What exactly made you a successful applicant?

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

For those who made it to grad. school:

Edited March 7, 2013 by Rose Egypt

[NowMoreSerious]

I think I need a category for "animal magnetism" or "good looks"

[champagne]

[sebastiansteddy]

You forgot luck.

[ZacharyBinks]

 

dat ass

[Porridge]

For me:

 

1 Focused SOP and WS (these two are both vital). The WS is in my field of interest.

2. LORs

3. GPA and Masters (I will shortly have 2)

4. GRE - Appalling Maths score. Good verbal. Meh writing.

 

My age: 35. gap year between under and graduate - 9 years. Professional expertise in the field I want to academically specialize in: 9years.

 

Acceptances: heaps, in top 10 and also excellent state schools. 

Rejections: None so far, although I cannot wait for that rejection from Buffalo.

 

 

Point is? Luck maybe, but also strategize. I did. And it paid off. Also do not let anyone tell you that you cannot do this. I had many people poo my desires and my response was a kind flick off.

[Gwendolyn]

Personal Statement

Letters of Rec

Conference Presentations

Staff connections

 

I'd also add undergrad awards/fellowships

 

I think my GRE and my GPA were solid, but there's a lot of solid GRE scores and GPAs out there which is why I think the other things counted far more. When I applied I really didn't believe any of my package was good enough and I didn't think I'd get in anywhere which makes me hesitant to include my writing sample, but it was apparently better than I thought.

 

I'm a pessimist.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Gwendolyn

[yellow.wallpaper]

I would have to say that being a minority, Latin woman, interested in pursuing graduate studies has helped me with funding considerations and the fact that my GRE wasn't that awesome, even if I knocked the TOEFL out of the park.

Just a consideration for many international students. (Even though I'm not actually, technically, international)

[Datatape]

[lisajay]

my grandma bears a striking resemblance to betty white. true story.

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

I'm really impressed with how much LORs are important, but I have a question: Do you think it matters more what is written in the letters about you, or it's more about who wrote the letters (i.e, well-known professors, professors from highly ranked schools...)?

[ComeBackZinc]

Both. 

[sebastiansteddy]

I'm really impressed with how much LORs are important, but I have a question: Do you think it matters more what is written in the letters about you, or it's more about who wrote the letters (i.e, well-known professors, professors from highly ranked schools...)?

 

None of my letters were written by incredibly famous researchers. I didn't get in anywhere like HYP, but I got in a few places. My undergrad institution's name did not help me at all. My GPA and GREs are both pretty good - good enough to get me through a first cut at most places, I suspect. On my statement and writing sample: I've NEVER worked so hard on anything in my life. I have no publications, and only one conference presentation. Beside some minor tutoring and coaching, I have no teaching experience. I do have an MA from what seems like a fairly respectable institution, based on the acceptances that our MA students tend to receive. I cast a wide net and applied to a variety of places varying in rank.

 

But.. let me reiterate. I have never ever worked as hard in my life on anything as I did on my statement and writing sample.

[ProfLorax]

I obviously didn't sit in the adcomm meetings, so I'm not 100% sure what helped me get in. However, I will tell you this: each and every professor who has emailed me to congratulate me on my acceptance either mentioned my writing sample or my statement of purpose. "I especially enjoyed reading your writing sample about X, Y, and Z." "I'm excited to see how our interests in X, Y, and Z align!" No one mentioned my GPA, conferences, or GRE scores; even if those did help me in some minor way, they weren't what "got me in."

 

Also, when University of Arizona called, the director said, "during the first round of application screening, we can always tell who will be our top applicants based on how long the letters of rec are." I imagine they also read the letters themselves, but it makes sense that the top applicants would be the type of students professors are really excited to talk about.

[Gwendolyn]

I'm really impressed with how much LORs are important, but I have a question: Do you think it matters more what is written in the letters about you, or it's more about who wrote the letters (i.e, well-known professors, professors from highly ranked schools...)?

Definitely what is written.If Professor Famous writes you a letter of recommendation that doesn't speak very highly of you, is very broad and generic, doesn't prove you why you're prepared for graduate study etc. then you're worse of than the student X who gets a very personal letter of rec from Professor Nobody that adequately speaks on behalf of her ability to do well in graduate study.

 

Not sure about the environment of departments in larger school, but I think I was lucky to go to a school with a smaller department because it allowed me to get to know the majority of professors in my department on a more personal level. There's one I stop to speak with every day and a handful I see at least once a week. I think building those connections over the course of undergrad helped me get strong letters of rec. Alternatively, I've spoken to people from bigger universities who maintain many of their professors are hard to reach.

Edited March 8, 2013 by Gwendolyn

[sebastiansteddy]

Definitely what is written.If Professor Famous writes you a letter of recommendation that doesn't speak very highly of you, is very broad and generic, doesn't prove you why you're prepared for graduate study etc.

 

Exactly! Someone on the adcomm where I am getting my MA told me an anecdote about this. An undergrad applicant from Yale had a LOR from Harold Bloom. The letter read something to the effect of "Dear Job Search Committee, I recommend _____ for this position. I have no doubts that _____ would be a great addition to your faculty. Sincerely, Harold Bloom." The blanks were not filled in... and he used his job LOR form, not his application LOR form... That student was not accepted.

[Datatape]

Exactly! Someone on the adcomm where I am getting my MA told me an anecdote about this. An undergrad applicant from Yale had a LOR from Harold Bloom. The letter read something to the effect of "Dear Job Search Committee, I recommend _____ for this position. I have no doubts that _____ would be a great addition to your faculty. Sincerely, Harold Bloom." The blanks were not filled in... and he used his job LOR form, not his application LOR form... That student was not accepted.

 

[lovinliterature]

Exactly! Someone on the adcomm where I am getting my MA told me an anecdote about this. An undergrad applicant from Yale had a LOR from Harold Bloom. The letter read something to the effect of "Dear Job Search Committee, I recommend _____ for this position. I have no doubts that _____ would be a great addition to your faculty. Sincerely, Harold Bloom." The blanks were not filled in... and he used his job LOR form, not his application LOR form... That student was not accepted.

 That's awful.  That actually makes me think very terribly of Harold Bloom rather than the student.   

 

As for the first question, what made us a successful applicant, I think it varies whether the school is a state school or a private school.  I believe that many state schools do have less-flexible standards for GRE scores and your GPA.  I think this is especially true for giving university-wide awards such as fellowships.  While writing samples and personal statements are still the most important element, I don't believe you can be given a big financial award without strong GREs and GPAs at a state school.  I recently received a big university-wide fellowship at a state school, and my award letter said something like this:  "We were very impressed with your writing sample which showed a deft handling of Novel X.  Combined with your decisive GPA and GRE scores, you have been awarded Gigantic Big Fellowship."  While good scores and GPAs do not get you in the door, I do believe they can keep you out of the door.

 

For example, two years ago I applied for PhD programs, and I was soundly rejected.  I still had a strong GPA and test scores, but my writing sample was less impressive, and my statement of purpose was unfocused.  Additionally, my LOR's were from professors at a small liberal arts college, which was problematic.   For me, I believe that every part of my application was strong this time.  Regardless, I still received quite a bit of rejection this time, too.  You also have to apply very widely because luck is a major determining factor.  This is a tough process, and I think applications need to have as many strong points as they can.  

[ComeBackZinc]

I don't disagree with anything that's been said here. I will note that the notion that connections aren't important will always be voiced more strongly here than the alternative, because it's what people want to hear. There is not a single competitive human process where connections don't matter at all. And, again: we're talking about cohorts, perhaps, of 6 or 7 people. If one or two of them take advantage of even subtle networking, that has a big impact on the composition of the cohort and the chances of those trying to get in.

 

It's not corruption, and it's not an explicit quid pro quo. Nobody says, "this student is garbage, but let him into the program because you owe me." What people do say, all the time, is "I know this student is brilliant and hardworking and you two will work really well together." That matters. It just does. I know it's uncomfortable to think about, but it does. You can only control the things you can control. But I hear on this board so often that your undergrad institution doesn't matter and that your recommenders don't matter. And that's just not true. It just isn't.

 

That's my spiel. 

[Swagato]

I don't disagree with anything that's been said here. I will note that the notion that connections aren't important will always be voiced more strongly here than the alternative, because it's what people want to hear. There is not a single competitive human process where connections don't matter at all. And, again: we're talking about cohorts, perhaps, of 6 or 7 people. If one or two of them take advantage of even subtle networking, that has a big impact on the composition of the cohort and the chances of those trying to get in.

 

It's not corruption, and it's not an explicit quid pro quo. Nobody says, "this student is garbage, but let him into the program because you owe me." What people do say, all the time, is "I know this student is brilliant and hardworking and you two will work really well together." That matters. It just does. I know it's uncomfortable to think about, but it does. You can only control the things you can control. But I hear on this board so often that your undergrad institution doesn't matter and that your recommenders don't matter. And that's just not true. It just isn't.

 

That's my spiel. 

I will echo this rather strongly. I recently learnt that one of my professors had an extensive talk with one of my POIs. I have no idea what went on there, but I can't imagine that it had no influence (one way or another) whatsoever.

 

Also, yes undergraduate (and MA-granting, if you are entering with an MA) do matter. As does the names of the people writing your letter (though an exceptionally personal/insightful letter from a lesser-"known" professor could work too). 

[Datatape]

 That's awful.  That actually makes me think very terribly of Harold Bloom rather than the student.

 

You should think terribly of Harold Bloom.  He is a misogynistic narcissist.  He is not even in their English Department.  They gave him his own department of Humanities because no one could frackin' stand him.

[dazedandbemused]

I don't disagree with anything that's been said here. I will note that the notion that connections aren't important will always be voiced more strongly here than the alternative, because it's what people want to hear. There is not a single competitive human process where connections don't matter at all. And, again: we're talking about cohorts, perhaps, of 6 or 7 people. If one or two of them take advantage of even subtle networking, that has a big impact on the composition of the cohort and the chances of those trying to get in.

 

It's not corruption, and it's not an explicit quid pro quo. Nobody says, "this student is garbage, but let him into the program because you owe me." What people do say, all the time, is "I know this student is brilliant and hardworking and you two will work really well together." That matters. It just does. I know it's uncomfortable to think about, but it does. You can only control the things you can control. But I hear on this board so often that your undergrad institution doesn't matter and that your recommenders don't matter. And that's just not true. It just isn't.

 

That's my spiel. 

 

Honestly, I don't think people disagree with you because they don't want to believe it. I think enough of us got into good schools from with no-name undergraduate degrees and unknown LOR writers that we just can't believe it. Yes, if you have connections, your chances are probably much more heightened; I don't think anyone would deny that. I know a student who got into Columbia and she thinks that her MA advisor's connection to the DGS really helped her. But the idea that a lack of connections may make an app weaker just doesn't sit well with me.

[ComeBackZinc]

Oh, hey, listen: I would never say you can't get in without those connections, and I would never say that a lack of connections can't be overcome. I know for a fact that that isn't true. I'm saying that it matters some of the time, and that because of the small numbers we're talking about here, small differences have major impacts. I have read on this board, all the time, "It's all about fit." No, it isn't. Fit is exceptionally important. But to say that it is all fit is neither true nor productive. There's a weird sense in which people want to have it both ways on this board: they want to talk about the process as simultaneously difficult to understand and alchemical and mysterious, and simultaneously deny all the many ways in which success is out of the hands of the candidates.

 

My natural disposition is to be supportive, positive, and encouraging. But my discretion tells me that pessimism can be more valuable. To take the opinions on this board at face value, everyone will get into every school, everyone will get a job, everything will turn out great for everybody.... That's not realistic, and it's kind of cruel, in the long run. I want to be kind and supportive, but I also know that positivity can be distorting. I just hope that everyone runs everything read here through a filter of necessary, defensive realism. That's all.

[ProfLorax]

I think the problem isn't the tension between optimistic and pessimism in this process; the problem is that people come onto gradcafe in the hopes of discovering some "absolute truth" about the application cycle. The fact is, there are no absolute truths, and that makes applicants uncomfortable. Some of us benefited from connections; some did not. Some applicants loved their unfunded MA experience; others would never even consider attending an unfunded MA program. A handful of us had stellar GRE scores, but many of us had just above average numbers.

 

The awkward, uncomfortable truth is that there are no absolutes in our field, no one factor that will guarantee acceptance into a PhD program. Our experiences are our own truths, and they may not apply to everybody applying to grad school. 

 

So, what can one do to improve their chances? Make sure that every aspect of the application is strong. Work consistently with advisors on the statement of purpose and writing sample. Build the CV. Study for the GRE's. Talk to people at conferences. Research the hell out of potential programs. Pour every ounce of energy, focus, and time possible into the application. GradCafe is a great tool to build community, connect with potential colleagues, vent, and celebrate. But it is not the place where anyone will find the secret recipe to getting into grad school-- because no such recipe exists.

Edited March 8, 2013 by proflorax

[sebastiansteddy]

 Pour every ounce of energy, focus, and time possible into the application. 

 

As I have stated, I have NEVER worked so harder on anything in my life than I did on my WS and PS. While it still wasn't enough to get me into Penn, Chicago, etc., I have to believe that this explains my success at places like Ohio State, Riverside, Irvine, etc. 

 

(And I am considering my wait-list status at Irvine a success.)

Edited March 8, 2013 by sebastiansteddy