What does it take to get into a top-tier program?

[anon455]

Although I'm not an expert on this by any means, I'd stress (like some other people on this thread) that the most important thing is fit. My SOP went through at least 30 drafts and I had several professors tear it to shreds several times. I changed it for each school and I didn't choose top-tier programs because they were top-tier, I chose them because of the faculty that I wanted to work with, faculty that I respected, had read, and was nuanced by their contributions to my field.   

 

I didn't graduate from a top-tier university for my B.A. or my M.A., or have any publications, or have an amazing subject test score, or perfect verbal, but they were good enough, and I showed with my writing sample (which was from my M.A. thesis and highly edited and reworked like my SOP) that I could work my ass off in my M.A. program and that I also saw the direction of my future work in alignment with the particular school's. 

 

The point is that I'm not here to toot my own horn, but I am saying that it is possible to go your dream school or top-tier school without having an ivy-league B.A./M.A pedigree. Maybe I did work harder than one, maybe I didn't, I don't know. I only have this recent experience of mine to offer some insights.

[ComeBackZinc]

I agree with that. What I don't understand is who is disputing that. People like me say, "on balance, yes, the prestige of your undergraduate institution seems to matter a lot, but of course there are people who can and do excel coming from programs that are not considered prestigious." People then respond, "well here's an example of the latter category." But no one is saying that it's impossible. We're trying to assess broad trends. Like I said above: I highly recommend that people go to the faculty pages of a bunch of programs and check out the schools where current profs got their BAs and MAs and PhDs, and try to think about what this says about the overall landscape.

 

The reality with a crowd-sourced advice forum like this is that most of what you're going to hear ends up getting bent towards what people want to hear. It's just human nature. The problem is that you end up with these endless number of threads where someone says, "My GPA isn't that great, will that sink me?" And everyone emphasizes the exceptions instead of the general rule. "My cousin got into Berkeley with a 2.75 GPA!" Which may very well be true! But then by the end of the thread people are essentially arguing that undergrad GPA doesn't matter, when it matters a hell of a lot. Same thing here: what ends up winning the day is almost always what people want to hear. 

[CommPhD20]

Stanford, for reference:

Princeton '62

Trinity College '66

Washington University in St. Louis '73

Yale

Yale '87

Brown '79

Oxford '90

Universita' di Roma Laurea '72

Brown '93

Columbia '54

U of Manitoba '67

Rutgers

UC-Santa Cruz '80

UT-Austin '72

Vassar '87

Illinois State '75

U of Manchester '86

Yale '88

Oxford

 

Things are a little more jumbled up once you look outside an elite program that itself is in the Ivy league. Also worth thinking about the fact that the game has likely changed to a great extent in that elite students aren't always going Ivy and that there is more of a deliberate effort inside and outside of the Ivy/non-Ivy elite undergrad institutions to give aid to less wealthy folks. I'd fancy myself one of those "needed help to go to school financially" people and while I had offers from Ivies, I had just as competitive offers from non-Ivies and chose one of them instead, going with a SLAC where I felt like I mattered as an undergrad. 

 

I feel like we've done little to prove that the reason people from elite institutions tend to cluster at elite institutions for any particular reason -- we do have to face the possibility that it isn't the institution that holds weight, but rather the best applicants are going to those schools in the first place and continue to go to them at the graduate level. With that said, I think you'll see a strong presence of "that's a nice school" folks even at the best programs, though we can see some serious self-selection bias at the Ivy institutions.

[Swagato]

The general trend has always been that undergraduate institution used to matter tremendously, because you'd go on to a PhD directly from there. Over the past...10? 15? years this has gradually changed somewhat, as it is now increasingly common to earn an MA elsewhere before finally beginning the PhD. So, now, it works two ways (generally): 1) Top undergraduate, top MA, top PhD program; 2) Not-a-top-undergraduate, top MA, top PhD program. There are numerous examples of the latter among recent faculty at prestigious departments. In short, today where you do your MA is crucially important, if you're going to do it before applying to PhD programs. 

 

Certain people tend to cluster at top departments--Ivy or not--because those departments can offer greater resources, greater opportunities, greater visibility, etc. 

[hashslinger]

I think it's really obvious that prestige matters--on some level. After all, we're sitting here talking about how one gets into a top program--not how one goes about getting into University of Northern Tip of Alaska. So while we all recognize that it's best to get your degree from a certain graduate program, we're uncomfortable with the idea that rankings and prestige matter when one is being vetted for that top program. There's a bit of a "disconnect" (I really hate that word, so I use it sparingly); I see people saying things like "I want to get into a top program; it really matters to me where I get my degree, but I don't believe that anyone should judge me by my pedigree (or lack thereof)."

 

Of course no adcom member is going to come out and say that they are wowed by a BA from Yale. On some very real level, they probably aren't. In the end, Yale's writing sample is going to have to stand on its own two feet like everyone else's. But while I do think that there are people out there who enjoy "finding talent" in weird and obscure places, I also think that adcoms are made up of individuals with biases. I think it's naïve to not recognize that your undergrad degree carries its own currency.

Edited February 12, 2014 by hashslinger

[cherish_wisdom]

I spoke to a professor at Stanford about this a while ago (I was inquiring about the Philosophy program there), and basically he told me that the most important parts to an application, in order, were:

 

1) Letters of Reference

2) Writing Sample & SOP (joint)

3) GPA

4) GRE

 

Now, I asked him specifically about the prestige of the undergraduate university, as I went to a smaller Australian university, and his answer made a lot of sense. No, it does not matter what undergraduate university you went to per se. What matters, and is the main reason why top tier UGs go to top tier graduate programs, are the letters of reference that you get from them. So, when they get a letter from a superstar academic in the field, it is treated with a lot more respect and (and this is key) trust. Even if your LORs are excellent and amazing, if the faculty reviewing your application have never heard of that person and have no reference to their own academic abilities or judgment, it unfortunately makes your application a lot weaker than someone who gets a short simple recommendation from a world leader in the field.

 

So theoretically your UG institution does not matter. Practically, however, it could matter a lot depending on the faculty.

[wetheplants]

How do you think one should go about finding out about "fit" for their department? I'm applying for an MA right now (which is really limiting my top-tier options!) but I'm just really stuck getting information on what these programs are like and what they focus on... I'm looking into Yale for a Masters but I can hardly find anything about what their style is, etc. Their website sucks!!
I'm more interested in Cambridge and St. Andrews right now just because they actually have information on their websites about what they do.

[Dr. Old Bill]

How do you think one should go about finding out about "fit" for their department? I'm applying for an MA right now (which is really limiting my top-tier options!) but I'm just really stuck getting information on what these programs are like and what they focus on... I'm looking into Yale for a Masters but I can hardly find anything about what their style is, etc. Their website sucks!!

I'm more interested in Cambridge and St. Andrews right now just because they actually have information on their websites about what they do.

 

Fit is a fairly amorphous concept, and I suspect that five different GC posters could suggest five different ways of determining fit...and all would be correct. Having said that...

 

I sort of figured "fit" out as I went along. I researched most of the USNews top 50 Ph.D. programs for English and got a sense from the program descriptions (and their faculty interests) from each website to determine what kind of academic orientation each had. This was back in February or so. After that, I whittled down my own interests and figured out what I really wanted to achieve in graduate study. This was April or May. From there, it was a case of going back through faculty listings of the programs that initially appealed to me, as well as, quite frankly, some I had originally discounted for one reason or another. I contacted grad students to see if they thought my interests would fit well within their program. I contacted the occasional professor to see if my research interests might appeal to him or her. I talked to my LOR writers and other current professors to pick their brains about programs with similar interests or orientations as mine. I started threads on GC and PMed certain members. Basically, I spent most of May through August doing research on people and programs. When you do it for long enough, "fit" becomes more evident...though probably not as evident as it will be after you get accepted to one or more places. But in my experience so far, it's really a combination of figuring out what you want to do, and finding other professors and programs that share those interests and support the same approaches as your own. For me, I was quite surprised (perhaps even a little dismayed) to find out that most of the POIs doing stuff in my field are at top-tier institutions. I was hoping there could be a few so-called "safety schools" I could apply to, but there really aren't, other than for a random, single, strong POI here and there. But depending on your field of interest, there might be a number of schools that are mid-tier overall, but are GREAT for your discipline in particular. That's why you just have to search, and search, and search some more.

[ProfLorax]

How do you think one should go about finding out about "fit" for their department? I'm applying for an MA right now (which is really limiting my top-tier options!) but I'm just really stuck getting information on what these programs are like and what they focus on... I'm looking into Yale for a Masters but I can hardly find anything about what their style is, etc. Their website sucks!!

I'm more interested in Cambridge and St. Andrews right now just because they actually have information on their websites about what they do.

Also, people may or may not agree, but I find that the issue of "fit" isn't as emphasized in MA programs because they tend to be pretty general. Make sure the programs teach classes you'll want to teach and have faculty you'd like to work with, but since you'll primarily be doing coursework as an MA student, the ever important and elusive "fit" we discuss tends to be of less importance at the MA level. 

[wetheplants]

Also, people may or may not agree, but I find that the issue of "fit" isn't as emphasized in MA programs because they tend to be pretty general. Make sure the programs teach classes you'll want to teach and have faculty you'd like to work with, but since you'll primarily be doing coursework as an MA student, the ever important and elusive "fit" we discuss tends to be of less importance at the MA level. 

Well hopefully that will be a good thing for me  because my list right now is pretty small, only like 6 programs! (I applied to 15 for undergrad haha). So few places in the US are even offering a proper Masters program. Guess I'll just hope they pay more attention to my credentials!

[ExponentialDecay]

I wonder whether looking at the educational background of people who graduated UG in the 60s and 70s is really useful. The academic landscape has changed since then. As an example, women's colleges like Mt. Holyoke were a lot more prestigious in the 60s than they are now (then Mt. Holyoke was the female equivalent of Brown). Now, somebody who graduated UCLA may be in a better position letter-wise than somebody who graduated Bryn Mawr.

 

It's much more informational to look at the CVs of young professors (max 10 years out of PhD) or grad students. Look at the people who get hired tenure-track versus people who get prestigious post-docs versus people who get teaching post-docs.

[mikers86]

Also, people may or may not agree, but I find that the issue of "fit" isn't as emphasized in MA programs because they tend to be pretty general. Make sure the programs teach classes you'll want to teach and have faculty you'd like to work with, but since you'll primarily be doing coursework as an MA student, the ever important and elusive "fit" we discuss tends to be of less importance at the MA level. 

 

I would say fit is far less important when applying to MA programs. You likely have an idea of your interests, but the entire point of an MA is to explore other areas, become informed about differing theoretical/methodological programs, and just be open to the options of the field. Otherwise you would just be applying to PhD programs with some semblance of a research topic in mind. But as proflorax said, if you think you're interested in Med/Ren, make sure programs you apply to actually have faculty in these areas. Email them and ask with what frequency they teach grad courses, or see if there are archives of course options from prior years. Fit is a much looser concept at the MA level, honestly. What's more important is opportunities for writing a thesis that you can turn into a writing sample for doctoral programs (if you decide to go that route), opportunities to teach, funding, conference support, and all those wonderful things that help professionalize you on your way through academia, and if/where that department is placing students in PhD programs.

[lyonessrampant]

Well hopefully that will be a good thing for me  because my list right now is pretty small, only like 6 programs! (I applied to 15 for undergrad haha). So few places in the US are even offering a proper Masters program. Guess I'll just hope they pay more attention to my credentials!

 

What do you mean by a proper Masters program?  Since you listed UK schools, which generally won't fund you, I'm guessing you mean something other than a funded MA.  I would strongly suggest that you look at funded MA programs.  It's much better to have a funded MA from a "low-ranked" school than pay for one from a top tier school.  Search for funded MA in this forum and there is a list I remember seeing in a thread of funded MAs.  It was from a couple years ago, and not all of those schools still have funded MAs I would guess, but it will help you lengthen your list.

[wetheplants]

What do you mean by a proper Masters program?  Since you listed UK schools, which generally won't fund you, I'm guessing you mean something other than a funded MA.  I would strongly suggest that you look at funded MA programs.  It's much better to have a funded MA from a "low-ranked" school than pay for one from a top tier school.  Search for funded MA in this forum and there is a list I remember seeing in a thread of funded MAs.  It was from a couple years ago, and not all of those schools still have funded MAs I would guess, but it will help you lengthen your list.

I just meant proper Masters as in they actually have a terminal MA program, instead of like every single US University that only offers it to their current undergrad batch or as a part of the PhD program.

SO you say it's better to have a funded MA from a low-ranked school than pay for a top tier one - do you mean like better for my resume or better for my pocket? 

I'm in the highly unusual position of not having the worry about funding, so that's why a bunch of the UK schools are on the list. Also, I think for pretty much all the US MA programs I've seen, none of the one year ones offer any kind of funding anyway. I think BC offers a two year one that's funded, but that's it. I was sort of hoping for the one year, but I suppose I should be considering two.

And I will search for the list, thank you!

[wetheplants]

I would say fit is far less important when applying to MA programs. You likely have an idea of your interests, but the entire point of an MA is to explore other areas, become informed about differing theoretical/methodological programs, and just be open to the options of the field. Otherwise you would just be applying to PhD programs with some semblance of a research topic in mind. But as proflorax said, if you think you're interested in Med/Ren, make sure programs you apply to actually have faculty in these areas. Email them and ask with what frequency they teach grad courses, or see if there are archives of course options from prior years. Fit is a much looser concept at the MA level, honestly. What's more important is opportunities for writing a thesis that you can turn into a writing sample for doctoral programs (if you decide to go that route), opportunities to teach, funding, conference support, and all those wonderful things that help professionalize you on your way through academia, and if/where that department is placing students in PhD programs.

Ah, thank you! That's what I've been trying to do, although it seems that some of the places with the best US Medieval faculty are only offering PhDs! Like Notre Dame, UT Austin, UVA, Harvard, etc... 

Yeah, well that's sort of why I'm applying to an MA. I have a sort of proposed topic for PhD level study, but I honestly don't know if it would fit better in a theater history department or an english department, so I'm hoping I can figure out what the graduate level methodology for drama in English department is anyway. (Also I was terribly unlucky in that my college just didn't have a Medievalist for 3/4 years I was there... >< So there were a lot of basic classes I wanted to take and missed out on.)

Thank you, this is definitely helpful! I'm working as a high school sub right now so thankfully I have infinite time to do paid faculty-hunting =]

[mikers86]

Just to throw it out there, UNH does have a funded 2-year MA that does not explicitly transition to their PhD. It's just competitive funding at the MA level. And they're hiring a Medievalist this year.

 

As for English/Theater History, that's tricky. I do have a friend who did her dissertation on Ren theater and had a theater history prof on her committee, so I imagine it would depend more on how you want to approach drama.

[lyonessrampant]

I mean both in that it is better for your pocketbook to not pay and better for your CV as well.  I did a one-year MA at U of Chicago.  It is a top school, and while I got partial funding for MAPH, I would have been better served, I think, to have done a funded MA at a place like Villanova (or any of the funded MAs really) than UC.  UC and NYU in particular have a cash cow MA reputation that is pretty well known.  While I did have an amazing MA experience and am a much better scholar and writer as a result, I regret the debt.  That said, I believe they've started offering a very few full tuition scholarships.  In that case, I'd recommend MAPH.  I really did have an amazing year there.  Funded MA programs here are 2 years because most fund you by having you teach or something like that, which is good experience in itself.  They also often have language requirements, and filling them is a good idea since you'll have them for a Ph.D.  You'll also either write a thesis or do comps (or sometimes both).  A thesis may become your writing sample or your first publication in a very revised form.  

 

So do you want to work on medieval drama?  Or do you want to work on early modern drama?  You might consider the MA at Mary Baldwin's College that specializes in drama and early modern performance.

 

Some other funded MAs (double check as this list is dated): U of Nebraska-Lincoln, Iowa State, U of Kansas,, Ohio State, Marquette, U of Connecticut, Kent State, SUNY-Binghamton (and many of the other SUNYs, too, I think), Auburn, Wake Forest, and there are others.  You'll notice these aren't at Ivies and tippy top programs.  Some do have Ph.D. programs, too, but the MA programs also stand alone as a terminal degree.

[unræd]

In re that list, I know that Ohio State, at least, discontinued their terminal MA program a couple of years ago. Also, I've heard the same thing sometimes said about the reputation of MAs from Oxbridge as about ones from NYU and UC--since they don't generally fund, they're happy to take students who might not otherwise make the cut but who are willing to pay.

If you're also looking at Medieval Studies MAs as well as just English ones, Kalamazoo and York should be on the list.

[cloudofunknowing]

Hey, wetheplants, check your pm! As for med/ren drama things: at least one early modern drama person here at UT emphasizes performance & stage history. I know a Ren PhD student who is doing things very similar to your interests here in the English dept at UT. Cheers!

[wetheplants]

I mean both in that it is better for your pocketbook to not pay and better for your CV as well.  I did a one-year MA at U of Chicago.  It is a top school, and while I got partial funding for MAPH, I would have been better served, I think, to have done a funded MA at a place like Clemson (or any of the funded MAs really) than UC.  UC and NYU in particular have a cash cow MA reputation that is pretty well known.  While I did have an amazing MA experience and am a much better scholar and writer as a result, I regret the debt.  That said, I believe they've started offering a very few full tuition scholarships.  In that case, I'd recommend MAPH.  I really did have an amazing year there.  Funded MA programs here are 2 years because most fund you by having you teach or something like that, which is good experience in itself.  They also often have language requirements, and filling them is a good idea since you'll have them for a Ph.D.  You'll also either write a thesis or do comps (or sometimes both).  A thesis may become your writing sample or your first publication in a very revised form.  

 

So do you want to work on medieval drama?  Or do you want to work on early modern drama?  You might consider the MA at Mary Baldwin's College that specializes in drama and early modern performance.

 

Some other funded MAs (double check as this list is dated): U of Nebraska-Lincoln, Iowa State, U of Kansas, Clemson, Ohio State, Marquette, U of Connecticut, Kent State, SUNY-Binghamton (and many of the other SUNYs, too, I think), Auburn, Wake Forest, and there are others.  You'll notice these aren't at Ivies and tippy top programs.  Some do have Ph.D. programs, too, but the MA programs also stand alone as a terminal degree.

Yeah, I'm in the odd position that I don't have to worry about my pocketbook right now. I could pretty much go anywhere that accepts me. 

I was definitely looking into UC and NYU, I'm glad to hear you enjoyed the MAPH! It looked kind of funky on the website but I'll take a closer look at it. Maybe it being interdisciplinary will be helpful if I can take classes in multiple departments.

Part of the reason I want to do the MA is because I'm trying to decide between medieval and early modern drama. We didm't have a medievalist on staff at my college for 3/4 years there ='''[ so I didn't really get to take as many classes in those periods as I want. I'm hoping the MA will help me figure out where my interest lies timewise and what kind of methodology I want to employ for a PhD. 

I will check out Mary Baldwin's college, I've never heard of that one.

I will check out the funded ones too. I guess I was kind of hoping to start building up pedigree now, since I can afford to do so. My college was really good, but it's very small and relatively unknown outside of New England, so I was hoping to get a fancier name on my resume.

(Also BTW please tell me your name is a Tamora Pierce reference!!)

[lyonessrampant]

It is indeed a Pierce reference  Even having the luxury of paying for the MA, I think you'll find that a funded MA will carry more weight than an MA from a program (in)famous for accepting lots of people to pay for the degree.  Best of luck whatever you decide to do!

[wetheplants]

Ok, good to know. =] Thanks for the advice, I appreciate it!
So happy to find Pierce fans... just reorganized those books!! Have to re-read them!!