Fall 2014 applicants??

[MissHavishslam]

Don't underestimate the cost of the application fees, transcript requests, GRE scores, and assorted, guys. I understand the logic of applying to a ton of schools, but I think that it has to be sensibly balanced with recognizing that this process can cost in the thousands of dollars.

 

Totally agree. I spent at least $900 when I first applied and that was when taking the GRE only cost $60 and now it's $175?! Plus the $25 to send it to each school? I think I actually spent more money sending documents than I did paying the application fees.

[bluecheese]

It can cost thousands of dollars--that said, even if you spent 4k now, it might make the difference between a 13k stipend and a 25k stipend over the next 5-6 years (not to mention job prospects after that). It's expensive, but it is seriously worth it.

 

Even if you had to apply 5 years in a row because you didn't get in anywhere (at 4k a year... which is like 25 programs or more)--one year stipend difference between certain top schools could potentially offset that. 5 x 4,000 = 20k. I've never heard of anyone applying 5 years in a row, but what I am saying is that paying for more schools (assuming you have time to fill out all the applications) is worth the time.

 

There are a couple of schools who have stipends in the 30k-ish range, and there are a couple of schools in the 10k-ish range in the top 50. That's around 20k difference in stipend for one year, and we're talking about 5-6 years over the duration of a program. 4k during the application season is a drop in the bucket. Work extra hours over the summer, put it on a credit card, take out a loan, whatever--it's worth it.

 

Also, if you can't afford 4k many schools have fee waivers.

Edited March 18, 2013 by bluecheese

[toasterazzi]

Totally agree. I spent at least $900 when I first applied and that was when taking the GRE only cost $60 and now it's $175?! Plus the $25 to send it to each school? I think I actually spent more money sending documents than I did paying the application fees.

 

Ugh the cost to send the scores to each school is the part that gets me the most. I don't plan to apply to like 20 schools, but I do want to hit a decent amount. Guess I know what a good portion of my financial aid for the fall will be going toward.

[ComeBackZinc]

I don't think I disagree with your general point. I will say, though-- if both your first and second round of applications are washouts, I think you should seriously consider choosing a different life path. I'll be the first to say that this process is fickle. But you have to remain open to the reality of the signal schools are sending you. (I say this, by the way, as someone who washed out completely his first time around.) Just my opinion.

 

Edit: that's in reply to bluecheese.

Edited March 18, 2013 by ComeBackZinc

[Taco Superior]

I don't think I disagree with your general point. I will say, though-- if both your first and second round of applications are washouts, I think you should seriously consider choosing a different life path. I'll be the first to say that this process is fickle. But you have to remain open to the reality of the signal schools are sending you. (I say this, by the way, as someone who washed out completely his first time around.) Just my opinion.

 

Edit: that's in reply to bluecheese.

 

I wouldn't be so hasty--unless you think you've put together the best app you can, there's no way to improve it, and you've applied to 10-15 schools already. This is my third cycle and the first was really a throw away cause the writing sample was old and irrelevant and I skipped the math section when I took the GRE. Then it took me awhile to write an appropriate sample (been out of school for 10 years so I had to find what would be relevant). Also had to figure out how to sell my "nontraditional" status in the SOP etc. Anyway, that's my two cents.

[ComeBackZinc]

That's a good point, and of course everybody knows their own situation best. I guess I'm just saying that I think rejections should force you to really deeply consider your strengths and weaknesses, and part of repeated rejections should be to wonder if your resume has too many red flags to gain admission somewhere. I'm just always looking for ways for people to be a little less romantic about this process.

[midnight]

I wouldn't be so hasty--unless you think you've put together the best app you can, there's no way to improve it, and you've applied to 10-15 schools already. This is my third cycle and the first was really a throw away cause the writing sample was old and irrelevant and I skipped the math section when I took the GRE. Then it took me awhile to write an appropriate sample (been out of school for 10 years so I had to find what would be relevant). Also had to figure out how to sell my "nontraditional" status in the SOP etc. Anyway, that's my two cents.

 

Yeah, I don't think applying three times is unheard of nor is it indicative of a person's abilities or potential.

 

I don't think admissions is ever firmly rooted in reality. The reality is that one year an applicant may not make the cut, but another year she may be perfect for several programs--even if her application isn't significantly different or improved! And all it takes is one acceptance.

[Fishbucket]

I've revised my opinion of multiple re-applications. The only way that applying a million times in a row would ever really be a terrible waste is if you had stopped living in the meanwhile. But trying repeatedly for a very difficult goal is just what you have to do to achieve a very difficult goal. Almost all of my professors and TAs had to apply more than once before they were accepted to grad school.

[ComeBackZinc]

I don't know, you guys. I know how positive the vibe is around here. But the reality is that many people are ill-suited to being a grad student, who don't have the minimal qualifications. Again, I washed out my first time before a long break, so I know the value of multiple application seasons. But to hear people talk in this space, everyone who fails to get in is someone who deserves to and will in due time. And that just doesn't jibe, not with the realities of a system where the significant majority will be rejected from most prominent schools, nor with the basic notion of quality of applicants and programs. People talk all the time about how so-and-so is a great applicant or such-and-such is a great, selective program. If those things are true, then it necessarily has to be true that not everyone is cut out for this. I'm not saying don't apply multiple times. I am saying that after a failed application season, you should seriously take stock and consider whether your rejections are in fact indicative of the quality of the application you can realistically send out. Look, you become a much better applicant your second time around, I believe that. And of course we have plenty of evidence of people who succeed after multiple applications. But to not consider if in fact you are being rejected because you are unqualified is not helpful.

 

If you want to believe in the idea that getting in connotes at least some kind of excellence, you have to be willing to entertain the obverse, which is that not everyone is excellent. That's all I'm saying. 

[Fishbucket]

If you want to believe in the idea that getting in connotes at least some kind of excellence, you have to be willing to entertain the obverse, which is that not everyone is excellent. That's all I'm saying. 

 

I don't believe either statement is 100% true. But then again, what is truth?

[midnight]

I think there's validity to what you're saying, CBZ. Not everyone is qualified, just like not everyone should get a gold medal just for showing up.

 

However, as others have noted, applying to grad school and living one's life are not mutually exclusive. I don't think there's inherent harm in trying three times (aside from a hit to one's pocketbook and some of the stress of waiting, of course). And I do think many people wash out the first time not because they aren't qualified but because they don't fully understand the intricacies of the process.

[bluecheese]

I applied to 20+ schools and received offers from 9 including UW-Madison, Ann Arbor, Brown, and NYU - I'm glad I had the option to choose between these schools, and I was able to take the one with the best all around package for me (faculty, teaching, living, stipend, etc.)

 

And any amount of money I spent in application fees has been more than offset by the aid package I received.

 

Also, I wasn't actually saying that someone should apply 5 years in a row--I was simply pointing out the the difference in financial aid packages between schools can often offset the application fees several fold (just in terms of one year of funding... literally, the stipend can range from anywhere from 10k to 30k--that means it might be 20k more for ONE year... so, what's 4k in application fees?)

Edited March 18, 2013 by bluecheese

[MissHavishslam]

Also, another thing to realize is that depending on the year you apply, it's really a crapshoot. English departments have an ebb and flow cycle to them. If the previous year, they accepted a large group of students with a British focus, then chances are that they are going to be more likely to accept students with an American focus the next year. It is so that they keep students that have multiple focuses in their department at all times. This doesn't go for all programs but it definitely does in the programs where they accept only 3-5 students a year. It might be optimistic but I feel like if you know that this is what you want to do then you are going to be willing to do everything in your power to get there--no matter the cost. Of course, my mind may change if I strike out again this year...so we will see...

 

And if it helps at all, the only people who I know that were accepted to a PhD program on their first try were people that were in MA programs that pushed their terminal MAs through to the PhD. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions but I have yet to meet one personally.

Edited March 18, 2013 by MissHavishslam

[ComeBackZinc]

I agree with everything you guys are saying. I guess I just think that, sometimes, there needs to be a voice of pessimism, given the financial and (especially) emotional investment.

[Fishbucket]

In my personal case, I've been thinking a lot about whether or not I should stick this out and keep trying. I've spoken with a lot of my professors about this. They keep pushing me to re-apply. I find that very encouraging, since I figure that the people I'm asking for advice and recommendations would sooner tell me to give up and leave them alone, than stuff me full of false hopes and waste everyone's time.

 

If there's really a question of whether re-applying is a good idea, don't you guys think that there's some objective real world sources that can help you sort this out? Doesn't it seem like professors would be good barometers for this kind of thing?  

[MissHavishslam]

I agree with everything you guys are saying. I guess I just think that, sometimes, there needs to be a voice of pessimism, given the financial and (especially) emotional investment.

 

Of course! I see it as less pessimism and more realistic. Everyone needs to go in with the mind set that throughout this whole process you will more than likely get more rejections than acceptances. But in the end the payoff is worth the emotional distress.

 

Fishbucket--yes! I think professors are a great barometer. They wouldn't be pushing you to reapply if they thought it was hopeless.I felt the same way when I got my slew of rejections. I was embarrassed to tell them but they were very supportive, told me I have a great project in mind, and set up a meeting to plan strategy for next year. All in all, I hope they wouldn't be pushing us for no reason. At least, I've seen profs turn down people for recs when they didn't find their work strong enough yet.

Edited March 18, 2013 by MissHavishslam

[toasterazzi]

I think I'm aiming to apply to around 7-10 schools. That sounds like a decent amount that won't destroy my bank account or make me want to throw my computer from having to fill in the same information over and over again on various applications.

[MissHavishslam]

I think I'm aiming to apply to around 7-10 schools. That sounds like a decent amount that won't destroy my bank account or make me want to throw my computer from having to fill in the same information over and over again on various applications.

 

That is a good amount! I was told that 8-12 programs is good for English! I think I'm gonna shoot for 12 maybe more just because I want to be extra extra safe--if that is a thing

Edited March 18, 2013 by MissHavishslam

[toasterazzi]

That is a good amount! I was told that 8-12 programs is good for English! I think I'm gonna shoot for 12 maybe more just because I want to be extra extra safe--if that is a thing

 

Haha I understand the sentiment. It's definitely likely that it'll be more like 10 for me than 7 because I'll probably have a nervous freak out if I do anything less than that.

[cbttcher]

So... Since all my applications have turned into official rejections, I'm going to join this thread. I'll definitely apply again next year.

[toasterazzi]

So... Since all my applications have turned into official rejections, I'm going to join this thread. I'll definitely apply again next year.

First, sorry about that.

 

Second, welcome to the party! Have you thought about what you plan to change for the next round?

[champagne]

If there's really a question of whether re-applying is a good idea, don't you guys think that there's some objective real world sources that can help you sort this out? Doesn't it seem like professors would be good barometers for this kind of thing?  

 

Definitely. If anybody has the acumen and the motivation for telling you if applying is a bad idea, it will be your professors. 

 

I do agree with the assertion that there needs to be a measure of reality taken with every potential English/Lit PH.D. student. I also think that everyone has had the crush of reality laid upon them by their nascent academic influences. If not, it's high time to have that conversation.

 

Obviously, every situation is completely different, but I just feel like my timeline and current situation only allows for one season of applications. If I wash out, then I wash out. There are other ways I can help the human race. There just aren't ones with which I feel so inherently connected.  

[bluecheese]

If you can afford it, you should apply to 15+. I know the standard amount is 10-12. That said, supposing you have the time fo modify the fit paragraphs and so on, applying to more programs will put you in a better position when the dust settles. Hell, supposing you have a really solid SOP (show it to faculty, etc.) you should apply to 20 if you can. All it really entails is refiguring the fit paragraphs and filling out relatively similar online forms. We're talking about 5 years of your life at the very least--and more, if you consider job prospects after the PhD.

[Lycidas]

I would suggest that you apply to more than 2 schools. It will not be that much extra work beyond all the work you are going to surely do to prepare your SOP and WS (and getting those rec letters) as it is.

Here's part of my reasoning. If you get into either Berkeley or Oxford, congrats, you can ride off into the sunset. But if you don't get into either, I don't think you've really learned anything about your materials since those two schools are super elite and selective, meaning there's sometimes more randomness to it. I'd apply to like at least 4, and spread them among the tiers so that you have a better barometer of where you are at no matter what happens that application season.

 

Point taken; I think this is fair. Money is a serious issue for me, but that's no excuse since I can apply for fee waivers. I'll look around for some other schools to possibly apply to. I've actually spent some time looking for mid-tier schools with faculty who have interests close to mine, and it's been a struggle. The only one I've found is UI-Chicago, and their website states pretty explicitly that only those with an MA should bother applying. So it's back to googling/talking with my professors. 

[bluecheese]

NYU is super good for history of the book stuff.