My Tips for Reapplying

[DEClarke85]

Hello All,

I have been rejected by all six of the schools I'm applying to. I was completely blind to this process upon applying this year. Here's what I plan on doing next year:

1.) Raise my GRE scores. Obviously having a 560 (V) and 650 (Q) for a total of 1210 was not enough

2.) Take Subject Test to broaden the number of schools i can apply to

3.) Pay attention to school rankings/ratings, so I have a more diverse list of applications

4.) Get something published before the next round of applications go out (so my CV looks better)

5.) Sharpen my SOP

6.) Edit my WS again, making it even better

Good luck to everyone!

[commoner]

Sorry to hear that DE. I'm sure I'll be joining you (2 rejections to go).

A quick tip: Start studying for subject test now, if you haven't had the standard canon English lit background (which I haven't). It asks very specific questions. Maybe I will do the same. And don't worry about your Quant score. For the verbal, get the box of vocab words and put them in your bathroom. That alone brought my score up 150 pts.

Something to add to your list: start making contacts at the schools. People tell me this is key. Didn't do that myself this year, but I will for next.

[lyonessrampant]

I would second the part about contacting people at the schools you're interested in. I emailed UChicago asking about the weaknesses of my app. They said I was a very strong applicant and part of the final reviews, but they slashed the cohort. . . Of course, I'm disappointed about that, but what I did last time (and will do more of this time) is make professional contacts. One of the best ways to do that is by going to and presenting at conferences, especially ones themed for your area of concentration. I'd also recommend tailoring your writing sample and SoP to each school. Good luck!

I've been told by one school (UC) that test scores don't matter much, but Northwestern said that scores above 700 are very helpful. I have 700 V, 650 Q, 6 AW, and a 680 (above 92%) Subject. I think I will retake the tests as well but that being said, I think that prioritizing the other parts of your application is a good choice. By the way, the subject test is horrible. Start studying as soon as you can. It covers pretty much ALL of western lit and a few token questions about Russian, African, and South American lit. Needless to say, that's a lot.

[Yellow#5]

DE,

When you study for the Subj. Test, don't go too in depth! Get the Norton Anthology of Literature, read the chapter intros closely and skim the lit. selections. Maybe supplement it with SparkNote outlines of English Lit., depending on how widely you've read. Get the Princeton Review test prep. There are many, but I found that one to be the best.

One more tip, don't sacrifice GRE Verbal study time for the English Subject Matter test. I've heard from many people that the GRE Verbal is more important to ad coms than the Subj. Matter Test.

[Lisa]

There are several good websites regarding the English Subject test. They were put together by students who took them. I forgot what they're called, but look in Google. There's one that even has a list of the most commonly tested works (as compiled from previous tests). These helped me focus a lot. And, I echo the person's advice to start now--especially if you don't have a large background in English lit--which I didn't.

[hadunc]

DE,

When you study for the Subj. Test, don't go too in depth! Get the Norton Anthology of Literature, read the chapter intros closely and skim the lit. selections. Maybe supplement it with SparkNote outlines of English Lit., depending on how widely you've read. Get the Princeton Review test prep. There are many, but I found that one to be the best.

One more tip, don't sacrifice GRE Verbal study time for the English Subject Matter test. I've heard from many people that the GRE Verbal is more important to ad coms than the Subj. Matter Test.

This is great advice, thanks! I never thought of just reading the intros in the Norton Anthology, but that's a really good idea!

[lovewillcather]

The website Lisa mentions is called Vade Mecum and is here: http://www.duke.edu/~tmw15/. I studied from this website primarily, using the published test prep book and a little wikipedia/masterplots to supplement for the three months before the test and scored in the 94th percentile (and my undergraduate and MA coverage was not at all what the Subject Test expects). Number2.com I think is mentioned elsewhere on this forum, but it's got a great vocab builder.

[lotf629]

The vade mecum website is great for the Subject test. The two other things I did that helped me a lot were a) to get a recording of 100 famous poems and listen to it constantly while doing errands, etc., and to make flash cards using Bartlett's Quotations. I got a list of canonical authors, looked them up in Bartlett's, put their famous quotes on flash cards, and drilled myself to id them. Those two approaches, plus the website above, worked very well and were quite efficient (I got a 770, 40 pts above the 99th percentile). Let me also say, however, that it was really dumb of me in retrospect to put as much time as I did into studying for that test; I don't think my score had any effect at all on where I got in and where I didn't. Somehow it was really easy for me to get consumed by the standardized test prep because it seemed like the one part of the app that I could control most directly. I'd say that you should figure out if you can what the cutoffs or averages are at your programs and then, once you hit that threshold, turn your attention to other things.

[kfed2020]

Hey y'all. I had a pretty good run at applying to graduate school this year, and I learned a few things that might be helpful. I'll write them in direct response to the OPs suggestions for himself, because these were exactly the things I worried about when applying this year.

1) GREs. I would make a point of getting at least a 600V, but beyond that I wouldn't stress too much over it. In simple terms: which speaks more to your potential as a scholar? -- your GRE verbal scores, which account for 30 minutes of your life, or your writing samples, which demand much more of your intellectual energy? The things profs at each of my schools remembered about me had everything to do with my ideas and nothing to do with my numbers. I put grades in this category, too.

2) Subject Test. This probably depends on your field, but on the whole, I wouldn't stress so much over this, either. I bombed (seriously: bombed) the GRE subject test and got into a top tier school that required it. The GRE subject exam only means so much. At the end of the day, while great, broad training is important before getting to graduate school, this is training that any grad program worth its money will go out of its way to provide you. It's also training that's best reflected in your transcript. Not to mention -- for someone like me, who studies African American and queer genres, that test seems largely to think that what I want to study is canonically irrelevant, so f' it.

3) Pick good schools for yourself. Yes: apply to a good range of schools, but don't apply anywhere that isn't a number one choice. Applying to schools you're not excited about is a waste of money if you know you wouldn't seriously want to attend -- even if you're sure you could get in. The PhD process is lonely and isolating enough without the added torture of hating your school, advisers, etc. Really think about what you want from a program:

Ask not what you can do for the program; ask what the program can do for you. Heh. I, at least, found that approach pretty empowering, and it was good to keep in mind as a narrowed my list down to my 7 number 1s.

As well, I think people too often make the mistake of applying to a program for too few professors of interest. Realize that you're going to need to appeal to a committee of people, and that appealing only to a singular professor isn't going to cut it, especially at top-flight programs. There are many (very crazy) people who apply to Columbia to work with G.Spivak (again, they're crazy), but if she isn't on the admissions committee -- and even if she is -- your app is going to need to convince the other 5 or so readers that they, too, would love to see you attend their program. This doesn't mean you need to have a wide wingspan of interests, but it does mean that scholars from different corners of the discipline have to be convinced of your importance to the field. They're looking, not only for students, but for future colleagues; the applications that stand out are the ones with which the professors can put themselves in conversation as potential peers.

It also helps to apply to schools that are moving in the direction of your work. One of my schools is really getting more interested in performance studies and African American studies, as reflected by recent hires; I would've been a crazy person not to apply, not only because it was becoming more of a fit for me, but also because new faculty hires means the schools are looking to build cohorts of students interested in those fields. It's a very good strategy for getting in -- and more importantly, a great strategy for determining 'fit.'

4) Don't publish. I really wouldn't worry about this. You've plenty of time to make a name for yourself in the field; publishing now seems almost too professionalized for applying to graduate programs that intend to indoctrinate you into this profession. Unless your work winds up in a highly respected journal with a very stringent peer review system, the adcom is always going to rely more on its own opinions of your work than on the stamp of approval from a little-known journal. Work with the goal of making that sample the best it can be for the adcom; publish later.

5) The SOP is high priority. Agreed. My SOP is probably one of the best things I've ever written, and that's because it took me about 5 months to write. And it's only 2 pages! Give it to friends who aren't lit geeks; does it provoke them? Does it make them want to ask you questions about your work? Do they find it confusing and inaccessible? Too jargonistic? Too long? Repetitive? These opinions help...

I hope this helps...

[lyonessrampant]

Kfed, besides your riciculous name (I've seen your post in response to the reference to Britney's former husband as not being your inspiration I think your advice is really useful not only because it is salient but also because you got into some AWESOME programs this year. Here's my question: your interests and research focus, it seems, are less traditional. As a person applying for early modern and, to a lesser extent, medieval lit, do you think things like test scores might matter more? I got a 680 (above 92%) on the subject, and Northwestern (only top 20) told me 700+ was good but UChicago told me I was close (though they don't require subject tests) and just couldn't be offered admit or waitlist because of the slashed cohort size this year but that WS and SoP were more important. I guess I would say that if you are interested in a more "traditional" field, check with the school you're applying to. Some will consider a super high subject test score as important. On my practice tests, I was getting 780 and had a panic attack when I took the actual test so I think I will study to refresh and retake. However, if your field is less traditional, I don't think the subject test matters at all. I am well versed in the "canon," memorize very easily (nearly eidetic), and still had troubles with the subject when starting to study a couple months out (though develped my own 600-pg review manual, which took more of my time, to study. . . but this time around, I expect to maintain practice test scores of 99% plus on my actual test and btw still don't think it will matter that much. I just hope (based on responses from schools) that a test score that high, plus an awesome SoP and writing sample, etc, might make the difference between me and the other guy(s)/girl(s) when cohorts cut their size in half because of the econ. This time around, I've felt pretty jacked because I have an MA from at top 10 school, strong WS and Sop, 3 relevant conferences, and high test scores, but so far, I have no admits. In the grand scheme of things, I think that's fine because my husband returns from a deployment in Afghanistan about the time I'd start school. So, taking a year, in retrospect, is good. . . for me, but I wish all of you the best this year.

[jasper.milvain]

4) Don't publish. I really wouldn't worry about this. You've plenty of time to make a name for yourself in the field; publishing now seems almost too professionalized for applying to graduate programs that intend to indoctrinate you into this profession. Unless your work winds up in a highly respected journal with a very stringent peer review system, the adcom is always going to rely more on its own opinions of your work than on the stamp of approval from a little-known journal. Work with the goal of making that sample the best it can be for the adcom; publish later.

This is exactly what I was going to post. The OP's plan sounds good, but I'm not sold on the publishing part. There's a saying that goes "You can publish your way into any position... but you can also publish your way out." I'm not sure that there's any journal repuatable enough to help your chances that will take MA work. The vast majority of successful candidates haven't published yet, simply because they're too 'young' as academics. This sounds like a way to spend a lot of time that could be more productively used elsewhere.

[lyonessrampant]

I'm really not sure about the sentiments on publishing. I presented at a conference with both profs (full Ph.D.s etc) in my field and advanced Ph.D. students presents in early modern and medieval lit (my area), and I've been offered publishing opportunities. Why would you turn something like that down? It is a peer-reviewed publication. . . so why should you ever turn any peer-reviewed publication down?

[lotf629]

First of all, I want to say that I think KFed2020's post is excellent. I also want to defer to his or her Princeton admission: I didn't apply there, but I doubt I would have been accepted. As far as publishing, I want to chime in here on both sides of the question. I offer these observations as grounds for discussion, not staunch opinions: I'm quite open to the possibility that I'm wrong.

On the one hand, I don't think that publication is completely beside the point, though I totally agree with the points made above that not all journals are equal. I also think it's very well said that committees (especially at competitive schools) will value their own opinions more than those of any lower-tier journal's editors. Still, while an MA student, I was told by a Harvard prof at one point that I should try to publish an article if I could because it was a "feather in my cap" and would help my odds in applying to Ph.D. programs. Moreover, I think that the goal of publishing is a useful way to frame a larger question: that of doing quality research or analysis while an undergrad or MA student. In a different post, I said something about the ideal writing sample being "published or publishable." The point I was trying to make is not that publication itself is a be-all, end-all (hence "publishable"), but that the standards of publication are useful in helping students determine what counts as a real contribution toward the field (or substantial progress in that direction), and that top programs often expect students to evince some signs of being able to make such a contribution. To go out on a limb, I'll say that I think the standards of publication may be even more useful to students attending an undergrad program outside the top 10 or 20 schools.

To play devil's advocate, I also want to ask jasper.milvain, respectfully, "Time used better elsewhere? How?" Maybe my own prejudices are coming into play at this point. Still, I think that of all the things I did to prepare for the Ph.D. application process, the one thing that had the most intrinsic merit was the work I did toward preparing a few scraps of new knowledge for public consumption. Working toward publication was far more valuable than all the damn time I spent on GREs. It was also more valuable than the time I spent maintaining my grades in irrelevant coursework (writing dumb response papers for introductory courses that I had to take in order to graduate, and that I needed A/A-s in in order to keep up my GPA). It was even more valuable than all the seminar papers I wrote that I really cared about and worked hard on, since those papers benefited only me. The only thing I did that had any value outside my own application or narrow academic trajectory was the work I did toward publication. Then again, if you mean time used for things like, oh, having a life , I have to concede the point.

On the other hand, I agree that fit is far, far more important than publication, and that researching and proving fit is a much better use of one's time than jumping through all the hoops required to get a paper into a lower-tier journal. I also want to repeat that KFed2020 sure as hell knows what he or she is talking about, based on his "Accepted" list .

[spartaca]

As far as the Subject test goes - I used the Princeton Review's test prep book and found it extremely useful. I actually employed some of their strategies for approaching the test and think it only helped me. I didn't get a spectacular score, but scored slightly above the 600 I was aiming for, and so was pleased. On the matter of scores in general... As I'm sure many of us know or have heard, these scores are not what get you in and most of the time they're not what get you rejected either (unless you have, like, a 370 V). Many times they're used to justify the department's recommendation for (funded) admission to the Dean/Graduate School. If the Dean is going to reject a candidate that the department has recommended for admission, it will most likely be based on test scores. BUT the department knows this, and so if you do have slightly lower test scores and they want you, they'll talk you up to the dean and make sure you're offered admission. If you have good scores, don't retake these tests. It's a waste of time and money, and I know plenty of people who have gotten into great programs with what we might consider mediocre GREs.

When researching programs, I made sure that there were at least three faculty at each school who I'd love/be happy to work with. This can safeguard you against things you don't know or are unable to anticipate, like Prof. A is going to be on leave to work on her book for the next two semesters, or Prof. B has a visiting scholar appointment next spring, or Prof. C is a superstar who doesn't really have time to take on too many advisees. I mentioned faculty whose literary interests aren't in line with mine but who study theories that I'm really into or really want to learn more about. I also looked up their graduate seminar offerings, and made sure to mention interesting course titles taught by some of these faculty. By cross-checking faculty interests and course offerings, you might discover a professor you hadn't noticed before bc of his/her awesome course description. And, of course, the opposite is true as well.

One thing that I think helped me - I could be wrong - is that I really explored websites, clicked links that took me elsewhere, and tried to find something outside the department that made me interested in the university as a whole/"community." Most schools have Humanities Institutes (or something along those lines) to get involved with, and these often provide opportunities to attend conferences or works-in-progress symposiums right on your own campus, put together a panel, have contact with other departments and grad students in the humanities. When I found a related program or organization that I thought sounded interesting, I included it in my SOP, right in the "fit" section.

3) Pick good schools for yourself. Yes: apply to a good range of schools, but don't apply anywhere that isn't a number one choice.

I couldn't agree more. This speaks a little to the debate about safety schools. Since there really is no such thing in this PhD game, make sure you'd be more than happy to attend each program to which you apply. No one wants to be in the position of having only one acceptance and it's from that school you weren't that thrilled about but you applied to thinking you'd probably get in. Do you go just so you can get started or do you reapply? I cut two schools from my list for this reason alone.

That's my 2 pennies.

[engguy]

i want to chime in to agree with much of what's been said already in response to the OP. It's tempting to think that, if you've faced a lot of rejection, it has to do with your scores, which are numbers that you can see and hope to improve on. but i really wouldn't waste a lot of time sweating the GRE general and certainly not the subject test.

some background on my app. process: i applied last year as a poetics / medieval student. was accepted at 5/8 schools. NOT princeton, unfortunately, to which i did apply, but i did get in to one top-20 school as a straight medievalist. at that time, i had not even taken the subject test, though it was 'required' at half the schools i applied to. things might be different this year, and i wouldn't encourage anyone to try that, but it does underscore the relative lack of importance of the subject test. (i just included a note that said i would take it at the next opportunity...)

if you are going to spend five months doing something, as kfed mentioned, make it your SOP and your writing sample. everything else is secondary, if not tertiary. keep in mind that many schools only accept one-three students in a given field per semester (makes sense, if the cohort will be 10-15 people, and they want to spread you among fields they already have). your SOP / sample needs to grab the committee by the throat and really wow them. it's not that you need to be the "best" early modernist etc., but you really need to stand out from the other app's. it's in that sense, too, that the advice to find seven "no. 1" schools applies: you need to make a case that this is the only program where you can do what you want to do.

[draff]

You might think about using a different (or writing a new) writing sample, also -- the suggestion that you don't want to pour too much energy into test scores has this on the other side of it. If you can, you should definitely be getting in touch with any DGS whose program you applied to, and who will talk to you about your application -- about your writing sample and statement in particular. I've heard of great things coming out of those conversations.

[jasper.milvain]

To play devil's advocate, I also want to ask jasper.milvain, respectfully, "Time used better elsewhere? How?"

I was indeed thinking of having a life, or setting up an excellent Plan B. I (embarrassingly) wasn't considering the clarification of ideas that might come from working towards publication. That process is obviously very valuable, but the paperwork side would be an investment of time, and yet another exercise in stress, waiting, and possible rejection to pile on top of an already brutal process.

I'm really not sure about the sentiments on publishing. I presented at a conference with both profs (full Ph.D.s etc) in my field and advanced Ph.D. students presents in early modern and medieval lit (my area), and I've been offered publishing opportunities. Why would you turn something like that down? It is a peer-reviewed publication. . . so why should you ever turn any peer-reviewed publication down?

You mean conference proceedings? Can't see much wrong with that.

Think of it this way, though--we're working towards dissertations. Likely, the subjects that we're most passionate about at the moment will be part of those dissertations. If you want to turn your dissertation into a book once you're done (in the magical universe where we all get tenure track jobs) it's best not to have published more than two chapters of it, according to Colon-Semenza's excellent _Graduate Study for the Twenty-First Century: How to Build an Academic Career in the Humanities_. When do you want to publish those two big chunks of your first big idea: when you're CV building and scrambling to get in, or once you've had the benefit of more years of coursework and exams to expand your knowledge about the discipline and your field, with your PhD supervisor to consult for edits?

You can keep taking the same paper to conference after conference, but you can't keep publishing it. If you print a crappier version of your pet project in, say, an author-specific graduate journal, you may regret not being able to send it in to a major journal in your field later.

Again, I'm in Canada, so things may be different here. But most of my PhD friends didn't publish until their second or third year, and then they started with book reviews. I have two grad conferences and three guest lectures at undergrad classes, and that's been good enough to get me into all the schools I applied to (again, in Canada) and get my federal research funding application to the final stage of review. Of course, I absolutely KILLED myself over my research proposal (Sop equivalent?) and did a thorough lit review, multiple revisions and review sessions, etc. That way, I'm working towards publishing eventually and developing my ideas, but I'm doing it in a more private way that doesn't commit me to my current views or cut off publishing opportunities for the future.

I'm sure that there are lots of other situations in which early publication makes a lot more sense, and I'm sure everyone is capable of making their own call. This is just my two cents.

[Minnesotan]

Publish every article, conference paper, edited collection, short note, book review, scrap of notebook paper, every Post-It note, every tissue covering a chunk of used chewing gum you can! It's been a while since I read Semanza's work, but I think his only concern with publishing too much of the diss as articles is when you're pitching it as a book project a year or two after earning your PhD. My response to that is, "Yeah, it's good to plan ahead, but take the small victories when you can get them." If you get to the point where you're abuot to defend and you already have two chapters published, then fine -- sit on it for a while and see if you can get the monograph out of it. But, especially this early in your career, you're going to be sorry for turning up your nose at any publishing gig you can get. Especially if it is something that requires almost no effort, like conference proceedings!

Maybe I'm just not arrogant enough to think I'm entitled a job without publishing much, but I shamelessly pursue every opportunity to add another line in the "Publications" category of my CV. Call me mercenary if you will, but that's how it is.

[jasper.milvain]

*shrugs* My friends who sat on job search committees said cluttered publishing records with lots of low to mid level publishing performed at a disadvantage against publishing records with fewer publications in better journals. I've heard similar things from enough sources that I trust to believe it.

[Minnesotan]

I've heard the opposite -- that all publishing is good publishing -- so we'll have to agree to disagree, since the arguments on either side are based on hearsay, not personal experience on the job market.

[jasper.milvain]

Fair enough! There's probably a happy medium in there somewhere.

[limelight]

Engguy, could you share why you decided to not take the subject test even though it was "required" for some of your schools? I understand that the test is less important than other parts of the app, but did you suspect before sending in your apps that it would not be held against you if you did not take it? I'm just curious. Thanks.

[engguy]

it was not a deliberate thing -- at the time i decided to begin the application process, i did not get around to signing up for the subject test till rather late in the game. as it happened, last year they moved the test dates up, so i had already missed the deadlines by then. i signed up for the next available test, which was april, included an explanatory note in my application package, and hoped for the best. as i recall, four of the eight schools i applied to required the subject test; i got into two of them. hope that helps.

[justin121883]

Back on the subject of GRE Lit preparation:

In part because I'm neurotic, in part because I'm desperate to realize some kind of gain from all my hard work (no PhD programs for this year), and in part because I'm just so darn helpful (!), I've started posting all my GRE Literature flashcards at http://www.grelitblog.blogspot.com. I'll be posting a minimum of 1-2 cards per day, with links to information on or full online texts of all the works mentioned in each card.

Vade Mecum is also a great source, and the Princeton Review book was well worth the money.

[Minnesotan]

That looks extremely helpful, Justin. Even though I'm already working on a PhD, I might subscribe to the RSS feed just for fun.