Fall 2013 English Lit Applicants

[id quid]

That is a very good and extremely important point, ComeBackZinc.

I think at this moment I am indeed considering the problem from a very specific, and very limited, frame of view. Specifically, I am thinking about the 6-8 years of school wherein that will necessarily be true, assuming I want to leave with a PhD and any academic job prospects at all, and projecting that experience into the post-grad job that is "supposed" to come with it. 6-8 years is a long time to do "one" thing, especially when the light at the end of the tunnel is more likely to have been the train of Real Life Job Statistics than the promised land of tenure-track professorship.

Oddly, I find this comforting. 6-8 years is something, but 6-8 years getting paid to do something I love? Excellent. Even if it means I have to return to the working world at the end of it, I know I wouldn't trade the experience for anything, even if it did turn out to be the less-than-ideal version of grad school where I fail at some assignments, disappoint some professors, change my mind a thousand times about my dissertation, and barely scrape my way out with a PhD.

--

antecedant,

You and I ended up saying pretty much the same thing, which is pretty great since we were typing at the same time. I reiterate what I said before -- I actually find the idea that I'm not guaranteed a job in academia comforting! While I'd love it, and I do think I'm suited to it, I also know I have these millions of other things that I'd like to give a go, and a lifetime to explore them.

Edited March 30, 2012 by saecla vincere

[bfat]

The whole "job" and "real life" thing inevitably comes up when talking about future plans, but really, there's so much more to consider. As for me, I've spent the last 5 years in the "real world." I got my BA, travelled internationally for a bit, then got a job in my field (I was a film major and then a video editor for 2 years). While I was happy for a while doing what I'd planned to do, after about 8 months, I was like "Is this it? Is this what the rest of my life is going to be like?" And I sunk into a deep depression. I was making enough money to live on, I had a wonderful significant other (to whom I'm now married), a house, an adorable dog... I felt like everything should have been perfect, but there was this gaping hole.

I wasn't challenged anymore. I felt like my brain was turning to mush.

Finally, the thought occurred to me, "Hey, what about grad school?"

No one in my family has ever attended grad school, so I never considered it as a possibility. But as soon as I thought about it and started doing some planning, that hole started to disappear. It felt so right. I was accepted pretty much right away into an MA program (at the school where I got my BA)--I was too intimidated to try for something "better," not confident enough to even consider a PhD or going full-time back to school. I was lucky to get a position at the university so I have full tuition remission, but working full-time while trying to earn my master's in these last few years has been really difficult.

In short, I can't wait to do nothing but study. I am so so sick of dealing with the 9-5, and I haven't even been doing it that long.

So I guess what I'm saying is, taking time off may not be a bad idea--it might just show you how badly you actually want to be doing something different. But if you're like me, and the only thing you've ever really enjoyed is school, follow that dream for sure. Even if you have to end up in a crappy 9-5 in the end--whatever, that's like 10 years from now. No reason to throw yourself into that misery any earlier than you have to.

[id quid]

I'm so glad I let go and posted about my concerns. Reading these replies has really made me feel so much better about what I'm setting myself up for this fall.

Thanks, bfat!

[Casserine]

Hi everyone,

I'm another (possible/probable) Fall 2013 literature PhD applicant. I'm just completing my final year of undergrad and I've been accepted to a one year MA in the University of Sussex (I'm Irish). I don't know whether I'll want to stay in the UK for my PhD or whether apply to the States, but possibly I'll try both. Regardless, I'm taking the English subject test in a few weeks just in case. I want to get it out of the way, and part of me is rather perversely enjoying the challenge!

[harvardlonghorn]

Hi everyone,

I'm another (possible/probable) Fall 2013 literature PhD applicant. I'm just completing my final year of undergrad and I've been accepted to a one year MA in the University of Sussex (I'm Irish). I don't know whether I'll want to stay in the UK for my PhD or whether apply to the States, but possibly I'll try both. Regardless, I'm taking the English subject test in a few weeks just in case. I want to get it out of the way, and part of me is rather perversely enjoying the challenge!

Good luck on the exam!!

[hiphopanonymous]

When I met professors on campus visits who'd served on admissions I tried to ask about how the process worked. It seems like, as is typically acknowledged, on big initial cut gets made to lower the pool from, say, 400 to 150. At one school, I know that cut was unilaterally made by the DGS, and the rest of the 150 applications were each read by the entire admissions committee. On this committee there was one prof--out of a handful--who cared about GRE scores. Not exclusively, but he cared about them. The other professors didn't even look.

I wish I'd spent less time on my exams. Anybody's guess whether I would have used that time on my writing or on my drinking. But at least I wouldn't have spent it flipping through flash cards of pythagorean triples. On the other hand, if I'd done badly I would have blamed myself for not studying more, I suppose.

The other interesting thing I found was that professors really advocate for as many people as possible, at least initially. I always thought about the process as if admissions committee members were looking for any reason to toss my file. But if you're in Renaissance, for instance, know that the one Renaissance prof on the committee is likely going to try to get as many Renaissance applications through as possible, including yours if you made the initial cut. People want you there. It's just a question of space.

Good luck, all.

[poeteer]

the GRE won't keep you out of prestigious schools like Yale and Brown and Cornell--schools with English programs that have a lot of autonomy. You can bet Mr. Grimwig beat out plenty of people with extremely high scores AND extremely good writing samples to get his spots at Columbia and Brown, so I'm not sure I agree that a high GRE "distinguishes" you. I really don't think they care beyond a certain point.

but Ido think the GRE could potentially keep you out at some schools that rely more on school-wide fellowships and the like to fund students, i.e., where the funding is a more complicated song and dance. these fellowships are often open to all disciplines (or sometimes all humanities disciplines) and sometimes have higher composite GRE expectations. I think 99% of English faculty do not care about your score beyond a certain bar. but sometimes the university does when it comes to funding. you could get waitlisted or rejected because of the way the funding went down that particular year (when in another year you may have been accepted).

that said, at these schools, they aren't going to even bother putting your application in the pool for fellowships if your SOP and writing sample aren't up to snuff. and they certainly aren't going to give you a spot on their own dime. so, work on those first and more often. and if you realistically can't get a high GRE score, that's okay. most of us can't and we still get in. I would have needed to hire a math tutor to pass 600Q, let alone 650 or 700, because I get confused teaching it to myself (as evidenced by my math score in the 25th percentile, whoops...). I'm only saying that it's good to have these bases covered if it's reasonably possible for you to do so.

also, I'm not on faculty at any department, so maybe I'm wrong about all this. disclaimer.

Edited April 1, 2012 by poeteer

[rems]

I wish I'd spent less time on my exams. Anybody's guess whether I would have used that time on my writing or on my drinking.

Amen.

[rachelelin]

Hi everyone,

I've not been successful with applications this year and so am planning to reapply in the next cycle. I'm just wondering if anyone has any thoughts about the personal statement. I'm an international student (from the UK) and am trying to determine what sort of tone to strike with my statement. I was advised that US schools expect a much more personal narrative-like statement with information about your personal drives, motivations etc. Perhaps some of you successful applicants could comment? Would be a great help for me!

[TripWillis]

Amen.

May I third this? Of course, I didn't study for the general at all. Not one bit. Did fine on it. Studied for 6 months for the subject test and totally fucking bombed on it. Who's to say, though? Maybe if I had gotten a higher subject test percentile I would've gotten into a couple other schools.

[rems]

Hi everyone,

I've not been successful with applications this year and so am planning to reapply in the next cycle. I'm just wondering if anyone has any thoughts about the personal statement. I'm an international student (from the UK) and am trying to determine what sort of tone to strike with my statement. I was advised that US schools expect a much more personal narrative-like statement with information about your personal drives, motivations etc. Perhaps some of you successful applicants could comment? Would be a great help for me!

I haven't successfully written a statement of purpose, but from what I've researched and what I've heard fromothers who have gotten in PhD's programs is it varies from school to school what they're looking for. Some schools ask for a SOP and a personal statement. Some only want a statement of purpose. Some have outlines for what they want each paragraph to be on.

The general rule of thumb, that I've heard, for SOP's is not to tell them your life story by any means but to stress what you want to do with your PhD and why you're a good fit for their school. One of profs told me to start with one sentence about my myself, and that be all I mention that's personal. The rest should be a business proposal, so to speak.

OF COURSE, this varies by school. The app page on their website will usually have the info on it of what they're looking for. If they don't specify what they want, I've been told that if it's called a "Statement of Purpose" they want that and not a personal history.

I'm def not an expert in this at all, but that's what I've heard.

[rems]

Hi everyone,

I've not been successful with applications this year and so am planning to reapply in the next cycle. I'm just wondering if anyone has any thoughts about the personal statement. I'm an international student (from the UK) and am trying to determine what sort of tone to strike with my statement. I was advised that US schools expect a much more personal narrative-like statement with information about your personal drives, motivations etc. Perhaps some of you successful applicants could comment? Would be a great help for me!

And... I totally just realized you said "personal statement" and not "statement of purpose." Sorry about that! But I've heard that if they want a personal statement, then it should be personal and more narrative-like than a statement of purpose would be. I think... Once again, I know very little about this, this is just what I've heard through the grapevine.

[ComeBackZinc]

Part of the reason the GRE hot potato gets tossed around so much is the simple fact that individual schools and departments vary so much. You just can't say for sure.

[Stately Plump]

And... I totally just realized you said "personal statement" and not "statement of purpose." Sorry about that! But I've heard that if they want a personal statement, then it should be personal and more narrative-like than a statement of purpose would be. I think... Once again, I know very little about this, this is just what I've heard through the grapevine.

Most schools are probably looking for something that is much more interest and research driven rather than personal. They already know that "I've always loved to read" and they already know that "I've always had a passion for learning and researching and teaching and etc. etc. etc...." They know that because if you didn't love those things, you wouldn't be applying for PhD programs in literature.

What will stand out for departments is a personal statement that is able to include a bit of personal narrative (it is, for many programs, the closest they'll get to an interview), but is mostly focused on your research interests and why you would be a good fit for their school. If you can include some personal narrative in your research interests (I mentioned an undergrad trip to the British Library, where I saw manuscripts from Philip Sidney, which sparked my interests in early modern lit), then that's probably the way to go.

But like you said, it varies from school to school. My best advice is to draft early and often. Write a personal statement, edit it, then write a completely new one, using none of the same material. It's easy to get attached to something you've written, but just because you're attached doesn't mean it's as good as it can be. Play around and experiment. It can be fun if you make it so

EDIT: (sunglasses to hide fact that writing personal statement is never fun)

Edited April 2, 2012 by Stately Plump

[Fiona Thunderpaws]

Before I wrote my personal statement, I asked my friends who had applied before me if I could have their SOPs so I could get an idea of how they were written. Then I drafted the stupid thing about 10+ times. Then I begged these wonderful friends from before to look at it, along with my professors, and I drafted it a few more times.

There's a lot of drafts involved.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Fiona Thunderpaws

[id quid]

I picked up a copy of the PR guide to the Lit GRE. Figure I may as well start tackling that beast WELL in advance of the October test date to which I'm committing. My coursework was pretty deficient in theory and, er, modern literature (where modern = anything after 1600) so I've got quite a lot to do!

I know of Vade Mecum and Hapax Legomena.

Anyone have any advice for approaching this test?

Edited April 2, 2012 by saecla vincere

[athousandlemmings]

I picked up a copy of the PR guide to the Lit GRE. Figure I may as well start tackling that beast WELL in advance of the October test date to which I'm committing. My coursework was pretty deficient in theory and, er, modern literature (where modern = anything after 1600) so I've got quite a lot to do!

I know of Vade Mecum and Hapax Legomena.

Anyone have any advice for approaching this test?

I've taken it twice, and the thing that I struggled with both times was the grammar/rhetoric stuff. Not hardcore grammar/rhetoric, but there were a few more rhetorical and poetic devices than I had hoped for.

Also--and this seems to be the case with everybody I know that's taken the test--know your old British stuff. Have at least a familiarity with Old and Middle English lit (and languages!), and know Renaissance/17th Century poetry pretty well. I've seen at least five different Milton poems referenced on the tests.

[Silent_G]

I picked up a copy of the PR guide to the Lit GRE. Figure I may as well start tackling that beast WELL in advance of the October test date to which I'm committing. My coursework was pretty deficient in theory and, er, modern literature (where modern = anything after 1600) so I've got quite a lot to do!

I know of Vade Mecum and Hapax Legomena.

Anyone have any advice for approaching this test?

I also used the Princeton Review book and it helped me immensely, as did both of those sites. I also studied the Norton Anthologies religiously. I read all the short stories and poems recommended by the PR book and as many novels as I had time for. My test was at 8:30 in the morning, and the center was about 45 minutes away from me, so every Saturday for two months before my test I woke up early as if I was going to take it, just to get my body accustomed to the situation. I didn't make any flashcards for the subject test, though I did when studying for the general test (I made A LOT of flashcards for the general test).

I was not an English major. I studied Anthropology and Philosphy as an undergrad, so I was extremely worried about how I would fare on the subject test. I ended up scoring in the 69th percentile, and I'm pretty happy with that as a non-major. Truthfully, I feel like I spent far too much time and energy on studying for the GRE's, and I think it ultimately ended up hurting my SOP and writing sample, which is probably one of the reasons why I wasn't accepted into any PhD programs. I did get into an MA program, though, and although I wish I had focused more on my writing, I'm glad I scored high enough on both tests that I won't have to retake them for my next round of applications.

[Fiona Thunderpaws]

I picked up a copy of the PR guide to the Lit GRE. Figure I may as well start tackling that beast WELL in advance of the October test date to which I'm committing. My coursework was pretty deficient in theory and, er, modern literature (where modern = anything after 1600) so I've got quite a lot to do!

I know of Vade Mecum and Hapax Legomena.

Anyone have any advice for approaching this test?

Honestly, if I thought the general GRE was inconsequential, it is nothing compared to how ridiculous I think the lit GRE is. This isn't to say that you should ignore it completely of course, but if I were to rank the importance of application materials and how much time I should have devoted to working on them, it would probably be writing sample > SOP > General GRE > Lit GRE.

Beyond that, I was surprised by the amount of reading comprehension and grammar stuff on the test. Luckily, studying for the general GRE helps with this to an extent. My abilities to figure out the meaning of passages and such helped me way more than knowing a bunch of names and works and devices.

Seriously, you could spend YEARS studying for this test and still do badly. I scored in the 49% percentile and am waitlisted at a top 20 program, and while I didn't have the most successful season, I KNOW this was because of my SOP and writing sample. I'm not on an adcom obviously, but I really doubt any school is going to read through a mindblowing SOP and writing sample and go "wow, she's amazing, but she got a 400 on the lit GRE... I don't think we should take her." Honestly, if a school actually did that, I don't think it's the sort of program I would want to immense myself in anyway.

Sorry, this post as gotten a tad divergent. The lit GRE is just so nonsensical and ridiculous... In a nut shell my advice is, (a) study a little, but not at the expense of other parts of your applications, ( take timed practice tests, because being able to do things quickly is paramount when you're actually taking the test, and © no matter how badly you do, I don't think it's worth retaking the test at the detriment of your other applications materials and bank account.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Fiona Thunderpaws

[id quid]

I appreciate that the test score is probably not among the important things in my application, but it is still required for a number of the schools on my list.

Honestly, the study is more important to me than the test itself. As I mentioned, my coursework is deficient in post-1600 literature and theory. I'm looking at the study period as a time to shore up on all that before I start writing my SoP and personal statement, and to help inform the edits I'll be making to my writing samples.

I am glad to hear it doesn't stand in the way, though. That'll make it much easier to approach from the "study for study's sake" perspective.

(That said, I also need good test scores to corroborate my story that my undergrad GPA is not reflective of my abilities due to extenuating circumstances!)

[lpbuck09]

I'm still on the waitlist at a school I'd very much like to attend, but I'm starting to think about a second round of applications in case it comes to that. I know that the SOP and writing sample are way more important than the GRE lit score, but I'm planning to take the test again because it won't hurt to have a higher score.

I scored in the 79th percentile the first time around. For anyone who's done better than that, did you find the Princeton Review book and Vade Mecum helpful? I've heard from many who have scored in the 90th + percentile that the test has changed drastically in the last few years and that there aren't really any resources out there with accurate prep information. Besides doing your best to memorize the Norton Anthology, has anyone found good resources/strategies that match the current exam?

[Stately Plump]

I got a 520, which translates to 39% percentile, on the Lit GRE. I got into two PhD programs and two MA programs, as well as getting wait-listed at a third PhD. So my guess is that it really isn't that important, as long as the rest of your file is good.

[rawera]

I can shoot some PMs to interested parties regarding my subject study methods and exam experience. I scored 90%+ with like 2 months' prep time.

Full disclosure, I have only unfunded MA offers this year (ie, didn't get accepted). Compare to Stately above.

Edited April 2, 2012 by rawera

[rems]

I'm still on the waitlist at a school I'd very much like to attend, but I'm starting to think about a second round of applications in case it comes to that. I know that the SOP and writing sample are way more important than the GRE lit score, but I'm planning to take the test again because it won't hurt to have a higher score.

I scored in the 79th percentile the first time around. For anyone who's done better than that, did you find the Princeton Review book and Vade Mecum helpful? I've heard from many who have scored in the 90th + percentile that the test has changed drastically in the last few years and that there aren't really any resources out there with accurate prep information. Besides doing your best to memorize the Norton Anthology, has anyone found good resources/strategies that match the current exam?

I used both of these sources to study -- seriously read through them, took the practice, read the lists, spent a lot of time on wikipedia, etc. etc. -- and I scored in the 55%. The thing that really hit me on the test? Reading comprehension. I can't remember who said it, and I'm too lazy to scroll up but someone said studying reading comp for the gen test will help you here. I SECOND that. There was a lot of old poetry on there that I hadn't seen before and a lot of questions that read: "In lines 3-4, what is the girl hoping will happen?" and then none and all of the choices at the same time sound right. But, then again, I'm a terrible test taker and I scored equally as bad on the general test for reading comp. That might just be me tho. Sad face.

Anyway, they're helpful for guidance but I wouldn't put all my stock into them. I didn't get one vocab question for literary terms, so, go figure. I'm pretty sure I only did as well as I did because I study Irish lit and there was a Joyce question and a whole set on Heaney. If it weren't for that, I probably would have had to drop out of school my score was so bad.

But, then again, I took the exam sitting next to a kid taking the GRE Physics and his test looked HARD. So at least we're not physics majors, eh?

[Fiona Thunderpaws]

IBut, then again, I took the exam sitting next to a kid taking the GRE Physics and his test looked HARD. So at least we're not physics majors, eh?

I second this. I was talking to some Chemistry people before my test, and the one kid said he was shooting for the 20th percentile, and I made some sort of snide comment that easily obtainable goals were the best goals when it came to tests, and he turned to me and said "no seriously, I'll be delighted if I make the 20th percentile." I have never so happy to be in the humanities.