Beating the Odds Stories

[zanmato4794]

I have kind of a strange question.

Does anyone here know of someone who did less than stellar as an undergraduate, made a comeback as an Master's student, and then got accepted into like a top ten school? I'm sure such people exist, but hearing stories would be heartening right about now.

I made a bunch of stupid decisions as an undergrad, and also had a lot going on (onset of bipolar disorder, working too much, huge commute, etc), but still got accepted into a decent-ish MA lit program.

I took the GRE recently: 170V, 161Q, 5.0 W; and I have a 4.0 so far in the program. When I took the Lit test as an undergrad I got 620, but that was three years ago, so I'm confident I'll get high 600s or maybe even break 700 this time.

I'm confident in my SOP and writing sample.

I'm applying to Harvard and U of Penn, then three other schools (all top 30), but I'm afraid they'll all look at my undergrad transcripts and just think "he's too much of a liability." Why accept a recovered student over one who has remained consistent throughout his entire career? It's not even like my undergrad transcripts were that bad: 3.45 overall, 3.6 English, but several withdrawals.

It feels like since I've started my MA and got on medication, I've finally had the opportunity to work the way I would've liked to all along. It also feels too late though. Also: making an impression as a Master's student is difficult. I feel like I hardly know the faculty members writing letters of rec for me, yet they all say asking undergrad professors would be a bad idea.

So: if anyone has a story of someone beating the odds, I'd love to hear it. I don't want to think of my application fees as donations.

[asleepawake]

In what universe is a 170V and a 4.0 for the MA "against the odds"? I mean, really. You're letting your anxiety get to you! Your stats are quite good. I don't think the fact that your undergrad grades are imperfect will hurt you. You are qualified, but so are hundreds of others applying to places like UPenn. Now you just have to have the writing sample, the LORs, the fit, and a whole ton of luck.

Edited September 11, 2012 by asleepawake

[rems]

I have not been diagnosed as bipolar but I do have similar fears regarding my undergraduate. I have my reasons for my awful transcript, but all-in-all I'm scared shitless that adcoms will throw out my file instantly because of it. I came back in my final two years of school (5-year route), did awesome, got into graduate school (not a good one but I made the best of it), and at this point I feel as though I'm a highly competitive candidate for some great top 20 programs. BUT there's the looming blackhole of my first two and half years of undergraduate (dropped out for a semester) ready and waiting to get me knocked out of the competition without a second glance.

Your scores are awesome (to echo asleepawake), and you seem to have a great profile going in. One of my profs had a horrible undergrad, dropped out, drank a lot, went crazy, came back, graduated, went to Notre Dame English PhD, tenured professors, Fulbright, etc. etc. She promotes this all the time, too, saying that it isn't your pedigree that matters in the end but what you can do with it. Kinda lame, sure, but at least a little inspiring for us on the not-so-glamorous end of higher academics. Hopefully, and this is only hopefully, some adcoms or profs on said adcoms will be looking for candidates who are interesting, and can produce interesting work. Your history gives you an interesting edge meaning that you probably think differently than most people which to some will be an advantage. To others, of course, this will be a huge disadvantage. It all comes down to who is sitting on what committee and what they're looking for. Maybe they're tired of continually admitting the "same" perfect score students. Maybe they only want perfect score students. You never know. So apply anyway.

I'm sorry to hear that you're having to make up for something that is out of your control in the first place. That totally sucks, and I'm sorry to hear that you have to deal with it. To be frank, if bipolar disorder was an issue in accepting/hiring academics, the entire system would shut down. I'm not trying to sound blunt or to undermine what you're dealing with by any means, of course.

Best of luck to you!

Edited September 11, 2012 by rems

[ProfLorax]

Hi zanmato,

You and I have similar experiences. My undergrad was solid, but not exceptional, due to mental health issues (yay depression and anxiety!). I also have a 4.0 GPA for my MA program, which sounds more awesome than it really is; most MA programs simply expect straight A's. I doubt my GRE scores will be as high as yours, but who knows? I am taking the test this Saturday. Miracles can happen!

So while I can empathize with your plight, the reality is that no one here can really answer your question. I know this post is titled as "Beating the Odds Stories," but in reality, this is a "what are my chances?" post. Unfortunately, we have no idea. We are all in the same boat as you: stressed out, hypercritical of ourselves, and nonplussed by this entire process. And if you read through the posts over the past year, you'll realize a trend: there is no universal truth to PhD applications, so there really is no way to say whether someone is "beating the odds" or not. In reality, with how competitive these programs are, anyone who gets in has beaten the odds. You'll find people in this community with exceptional numbers and bright minds who have been rejected multiple years in a row. You'll find people with lower than average numbers who were accepted with full-funding into Ivy League programs. If the selection criteria was clear and predictable, we wouldn't need this forum to rip our hair out and cry out to the academic gods "WHY IS THIS SO HARD?!?!"

So my advice to anyone who is wondering what their chances is to talk to their professors. When I decided to apply, I had the same fears. I was especially nervous because I have a BA and MA in literature, and I am making the switch to rhet/comp. I emailed my comp professor from my MA program; it was a very honest email detailing my anxieties about my chances and about how I would fit into a rhet/comp program. He responded with encouragement, enthusiasm, and most importantly, some specific advice on how to go about this process. Then, I emailed other profs (including some from my undergrad years), and they have all given me the pat on my back and guidance that I need to navigate this application season. And while I receive very grounded and helpful advice from the academics in my life, I am using this forum to gripe about the GRE, connect with fellow applicants, and build a support system for this application cycle. And really, this community is FANTASTIC for that.

Edited September 11, 2012 by proflorax

[Grunbein]

As has been posted a number of times already, an applicant's writing sample and SOP are weighed most heavily by committees. Grades, institutions attended, GRE scores, etc. are of secondary importance but not negligible. This is because Universities want to know that the applicants they accept (and fund) are those most appropriate and apt to succeed. So yes, there are success stories (that I know of) in which an applicant has been accepted into a higher tier university despite the odds--we should say competition, these are people after all--because they were able to show convincingly that they were a good choice. To be more specific, I know of a student in similar circumstances, that is, one who attended a good but not great university for their BA, had good but not great grades, acceptable GRE scores, and went to a good but not great university to pursue an MA. This person excelled in their MA program, however, and was fortunate enough to publish a paper in a highly competitive peer-reviewed journal. This proved enough to win them entrance into all the Ivy-League schools they applied to, which they turned down to go to a school that seemed a better personal fit--UT Austin, a great school nonetheless. This might seem insane but only in a world in which the pedigree of a school is more important than its ability, if it has one, to foster creativity and personal success as these are the things that matter in life, professional and beyond. Beating the odds seems more to me like achieving the goal of recognition, which is a fair personal goal, but not--in my mind--of the highest priority. What matters more I would argue is finding a school that will allow you (and me) to develop professionally: learn how to teach students and contribute to academic discourse. And fortunately for all of us there are many, many schools like this in the US.

[Two Espressos]

I'm hoping I'll have a beating-the-odds story to tell of my own next spring, seeing as everything's really against me: I attend a sub-par university and have average grades, decent but not exceptional GRE scores, and an area of interest that I feel will be difficult to accommodate. I don't feel as if I stand out as an applicant in any significant way; I'm just a kid with big conceptual questions that I wish to explore.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Two Espressos

[Stately Plump]

Nearly all departments accept less than 10% of applicants; many are in the 5% or lower range.

Food for thought: Harvard's undergrad acceptance rate last year--the lowest in the country--was about 6%, Princeton's undergrad rate 8%, Penn's undergrad rate 12%, and Cornell's undergrad rate 16%. If you were to conduct a straightforward comparison of acceptance rates alone, you would conclude that being accepted to a funded PhD program is *at least* as difficult as getting into an Ivy League undergrad, and in reality, probably more difficult.

Trust me when I say: any student, from any background, with any scores/grades/undergrad institution/writing sample/SOP, who makes it into a funded PhD program, has beaten the odds.

[The Aged P]

Yes! Me! It can be done! I put off applying for two years because I was certain that my horrible--not less than stellar--trainwreckishly awful undergrad transcripts would make me the laughing stock of every admissions committee. Like you, I got my life together and worked really hard in my MA program, but I was under the impression that BA performance was more important than MA performance. While I'm not prepared to make a blanket statement about how heavily transcripts are weighted relative to one another, I can tell you that I'm three weeks into my fully funded top 30 PhD program and my only regret is that it took me so long to work up the nerve to apply. Devote your every waking moment to the application elements that are currently under your control, obsess over fit, and don't apologize. /peptalk