Getting around admission requirements?

[wubwubwood]

I studied linguistics, and graduated with a 2.8 GPA from a state school (most graduate schools require at least a 3.0). In addition, there are only 2 linguistics teachers at my old school that could write a recommendation for me (most programs require 3). I also don't have GRE scores (I will not take the test on principle).

 

But, I have published a book, done several original research projects (one of which was featured in a study by a professor in Australia), have a glowing review from an esteemed scholar (my old professor), and I had done grad-level fieldwork with a Native American tribe for almost 10 months.

 

Is there a way to get around these surface-level admissions requirements?

Edited September 16, 2014 by wubwubwood

[GeoDUDE!]

Your letters don't all have to be from linguistic professors. So get one more. Thats a really dumb thing to not do. 

 

You will not get in if you have a bad GPA and no GRE.  In graduate school there are many hoops you have to go through. If you wont even go through the admissions hoops, why would they accept you?

 

You probably wouldn't get in with that GPA and a perfect GRE, since you are below the minimum requirement. 

 

Perhaps you are brilliant enough, and could speak to someone at admissions. But your application will say "incomplete" and they will probably not review it. 

 

But here is a real question, if you are really that smart, then why wouldn't you just do these simple things? Belligerence is not a trait admissions committees look for. 

 

Some food for thought.  If I had read this post, and was a Professor, I would not want you as my graduate student. 

Edited September 16, 2014 by GeoDUDE!

[wubwubwood]

 

Your letters don't all have to be from linguistic professors. So get one more. Thats a really dumb thing to not do. 

 

I would love to have another letter, but during undergrad I didn't have any other teachers for more than one semester (i.e. they don't know me or my work well enough for it to be beneficial to my application).

 

 

You will not get in if you have a bad GPA and no GRE.

 

My preferred school (UCLA) does not even accept GRE scores, so I'm not worried about that as much. As for GPA, there's nothing I can do to change it (and a 3.2 in the major field is not bad).

 

 

if you are really that smart, then why wouldn't you just do these simple things?

 

Having a good GPA is not indicative of research ability in Linguistics, nor is the GRE. I was stuck with an underfunded state school with only 2 linguistics professors, and I have both of their amazing recommendations. 

 

 

Some food for thought.  If I had read this post, and was a Professor, I would not want you as my graduate student. 

 

Well you're not a linguistics professor and have no knowledge of my research.

Edited September 16, 2014 by wubwubwood

[GeoDUDE!]

You are totally missing the point, its not just about performance, but its also about checking the boxes.

 

Being good at research isn't the only thing that is required to finish graduate school. Those of us who have been in it for a while know that. Perhaps you will be fine. You are correct, I don't know about your research; but other linguistic professors might never know either because you are too busy not filling in the boxes. 

 

Your extra letter will be beneficial: they asked for 3 letters and you gave it to them. Plenty of people have a mediocre letter and get into graduate school. The fact that you completely dismiss it is the bigger problem though: I hope that doesn't come through in your statements. Are your letters from 'big wigs'? Often, the name of the person is more important than the contents since they are all full of hyperbole. Perhaps the person/people you want to work with know your letter writers very well. If thats the case, you might ask them to send an email to them to see your application gets reviewed. 

 

If you make it into graduate school ( and I hope you do as that is what you seem to want) there will be far more bureaucratic  annoyances that you will have to go through. You might have a committee member that doesn't even read your thesis before your defense (One of mine didn't). But when she makes minor corrections, you still have to respect them. 

 

Programs want to accept people that will make it through their program: beyond wowing them with your self proclaimed impressive research they want to see some sort of track record of reliability.  And while a 3.2 in your major might not seem bad, one would ask why its so low if thats the thing you want to study. A 3.2 is awfully close to failing in graduate school.  

 

Perhaps you will dismiss my advice, and sure, I don't know a lot about linguistics programs. But my guess is that the field is competitive, and there will be applicants with similar research profiles to you (is this book an actual peer reviewed publication? If its not, then it hardly matters), or perhaps stronger, with way higher GPAs and GREs. This is a international competition.

 

Why would they want to accept you? 

 

If you can answer that well, perhaps you have a chance, if you can get them to read your application; you would be surprised how much better you might do if you went back to school and retook some classes you did poorly in or took some more graduate hours to raise your GPA even .2.

 

A very wise computer scientist is now a full professor of CS at UIUC (top 5 dept) had a 2.4 GPA coming from undergrad. He documented his experience in his blog post: http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.html

 

You will find people with low GPAs who got into graduate school (I am one of those people, and am at a top 20 dept in my field), but none of the one's i've met have exhibited such a resistance to giving the programs what they want. You are not the judge of your application. They are. 

[Eigen]

I don't think it's the research that's lacking, I think it's the attitude. 

 

You may have great research, but you have several major deficiencies in your application that you don't seem to want to put effort into resolving, and that makes it seem like you don't have the right attitude for graduate school (i.e., doing what you need to do even when you don't want to). 

 

I went to a small regional state school with only two faculty in my field of research. You know what? I branched out, and made strong relationships with faculty in other research areas. And had multiple strong letters because of it. 

 

Having only two letters is a pretty bad sign to most committees. 

 

Not taking the GRE (on principle) is a bit strange, but OK, the school you want doesn't require it, so I'm not sure why you brought it up. 

 

Low GPA is bad. A 3.2 major GPA is bad. A 3.2 general GPA with a higher major GPA would be workable, but still bad. I would strongly suggest a MA to try to get a better GPA, and get other people who will write you letters. 

 

And unless the book is a research-based manuscript within your field, it probably won't matter that much. 

 

But as has been said, if you have close ties to world class scholars, they are who you should be asking, not us. They're the ones that can get you into graduate programs. 

[wubwubwood]

but you have several major deficiencies in your application that you don't seem to want to put effort into resolving

 

On the contrary. Since changing my GPA and letter numbers is not possible for me at the moment, I'm producing research papers and submitting them for publication to make up for it. My original question was if this research would be enough to get past the academic deficiencies. I know in the hard sciences it would not be, but I'd like to get a view from the social sciences as well.

 

 

I don't think it's the research that's lacking, I think it's the attitude. 

 

I am driven and assertive and passionate about my field. But I also like to push boundaries. Is that undesirable?

 

 

And while a 3.2 in your major might not seem bad, one would ask why its so low if thats the thing you want to study.

 

I didn't know it was what I wanted to study until it was too late to change my GPA.

 

 

 

You know what? I branched out, and made strong relationships with faculty in other research areas. And had multiple strong letters because of it. 

 

Congrats, but I could not do this because I had no idea I really wanted to go to grad school until my senior year.

 

I know what I want to do now. I dicked around for three years, and I want to know if I can fix it.

Edited September 16, 2014 by wubwubwood

[surefire]

You would not be pushing boundaries by trying to buck (or "get around") these requirements, you'd just be pushing buttons - and YES, that is undesirable.

 

What is the story here that you want the adcomm to "buy"? That you are capable of being successful if certain circumstances are in place (oh, and btw, you don't mean their rigid definition of "success", you mean the definition of success that you've taken it upon yourself to craft)? You don't get points for circumventing requirements. While it's entirely possible that you'll find a supervisor who will agree that GPA and the GRE are indicative of squat, I guarantee you that an admissions co-coordinator or committee is not interested in humouring you in that debate, and you need to get through the latter to get at the former.

 

Your narrative here is one of non-accountability - you're casting yourself as a victim of circumstance and thus you cannot HELP but have a low-GPA, lack of traditional letters ect;

 

The circumstances that you describe (small school with limited faculty in your area, not knowing what you wanted to do initially in your undergrad) are not at all unique. You can peruse the forum and find that these situations are fairly common - but many successful applicants "get it together" in their final year or so and then craft a narrative that points to their accountability and resourcefulness in turning it around. These narratives are often more compelling than those from students who consistently pulled down 4.0 grades - it is helpful to see how a student takes ownership of, and resolves, challenges.

 

So, you need to establish an "upward trend" that is recognizable to the adcomms, and then craft a narrative around that. A good way to do this, as others have said, is to try your hand at an MA.

 

I think that you've got a lot going for you if you've had your mettle tested on the publishing/research front (as others have said, this is dependent on the peer-review nature of the endeavours). There's a lot to be said of a student who is acquainted with some of the nuances of fieldwork and collaborative research. So leverage this to get into an MA, and then use some of your time in the MA to establish some markers of "success" that are recognizable to PhD adcomms. While GPA/GRE may not comprehensively indicate quality of research, they do indicate one's capacity to navigate a grad program (I mentioned that your supervisor may not care, but a grad program WILL care, as it might give them pause about your capacity/willingness to contend with other non-fun standardized/bureaucratic things like progress reports and quals/comprehensive exams).

 

Your entire academic career will partially entail translating your passion and research into recognizable markers (for departmental people, funding agencies, ect;). Your admission application is an opportunity to begin to hone the skills you'll need to do that. Pull in a third letter from someone you've been doing high-level (hopefully peer-reviewed) research with. Speak with that esteemed scholar that holds you in high regard to figure out what MA programs might be appropriate and how to write compellingly and relevantly about your experience. Apply for that MA.

 

Good luck!

[MarieCRL]

As others have stated, your attitude is a major hindrance.

 

I don't think you are interested in how you can "fix" your current situation, as others have offered suggestions you have decided to ignore. You are only interested in how you can get into grad school with an incomplete application.

 

It's cool to go against the grain, but you also have to acknowledge that it's going to be an uphill battle that you may not win.

 

Most grad schools will not look at an application that only has 2 letters when they requested 3, especially if that person has a GPA below the minimum. Adding another letter, even if it is a medicore, "Did well in class" LOR can only help your situation.

 

If it is going to be an issue obtaining another letter, take relevant courses at a nearby university or get a job. That will not only give you an additional LOR, but strengthen your application as well. 

 

Having a GPA below the minimum means you need to work harder than the average applicant to make your application stand out. In some cases, this involves going far beyond what the typical applicant has to do. It's going to be near impossible if you are only willing to go below the minimum requirements.

 

Is it possible that you can still get into a program with a 2.8 GPA, no GRE, and 2 (instead of 3) LORs? Maybe.

 

Is it likely? No.

[TakeruK]

I have to agree with surefire's statement that you are really pushing buttons with this approach/attitude, not pushing boundaries. Academia is not that much different from many other workplaces--think of it this way: if you were an employer and set up your job application a certain way, would you want to hire an employee that criticizes your approach to hiring and/or tries to use as many loopholes to get around your requirements as much as possible? Sure, there may be one or two cases where a creative job applicant can earn a job this way, but that's definitely not the norm. So, why would you expect academia to be different from this? 

 

The application requirements are there because the professors want them to be there. They are not "surface level" and treating them that way isn't going to help you in the long run. How are you going to feel when your paper abstracts are limited to (for example) exactly 250 words? Obviously the quality of research is not tied to this magical arbitrary requirement, but that's the limit for journals in my field. Like any other workplace, in academia, there are many arbitrary rules that people just have to follow to practicality and/or fairness (it wouldn't make sense to allow 1000 word abstracts, but it also wouldn't be fair if some people were allowed more than other; thus some arbitrary limit must exist).

 

Instead of trying to find ways to "get around" or circumvent them, find ways to meet them instead! You don't need all 3 of your LORs to be super glowing to get into grad school. Even in more research based fields, some students find it pretty hard to get 3 LORs from research supervisors. Most people get as many as they can (usually 1 or 2 depending on the opportunities they had) and they fill in the rest with LORs from as closely related professors as they can get. In your case, you have 2 LORs from your field. Just ask the next best person you can think of to write your 3rd LOR--even a standard bland LOR is better than an empty slot or an incomplete application (which might not even get reviewed). I'm not sure why you would even want to "get around" this. 

 

As for your other requirements, it seems like you're set. As you said, your GPA can't be changed and it's great that you are getting more research to make up for it. Your school doesn't need the GRE which is great. I think it's a terrible test too, but since the schools I wanted to get in required it, I took it. If you are applying to schools that made the choice to require the GRE, it's not wise to declare to the school that you're too good for the GRE, or that you should be granted a special exception somehow, even though every other applicant is doing so.

 

I do appreciate people with the courage and determination to push boundaries where necessary. But, there is a right time for boundary-pushing. It is absolutely the wrong time to push boundaries when you have no power at all (i.e. in the applicant stage), If you want to create change or influence people to accept a different, probably better, viewpoint, you need to first gain mutual trust and respect. You can't just come in telling everyone that they are doing it all wrong and that your way is the best (even if your way is better!). Keep in mind that some of the boundaries you are trying to push might also be boundaries that people already in the department are trying to change too. And the "come in with guns blazing" approach to cause change might actually undo or otherwise undermine the efforts of those who have worked to gain mutual trust and respect and trying to change things for the better. 

 

Finally, the above about my appreciation for boundary-pushers only applies when the boundaries you push are indeed for the greater good. For example, convincing the department to do away with (or reduce the importance of) GRE scores after you've already been admitted might be a "greater good". But, your situation here sounds a lot like you want to do this for personal gain--i.e. make an exception for you! "Pushing boundaries" has noble connotations to me, but not when it is only for personal gain!

[StenoLubr]

lol why did you even post this if you are just going to disagree with what everyone is saying?

 

You need good gpa or gre (unless the program doesnt take it like your case)

 

again you are applying to a graduate school and not a research lab

 

you still have to take classes and stuff and low gpa is a good indication of how well you will do in class.

 

even if you are an amazing researcher, you cant graduate if you fail the course. 

 

i suggest you do post-bac or take classes in local college to improve your grade or show that you can do well in classes.

 

plus you are saying you can't do anything about your gpa now, but that is why you should take GRE. 

 

high gre score somewhat makes up for low gpa. also you said you are smart, and alot of smart people dont even really study for gre and still do well

Edited September 16, 2014 by kingwd

[wubwubwood]

I did not mean to say that I wanted to push boundaries with this application- I meant in terms of research.

 

 

why did you even post this if you are just going to disagree with what everyone is saying?

 

What I asked was if it was possible to make up for academic deficiencies with research experience. A yes or no question. Instead what I got was people chastising me for my past mistakes and accusing me of being lazy for asking this question. In my current situation I cannot change my GPA. I also can't afford the GRE right now, so please don't think I'm being lazy by not taking it.

 

Telling me "you NEED this" when I obviously don't have it does not answer my question or help me in any way now.

 

I will pursue an MA first to build up a better profile, as suggested.

Edited September 16, 2014 by wubwubwood

[GeoDUDE!]

I will pursue an MA first to build up a better profile, as suggested.

 

That seems like a good plan. I got a funded MS, so its possible you can to (my GPA was barely over 3.0). Make sure its a thesis based program. If you have to pay out of pocket you probably should think about doing well for a year and then trying to transfer to a higher ranked PhD program without completing your MA: paying for graduate school is very expensive and may not be the most efficient use of your money. Especially if you have some reasonable research experience and the only real weaknesses in your application come from obtaining 1 LOR (which can come from an MA class), taking the GRE (perhaps you can save up little by little to afford the test), and your GPA (which can be offset by a year of straight A's). Just make sure that everything you do from now on is excellent (if you take the GRE, try to get 75%, get as close to a 4.0 as possible).   

 

We thought you were being lazy by not taking because of two things one " also don't have GRE scores (I will not take the test on principle)" sounds awful lazy, and two, you would only turn in 2 LOR. Like said before, getting a flyer from someone in a class you did well in could only help your application. 

 

good luck.

[moody]

 

 

I will pursue an MA first to build up a better profile, as suggested.

 

As a linguist, I would say that this is the best suggestion you have received, and so I am glad that you are looking into it.  Our program is less selective than UCLA's but for us your GPA would still be a serious barrier to admission.  Once you add a great graduate GPA on top of it, however, the undergraduate GPA becomes much less relevant; the grad GPA gives us confidence that you can handle graduate course work.  Taken together with research experience, this would make a strong application.

 

There are lots of great linguistics MA programs in the US, and many even offer some funding – this is especially true at places that don't also have Ph.D. programs.  You might also consider some of the Canadian programs; funding is the norm there and many have strong fieldwork emphases.

 

w.r.t. letters, if you don't have three letters from faculty members, that is fine, but you do need three letters in order for your application to be considered complete.  Even if the department wanted to admit you, the university would probably not allow them to without a complete application.  Is there someone from your fieldwork experience who is familiar with your work who could write for you?  If so, this strikes me as your best bet at this stage.

 

Best of luck!

Edited September 16, 2014 by moody

[wubwubwood]

don't have GRE scores (I will not take the test on principle)" sounds awful lazy

 

It's funny, I actually had prepared a well-researched defense of not taking it a few years back. If I had the opportunity, I would've sucked it up and taken it bitterly, but atm it's not an option at all.

[Munashi]

 

What I asked was if it was possible to make up for academic deficiencies with research experience. A yes or no question.

 

Can research experience help do "damage control" for academic deficiencies?  Sure.

 

Will it enable you to avoid application requirements (such as a 3rd letter)?  No.

[surefire]

I did not mean to say that I wanted to push boundaries with this application- I meant in terms of research.

 

 

What I asked was if it was possible to make up for academic deficiencies with research experience. A yes or no question. Instead what I got was people chastising me for my past mistakes and accusing me of being lazy for asking this question. In my current situation I cannot change my GPA. I also can't afford the GRE right now, so please don't think I'm being lazy by not taking it.

 

Telling me "you NEED this" when I obviously don't have it does not answer my question or help me in any way now.

 

I will pursue an MA first to build up a better profile, as suggested.

 

I very earnestly did not undertake to chastise. My "boundaries/buttons" comment was ventured in consideration of your comment regarding not taking the GRE on "principle" and in light of the title of this thread (FWIW I think that the tone of the responses would have been very different if you had titled the thread "Is it possible to make up for academic deficiencies with research experience?" instead of "Getting around admission requirements?"). Regardless, I would agree with you that feeling beset upon by a series of users does not make one feel helped, and the GC generally does aim to be a helpful community!

 

Answers to grad admissions questions tend to come in varying shades of "it depends", rather than "yes" or "no". So I'm actually gratified that the responses, while some of them put the "tough" in "tough love" (lookin' at you GeoDUDE!), still helped to suss out a distinct but different response for you: look into an MA! I do think that the content here can be helpful for you, in terms of offering a concrete next step as well as some insight (unsolicited, I know, but still!) on how to approach admission expectations. While I don't want to volunteer anyone for additional correspondence work, one of the awesome mods here (fuzzylogician) is in linguistics and might be receptive to a PM, if you feel so inclined. The GC is really an awesome community and I hope that you continue to engage here as you consider potentially pursuing MA stuff!

 

Really sincerely, best of luck to you!

[wubwubwood]

I guess I could've worded it differently, I didn't think of how it would be received. Noted for future reference, thanks

Edited September 16, 2014 by wubwubwood

[victorydance]

Just so you know, if you apply to a school with required GRE scores and you don't submit them, your application will be thrown in the trash.

[bsharpe269]

So the main question seems to be whether reserach can make up for the GPA and I think the answer to that is yes, though it obviously is more difficult to get in than the combo of great GPA and great research. It might take a couple cycles but many people get grad school acceptances with low GPAs.

 

It sounds like the GRE isnt an issue for a couple schools that you are interested. If you want to apply to more schools though so that you have a better chance of getting an acceptance than I recommend taking it. I understand that you may not personally value the score but adcoms have their own reasons that they value it based on their personal experience and/or research. I think you should put aside your personal opinions on the GRE and take it since your future mentors (people you respect) may value it. That is enough of a reason for me to study and try to do well on it.

 

As for the third letter, based on all of your experience, I am sure have met people through your research experience and opportunity abroad who can write for you. If you have 2 letters from professors in your field and a third from someone who met through these research experiences then it sounds like that would take an awesome combo.

[ToomuchLes]

I enjoyed reading this. Lol. Thank you

[Vene]

Incomplete applications do not get looked at. You have to be able to follow directions no matter where you work. Even if your third letter or GRE score is abysmal you at least will be considered. But submitting an incomplete application is a waste of time and money.