made sure to frame it that way.

[ecritdansleau]

I know, TripWillis, I wasn't trying to sound too cynical. But my fear is that in the 3-4 sentences that we include in our statements, it won't be easy for the adcomms to tell who is genuinely compelled to be there and who is merely faking it.

As always, the SOP name-dropping is something to tread carefully. For the record though, the DGS at my undergrad (an R1 state flagship public university with a decent PhD program) stated that, when he sees faculty names and whatnot on the SOP, he sees it as a sign of the applicant's interest in the department. On the other hand, listing names could really come off as "faking it." I'm wondering though, if it has become so commonplace to name-drop that it has been done infelicitously so as to give it a bad rep? I can't help but think that, in the end, it's not the name-mentioning that matters. It's more about understanding HOW faculty interests coalesce with one's own, and conveying that--it's one thing to know who wrote what article and a bulleted list of a professor' field and interests. It's another thing altogether to have read a faculty member's work extensively and to know the nuances of that professor's ongoing project. Obviously, the latter is going to do much more for an applicant than the former.