Fall 2014 applicants??

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

I asked a similar question before about schools that say GRE is not required, but "highly recommended". Why wouldn't they just say it's required? I'm afraid it will negatively affect my application if I don't submit it, and at the same time I'm sure it'll hurt my application if I submit it cuz I really sucked at the test 

[purpleperson]

"GRE subject test is not required but highly recommended"

 

That's just their complete asshole way of saying you're damned if you do and damned if you don't.  

 

Anyway, I scored incredibly low on the GRE subject test.  Like, ridiculously low.  I'm applying to 14 schools, and six of them require it.  i sent the score to all six, but I also sent a letter to each department explaining my score.  Not making excuses for it, but putting forth the reason I believe I got a low score, as well as attesting to what I believe is as strong a background in literature as one could expect from someone with an M.A.   

 

I'm not that worried about the low Subject Test GRE.  I think a low General Test GRE is more reason to worry than the Subject Test GRE.  And while my General GRE isn't high either, it's not "embarrassingly low" like my Subject Test GRE.  

 

Anyway, I'm putting all my stuff out there.  Let the chips fall where they may.  

 

Oh yeah, I'd say if they say not required but highly recommended, and you have a low score, don't send.  If you have an okay to great score, send.  

Edited November 18, 2013 by purpleperson

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

That's what I thought. Thank you for the advice and good luck to all of us

[ComeBackZinc]

Two things to bear in mind.

 

1. Work the program. The schools are not looking to uniquely screw you; you don't need to do anything unique to get in. You need to have great grades, you need to have strong recommendation letters from faculty that are invested in you, you need to write an SOP that demonstrates that you know what an academic career really is and that you have what it takes to succeed in one, you need to include a writing sample that shows the quality of your work at its current highest level. Coming from an elite undergrad helps a lot, as does having highly-respected faculty writing your letters. Proving you have a pulse on the GRE doesn't hurt any.

 

Nobody is looking to screw you. There are all kinds of perfectly conventional and straightforward reasons that they could reject you without having to look for a way to entrap you.

 

2. This process works to serve the department's needs, not your own. Always. Always always. That's the answer to a lot of the "why do they do it this way?" questions: because the process serves the department, not the applicant.

[Creffecreve]

Hi,

So this is kind of a silly, last minute panic question. How do you decide what range of schools you would be competitive at? I mean, yes, obviously interests and fit determines the schools you look at, but how do you decide whether or not you stand a chance at Columbia, say? 

 

aka, I think I won't get in anywhere, halp!

[purpleperson]

Hi,

So this is kind of a silly, last minute panic question. How do you decide what range of schools you would be competitive at? I mean, yes, obviously interests and fit determines the schools you look at, but how do you decide whether or not you stand a chance at Columbia, say? 

 

aka, I think I won't get in anywhere, halp!

 

Well, I, for instance, don't think I'm competitive at top programs, but I'm reaching for a couple anyway that at least give the facade of looking at one's package "holistically."  Also, if that same place that claims to look at things holistically also happens to be known for the exact field of study I'm interested in, I assume I have some shot there.  In contrast, I heard Columbia says on its website that you should just get lost if you are not in the 93rd percentile or above on the Verbal GRE -- doesn't matter what the rest of you is like.   I hear the same of Berkeley.  I guess, in general, I'll "reach" for a school that's # 17, but not for a school that's # 2.  I'm honestly not concerned with being at a top school anyway, though.  I'll be thrilled if I get into a #88 that fits what I'm interested in and is in one of my preferred cities.  

 

That being said, there are just certain schools that I intuitively feel I have no chance at.  Like NYU, Columbia, Berkeley.  

[gatz]

Part of evaluating an application holistically is taking test scores into account, regardless of whether they are your personal strength. But of course it seems to get a little ridiculous at the high end of schools. The lowest median verbal for accepted students at UVA, over the past four years, was 98 percent.

(http://gsas.virginia.edu/sites/gsas.virginia.edu/files/Profile-English.pdf)

 

I didn't post this to start a dumb standardized test debate or commiseration group hug, but just to say that no matter what your application looks like you're never going to feel sure about anything. I'm dealing with the uncertainty by applying to funded masters programs. The admissions committees know exactly what to look for and, you know what? If they tell me I'm not top-20 phd material right now then I will believe them and the process that they follow every single year (which clearly works in general if not in every case). And if I don't get into any of my masters programs? I'll be able to let go because screw clinging to academic life or going into debt for the sake of my precious Ideas About Literature. If the people who really know what it takes don't see it in me, they're helping me out by letting me know!

Edited November 19, 2013 by gatz

[purpleperson]

Part of evaluating an application holistically is taking test scores into account, regardless of whether they are your personal strength. But of course it seems to get a little ridiculous at the high end of schools. The lowest median verbal for accepted students at UVA, over the past four years, was 98 percent.

(http://gsas.virginia.edu/sites/gsas.virginia.edu/files/Profile-English.pdf)

 

 

 

Well, yes, I realize. But if they evaluate holistically, that means that they can potentially consider you a viable candidate even if your test scores aren't great.  I was by no means saying that "holistic" means that scores don't matter.  

[purpleperson]

Part of evaluating an application holistically is taking test scores into account, regardless of whether they are your personal strength. But of course it seems to get a little ridiculous at the high end of schools. The lowest median verbal for accepted students at UVA, over the past four years, was 98 percent.

(http://gsas.virginia.edu/sites/gsas.virginia.edu/files/Profile-English.pdf)

 

I didn't post this to start a dumb standardized test debate or commiseration group hug, but just to say that no matter what your application looks like you're never going to feel sure about anything. I'm dealing with the uncertainty by applying to funded masters programs. The admissions committees know exactly what to look for and, you know what? If they tell me I'm not top-20 phd material right now then I will believe them and the process that they follow every single year (which clearly works in general if not in every case). And if I don't get into any of my masters programs? I'll be able to let go because screw clinging to academic life or going into debt for the sake of my precious Ideas About Literature. If the people who really know what it takes don't see it in me, they're helping me out by letting me know!

 

That's kind of a good attitude.  But at the same time, you not getting in doesn't mean you don't have what it takes.  They probably have way more people who have what it takes than they can let in.  I think if it were as simple as rejection = you don't have what it takes, a lot of people could probably let it go more easily. I think I could, too.  But not getting in doesn't mean you don't have what it takes, which is evidenced by people getting in the second year.  Or people, in a single year, getting rejected by four schools, but into two.  If they had for whatever reason only applied to those four schools who rejected them, and got rejected by all schools they applied to, they might latch onto the false idea that they don't have what it takes.  

 

That said, I also think people shouldn't cling to it too much.  I'm pretty obsessed with applications and getting in (for now), but at the same time, I remember when I applied for an M.A. and didn't care whether I got in or not, and ended up getting in, I want to duplicate that "not caring" -- and truly not care.  I actually think sometimes that the good thing about not getting into a Ph.D. program is...hey, then I don't have to do a Ph.D.  It's a lot of goddamn work.  And not to say that a Ph.D. program isn't worth it, but honestly, there's a lot I can do on my own even without being IN a Ph.D. program.  It wouldn't be exactly the same (I know), but certainly I could do a good bit of what I want to do even without the formal structure.

[hj2012]

Part of evaluating an application holistically is taking test scores into account, regardless of whether they are your personal strength. But of course it seems to get a little ridiculous at the high end of schools. The lowest median verbal for accepted students at UVA, over the past four years, was 98 percent.

(http://gsas.virginia.edu/sites/gsas.virginia.edu/files/Profile-English.pdf)

 

 

So, to answer creffecreve's original question, it seems that it's useful to look at median GREs at schools and use that as a launching point. If the median verbal scores at UVA are indeed that high, then I can probably surmise that my scores will likely prevent me from being a competitive candidate at that particular school. Ditto for Columbia and Berkeley. 

 

However, I have heard that some top ranked programs (U Chicago, for example) don't really emphasize GRE scores at all...so maybe it's less about instituting arbitrary cut-offs based on rank (top-10, top-20) and looking at each school individually.

[Creffecreve]

Thanks for the answers! It's interesting that GRE scores came up as the focus of this discussion, because (while I would love to have done a couple of points better) it's really the subjective portions- the writing sample, especially- whose strength I can't figure out!

[champagne]

Oh, hey, crippling lack of confidence in my ability as an academic. It's so nice of you to drop in right as I'm filling out applications to graduate programs. If you would come back at a time when I'm more available, I'd be glad to tackle you then.

 

FUCK YOU. KTHNXBYE.

 

-champagne

[Creffecreve]

In more news about panic attacks, one of my letter writers told me that "graduate programs expect you to come in with a masters". Why are people such inconsiderate idiots? And is this true?

[BunnyWantsaPhD]

In more news about panic attacks, one of my letter writers told me that "graduate programs expect you to come in with a masters". Why are people such inconsiderate idiots? And is this true?

 

No, this is not true. At some places it might be truer than others, but actually the reverse can be true too (that a masters can hinder you). For example, word on the street is that U of Wisconsin prefers that you don't have a masters (and seems to not accept you if you do?). 

 

Just make your applications the best they can be. If you're concerned, you can always ask the schools. 

[semicolon2013]

It is absolutely not true.  Many successful applicants do not have an MA.

[toasterazzi]

Yeah there are some programs that require a MA and some that won't give you any credit if you already have a MA, but most I've looked at seem to fall somewhere in between where it's not required but having it might get you some course credit toward the PhD.

[ComeBackZinc]

It really depends. Some schools only consider students who already have an MA in hand; some schools prefer students they can raise up from a BA. Seek advice from people at the school.

[semicolon2013]

I feel so unready to apply.  Have been struggling with my SOP all day after receiving comments from a professor.  Can't squeeze everything I want to say into the word/page limits and still make it eloquent.  Also, Berkeley personal history.  Oh, why does it exist?

 

Just had to vent.

[hj2012]

I feel so unready to apply.  Have been struggling with my SOP all day after receiving comments from a professor.  Can't squeeze everything I want to say into the word/page limits and still make it eloquent.  Also, Berkeley personal history.  Oh, why does it exist?

 

Just had to vent.

 

I'm also struggling with Berkeley's personal history. Why, why, why??? I found an example personal history online (from a history phd applicant), and reading it just gave me more angst. 

[gatz]

Yeah it's so strange finally being at the final stages. Feels like I've been working towards this forever, albeit verrrrry gradually until now. I'm actually happy I have one deadline coming up a week or two before the rest so I have no choice but to put the final touches on the writing sample and general bits of the SoP at least. 

 

I don't think I've worked this hard in years. It is indeed possible to run one's literary-critical faculties on adrenaline (at least until an inevitable mid-december crash!)

[Katia_chan]

Oh, hey, crippling lack of confidence in my ability as an academic. It's so nice of you to drop in right as I'm filling out applications to graduate programs. If you would come back at a time when I'm more available, I'd be glad to tackle you then.

 

FUCK YOU. KTHNXBYE.

 

-champagne

 

Don't worry, you're not alone.  During a meeting about "hey I graduated a year ago but still want you to write a letter for me this is what I'm up to," after voicing my frustration with freshmen/teaching freshmen comp, my former advisor told me that "If you don't like freshmen, you might want to seriously consider whether you want to teach."

 

...possibly a valid point.  But are you *really* telling me this two weeks before I start submitting apps?  I'm set on my course, I want a PHD and to teach, and an identity/confidence crisis is *not* what I needed right now.  (I would take the advice more to heart if I weren't in a transitional period where I really want to get moving with my life but can't because I'm waiting on grad schools, which is possibly making me grumpy towards life).

 

She also told me to be competitive at Northwestern I had to be in the 99% for verbal GRE.  So that was fun... Chicago, it was nice while it lasted.

 

/rant. *goes back to staring at WS in despair*

[echo449]

Um I would point out that Northwestern themselves do not say that: http://www.english.northwestern.edu/graduate/prospective-students/phd_program.html. Their listed average is around 95%, so there's that. Don't panic yet!

[purpleperson]

I submitted apps to Rutgers and Northwestern in the past week and a half and pretty much think I have no shot.  I would say that I wish I could take it -- and my money -- back, but truthfully, even knowing how little shot I have at both, my state of mind during this application season is such that I don't want to wonder if I might have been that anomalous person who got in without a good GRE score.  Both schools are specialists in my field, and the whole "you never know" thing made me spring for their application fees.   I'm kind of disgusted with myself for even thinking "you never know," though, because the odds are really, really stacked against me.

 

Of course, I'm feeling particularly negative right now, because despite one of my advisors telling me to submit my writing sample to a certain journal (the prof thought it was good enough for publication), I heard back from that journal today, in response to my submission, that the "writing is too elementary.." (along with other criticisms that people wouldn't understand the context of unless i name the book, which I don't want to do).  It just reminds me that what I think is a good sample (and even one of my professors thinks is publication-worthy) could well be viewed as "too elementary" by the admissions committee.

 

I think this reinforces the subjectivity of it all, too, though.  People should apply to as many places as they can that interest them and that fit, because one school's trash is another's treasure.

Edited November 21, 2013 by purpleperson

[jazzyd]

She also told me to be competitive at Northwestern I had to be in the 99% for verbal GRE.  So that was fun... Chicago, it was nice while it lasted.

 

/rant. *goes back to staring at WS in despair*

 

That is 100% not true. I wasn't nearly in the 99% or a even 95% on my verbal. I took the GRE twice with my verbal being much higher the second time, but I think because of NW's deadline they only got the first GRE (in which my verbal was below 80% I believe...). So do not listen to that hogwash.

[champagne]

Of course, I'm feeling particularly negative right now, because despite one of my advisors telling me to submit my writing sample to a certain journal (the prof thought it was good enough for publication), I heard back from that journal today, in response to my submission, that the "writing is too elementary.." (along with other criticisms that people wouldn't understand the context of unless i name the book, which I don't want to do).  It just reminds me that what I think is a good sample (and even one of my professors thinks is publication-worthy) could well be viewed as "too elementary" by the admissions committee.

 

I think this reinforces the subjectivity of it all, too, though.  People should apply to as many places as they can that interest them and that fit, because one school's trash is another's treasure.

I think it might be important to point out, for discussion's sake, that adcomms might not be looking for the next Foucault or Butler in their applications. In fact, having that kind of dense language and thought in your writing sample might be more damning than anything. I've been told (which could be untrue as evidenced by some of the information disseminated by other faculty members) that adcomms are more looking for your ability to write well, succinctly, and elegantly. In reality, they merely need to see the trajectory of your ability rather than your current esoteric knowledge. It's their job to help you develop in that direction. Publications, meanwhile, only are concerned with your piece providing something new to the field. My first draft of my writing sample was way dense, and my professors advised me to strip it down, essentially make it more "elementary".

 

Of course, this could all be my professors just kindly telling me I'm a terrible writer, but I don't want you to think that rejection from a journal means rejection from an admissions committee.