Carnegie Mellon, Syracuse, and Pitt

[sylvia]

Does anyone know how competitive these schools are?

[sylvia]

:?: Anyone?

[Minnesotan]

For what? RhetComp, Lit, complit?

I know Carnegie Mellon's RhetComp program is VERY picky. They accepted something like 3% two years ago, when I contacted them.

[sylvia]

Apologies! :oops: I meant to ask about the Lit PhD program. As you didn't mention it, maybe it's not that competitve, at CMU anyway? Do you know about Syracuse and/or Pitt?

Thank you!

[sylvia]

:?: Anybody have any thoughts on this, please? Thanks!

[YagglesSnaggles]

Not sure what you mean by competitive, but a quick look at the results page might tell you that if this site is a decent sample size then they are pretty damn popular. I have a feeling that this is so because each of these schools were around the median of the older U.S news rankings, so people figured by randomly selecting these names they wouldn't be aiming too high or low. It also might be due in part to the notoriety of these schools for having cultural studies programs, which is appetizing for those wishing to depart from traditional English programs. If i remember correctly, Carnegie Mellon was ridiculously competitive last time around, accepting something like 5 out of 500; but not sure about that.

[Tropes]

Carnegie Mellon's Literary & Cultural Studies accepted 3 people this year.

[jasper.milvain]

Traffic around here is pretty slow now that everyone has made their decisions for 2009, Sylvia. I wouldn't stress out about a lack of responses. Maybe you'll get more if you come back in the fall?

[Minnesotan]

For Lit, CMU and Pitt are extremely competitive. I can't say much about Syracuse, since I've never really looked into their programs or known anyone who did.

[JackieW]

Hmm. Well, I think I might be applying to Syracuse, if that helps you out at all?

[Minnesotan]

Hmm. Well, I think I might be applying to Syracuse, if that helps you out at all?

If you have any useful information, feel free to share.

Surely a potential applicant should have done some research, yes?

[JackieW]

Should have done some research, yes... heh. Anyway, I'm applying because one of their specialties is Victorian Lit.

But, I tried and I couldn't figure out how competitive Syracuse is. If the results help, three people were accepted last year and four were rejected. I just did a rather detailed search and couldn't find any numbers for Syracuse--- which, at the very least, certainly means it's not Yale "We Accept 4 People Out of 4 Thousand" competitive, right?

[Minnesotan]

For a Lit. PhD, most every program is going to be in the single-digits for acceptance rate.

Here's how I look at it :*

Pretty much everyone gets into undergrad somewhere.

less than 5% apply to grad school.

25% of those people get into a master's program.

50% apply to PhD programs.

10% get in (if un/lucky).

50% of grad students are promoted to candidacy**

50% of PhD candidates finish their dissertation

about 50% eventually receive a T-T job.

What this means is that for every 100 people who go to college, 0.0078125 receive the type of job most (humanities) PhDs hope to get.

*I should mention that my math is based on the rough estimates I've wheedled out of professors who have served on admissions committees in the past. Thus this is certainly not precise, but for purposes of "ballparking," I think it's an illuminating exercise.

**In English, including prior attrition rate of MA, I would assume. This was the rough estimate two grad program directors agreed on -- the numbers could be specific to those two institutions/programs, I suppose.

[JackieW]

I did some more research. Go me, right?

Anyway, if you want to know anything about admissions rates, check out Peterson's. Sure, it's a little outdated, but it's better than just a shot in the dark, right? Also, always assume they overshoot rates, rather than undershoot.

For example, Syracuse's acceptance rate is 9%. Good luck to us!

[Minnesotan]

For example, Syracuse's acceptance rate is 9%. Good luck to us!

Good show! Someone brought hard numbers into the discussion, even if they're a bit dusty.