Fall 2014 applicants??

[ComeBackZinc]

I submitted a Works Cited with my SOP, but many, many people don't. I don't think you can really go wrong.

 

Obviously, a WC with your writing sample is a must.

[practical cat]

I didn't cite anything in my SOP so I didn't submit a works cited. I could see circumstances where you would though. Do what's necessary.

[id quid]

I suppose that depends on what your SOP contains! I wouldn't do it just for the books/articles you mention, but if you take any substantive arguments or statements from it, I'd cite as normal.

[ProfLorax]

Re: Re-taking GRE tests: If you have the time and money, and re-taking the test will make you feel better about your application, then do it. Think less about what ad comms want (it's too hard to predict what they will prioritize anyway) and focus on what will make you feel more confident about your application. 

 

I got a 157V my first time. I tried to tell myself I was okay with the score, but it kept eating away at me. Once I signed up to re-take the test, I immediately felt better. My second attempt, I scored a 161V, which isn't anything special but I felt so much better about my application. Of course, it's impossible for me to know if that made an impact on my application season, but I do know that re-taking the test helped me sleep better-- that alone was worth the time and money. 

[BunnyWantsaPhD]

Re: Re-taking GRE tests: If you have the time and money, and re-taking the test will make you feel better about your application, then do it. Think less about what ad comms want (it's too hard to predict what they will prioritize anyway) and focus on what will make you feel more confident about your application. 

 

I got a 157V my first time. I tried to tell myself I was okay with the score, but it kept eating away at me. Once I signed up to re-take the test, I immediately felt better. My second attempt, I scored a 161V, which isn't anything special but I felt so much better about my application. Of course, it's impossible for me to know if that made an impact on my application season, but I do know that re-taking the test helped me sleep better-- that alone was worth the time and money. 

 

 

Thanks, that's exactly what I needed to hear. I think I was waiting for someone else to give me permission to not think about it anymore, but the truth is that it's not that great of a score and I'm not okay with it. $185 isn't that much money if I'm investing in my future. I think I'll sign up again and hope for the best. 

 

Question: did you study more in between tests? I just don't know if I can really look at this thing any longer and I don't know if it is really helping. 

[ProfLorax]

Thanks, that's exactly what I needed to hear. I think I was waiting for someone else to give me permission to not think about it anymore, but the truth is that it's not that great of a score and I'm not okay with it. $185 isn't that much money if I'm investing in my future. I think I'll sign up again and hope for the best. 

 

Question: did you study more in between tests? I just don't know if I can really look at this thing any longer and I don't know if it is really helping. 

Not really. I did re-read some sections of the Princeton Review GRE study book. But for me, going in knowing what to expect AND knowing that I at least already had a GRE score really relieved the pressure. I think it was more of an emotional state I needed to achieve, rather than memorizing more vocab words. The only other difference is I actually tried on the math section, which I didn't before. I think keeping my brain engaged the whole testing time also helped increase my verbal score.  

 

Good luck!

[BunnyWantsaPhD]

Not really. I did re-read some sections of the Princeton Review GRE study book. But for me, going in knowing what to expect AND knowing that I at least already had a GRE score really relieved the pressure. I think it was more of an emotional state I needed to achieve, rather than memorizing more vocab words. The only other difference is I actually tried on the math section, which I didn't before. I think keeping my brain engaged the whole testing time also helped increase my verbal score.  

 

Good luck!

 

Thanks! I agree on the mental/emotional aspects. I think I just got psyched out this last test. On practice tests I was spending like 1/2 the time per question. So, hopefully I'll go in with a different attitude this time! I'll let you know how it goes.

[Katia_chan]

Just because this is an interest of mine as well, I feel like I should agree that what you are being asked to do is absolutely ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with you, and you did not have to overcome your disability to succeed but rather the messed up, backwards, elitist institution of higher education. Ugh. Just had to get that off my chest.

 

Also, I wanted to ask what your interests in medieval lit are. I'm not a medievalist myself, but I have been reading in medieval disability lately and it seems like a lot of work needs to be done in that area.

 

 

Thanks--you share my rant exactly. Most of the "overcoming adversity" I've had to do was figuring out how the hell to make Moodle work with a screen reader, and how to keep Mac Pages from sneakily reformatting my shit without telling me.

.

My interests largely center around codicology/manuscript studies, and national identity/perception, mostly in the Celtic fringe.  I've looked at medieval disability studies, and I find it vaguely interesting to read about, but it's never been anything I had any interest in writing about.  It's possible this comes from a dislike of feeling (possibly irrationally) pigeon-holed into disability studies by dint of having a disability.  But I do have a few projects in mind along the lines of digital humanities/medieval manuscripts, so we'll see how that goes...

 

If I can ever write the bloody SoP.

 

 

How has being labeled in such a way (i.e. "disabled") informed your experience of reading literature?  You mention medieval studies - surely there is some resonance there, no?  Otherwise, how did reading Medieval lit inform your experience of disability?

Are you certain that your professors simply want to hit a minority angle?  I would assume there is far than that.  How did having a disability at a university create adversity, as you mention, or conversely, were there moments where you wished it was not labeled or recognized as adversity at all?  (I'm asking this because disability theory is a huge interest of mine - if you want to chat about it at all,  please feel free to PM me anytime you want).  There are definitely ways to discuss disability in your SOP that are new and engaging, as I'm sure you know - and you will find them. :}

 

When I asked my advisor about it, she basically said I should play up any helpful angle as much as I could, including having a disability.  She compared it to being part of a minority race group...

 

Most of the things I've done, I would prefer not to be thought of as overcoming adversity.  I've had to make adaptations to make a few things work, but mostly it's just a matter of getting and keeping things in working order.  There is a way I could discuss it, being that I work with...books, which are historically inaccessible, but I'm not far enough along on that track to be able to use it effectively in a SoP.

 

Either way, I have to use it.  I'm just trying to figure out how, without having it take up much room--I want to address it and move on pretty quickly.

 

And vise versa, if there are any questions you have, or things you'd like to discuss, feel free to PM me as well.

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

Guys, is Nov. 14 too late for GRE? Most of my deadlines are in mid Dec., so a month will be ok right?

[toasterazzi]

I think it *should* be fine based on how soon I got my scores back (about 10 days), but I suppose it's possible it might take a little longer if they're busier in November.

[Katia_chan]

That's the date when I took my test the first time.  I didn't have any trouble getting scores places, and I even had the 4-6 week BS to contend with.  So you should be fine.

[champagne]

I just wanted to add in that I've talked to several professors (with and without adcomm experience), and their basic usage for the GRE is as a secondary (or tertiary, even) metric if there are less-than-catastrophic problems in the more important parts of the application (WS, SOP, LORs). Now, the larger an application pool (i.e. "more prestigious"), the harder it's going to be for them to separate applicants on an individual basis, therefore, GRE scores will inherently be given more scrutiny. It's just a reality with the numbers that they have. If you feel confident that your SOP and WS are your best work and that your LOR's are beneficial and comprehensive, then there should be nothing to worry about with GRE scores as long as they aren't lower than 50th percentile or something abysmal.

 

I also think that several programs listing >90th percentile as their requirement is akin to companies posting positions that require 3-5 years of work experience. It's more of a tactic to ward off applications that will waste their time than an actual hard-line rule. I feel confident that none of y'all's applications will waste their time, so I wouldn't be frightened by those published parameters.

[Porridge]

I would like to add that regarding GREs, some places (SUNY Buffalo) require a certain result (305 +, or something)before they consider you for funding.

[asleepawake]

I would like to add that regarding GREs, some places (SUNY Buffalo) require a certain result (305 +, or something)before they consider you for funding.

 

You've misread the rules at Buffalo. A certain score is needed to qualify for fellowships, which are offered separately from a TA stipend.

[ComeBackZinc]

But the general point stands: there are universities, or schools within universities, where there are explicit cutoffs for GRE that are establish by policy, and this usually ties the hands of departments even if they would prefer to take someone on. I have no idea how common it is, but it's been reported several times around here. Far more common with GPA.

 

Which doesn't change the basic point that the GRE is usually very low down on the list of important factors for admission.

Edited October 12, 2013 by ComeBackZinc

[asleepawake]

Yes, of course. I just replied because Buffalo was the particular school mentioned and it wasn't completely accurate here. Even the schools that have these cut-offs may have some room for exceptions. I remember some posts by a history professor at OSU who discussed the specifics there, which allowed a few exceptions for each department, I believe.

 

That said, I do think your best bet is to apply mostly to schools where you don't have to be the exception, but if you think you are a good fit in every other way, I don't think you should automatically ax a school for this reason.

Edited October 12, 2013 by asleepawake

[ComeBackZinc]

And I think as is often the case, grad directors and grad secretaries can give you good advice about whether or not to send an app anyway.

[antigone56]

 

I also think that several programs listing >90th percentile as their requirement is akin to companies posting positions that require 3-5 years of work experience. It's more of a tactic to ward off applications that will waste their time than an actual hard-line rule. I feel confident that none of y'all's applications will waste their time, so I wouldn't be frightened by those published parameters.

 

That's a really good point.  I've had that thought before, myself, about what schools' websites say about GRE scores.  It is like they're stating their preference, but with full knowledge that reality sometimes presents them with a very viable candidate who doesn't meet their preference at all, but they still want that person.

 

I can't say how many jobs I used to get in which I did not have the experience they said they wanted.  And when they called me for an interview, I was thinking...what?  But I was glad they called.  

 

That said, sometimes they (schools/employers) really do stick with their stated standards.  But I'd put it, in general, at 50-50, which aren't bad odds....

Edited October 12, 2013 by antigone56

[Romanista]

I'm curious as to whether anyone is applying to a program with just one faculty member in their field of study. Is it even worth applying? Assuming that the one professor fits one's research interests adequately. 

[bfat]

Which doesn't change the basic point that the GRE is usually very low down on the list of important factors for admission.

 

This is true, but also kind of misleading. I hate to be Debbie Downer, because obviously people get accepted to schools with lower than "stellar" GRE scores, but I recently talked with a prof who sat on the AdCom last year who gave some different info. She said that PSU received about 800 apps last year and that there was a certain "quantitative" element to making decisions that the grad school itself (not just the English dept.) "needs to see" when the number of apps is that high. She said she wouldn't give numbers because it was "too depressing," but I got the impression that it was a pretty high cutoff. I know this has been mentioned before many times, but I'll say it again: for schools that receive a huge number of apps, the GRE is never a top factor in getting accepted, but it can definitely knock you out of the running. I don't have any idea what the specific percentiles are that might be cutoffs (these are mysterious, ethereal figures that I don't think anyone outside the committee knows), but to a certain extent, all competitive programs have GRE cutoffs.

 

Again, though, it depends entirely on the school. Some might be the 75th percentile, some might be the 98th. Alas, I don't think we will ever know which school does what.

[ComeBackZinc]

^ I agree.

[PageAndStage]

I have two questions for you.

 

1. Would you contact professors you are interested in before you apply? I read a book related to graduate school application (which was a bit outdated by the way. It was published in the early 2000s) and it said that professors in English lit department don't appreciate students contacting them before applying. 

 

2. I'm outside the U.S. so I don't know how bad things are but it seems like the current president of Emory University isn't very fond of departments that aren't "lucrative." It won't accept ph. d. applicants for Spanish lit, integrated humanities(I don't remember the program's name exactly), and economics. I wanted to apply for Emory but now I'm having second thoughts at this news. What do you all think about applying for Emory?

 

I would love to hear your thoughts!

[ComeBackZinc]

As for your first question, that's consistently the most controversial topic here. I have no answer for you, other than to say that people have contacted professors beforehand and been quite successful, and people have not contacted professors beforehand and been quite successful.

[marlowe]

As for your first question, that's consistently the most controversial topic here. I have no answer for you, other than to say that people have contacted professors beforehand and been quite successful, and people have not contacted professors beforehand and been quite successful.

 

..And that people have contacted professors beforehand and been quite unsuccessful.  

[ComeBackZinc]

... And that people have not contacted professors beforehand and been quite unsuccessful. I thought both were implied.

Edited October 16, 2013 by ComeBackZinc