I'm starting to really wonder...

[th3_illiterati]

Out of sheer frustration, I am venting on this board. Of course, feel free to reply with any helpful advice, although I appear to already be swimming in it -- not that it's been of any particular use. Which leads me to the point of wishing to repeatedly jab sharply whittled objects into my eye sockets several hundred blessed times in a row for some sense of relief. Ok...

This is my second year of applying for my Ph.D. in English Literature, with a dual emphasis in 19th C. British Literature and Theory (it's more fleshed out, sincerely). I've just received my 14th straight rejection, which marks the last of this round of applications.

Not only did I graduate with a 4.0 BA in English with a Lit Core, but I graduated cum laude with a 3.72 total GPA. I also gained Special Distinctions in English. Additionally, I speak fluent French, some Spanish, and some Latin. My GRE Verbal was 650 and the Lit Subject Test was 550 (I took it very early in my education). Because I was the top ranking student in my class, I was permitted to attend Master's Courses so that I could TA undergraduate courses as an undergraduate myself. This was unusual, and constructed toward giving me a "leg up" when I applied for my Ph.D.

I lectured in Critical Theory, as well as served as a regular section leader in a variety of other 300 level English courses.

All of this was in a mid-sized American public University. Not a Research I, but a teaching college.

Through this work, I was able to get great letters of recommendation: from the Chair of the Department, from the Director of Graduate Studies, and a third from another top Professor who is a Departmental Director in a related field.

As if this weren't strong enough, I then married an English Professor. A huge number of our friends are young English academics, either Professors or else still in Graduate School. So all of my application materials have been handily reviewed by people specifically in the profession. And I get to see what teaching English at a University-level looks like on a daily level (harder than Grad School and less rewarding; he went to an Ivy League, and was accepted to half of the schools he applied to).

Did I mention my Grandmother taught at several Universities and has her Doctorate in Education, with previous funding from Carnegie-Mellon and Ford? That she and my husband are both published in English and Education? That she wrote textbooks on Educational models where I was part of her guinea pig control group for autodidactics? I'm starting to sound like Dubya here. But seriously, this is horrible.

Why can't I gain acceptance into any English Programs? I recognize that I went to a State University, but that's the only drawback I can see. It has frustrated me to no end and basically confounded most of the academics I know. They come back to the issue of having gone to a State University. Also, the advice I've received about applying to a Ph.D. program straight out of my BA vs. applying with an MA his been conflicted and seems very subjective.

I'm not from a particularly economically privileged background -- it was a bit of a back and forth, sometimes we had money, and sometimes we didn't -- attended about half private and half public schools growing up, and managed to skip ahead three full grades so that I began college at 15 years old... my ethnic background is a mixture of European and Sephardic Jewish. I feel like I'm a "dream candidate," but today I feel more like a walking joke. What on earth? If I wasn't so level-headed, I'd get angry. I'm lying. I'm pretty angry!

At any rate, maybe this will shed some light on how lame and arbitrary the graduate process can be. Sorry to be so dogmatic, but it's a rough day. I literally don't know what to improve, although I don't think I will probably pursue a third year of applications, particularly given the horrors of the academic job market where so many friends of mine are floundering and flailing.

Feel free to respond.

Everyone keeps telling me that I'm bright enough, etc... but honestly, I've begun to wonder if I'm not secretly a giant dolt. A fatalist, yes. An impossible contender, not so much.

Incidentally, the Universities I applied to were about half UC's, a few Ivy Leagues, a few "safe" schools that ranked around 30th/40th, and one other program that just fit my needs well. I did NOT approach any Professors specifically about working with them and will do that if I reapply in the future.

Sorry for any crummy grammar but honestly, I've been tearing up all day and am a bit overwrought at this point. Has anyone else actually been rejected by so many Universities in a row?

[Spritely]

In many ways you do sound like a "dream candidate." But, there is no perfect candidate, or a perfect program for that matter. It seems to me that your qualifications are more impressive than mine, and our test scores and GPAs are comparable. I applied for grad school four times (this year included): once after undergrad, for a masters; once after my master's, for a second master's, but did not go back; last year for Ph.D. and did not go back; this year for Ph.D. and will go back. So, needless to say I empathize with your frustration, confusion, and anger, if there is any.

I will rattle of some brief thoughts, hoping that one or two might help.

If you want to go back to school and get a Ph.D., I would not let the current economic situation stifle you, or your current frustration. It took me a few months after last year's rejections to get back in the application process, but you do recharge and can approach it with a new focus and determination, perhaps finding several ways in which to improve your application.

It sounds like location is not a determinig factor for you since you applied to UC schools, Ivies, and top 40 schools. I would broaden your search and consider a handful of schools ranked lower or even unranked. Top 40 is not a safety school, unless perhaps you're one of those people on this forum that got into several top 20 or Ivy League schools. If you are like the rest of us, Top 40 is a dream come true in this application process. If you reapply next year, and I think you probably should, I would try one or two Ivies and UC schools, but also look for compelling programs lower in the rankings. I applied to several schools in the 50-70 range on this list: http://www.english.ucsb.edu/undergrad/a ... nkings.asp. While I do not consider this the definitive ranking list (and it's dated 2001, anyawy), it is a starting point and helps put things in perspective. You can probably find some good programs for you in the 60s or 70s that would be a good match. If you want to really put the "safety school" idea into practice, you may also need to apply to two or more schools you could be happy at but that do not even appear on that list. Look around at the schools to which others on this forum have applied to get some ideas of these schools. In my case, this resulted in my first two acceptances this year, although I got into UN-Lincoln today and am hopeful to also get into other programs off of wait lists.

I think GRE scores are really only decisive in the very top programs. If you have fairly strong GREs but a great GPA, experience, and letters, you should be fine. I think it's much more important to have a strong statement that is tailored to the programs, which should be good fits for you.

Granted, some of the application process comes down to sheer luck, but if you continue to work on your app and branch out a little more in which schools you apply to, you are likely to have better luck next year. If you are reapplying, you might consider meeting up with those in the thread about reapplying next year. I really wish I were on this forum six months ago as I was starting to work on applications.

Good luck!

[lyonessrampant]

I'm sorry to hear that you've had such a rough go of it. It sounds like you do have a lot of distinctions. I feel similarly jilted this year, particularly after receiving some very strong LORs and assurances from my MA profs at a top 6 school. However, the economy this year has had some pretty significant impacts, as one of those some profs reminded me. UChicago in an email after I requested any feedback said I was a very serious candidate but that they couldn't offer me admission this year because they slashed the cohort in half. I also turned down a Ph.D. offer to Notre Dame in 2007 (for a variety of reasons) so while I'm not a successful applicant. . . I do feel like I might have some advice to share.

Your test scores are okay, not great, so (if you apply again) you might want to retake them. I also have okay not great scores (700 V, 6 AW, 650 Q, and 680 or 92% on subject). Northwestern told me that they like 700+ scores. . . but UC said they don't use them as much more than as a benchmark to sort through the first 1/2 of the pile to reject and then they don't matter. I don't know what their cutoff is, but I figure that with the increasing competitiveness, schools might begin setting that benchmark higher and some schools, like Northwestern, apparantly care more about them. That being said, a lot of schools say these scores don't matter, and people on this board have gotten into some great schools without great test scores. . . so I think this depends a lot on the school AND what the rest of your app looks like. If everything else is super strong but your test scores weak, well, I don't think it matters, but if the test scores are a bit low and some other parts are weak. . . I think they might matter more.

If your LORs are as strong as you say, then I would think that there might be something in your SoP or writing sample that might be a bit weak. Most schools agree that these are the two most important components of your application. Did you tailor these two documents to each school you're applying to in order to demonstrate that you "fit" with their program? Did you write about people you think you'd like to work with and how their research interests mesh with your own? If not, this would be a good place to revise if you apply again.

It sounds like you don't have an MA. . . maybe that would help improve your writing skills, hone your research intersts, bulk up your CV etc. Speaking of your CV, do you have some conference presentations and/or publications to boost it? It sounds like you've got some teaching experience, which is great, but maybe diversify that a bit.

Finally, keep in mind that this whole process is a crap shoot. . . and sometimes really qualified people don't get in. Good luck and keep your chin up

[Spritely]

I agree that an MA might not be a bad idea. Maybe try to get into a well-respected MA program with promise of moving onto the Ph.D... and try to only apply to those with funding so you're not putting yourself in a hole (plus it would be good to get more teaching experience for your future applications).

I might also add that many schools do not require the subject test. While the majority do, I was able to find a lot of schools to apply to without it since my score on the subject test was much lower than I had hoped.

[hepkath]

With the caveat that I really feel for your situation and do think this process is horribly unpredictable (not to mention unavoidably unfair to who we are as *people*)... Might you consider the following?

Your GRE scores. Without reading your essays (and especially, without reading the 'fit' paragraphs of your SoPs), your scores stick out as the biggest (but also most easily addressed) weakness. If you're not applying from a recognizably prestigious school (and therefore suffer from a lack of connections through your recommenders), you really need to offset any perceived lack of rigor in your undergraduate education with stellar standardized testing scores. I know there's a whole heated debate over how much the GRE counts, but I think in your case it might count for an awful lot. Especially your Verbal score, which is quite low for an applicant in English Lit. The majority of the schools you applied to will only very rarely admit someone with a Verbal score below 700, and that's actually the bare minimum. The bare minimum for the Subject Test is generally 650 (although I do think lower scores on this test are more easily overlooked). If it comes down to your file and a very similar file from someone with a higher score (or a similar score but greater undergraduate prestige), the higher score/prestige will translate into the better bet.

(We're setting aside, for the moment, the issues with computer-adaptive testing and standardized testing in general; I mostly think it's bull, but that doesn't change its current relevance. The Verbal section is undoubtedly the hardest section for most GRE takers, which is why it's easy to get a nice percentage with a so-so score, but top English grad programs definitely expect to see Verbal scores in the high 700s.)

Another thing to consider: unless your recommenders are very prominent in their field (offsetting the lack of prominence of your institution), their letters will unfortunately carry less weight with admissions committees, no matter how glowing. Clearly, you have no control over this and should stick to the people who know you well for the strongest letters possible, but the best way to counter a lack of connection through recommenders is to just go out and do the leg-work yourself. You really do need to contact professors at potential programs (*especially* at the Ivys, where positive, pre-existing relations are particularly important in the admissions process).

So. Just my drive-by, entirely subjective analysis. Study up and ace the GREs. As you say, you took them early on, so they really don't reflect what you're capable of. Don't let that false impression mess with your chances! And contact, contact, contact. Read articles by profs you'd like to work with, get to know their current pet projects, and then don't be afraid to start up some dialogues. (This sort of cold-contact scares the crap out of me, by the way, but I've come to acknowledge that it's the best way to approach this process; if I were doing this again, I'd be far more proactive as well).

Might I ask what factors informed your choice of schools? Also potentially useful: do you know what the record for admission to grad school is like for the English department at your institution? Do students from your university regularly get into the sorts of programs you've been applying to?

By way of reassurance, it really does sound like you're in a fantastic position to do excellent graduate work, and that your lack of acceptances is in large part the result of things beyond your immediate control. Fix the things you can and recognize that this application year in particular has been utterly miserable for many. (Across-the-board rejections are *not* uncommon, no matter how inherently talented the applicant!) Beyond that, try and remember all the things you do well (one of which is most definitely working with and teaching English Lit) and don't let the process define you. I'll be wishing you the very best!

[engguy]

English grad programs definitely expect to see Verbal scores in the high 700s.

Are you joking? OP, do not listen to this hoohah. Granted, I did score in the high 700s, but I personally know at least two people who scored sub-600 verbal and got into top-notch programs. I was going to urge you to do the opposite of what this person's suggesting -- don't bother retaking either the subject or the general test. There's a separate thread about reapplying somewhere down the English/lit heading; scroll through that to see more on the relative value of the GRE. And if you don't believe me, contact the programs themselves (those that rejected you, those you might apply to in the future) and ask them how important the scores are. I'll bet dollars to donuts it's far down the list of what they look at.

If you are going to spend time on something, I would recommend retooling your whole SOP and writing sample. Make it specific; make it scholarly; make it sing. Nothing else that you do will have more impact on your admission fortunes. In that vein, it might be good to do an MA, but if you have the kind of support you say at your current school and you're impatient to get going, ask if you can sit in on an MA course in your area -- enter the discourse, do the research, write a paper, etc.

And good luck. If you really want to do this, it will happen.

[nicholysseus]

I think the above advice--to disregard the GREs--is a bit disingenuous. Sure, some schools may not value the GRE very highly, but for each school that overlooks low scores there's another school that uses a benchmark. I don't have specific evidence of this, but I would expect this to be especially true at the Ivy level when you have a bloc of 700 applicants. Where might you start? Weed out the few hundred below a certain point on the GRE. It makes sense from a procedural standpoint, even if it might not be pretty.

That said, engguy's right about the SOP and sample. Regardless of whether or not a school values the GRE, they're certain to value the SOP and sample far more.

[hepkath]

Are you joking? OP, do not listen to this hoohah. Granted, I did score in the high 700s, but I personally know at least two people who scored sub-600 verbal and got into top-notch programs. I was going to urge you to do the opposite of what this person's suggesting -- don't bother retaking either the subject or the general test. There's a separate thread about reapplying somewhere down the English/lit heading; scroll through that to see more on the relative value of the GRE. And if you don't believe me, contact the programs themselves (those that rejected you, those you might apply to in the future) and ask them how important the scores are. I'll bet dollars to donuts it's far down the list of what they look at.

Hi, sorry, in case you've read the above and now think I was trying, somehow, to advise you in a poor direction, I *did* say I was being entirely subjective. Also, within the context of applying to top programs from an institution without tons of clout in the academic world, I do think GRE scores can be a big factor in validating your file. I *don't* think it's an ideal indicator of any sort, but it can help balance out a lack of name-recognition. And again, this is specific to *top* programs (many of which clearly specify preferred scores in the FAQ sections of their websites and will also say that the *vast majority* of their successful candidates scored a good deal higher than their preferred minimum). I do think they *expect* to see scores in the high 700s; whether said scores are the final deciding factor is another issue entirely ('expect' being different from 'require' or 'demand').

I don't know what sort of school you've got your heart set on

[thepoorstockinger]

I can't for the life of me understand what your grand-mom and your partner being professors has to do with anything.... or the fact that you're Jewish.

That said, your GREs and overall GPA are fine but not outstanding. The other thing I've realized from talking to friends doing English Lit is that tons and tons of applicants have 4.0+ gpas in English and that alone is not enough to get you noticed.

I did NOT approach any Professors specifically about working with them and will do that if I reapply in the future.

That seems like a giant mistake. Did you not contact anyone in two years? I'd suggest that is step one to improving your chances. You make it sound like your friends are all english professors - haven't they introduced you to potential advisers? That network of friends is only helpful to you if you're actually meeting people. Go to some conferences and start having conversations with people.

[engguy]

OK, sure. I believe some schools may have a cut-off for GRE scores, and in my haste to respond I did not really take into account that you're talking Ivies here... But to go 0-14, I would seriously look beyond GREs. There is no possible way that a 650 verbal kept this person out of 14 schools, unless they were the 1-14 ranked schools in the country. That's not the impression I got.

By all means, OP, as long as you're doing everything else, retaking can't be a bad idea. But again I would stress the writing, and any specific feedback you can get from friendly adcommers who looked at your file.

[Yellow#5]

Jeez th3,

I don't know what to say. I would kill for even half the exposure and experience you have and would feel totally confident applying...and yet, you've really hit a wall. All I can say (is what everyone is saying) this year is particularly tough.

The only constructive hypothesis I have to offer is that maybe you are too well versed in all the usual scholarly circles and so nothing in your application jars the committe and makes them think you'll contribute something a little different. I'll qualify that hypothesis by saying I have no idea what I'm talking about, but that's just the best I could come up with. Maybe if you undertook some kind of non-lit/teaching related pursuit this year while you wait to apply again. Be a missionary in Greece or Work for habitat for humanity or something really out of the box.

I'm pretty certain 50 more GRE points matters not one iota in your case. I think GREs are most crucial for students who had a low or uneven GPA, because, like grades, GREs test a certain kind of ability, but it's a narrow ability.

[britlitgrl583]

Incidentally, the Universities I applied to were about half UC's, a few Ivy Leagues, a few "safe" schools that ranked around 30th/40th, and one other program that just fit my needs well.

First of all, I know how awful you must feel, and I sincerely hope you try again and meet with more success in the future! Second, can I ask why you applied to these specific universities?

I'm only asking because, all numbers aside, what I think really matters is that the school is the perfect place for your research interests--it is 100% without a doubt perfect for the package you're selling in your sop and writing sample. I was accepted to 2 schools (and rejected by 10), and I now see that these two schools were by far the most well-suited for what I wish to pursue. Neither of them are very highly ranked, but I'd much rather be at a lower ranked school that's perfect for me than an ivy league that has maybe one or two professors in my sub-field but who have different theoretical approaches than me. I know you're frustrated and angry (who wouldn't be with the odds in this game?!), but your post sounds to me to be number-centric (and thus, all the responses you've been getting re:the GRE have been number-centric)--especially when you consider a "safe" school to be ranked in the 30's or 40's (although clearly you realize that there are no safe schools, thus the quotes)--so I would recommend, if you haven't already, stepping away from scores and rankings and location (although, I get the feeling that coordinating with your spouse might be an issue, in which case, I have absolutely no advice for that!) and taking a good look at any and all programs, and finding the perfect fit. Of course, I genuinely mean that question about why you picked the schools you did, and I think an answer to that might help these lovely people give you better advice. Hope I helped!

[lyonessrampant]

Just an observation, I think it is AWESOME that all these anonymous pseudonyms representing real people, many of whom feel pretty dehumanized from this process, are quick to offer solace and advice to other complete strangers. I love grad cafe (even when it is infuriating because of the results search . . .)

[joeygiraldo]

I feel like people are overconfident about the "fit" aspect of their applications. I've read dozens of posts by people who have stellar stats and "claim" that they are the perfect fit for a department.

Let me tell you, the "fit" part of your SoP isn't one or two sentences. Likely, it isn't even a paragraph. You need to link your research interests with the strengths of a particular faculty. If you want to study under one professor, mention him/her *but make sure* you mention two or three others!!! What if that one professor you love (you know, the one haven't even met) is planning on going on leave or isn't on the adcom? You need to appeal to the entire department. It's simple logic: an adcom is made up of several professors. On my best fits, I mentioned four professors that I wanted to work with, and connected my interests to each of theirs.

And I also second the motion to apply to a broader range of schools. 30-40 ranked schools aren't "safety".... EVER. Not even the schools 40-60 should be considered "safeties." I know sometimes the issue is money, but applying to a broader range of schools seems to be the key to success according to all the grad students I've talked to.

[stella]

yeah, what these guys said

Dude, seriously, though, I'm aghast.

My gre was similar to yours, and my subject GRE was lower (as is my gpa). I am graduating with a masters from a school that one professor I met with responded with, "Wow, I didn't even know XXU EXISTED." No joke.

My point is that I did MEET with people ahead of time. I researched extensively before I applied and kept up on all the journals in my areas of interest. I picked 30 schools I liked (I don't pay attention to rankings, I paid attention to 'fit' and 'placement'). Day by day, when I had time, I wheedled it down to 16 and picked my top four favorites and made arrangements to meet with the profs I would die to work with. I am NOT from a wealthy family at all. I don't have any "back-up" money to ask for/borrow, etc. I've known I've wanted to do this for a while, so over the years I stashed away $5 here $10 there and saved up $3,000 with the intention of never having to do this again. So far, I've gotten into 3 programs and I'm wait-listed at another. None of them are in the top 20 (or 30....come think about it) but they ALL have placement percentages of 80 or over and have professors that have personally expressed that they appreciated my sincere enthusiasm/were interested in my projects/would love to work with me, so they "fought" for me in the admissions committee meetings, or if not a member of the committee, wrote the committee a letter asking for me.

I think having a professor in the department at the institution rallying for me was more valuable than any other aspect of my application (and my SoPS kicked ASS, if I do say so myself---they had to because everything else was poop).

So, from my experience, I can't stress enough that opening a line of communication is key. That said, if you're not a "people person,"...I don't know if this works....

[mentalyoga]

I feel like people are overconfident about the "fit" aspect of their applications. I've read dozens of posts by people who have stellar stats and "claim" that they are the perfect fit for a department.

Let me tell you, the "fit" part of your SoP isn't one or two sentences. Likely, it isn't even a paragraph. You need to link your research interests with the strengths of a particular faculty. If you want to study under one professor, mention him/her *but make sure* you mention two or three others!!! What if that one professor you love (you know, the one haven't even met) is planning on going on leave or isn't on the adcom? You need to appeal to the entire department. It's simple logic: an adcom is made up of several professors. On my best fits, I mentioned four professors that I wanted to work with, and connected my interests to each of theirs.

Agreed completely. I think this may have been one of my biggest mistakes, along with not contacting profs (well, and applying to two Ivies...haha). I had advice from a number of faculty at my school, among other outside people, who told me I should NOT mention faculty names in my SOP. They claimed that I would be veering dangerously close to departmental politics--for instance, I mention Prof X in my SOP, and Prof Y, who is on the adcom, *hates* Prof X. Thus, Prof Y says I should be rejected. Well, that was what I heard, and so--with the exception of one--I did not namedrop in my applications. Looking back, I realize how impersonal that really made me seem--sure, I can say I appreciate the program, but there's little gauge as to whether or not I actually know anything about it, or have an idea of who I'd like to work with (even though I did! I just didn't go with my gut).

Likewise, I hear now from so many people that making contacts in these programs PRIOR to applying is crucial. I did none of that, and I'm regretting it now. Besides your GRE scores, everything shines. The only other explanation I could possibly offer is a lack of contacts or, stretching a bit, perhaps that you might seem overspecialized? I truly empathize. This is an awful process even for those who do make the cut, and I can't imagine 14 schools wasting what seems like such obvious talent. I can only say this from what you've mentioned, but sounds like you'd have an absolutely stellar application. Don't get discouraged in any case. Take a bit of time to be despondent, but after that, buck up. It sounds like you are beyond cut out for the life of an academic.

[abluedude]

Hey everyone,

My GRE scores aren't really great, below 600 in both areas. I mostly applied to schools ranking 50-60 in English on the US News & World Report list (which, by the way, a new one's being released in a few weeks). I know this list isn't definitive, but like another applicant who posted, I figured this put things into perspective. I took a GRE class my school was offering, and it raised both scores about 50 points; I didn't make it a priority, nor did I memorize all 5,000 of the recommended words. I did score pretty high on the writing component, which was a direct result of reviewing the GRE book and learning what format they want. If you have time to devote, having higher scores never hurts. I mean, at this point, any nudge upward seems a worthwhile pursuit.

Since my GRE scores were pretty weak, I did do exactly what several of these folks have said: spiced up my CV with conference presentations and wrote a kick-ass SoP. I worked for probably a month or more crafting that SoP word by word; I sent it to harsh, harsh friends with the instructions, "if anything even whispers 'arrogant,' 'unyielding,' or 'Republican,' call me out on it." That was rough on my ego, but ultimately, that's what got me into MSU, I think. I also just recently presented at a somewhat prestigious conference in my field, and although the recruiter didn't mention that directly, he emailed several times concerning my current research, even trading articles and suggesting books (things a mentor would do). So I think that conferences bespeak your willingness to put yourself out there, and they make you appear to be a burgeoning professional in your field. I don't have publications, so that's the next best thing. Not to mention it's a fantastic way to network and see a little bit of the world. :wink:

Here's the harsh reality: I get the impression that this year, because of the financial fiasco, these colleges divided the applicant packets into two stacks: 4.0 and everyone else. Several of my MA classmates who have really great CVs (filled out with multiple conferences, years of adjunct teaching, top of their class in every other way) have been rejected to universities from up and down the list. There's nothing you can do about that except know it and respond logically. Perhaps applying to selective programs that you would be happy in -- farther down the list -- would be worth your time? It's not for everyone, and I can certainly understand drawing your own lines between where you'll like and where you just can't go.

Best of luck to you.

[abluedude]

One more thing.

All of my "suggestions" come from a book I read, and I've confirmed its advice through experience. The book is called A Guide to Professional Development for Graduate Students in English, and it's by Cindy Moore and Hildy Miller. It was a required text for one of my professionalization classes, and Dr. Moore taught a class I took and held us to a high standard. I can recommend it: http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Deve ... 951&sr=8-1

[LOLhedgefunds]

So far, I've gotten into 3 programs and I'm wait-listed at another. None of them are in the top 20 (or 30....come think about it) but they ALL have placement percentages of 80 or over and have professors that have personally expressed that they appreciated my sincere enthusiasm/were interested in my projects/would love to work with me, so they "fought" for me in the admissions committee meetings, or if not a member of the committee, wrote the committee a letter asking for me.

What programs have that kind of placement rate? even among HYP etc I thought that they were lower than that for humanities? that's ill

[the_lisbon_girl]

One of my first recommendations would be to contact the programs who rejected you and find out why. That's one way to know for sure what you need to approve. Most programs are good about this and the ones who won't respond are the ones who don't want you to reapply (and some progs. don't). I did this the first time I applied and it was extremely helpful. One thing I was told, that might apply to you as well, is that they would have preferred all my recommenders to be English profs (one was humanities and one was a French prof. who I worked with as a research assistant for four years aside from having in class). Yes it's nice to have the DGS and another respected prof who know you well rooting for you, but they are more interested in people who know how you write and engage with the literature you want to study, so maybe there are more 18th century or theory profs who can write for you.

Another thing I'd like to point out, and this may just be because you're upset, but your application is about you, and nothing about who your partner or grandmother or friends are is going to have that great of an impact on your application if they don't see you putting forth the effort (also, I doubt that you would name these people in your SOP or anything, so how would they know?). To this effect, I would recommend trying to present at conferences (either in your field or at something like a regional MLA) or get something published. It seems like you've been out of school a while (I could be wrong), so you need to show them that you are still engaged in the scholarly conversations in your field. It has even been hinted to me that if a school you're applying to knows you will be at a conference they might have a prof or grad student who is also attending scout out your work.

And like mentalyoga I was advised not to mention people by name in my SOP and not to contact profs because of departmental politics. This is probably one of the biggest reasons why I only got one acceptance. So if you haven't done that, I would. Get introductions from your academic friends or just get email addresses from the department websites.

And I would say updating and improving your GRE scores wouldn't hurt either. And maybe re-thinking your list a little more. (same as others have said)

[joeygiraldo]

Agreed completely. I think this may have been one of my biggest mistakes, along with not contacting profs (well, and applying to two Ivies...haha). I had advice from a number of faculty at my school, among other outside people, who told me I should NOT mention faculty names in my SOP. They claimed that I would be veering dangerously close to departmental politics--for instance, I mention Prof X in my SOP, and Prof Y, who is on the adcom, *hates* Prof X. Thus, Prof Y says I should be rejected.

Hogwash. If a department has an undercurrent of latent animosity among its faculty members, I wouldn't want to go anyway. What's more likely, two professors who hate each other, or one of four professors that you mentioned in your SoP being on the adcom?

You are going to be entering this grad program and will be *representing* the university. You need to make it clear from the beginning that you are willing to do some research and reach out a hand to everyone in the department.

[lotf629]

Abluedude, thanks *so much* for that reference; I hadn't heard of it but it sounds great.

OP, your situation is really sucky and I sympathize, and I just want to chime in with everybody else who says that it's really unlikely to have much to do with your potential as a future scholar. A couple of quick points (or rather opinions):

The "how much do GRE scores matter" question continues to rage and has been examined exhaustively other places, but it seems to me that you should find out as much info as possible about how your program views scores, and then aim to hit their cutoffs and no more. It might be worth some calls to find out how your GRE scores are being perceived, if possible. Also, if you do manage to build up relationships with faculty at the places to which you intend to apply, you might be able to field a casual, tactful question about how GRE scores work w/r/t their program. That's another excellent reason to build faculty relationships: sometimes you can get insider info into those kinds of nuts and bolts. You might also want to keep in mind, though, that even within individual programs, different faculty will place emphases on different parts of your record. Even within a single school, some professors will care far more about GPA than others; likewise, some will care far more about GREs than others.

Also, I want to respond respectfully to the point you raise indirectly about class privilege: I think it might be a part of the picture in some cases, but I know plenty of people from dirt-poor backgrounds, sometimes even with significant family responsibilities, who slogged their way through the process and into top schools. It might be fair to say that it sometimes takes them longer, however, and that they may end up having to take on debt or work more than they'd like while in school. Perhaps you are in this situation as well: taking a little more time to find your way but headed to the same place in the end.

[lyonessrampant]

I agree with lotf's point about class. . . being able to afford even some private schools was never even a possibility for me and a lot of people navigating this process. I think programs should accept people on their own merits, not whether they come from certain classes or even ethnic groups. Of course, overcoming adversity testifies to perseverence, and in that case, I think it could matter, but I'm not a fan of affirmative action-type policies that write a blank check just because you can check a box. I consider myself about as liberal as they come, and I whole heartedly support programs to level the competitive playing fields by providing services to address poverty and disadvantageus living/educational situations, particularly at elementary and secondarly levels, but by this point, we've all had WAY more opportunities and advantages than the majority of the population . . okay, I'm off my soapbox. So, think about how you can get where you want yourself, not as someone who is entitled to it because of class, ethnicity, or who you know. Maybe that isn't how you think at all, but I did get that impression from your original post.

[stella]

What programs have that kind of placement rate? even among HYP etc I thought that they were lower than that for humanities? that's ill

I'd be happy to share if you want to pm me. Admittedly, I did not do the research to hunt down graduates from the program and see where they ended up and do the math, etc, so I might have been lied to, but one program even has it posted on their department page--that'd be CRAZY unethical if a lie, no? But, yes, this this is going by what they've told me. :?

[wheresthelight]

And like mentalyoga I was advised not to mention people by name in my SOP and not to contact profs because of departmental politics. This is probably one of the biggest reasons why I only got one acceptance. So if you haven't done that, I would. Get introductions from your academic friends or just get email addresses from the department websites.

So interesting to hear people's views on name-dropping. I did last year, and, granted the rest of my application was rather weak, I didn't get in anywhere. This time around, I decided I would go for the no-name approach. It worked out alright. I think it's important to convey fit throughout your SoP so that the folks you could work with would be obvious to the admissions committee, even if you don't spell it out. But that's just my take..