Who will be looking at my applications?

[todamascus]

Hi guys,

I know its a bit silly but this has been bugging me for months.

Who will be looking at my SOPs, writing sample on the grad level, professors, senior grad students or admission officers ？How different is it from college admissions?

I've heard some schools have admissions officers look over first but some just rally professors in their department ( "special committee")for "group-review".

This difference could be huge -- i 've heard from a college admissions officer that my SOP is not safe -- that i don't sound optimistic enough to her as an applicant...but it's difficult to sound gleeful in my research proposal on Kierkegaard, Michelstaedter, Camus, Dostoyevsky...without appearing like a clueless peanut head to professors.

I've been obsessing about my last two applications -- changing it back and forth on second guesses. Man i am hopeless.

If there's indeed a difference in reviewing process, does anyone know of any school in specific?

Thanks to y'all and have a good night.

regards,

h.

[Timshel]

It really honestly depends on the program. The school where I got my masters had a "grad committee" that changed yearly, and it was about 6 professors that made all the decisions. I know that Buffalo's adcomm is half professors and half current PhD students, and one of the schools I applied to informed me that they would send my materials to the faculty that specialized in my area....So yeah, I think all schools have a different way of doing things.

[0000000000AAA]

Usually the vetting at the grad school level is based on scores alone--I doubt someone not in your discipline will care much to skim your statement. On the departmental level, the person on the adcomm closest to your field will likely read the application closely and then make a recommendation to the entire adcomm, which will then take into account the entire application pool, and make a decision.

[Eigen]

There's also the chance that the adcom might refer your packet to someone not on the admissions committee that might be better placed to judge your application- either someone you mention by name, or someone closest to your area of interest if they don't feel any of them are close enough.

[surefire]

Variance is definitely more the rule, than the exeption. From what I can understand, the composition of admissions committees differs widely, not just from school to school, but program to program. Some will give you hints on their "Admissions" webpages, but by and large the number/identity of readers will be obscured.

I've mentioned elsewhere that I've been ON an admissions committee, as a student rep for my MA program. Speaking from that experience, there were about 6 profs, myself and a PhD student on the actual committee. Before we sat down with the apps, the Graduate Director and the Graduate Secretary went through all of them and removed the ones from the pool that were incomplete and/or didn't meet minimum admission requirements (and had no "good" - i.e., substantiated and appropriate - explanation of mitigating circumstances). So that's two sets of eyes looking at everyone, I think around 30 applicants (of 200-ish) were bounced at that stage. We split the committee into two, each side took half of the apps. We read the ENTIRE contents of these apps and (with the aid of department admin guidelines) each came up with a top ten (we were aiming to fill around 10 spots; ultimately, we made 15 offers and took 12 students). We came together, each with our top ten, and compared notes. We ranked, discussed, justified our choices and cut; then we repeated this process until we had an acceptance and wait list that we (mostly) agreed upon.

Again, this experience is context-specific, but if you were to break it down for MY program:

Sets of eyes looking at your app: between 2 and 10, depending on how far you get.

WHO is looking: Department and/or Graduate Head(s) and Secretary, profs (all from the department, though not all were on the faculty for the program), current student(s) from program

All that being said...

This difference could be huge -- i 've heard from a college admissions officer that my SOP is not safe -- that i don't sound optimistic enough to her as an applicant...but it's difficult to sound gleeful in my research proposal on Kierkegaard, Michelstaedter, Camus, Dostoyevsky...without appearing like a clueless peanut head to professors.

I've been obsessing about my last two applications -- changing it back and forth on second guesses. Man i am hopeless.

...I think that your anxiety is beyond the how-many-and-what-kind-of-people-am-I-prospectively-exposing-my-inadeqaute-asshattery-to?! nerves. I hope that knowing some of the details that I provided above puts you at ease, but I have a feeling that it won't; partly because everything is context-specific - accordingly, I would advise you to take my experience with a grain of salt - and partly because your question doesn't get to the heart of your doubt.

Everyone gets cold feet about their SOPs (although, for sanity's sake, I couldn't say whether or not it is better to be struck down by this doubt before or after app submission...). I'd caution against directing this concern to a excessive preoccupation with WHO will be reading your app, because you can't really find out nor can you control this element.

Focus instead, on what you can control and generally take care of. That is: create an SOP that displays competency without resorting to jargon (remember when I said that adcomm profs were in my department but NOT neccessarily faculty members in my program? keep that in mind, don't alienate anyone). As well, you would do well to convey FIT, ability to FINISH and capacity to CONTRIBUTE and to do this in a way that appeals to those who might not only work OVER you, but also alongside you.

Finally, you should have some more people read it before you submit it. And I mean different kinds of people. Those with an academic backround and otherwise. Not everyone is going to totally "get" it, but they should be able to tell you things like whether or not you are being clear, compelling and if your passion is shining through (the latter of these being a possible issue for you, I think, based on your post).

Good luck!

[wintergirl]

@ h.s. -

I'm so glad you asked this question. I've been wondering the same thing.

@ surefire -

Thanks for your expert insight! That's super helpful to at least have an inkling of how it might work.

[Jbarks]

I've mentioned elsewhere that I've been ON an admissions committee, as a student rep for my MA program. Speaking from that experience, there were about 6 profs, myself and a PhD student on the actual committee. Before we sat down with the apps, the Graduate Director and the Graduate Secretary went through all of them and removed the ones from the pool that were incomplete and/or didn't meet minimum admission requirements (and had no "good" - i.e., substantiated and appropriate - explanation of mitigating circumstances). So that's two sets of eyes looking at everyone, I think around 30 applicants (of 200-ish) were bounced at that stage. We split the committee into two, each side took half of the apps. We read the ENTIRE contents of these apps and (with the aid of department admin guidelines) each came up with a top ten (we were aiming to fill around 10 spots; ultimately, we made 15 offers and took 12 students). We came together, each with our top ten, and compared notes. We ranked, discussed, justified our choices and cut; then we repeated this process until we had an acceptance and wait list that we (mostly) agreed upon.

Again, this experience is context-specific, but if you were to break it down for MY program:

Sets of eyes looking at your app: between 2 and 10, depending on how far you get.

WHO is looking: Department and/or Graduate Head(s) and Secretary, profs (all from the department, though not all were on the faculty for the program), current student(s) from program

Thanks this post was pretty helpful. Even though I know the process varies, having some idea of what could occur, alleviates a tiny bit of anxiety.

[xfgdfrmgpo332]

Surefire: you said the "incomplete" apps were tossed...what exactly constitutes an "incomplete"? I've had problems sending in my official GREs and am paranoid I'm going to get thrown out of the pile without being looked at.

[lolopixie]

Surefire: you said the "incomplete" apps were tossed...what exactly constitutes an "incomplete"? I've had problems sending in my official GREs and am paranoid I'm going to get thrown out of the pile without being looked at.

Missing GRE scores is definitely incomplete. Call the ETS and/or program and make sure they have those!

[todamascus]

@Timshel @surefire @WellSpring @ Eigen @ bespeckled @ Jbarks@ joega1111@lolopixie - You guys are awesome!

@ surefire - bear hugs*** yeah I probably would be obsessing until April but knowing that they don't kill your application too easily is a great relief.

@ lolopixie - What if I've submitted the application but the update shows "GRE - not received"?

Do they send out an alert before tossing you out?

One of my friends told me it was just normal delay in updating my account but i better send an email to check...It's been four days.

By the by, having a lot of people read your SOP is not quite applicable in China -- people (including professors) here have the nasty habit of showing/ forwarding others your private stuff without letting you know. I was a bit shocked when I asked for a professor's opinion (we weren't even close) on my SOP and he sent me ALL the SOPs he had from other students for my "reference" -- "sure they wouldn't mind"!

Regards,

h.

Edited January 5, 2012 by h.s.

[Timshel]

I've had a couple of programs contact me because they thought they didn't have things (transcripts, GREs) only to find out that they did have the stuff, but of course they didn't find that out until I had a panic attack. But yeah, I think they contact you if you are missing stuff. At least that has been my experience thus far.

[silentskye]

I've just had a similar thought (sort of). If the two professors I talk about in my fit paragraph are both on sabbatical that year, does that necessarily mean that they will not see my application and/or that I am reducing my chances of acceptance from the get-go?

Yeah. Hurrah for over thinking it.

[Sparky]

I've just had a similar thought (sort of). If the two professors I talk about in my fit paragraph are both on sabbatical that year, does that necessarily mean that they will not see my application and/or that I am reducing my chances of acceptance from the get-go?

Yeah. Hurrah for over thinking it.

Well, those two profs will probably (almost certainly?) not be on the adcom, but that doesn't mean they won't see your SOP. In my dept, for example, the faculty actually pass around the SOPs and writing samples of finalists to *all* the faculty. The adcom definitely listens to their opinions, which is (according to the DGS) how I got in. And keep in mind that "on sabbatical" might very well mean "on campus but just not teaching this semester." It doesn't have to mean "incommunicado in the Brazilian jungle."

Also, my general understanding is that some programs tend to be more exact about admitting people to work with specific POIs; some are more about admitting people to the program in general, if that makes sense.

[ecritdansleau]

I've just had a similar thought (sort of). If the two professors I talk about in my fit paragraph are both on sabbatical that year, does that necessarily mean that they will not see my application and/or that I am reducing my chances of acceptance from the get-go?

Yeah. Hurrah for over thinking it.

One of my professors discussed reading over applications for the program even though she was not on campus that semester (she looked them over online, which is probably becoming more common with each passing year). So, in line with what Sparky suggests, it's definitely a practice for English PhD admissions. Non-adcom profs might not have the final say/decision, but their comments can be highly influential, especially when an applicant's interests are more in line with an on-leave professor than the professors on the adcom.

[indalomena]

Re: GRE (Not Received) problems --

I had a total freak out about this and resent my scores to Yale and Princeton. Then I saw this on the Yale grad FAQs:

Your test scores, when received from ETS, are held in a temporary electronic file until you submit your application and your application record is matched against this temporary file. It is only after that matching process has occurred will we be able to reflect receipt of your scores in your online application status. This matching process and subsequent reporting back to the on-line application can take anywhere from 1 to 2 weeks after submission of your application to initiate and complete. While we do not report the receipt of subject test scores, if we have scores from the general test we will have the subject test scores also.

source: http://www.yale.edu/graduateschool/admissions/faqstq.html

sit tight, they will probably match them up. Which means I just handed ETS another $46 unnecessarily, annoying!

Great thread btw with some useful information everyone, thanks for your insights

[Eigen]

While an app without GRE scores is considered incomplete, my experience has been that most schools will give the student at least some benefit of the doubt that ETS screwed up and contact you.

I had ETS not get my scores to Vanderbilt. Twice. They (Vandy) were really nice about letting me know, and helping me getting ETS to ship new scores free of charge.

[bdon19]

I've checked a few apps, some of which say GRE scores have been received, others that they have not. Others don't say either way. How long should I wait before contacting the programs? And, if I do contact them, should I be contacting the department or what? I have a feeling some of the scores probably went to the wrong places--like the department received them and not the grad school, or vice versa. Who has experience with this? And how long should I wait? I mean, most places probably will have just started looking at apps. I JUST got an e-mail from Duke yesterday confirming that my app was complete, and I applied to them at the beginning of Dec! I'm guessing that means they're just getting around to apps now.

[bigdgp]

From what I understand, most schools have an adcom made up of a handful of professors (some schools also include a few PhD students who are about to graduate). This does not necessarily mean, however, that these are the only people who will see the applications. In three out of the four cases of my acceptances last year, I was contacted by a potential advisor who was NOT on the adcom but who had looked closely at my application before the decision was made on my application. I assume that the adcom decides which applications make it to the desks of potential advisors, but that more do than we might think. In one case, I was sent a personal rejection email from my potential advisor (which was very thoughtful and sincere) who, once again, had not been on the adcom but who had read my application and apologized that circumstances at the university did not allow for her to approve my application. I assume that at least one of these circumstances was that there were too many stronger applicants (lol), but the takeaway is that a non-adcom potential advisor had the last call on my admission decision.

[surefire]

Surefire: you said the "incomplete" apps were tossed...what exactly constitutes an "incomplete"? I've had problems sending in my official GREs and am paranoid I'm going to get thrown out of the pile without being looked at.

joega, I'd go with lolpixie and Eigen on the GRE stuff specifically. I'm a Canuck. I don't have to do the GRE stuff. I didn't toss the apps myself, so I wouldn't commit to a firm definition of "incomplete". A few things though, applicants are generally responsible for ensuring that all of your stuff gets there (i.e. confirmation on sent transcripts, keeping an eye on online updates, staying on top of your referees, paying the extra money to get a tracking number on anything going through the post, sending stuff BEFORE the deadline so as to avoid getting bit in the butt by Murphy's Law). You should take all measures to ensure that stuff is getting there and be accountable to that end.

However, it's not all heartless bureaucracy. As I said, stuff was exempted for being below admin requirements/incomplete if they lacked a good explanation (reasonable, and where possible, substantiated). There is an understanding that things happen; and considerations are easier to come by if the missing component is something that has to be submitted by a third party - thus, there is a grace period, TO A POINT (for example: if a transcript is late because you didn't look into the process and realize that some schools take WEEKS to process transcript requests, then that's YOUR bad; if the transcript is late because the registrar's office staff are on strike, then that IS NOT your bad). As well, (and I can't stress this enough, this is from my experience only), it was my understanding that the office tried to reach out right after the deadline to those with incomplete applications (especially those with well-put together apps that were missing one third-party component) and left a two-week window in which to receive whatever was lacking - it was two weeks after the deadline that the adcomm committee assembled and had their first look at the apps. I say this, NOT so that anyone assumes a grace period or seeks a loophole, but so that the keeners (who likely comprise a large chunk of this forum) will RELAX. Stay on top of your app progress (be proactive in tracking stuff and after the deadline, keep an eye out for any "you're missing stuff" e-mails/phone calls and respond PROMPTLY) and keep a record of all exchanges/notifications of delay/evidence of mitigating circumstances (don't have an organized "sent" mail folder containing correspondence with referees/registrar's office ect;? MAKE ONE) and then, if something goes awry, you can show that you took all the right steps to prevent delays and appeal for reasonable consideration. That's seriously ALL THAT YOU CAN DO.

@Timshel @surefire @WellSpring @ Eigen @ bespeckled @ Jbarks@ joega1111@lolopixie - You guys are awesome!

@ surefire - bear hugs*** yeah I probably would be obsessing until April but knowing that they don't kill your application too easily is a great relief.

By the by, having a lot of people read your SOP is not quite applicable in China -- people (including professors) here have the nasty habit of showing/ forwarding others your private stuff without letting you know. I was a bit shocked when I asked for a professor's opinion (we weren't even close) on my SOP and he sent me ALL the SOPs he had from other students for my "reference" -- "sure they wouldn't mind"!

Regards,

h.

You're welcome h.s.! My pleasure!

That bit about SOP sharing is a little messed up. In my experience, Profs usually ask if they can keep your SOP on file, anonymize it and divulge it to inquiring students. I'm usually pretty free and easy with my SOPs and writing samples, but I would feel weird about having these circulated, with my name on them, to people that I had not directly agreed to divulge to. However, maybe that feeling is misplaced. After all, it's a common practice in Canada for Universities to keep successful grant proposals (like SSHRC) in a file for potential applicants to peruse (even though these are anonymized). As well, Sparky and bigdgp have a point: some components of these apps are going to get tossed about (if you mention that a prof. in the program has preemptively agreed to supervise you, you better believe that someone on the committee will try to seek them out to confirm). Maybe this is a topic for another thread eh?

In any case, I'm happy to try and clarify. The process that I was a part of was measured, fair, reasonable and resulted in a great crop of students. I think that most universities have an honourable process, but the fact that it is obfuscated and hidden from us brings out the worst anxieties.