What exactly made you a successful applicant?

[practical cat]

I would recommend dropping by the Political Science boards and reading what some of the faculty have to say under "Faculty Perspectives." The consensus seems to be that the selection-bias of the LOR process renders the whole thing kind of pointless. A letter from someone the admissions committee has seen letters from MEANS more than one from someone they don't know but it's hard to say if they MATTER more.

[Gauche]

Just for the record, I didn't get accepted into any doctoral programs, but I did get a fully funded offer for an MA program. The only terrible thing about my application was my GRE scores. They were abysmal, and I'm not just saying that because I'm hard on myself. Trust me, they were bad. I'm convinced that those scores were what kept me out of PhD programs.

 

I applied with a GPA of 3.9, which slightly dropped after fall grades. My writing sample was decent, but of course I believe it could have used more work. My statement of purpose was the best I could have made it (especially after at least 8 drafts). My undergrad is a state school, so no prestige there. I have no publications to speak of. I don't believe any of my professors have connections to the MA program that accepted me, but three of them did have connections to a few doctoral programs I applied to.

 

Probably the most outstanding part of my app was my letters of recommendation. I visited professors during their office hours as a freshman and so they got to know me early on as an undergraduate. It really helped knowing that I had quite a few professors to choose from if I ever needed letters of recommendation, but it was hard selecting only three. In the end, I chose two from my field, and the director of our university honors program (who also happened to be an English professor but not from my field). 

 

I also started presenting at graduate student conferences as a junior, which probably didn't count for much, but it does show initiative and a desire to contribute to my field rather than just write papers to turn in for a grade.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Gauche

[NowMoreSerious]

On the topic of rec letters, I do know one of my rec letters was 8 pages long.

[aGiRlCalLeDApPlE]

On the topic of rec letters, I do know one of my rec letters was 8 pages long.

Do you think they read all of it? It's almost a writing sample. And do you think it's appropriate to tell my rec. writers to write as long as they can? I didn't see my letters and I don't think they were so special. 

[hidalgo]

A school told me that I was being considered more on my compatibility with faculty than anything else. It's an easy way to pick through applicants who are all very similar in terms of grades, experience, etc. So, I'd trigger every personal statement toward that and if you have a writing sample that draws heavily from the work of a current professor somewhere, apply to that school.

[katja454]

And do you think it's appropriate to tell my rec. writers to write as long as they can? I didn't see my letters and I don't think they were so special. 

 

This is just my gut reaction, but I wouldn't advise your professors to do so. If they have a lot of really amazing things to say about you, then they'll write them, however many pages that ends up being. However, they could write equally amazing things about you and not write a book, so why pressure them to do so? I didn't see my letters either, so I can't speak for exactly what they said or how long they were. All that I did was make sure I asked professors to write my letters who I knew very well and had worked very closely with and talked with each of them about my plans for the PhD

[Gwendolyn]

A school told me that I was being considered more on my compatibility with faculty than anything else. It's an easy way to pick through applicants who are all very similar in terms of grades, experience, etc. So, I'd trigger every personal statement toward that and if you have a writing sample that draws heavily from the work of a current professor somewhere, apply to that school.

 

I'll definitely second this. I've heard this advice over and over again since I became interested in pursuing a PhD around sophomore year. Always write about the professors you'd like to work with and state how you fit with them.

 

Very basic example:

 

...Professor One  has conducted research concerning X, X, and X which informs my own interest in exploring X. Professor Two's work with X and X theory intersects particularly well with my own research on X . I hope to work under Professor Three to use his expertise on X and X to further my exploration of X.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Gwendolyn

[Laokoon]

I'll definitely second this. I've heard this advice over and over again since I became interested in pursuing a PhD around sophomore year. Always write about the professors you'd like to work with and state how you fit with them.

Very basic example:

...Professor One has conducted research concerning X, X, and X which informs my own interest in exploring X. Professor Two's work with X and X theory intersects particularly well with my own research on X . I hope to work under Professor Three to use his expertise on X and X to further my exploration of X.

I think this is exactly right. Any interesting archival work, conferences, languages etc. are what make you a strong applicant to English programs, NOT why you are likely to be admitted to a specific program with specific (intellectual) resources.

[jazzyd]

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.

 

Same. I never had my test scores mentioned (as I've mentioned before my subject at least was pretty abysmal) and while one professor did mention "So-and-so said so many great things about you," he was really the only one who had any sort of relationship with any of my letter writers. So the programs I did get into it was mainly my SOP and sample that sold me. 

 

I had an opportunity to get pretty close with my letter writers, if only because I had known I wanted to pursue graduate study for so long. But none of them are what I would call "famous" in the field (yet) and all of them are relatively young (all are now associates, but they weren't when we met). So while I don't doubt they wrote wonderful and specific things about my progress and preparation as a student since they've read my writing for so long, if LORs are all about "prestige" I definitely was lacking in that area. 

Edited March 9, 2013 by jazzy dubois

[KeelyMK]

On the continued subject of LoR writers, I don't know how "famous" my reccommenders were, but I was lucky enough to have my faculty mentor for a multi-year independent research project also happen to be the Asst Dean of Humanities, so even if they didn't recognize the name (which they probably did anyway) the title may have helped too.

Generally I made a huge point for myself to always go to office hours and really make myself known to potential letter-writers so they would have personal things to say about me. It's a challenge to get enough rapport with people in 2 years as a transfer student so my advice would just be to network early and often, but we all know that for the most part.

I also purposely got 4 LoRs instead of 3, and submitted them even when the apps advised against it. I just wanted to hedge my bets in case somebody turned theirs in late (which happened) or not at all.

[NowMoreSerious]

Do you think they read all of it? It's almost a writing sample. And do you think it's appropriate to tell my rec. writers to write as long as they can? I didn't see my letters and I don't think they were so special. 

I don't think they initially read all of it, but when the schools started narrowing down I am sure they read all of our materials multiple times. I recently did welcome day at UCSB and got the impression that several people read my Writing Sample and SoP more than one time, which, by the way, was terrifying.

[Swagato]

When I emailed my POI, and was informed that I had a very good chance of being receiving an offer, my stated research interests and writing sample were specifically singled out. I've been reading over that crap carefully, as I fully expect those to be brought up in specifics when I visit. @_@

[Grev]

A school told me that I was being considered more on my compatibility with faculty than anything else. It's an easy way to pick through applicants who are all very similar in terms of grades, experience, etc. So, I'd trigger every personal statement toward that and if you have a writing sample that draws heavily from the work of a current professor somewhere, apply to that school.

 

 

I'll definitely second this. I've heard this advice over and over again since I became interested in pursuing a PhD around sophomore year. Always write about the professors you'd like to work with and state how you fit with them.

 

Very basic example:

 

...Professor One  has conducted research concerning X, X, and X which informs my own interest in exploring X. Professor Two's work with X and X theory intersects particularly well with my own research on X . I hope to work under Professor Three to use his expertise on X and X to further my exploration of X.

 

 

I think these two are on to something.  I know in my case a big part of why I was accepted was compatible research interests with my PoI.  I'm into a sort of obscure sub-field, and when I mentioned this to one of my LoR writers, he suggested I look into working with Professor So-n-so.  I got in touch with her to see if she'd be interested in my (very roughly outlined) research project, and she was very exited about it.  In my SoP I outlined my proposed project, and then talked about how that professor's research and interests would support my own.  This was all backed up with a writing sample presenting research in the field, and (I presume) at least one of the LoRs.

 

The up shot was an acceptance and a lot of enthusiastic positive contact with the department and my PoI.

 

TL;DR: Connections with LoR writers help find the right PoI, and an interested PoI is a strong ally with the admissions committee/university.  The whole package is connected.

[practical cat]

for what it's worth, in some of my SOPs i mentioned people by name, and others i didn't. i was accepted at 1 and waitlisted at 1 where i didn't name specific people, and accepted to 1 where i did name specific people. i don't think it's so much the mention of specific names as it is implicitly demonstrating your knowledge of the dept and how your interests make you an excellent fit. 

And for what it's worth here, my three wait lists are from the schools where I didn't mention names and explicitly explain fit because I thought the fit spoke for itself. The rest, I did and, well. I also do not think that the difference between acceptance and wait list was in the absence of a fit paragraph, that difference was clearly in a rough patch in my writing sample and a relatively light undergrad record in the field. I thought that fit paragraphs were bull then and I feel it even more strongly now. Adcomms know how we fit far better than we do; we're working in a relative information desert.

[sebastiansteddy]

For what it's worth, my first time applying I did not include any fit paragraphs that mentioned specific names. I was only accepted to MA programs that go around. This time, I included a fit paragraph in every SOP. Again, I was not accepted to any place like HYP, but I view this application season as a success.

 

Also, I think certain schools react to fit paragraphs differently. I have heard (through the grapevine, so to speak) that Michigan tends to prefer applicants who do NOT list specific professors. But, who knows?

[Grev]

for what it's worth, in some of my SOPs i mentioned people by name, and others i didn't. i was accepted at 1 and waitlisted at 1 where i didn't name specific people, and accepted to 1 where i did name specific people. i don't think it's so much the mention of specific names as it is implicitly demonstrating your knowledge of the dept and how your interests make you an excellent fit. 

 

I thought that fit paragraphs were bull then and I feel it even more strongly now. Adcomms know how we fit far better than we do; we're working in a relative information desert.

 

For what it's worth, my first time applying I did not include any fit paragraphs that mentioned specific names. I was only accepted to MA programs that go around. This time, I included a fit paragraph in every SOP. Again, I was not accepted to any place like HYP, but I view this application season as a success.

 

I like to think there's a subtle difference between a name-dropping paragraph, and a fit paragraph.  The first one might be a bit more "[insert PoI name here]" and "[university name]" there, the second talks about your research interests and how they should, obviously, line up with things the department is doing.  Adcoms for lit programs are guaranteed to be able to tell the difference.

 

The Biggest Application Hack I Know: Form a relationship with the professors you're likely to be working with in your MA/PhD.  Pitch a project to them, and get feedback before you even start the application process.  Only talk to professors that are doing something you genuinely find interesting, and build a relationship from that shared interest.  THAT was the biggest thing I did, and I did it when I applied to both MA and PhD programs.  Then when I mentioned someone's name in the SoP, it wasn't just name dropping Fancy Professor McAwesome, it was saying "Hey, go talk to Dr. So-n-so next time you see her in the mail room and ask her about this kid from Oregon.  She thinks I'm cool."  It's a bit like having a secret extra LoR, except it's a faculty member who may even have some influence on what kind of funding you get offered.

 

As a bonus, I feel super confident about my decision because I already know I have an ally in the department, and we've talked about the program and the field.

[practical cat]

I like to think there's a subtle difference between a name-dropping paragraph, and a fit paragraph.  The first one might be a bit more "[insert PoI name here]" and "[university name]" there, the second talks about your research interests and how they should, obviously, line up with things the department is doing.  Adcoms for lit programs are guaranteed to be able to tell the difference.

 .

It seems to me that the latter is just... an SOP? I'm not sure what's happening in that document if it's not talking about research interests and their relation to the field. I just don't think you need to list specific names and projects to accomplish that.

But, sebastiansteddy's comment about Michigan is interesting in light of my own views on this. Maybe that's true -- I was certainly not told to do it.

[Gwendolyn]

I hope not to sound redundant, but I firmly believe it's important to write about program fit. 

 

For what it's worth, I have to attend an annual conference for one of my undergrad programs (although there are several optional events throughout the year) and the majority of fellows in this region are from emory, rice, and wustl so we'll typically have graduate admission counselors from those schools, but we'll also have graduate admissions counselors come from other prominent fellow schools from other regions sometimes  (when I say "prominent" I mean schools who produce a large number of fellows) to speak and answer questions about admissions as well (mainly ucla, university of chicago and northwestern, but I've seen harvard, dartmouth, and stanford and a few others). Over the course of two or so years it's been explicitly stressed over and over again from admissions counselors from these schools to make sure to write about how you fit into a program, but here's where some people might err. Don't just pick out professors blindsighted -- ASK if professors are willing to work with more students during the next school year. ASK if professors are interested in your research. ASK if professors think your research aligns with theirs before you apply.

 

Writing about your fit means absolutely nothing if your POI can't work with you (they might already be advising more students than they can manage or  they might be on a sabbatical by the time you enter etc.), if your POI doesn't have interest in what you're doing (their research interests do change - one professor at OSU told me he wasn't doing something I inquired about anymore, BUT he was interested in working with some of my other interest areas).

 

This is why it helps to list 3-4 people you can work with in your letter (hopefully you've at least contacted the primary 1 or 2). If you can only name one person you want to work with and he's not taking any more students, then you're out. If you've convincingly written in two or three others you can see yourself working with then, if admitted, you'll have access to Professor of Choice and you'll prove that if something happens to Professor of Choice (they leave the school, they retire, they die... all realities), you'll still have other people in the program who can guide you. Appealing to 1 professor is like applying to the professor. Picking a few reveals your interest in the department rather than just one POI. 

 

A few other things I've taken away:

 

1. Write about why you want to study at the school; what resources does the school have that will contribute to your research? Is there a special collection or a special institute? Is the location particularly beneficial to your research? Are there local off campus resources?

2. Explicitly state what you want to contribute to the academy as a whole. What conversations can you join? What new are you adding?

3. Tell what academic experiences prepare you for graduate study (avoid too much extraneous personal information unless requested). 

4. Know what you want to research, but be sure to indicate that you are a young scholar so your interests are evolving (this illustrates your flexibility and makes those professors with changing interests more inclined to work with you). 

[sebastiansteddy]

But, sebastiansteddy's comment about Michigan is interesting in light of my own views on this. Maybe that's true -- I was certainly not told to do it.

 

I think there's a difference between name dropping and indicating how a professor's work has and will continue to guide your own research. That is what I explained in each of my SOPs. Also, I did not contact a single professor before applying, unless I had a genuine question about the program or their research. I was advised not to. Again, no HYP for me, but still a successful application season, in my book. 

 

I was rejected from Michigan, and I did list specific faculty in my SOP. Perhaps they'd rather admit students who are a fit with the department as a whole, as opposed to a fit with 3-4 professors who may or may not remain with the department during that student's time in the program? It is entirely reasonable. 

[practical cat]

I think there's a difference between name dropping and indicating how a professor's work has and will continue to guide your own research. That is what I explained in each of my SOPs. Also, I did not contact a single professor before applying, unless I had a genuine question about the program or their research. I was advised not to. Again, no HYP for me, but still a successful application season, in my book. 

 

I was rejected from Michigan, and I did list specific faculty in my SOP. Perhaps they'd rather admit students who are a fit with the department as a whole, as opposed to a fit with 3-4 professors who may or may not remain with the department during that student's time in the program? It is entirely reasonable. 

I think what I have been trying somewhat unsuccessfully to say is that FOR ME, when I was at the point where I was naming how specific professors have/will continue to shape my work, I was at a point where the fit was such that it was only tenuous connections with a handful (sometimes even many!) specific professors rather than what the department is as a whole. FOR ME, that just didn't work. I honestly don't think naming professors actually matters -- I certainly do not think I got rejected for doing it and I doubt anyone else was either -- but I think the SOP as a whole conveys fit and some people are more successful than others at naming specifics and some are more successful with broad strokes. I want to be at a school with a strong intradepartmental focus -- I don't want to work with just the modernists or whatever -- and I think where I went awry this cycle and where my SOP reflected that is in not being able to express this prior to, like, two weeks ago. Like the application as a whole, the SOP isn't so much about what you say as about what you show (and I think there are many different ways to pull this off). So, yes, I agree with what you are saying and I VERY strongly suspect you may be on target with Michigan.

[dazedandbemused]

I didn't put any names of professors in my SOP on the advice of the DGS at one of my schools and my current academic advisor. Like girl who wears glasses, I saw myself as fitting into a department, rather than choosing to work with particular people. Maybe that's why I wasn't as successful as some others, but I'm ok with it. I think both of my acceptances were receptive to that. It really depends on what kind of department you're working with, I guess.

Edited March 10, 2013 by dazedandbemused

[sebastiansteddy]

And to reply to Gwendolyn, I named AT LEAST 3 professors I wanted to work with at each program. If a program had less than 2 or 3 people I wanted to work with, then I couldn't see it being a fit for my interests. At most places I applies, it was difficult to pick only 3 professors I could see as potential advisors.

 

ALSO - I am wondering if there might be some sort of a difference for applicants coming in with an MA versus those entering with a BA. With an MA, your research interests should be somewhat focused at this point, perhaps more so than those coming in with a BA. Perhaps with an MA it is more reasonable to point out specific faculty with whom you could see yourself working than it may be for those entering with a BA, who have more time to grow their research focus? Just food for thought.

[dazedandbemused]

ALSO - I am wondering if there might be some sort of a difference for applicants coming in with an MA versus those entering with a BA. With an MA, your research interests should be somewhat focused at this point, perhaps more so than those coming in with a BA. Perhaps with an MA it is more reasonable to point out specific faculty with whom you could see yourself working than it may be for those entering with a BA, who have more time to grow their research focus? Just food for thought.

Ooh, good point. I'm coming in with a BA , so I know there's a bit more wiggle room for me.

Edited March 10, 2013 by dazedandbemused

[Swagato]

I basically ended up doing what Grev wrote earlier in this thread. Back in April, I solicited feedback from a professor who turned out to be incredibly generous with his time and critiques. Their support basically helped me develop my new project, writing sample, and just my entire approach. I'm 99% sure that, without their intervention, I would likely not have been as successful this time around. 

 

For Yale, I knew I had a good fit because my project fit so neatly between film and art history. I stressed that (my writing sample makes it obvious). Interestingly, I had no idea that Yale was, at that very time, moving strongly toward the kind of research I specifically outlined in my SOP. In fact, just last month they convened a conference on the exact sub-areas I pitched. And, when I heard the word from Yale, a professor I hadn't even mentioned in my SOP pointed out how closely our research overlaps. I was unaware that their current interests are shifting in a way that is very, very compatible with my own. In retrospect, I can definitely say that my research, knowingly and (to an extent) unknowingly, found its best fit at Yale. It was just a happy convergence of good forces.

 

For Rochester, I have no earthly clue how I was accepted. I actually didn't think it was such a good fit. But, the program is excellent--if a bit underrated--so it was just as well.

 

For Pitt, I strongly suspect having my POI there helped land me my first waitlist.

 

For USC, I have no idea. It was a horrible early draft of my SOP and writing sample that they received, so I simply don't know how I ended up 'high' on their waitlist. 

Edited March 10, 2013 by Swagato

[Phil Sparrow]

These are things I have learned about literary studies Ph.D. admissions, and I do believe they are accurate:

 

Fit really does matter, though it is mysterious and difficult to gauge from the applicant's perspective, and it can mean a number of different things.

 

GRE scores and grades will not get you in, but they can keep you out.

 

Languages matter a lot more than you might think, especially for particular subfields; beware of applying to be a medievalist without Latin, for example, or applying as a transnational scholar without relevant languages. 

 

Letters of recommendation are very important, but not as important as the statement of purpose and writing sample. Your writing sample matters the most, followed closely by your statement of purpose (which is its own kind of writing sample).

 

The scariest truth of all: your writing sample may be very good, but that doesn't mean it's good enough to earn you a spot in any given year. In fact, your application as a whole may be excellent, but whether or not it's excellent enough is a different story. That's why you have to aim to be the best while hoping to land at "good enough." Sincere apologies if this makes anyone sad. It can be a painful thing, I know.