2015 Rejections

[goldfinch1880]

There are indeed plenty of places that still take people straight to PhD from BA, and even in programs that don't grant an "MA along the way"; I've been accepted to a few this cycle (as have plenty of other people in this year's GC cohort), and in the interview weekend I was just at, only two of the six candidates being interviewed for the spots in a PhD program had MAs. Both "people can go straight from undergrad to a phd program" and "MAs provide valuable training and professionalization" can be true at the same time. (And this is field dependent, too, right? I hear that in rhet/comp the MA first is much more the standard path, but I'm not in the field, so ProfLorax and comebackzinc would know better than I.)

 

I think it's hard to generalize about what makes an applicant successful, and while these discussions are interesting, I'm not sure how useful it is to extrapolate from personal experience to recommendation, to go from description to prescription. It's easy to say "I did this, and I was successful," and so it's tempting to slide from that to "this is what works," when it's really just "this is what worked for me, a sample of one." Pace fancypants, I didn't contact POIs; pace goldfinch, while I did work on it some over the summer, my writing sample was indeed just a reworked course paper, not a thesis at all (honors or otherwise). I don't bring up those examples because either was implying that those things are required; I just bring them up to show that there is really an awful lot of diversity in what people do in terms of what yields acceptances (and rejections). Unfortunately, that makes useful generalizations--at least ones that aren't so broad to be meaningless (i.e., "have a good writing sample!")--about the process so hard to come by.

 

ETA: Especially when those generalizations so obscure the parts of the process that really are out of an applicant's control, as a bunch of others have pointed out.

 

 

This ^^ seems just right to me: useful to hear what others' experiences have been, useless to extrapolate generally.  It's easy to forget, because the process is often so faceless (for legal reasons, I would assume), that the people on admissions committees are people, with the virtues and foibles that people usually have.  Group dynamics are probably a factor: what decision will make everybody in the room reasonably comfortable, and allow Professor Bob and Professor Susie to get along next semester.  Maybe Program A already has a second-career student, while Program B already has a higher proportion of straight-outta-undergrad than it has historically.  

 

The above comment made me remember instances in which I've hired people for work: some people just stand out, and it can be hard to say why.  They're not always the people with the most relevant experience, or the shiniest, most polished cover letter, or the greatest enthusiasm.  They just seem to fit, and you feel they'll ease in and do well in the context you know well (but they don't), and get the job done and be reasonably pleasant to work with.  It's probably profoundly unfair to make choices like that essentially by guessing, but it happens in hiring, and I bet it happens a lot in admissions committee meetings, too.  

 

Yes to all of the above. to clarify: my comment wasn't meant to be prescriptive. I wanted to say "this is how I made it work, and I don't have an MA, so you shouldn't accuse a system of being biased against BAs because you didn't get into a PhD program right away." I don't want to discourage those lurkers who think they have to go the MA route necessarily, while there can be benefits there if you didn't get to that place in your BA. although all of this is taken with a huge grain of salt that it's a crapshoot in any case. I just don't think it's a worse crapshoot if you haven't checked the MA box, if you were able to focus enough in undergrad.

[unræd]

Yes to all of the above. to clarify: my comment wasn't meant to be prescriptive. I wanted to say "this is how I made it work, and I don't have an MA, so you shouldn't accuse a system of being biased against BAs because you didn't get into a PhD program right away." I don't want to discourage those lurkers who think they have to go the MA route necessarily, while there can be benefits there if you didn't get to that place in your BA. although all of this is taken with a huge grain of salt that it's a crapshoot in any case. I just don't think it's a worse crapshoot if you haven't checked the MA box, if you were able to focus enough in undergrad.

 

Ack, yes--I tried to make it clear that I was just picking those things as examples, not implying that you were providing advice. I'm sorry if I didn't quite succeed!

[Mattie Roh]

Yep. I am at this point, too.

 

I really want to work as a tenure-track research archivist in a university hybrid library-archives-museum setting. Many of these positions have a dual appointment in an English department. A PhD isn't absolutely necessary otherwise, and I already have a subject MA, so I should be good. This was my last shot at trying for a PhD. Not to imply that I have applied before; I hadn't. But I had been thinking about it for 15 years. And more and more of these types of jobs want PhDs, plus I would genuinely enjoy continuing my research at a deeper level in an English department. I guess I'll have to stick to continuing ed in the form of MOOCs, staff course benefits, and Rare Book School. Not too shabby.

 

 

Unfortunately, I'm in a rather dead end job so one way or another I need to make a change. I was hoping it would be PhD program, because it was the first thing that felt right. I keep trying to remind myself that the job market is no picnic and maybe, like ComeBackZinc says, I dodged a bullet.

 

Still undecided on whether or not to apply for a third round next fall. I guess it depends on my work situation and if I've found anything that feels comparable to what I was gunning for in my studies.

 

ETA: I have to admit that this is the first time I've ever felt financially secure -- just finished paying off a load of debt I incurred during MA studies. So it will be nice not to penny pinch for a while, maybe even buy some clothes that aren't torn/stained.

Edited February 22, 2015 by Mattie Roh

[Wonton Soup]

Unraed touched on a key point--in rhet comp it is much more common to get an MA first. I think in part this is because many undergraduate programs insufficiently prepare students for rhet/comp research. At my own undergrad we had two and a half rhet/comp professors (out of 20 total) in the English department and I was able to take maybe three rhet/comp courses. 

[empress-marmot]

Unraed touched on a key point--in rhet comp it is much more common to get an MA first. I think in part this is because many undergraduate programs insufficiently prepare students for rhet/comp research. At my own undergrad we had two and a half rhet/comp professors (out of 20 total) in the English department and I was able to take maybe three rhet/comp courses. 

 

This is a good point--I felt like I had to spend a lot of time explaining that I was familiar with Rhet/Comp in my SOP. Upon rereading, it's almost to the point that I was apologizing for being a lit major, which is a problem. I'm certainly not ashamed of my humble little undergraduate institution. 

 

This kind of makes me wish I'd tried applying to one or two literature PhDs as well, as an experiment. 

[MonicaBang]

I almost applied there to appease my SO too. Had I of applied, I would have also been rejected. It seems they take very few people in and, those they take, need to be trilingual. 

 

Long-time lurker, first-time poster here. I have to chime in and agree that UCSD must be looking for a very, very specific type of student. I applied there three (!) times to appease my SO (we have lived in SD for nearly a decade and have both made great professional and personal connections in San Diego), and I was rejected each time. I don't think it's sour grapes to wonder if they screen out candidates based on language proficiency. 

[youngcharlie101]

ETS stands for "Evil Test Sadists." I call the GRE the "Graduate Ruination Experiment."

 

Has anybody heard from Penn's Comp Lit? 

[ComeBackZinc]

Long-time lurker, first-time poster here. I have to chime in and agree that UCSD must be looking for a very, very specific type of student. I applied there three (!) times to appease my SO (we have lived in SD for nearly a decade and have both made great professional and personal connections in San Diego), and I was rejected each time. I don't think it's sour grapes to wonder if they screen out candidates based on language proficiency. 

 

I can't tell you anything about UCSD, and I don't mean to speculate, but it is not unheard of for adcomms to keep track of who has applied before and flag those candidates. Remember that one of the principle functions of the early rounds is to find some means, any means, to whittle down the pile. Which, you know, is messed up.

[goldfinch1880]

Ack, yes--I tried to make it clear that I was just picking those things as examples, not implying that you were providing advice. I'm sorry if I didn't quite succeed!

 

it's all good!!

[1Q84]

wait- disregard

Edited February 23, 2015 by 1Q84

[MonicaBang]

I can't tell you anything about UCSD, and I don't mean to speculate, but it is not unheard of for adcomms to keep track of who has applied before and flag those candidates. Remember that one of the principle functions of the early rounds is to find some means, any means, to whittle down the pile. Which, you know, is messed up.

 

This is an interesting thought, and something I've wondered about myself. I've heard alternating views on this -- some friends who are in admissions admin have mused that repeated applying shows you're truly interested, but others (including myself) have posited that it is a reminder to the committee that they already made a decision about you.

 

(I'm a little embarrassed about the idea of the adcomm being like "oh, her again, bye bye!" But I suppose I'm a .005-second blip on their application radar, so embarrassment probably isn't warranted.)

[greenmt]

This is an interesting thought, and something I've wondered about myself. I've heard alternating views on this -- some friends who are in admissions admin have mused that repeated applying shows you're truly interested, but others (including myself) have posited that it is a reminder to the committee that they already made a decision about you.

 

(I'm a little embarrassed about the idea of the adcomm being like "oh, her again, bye bye!" But I suppose I'm a .005-second blip on their application radar, so embarrassment probably isn't warranted.)

 

I reapplied to one school this year, after asking whether the program ever considers re-applicants... this after a lengthy wait on their waitlist last spring.  Both the DGS and my prospective advisor said, basically, "Yes, of course."  It probably varies from program to program.  (Edit: my proposed research changed a bit from last year to this, and I completely rewrote my statement of purpose based on their feedback.  So, whether for better or worse, there were some substantive differences in the application.)

My wife is from San Diego (with a UCSD BA), and I've a lot of good bit of time there.  There are great programs in LA, and UC Riverside looks interesting.  I thought about applying there, and to USC and UCLA, partly to bring us closer to her family, but it would have been too big a move for us.  Anyway, if I were in SD, I'd at least consider the schools in and around LA; we have friends who've been there for years and maintained connections to SD.

Edited February 23, 2015 by greenmt

[empress-marmot]

(I'm a little embarrassed about the idea of the adcomm being like "oh, her again, bye bye!" But I suppose I'm a .005-second blip on their application radar, so embarrassment probably isn't warranted.)

 

The admissions committee isn't always made up of the same body of professors, either (at least, I assume so). If a serial applicant keeps applying and applying and making him/herself a nuisance to the department, I could see them doing the "oh, him/her again" thing. 

 

But applying the next year because the school is still a good fit and one has a stronger application? I don't think the committee can penalize that determination. 

[TeaOverCoffee]

The admissions committee isn't always made up of the same body of professors, either (at least, I assume so). If a serial applicant keeps applying and applying and making him/herself a nuisance to the department, I could see them doing the "oh, him/her again" thing. 

 

But applying the next year because the school is still a good fit and one has a stronger application? I don't think the committee can penalize that determination. 

You're right; the committee isn't always the same group of professors. My advisor used to be on the committee, but he wasn't this year. So I assume it varies every year. 

[christakins]

The admissions committee isn't always made up of the same body of professors, either (at least, I assume so). If a serial applicant keeps applying and applying and making him/herself a nuisance to the department, I could see them doing the "oh, him/her again" thing. 

 

But applying the next year because the school is still a good fit and one has a stronger application? I don't think the committee can penalize that determination. 

 

Here's a story: I was wait-listed at a program two years ago (right out of undergrad) and then flat out rejected this year with my MA. It really walloped me. I have a couple of other strong offers, so it's not that I have nowhere to go it's just I KNOW my app was stronger this round.

 

Come to find out two of my POIs (one of which even flagged my app for the DGS) weren't on the committee this time. Thus my rejection, I presume. So yeah, committees can vary a whole heck of a lot year-to-year.

[empress-marmot]

Here's a story: I was wait-listed at a program two years ago (right out of undergrad) and then flat out rejected this year with my MA. It really walloped me. I have a couple of other strong offers, so it's not that I have nowhere to go it's just I KNOW my app was stronger this round.

 

Come to find out two of my POIs (one of which even flagged my app for the DGS) weren't on the committee this time. Thus my rejection, I presume. So yeah, committees can vary a whole heck of a lot year-to-year.

 

I'm sorry to hear that! Everything is so arbitrary in the admissions process...congratulations on your other offers, though.

 

I still don't know about the relative ethics of finding out (and approaching) faculty on the adcomm. The info is usually buried on faculty-only pages, or in senate-minutes. It's not impossible to find, but it still has the aura of "you shouldn't be looking at this." 

[christakins]

I'm sorry to hear that! Everything is so arbitrary in the admissions process...congratulations on your other offers, though.

 

I still don't know about the relative ethics of finding out (and approaching) faculty on the adcomm. The info is usually buried on faculty-only pages, or in senate-minutes. It's not impossible to find, but it still has the aura of "you shouldn't be looking at this." 

 

Thanks, empress-marmot. I took a day to process and cry a little but I'm over it now. Onwards and upwards!

 

No idea about the ethics of adcoms either. I still advocate politely contacting POIs regardless of perceived ethics. 

[squankabonk]

Honestly, I've been avoiding this thread like the plague because of the title ("I'm getting rejections and complaining to my friends, why would I want to go and read a thread where people are complaining and feeling equally bad?" I stupidly asked myself). Of course I should have given GC more credit, as everyone on here is being really supportive and awesome. I guess I have two things to add:

 

First, on the "getting into grad school is a major crap-shoot" side of things. I am in the second year of an MA. This means that I've seen three app cycles at my school (my cohort, this year's,  and next fall's). My school has a couple of prominent faculty who are contemporary Americanists, and we always get a ton of apps in that field. Now, the cohort before mine, through the vagaries of the wait list, ended up with like 6 people from that field. A couple of more got in my year. That meant that last year, people applying in that field had little to no chance of getting in -- the faculty advisers in those fields were just swamped. We admitted a bunch of medieval people to sort of balance out the department. OF COURSE these new students are awesome and deserved to get in, but equally deserving contemporaryists probably got snubbed. But how could you possibly account for this if you're a comtemporaryist applicant? Answer: you couldn't, and it's unlikely that your letter of rejection would explain the situation. You'd feel equally bad, even though you may have been considered a shoo-in if you'd have just applied a year earlier or later. 

 

Second, on the "doing an MA and feeling like you're treading water" side of things. I applied to a school's PhD out of undergrad and got waitlisted. Applied again this year in the final semester of an MA (even with a shiny new publication in a big-kid journal!) -- same result. It's tempting to look at those facts side-by-side and feel like I haven't made any real progress, but of course that isn't true. My research interests are so much more specific than they were before, and having excelled in my program for two years I am 100% confident in my ability to complete a PhD. I've taught my own comp class and written a syllabus. I'm not terrified of students any more. I simply couldn't have said these things two years ago. I guess this is getting a little sappy, but I guess I wanted to say that you can end up in a situation that wasn't your top choice, kill it, and end up with something worthwhile to show for it. That's always on the table, if you work for it.

[silenus_thescribe]

Rejected from Rochester's PhD, and was offered to apply for their MA. Given that funding appears spotty, I won't be doing that.

 

Rejected from Chicago's PhD, but my application was forwarded to the Masters in Humanities application pool. Unsurprising, but nice to see that my app wasn't thrown out outright at a top 10 school. 

[angel_kaye13]

Rejected from Rochester's PhD, and was offered to apply for their MA. Given that funding appears spotty, I won't be doing that.

 

Rejected from Chicago's PhD, but my application was forwarded to the Masters in Humanities application pool. Unsurprising, but nice to see that my app wasn't thrown out outright at a top 10 school. 

That's a nice turn of events! Here's hoping for some happy return from the Masters in Humanities DGS! {fingers crossed!}

[bgt28]

Harvard rejection is official

[margeryhemp]

Harvard rejection is official

 

Oh no! I'm so sorry! Do you mind sharing how you found out?

 

Rejected from GW PhD, admitted to the MA, which I'll be turning down.

Edited February 24, 2015 by margeryhemp

[bgt28]

I applied to their African American Studies program, and was just perusing the gc results page when I saw a rejection via post. I then proceeded to check the portal and, lo and behold, my rejection letter was uploaded. No email, no notification, just random chance. This is absurdly funny and at once agitating. I seriously don't understand how some schools notify (or rather, don't notify) their candidates, regardless of the news that is to be relayed.

Edited February 24, 2015 by bgt28

[margeryhemp]

I applied to their African American Studies program, and was just perusing the gc results page when I saw a rejection via post. I then proceeded to check the portal and, lo and behold, my rejection letter was uploaded. No email, no notification, just random chance. This is absurdly funny and at once agitating. I seriously don't understand how some schools notify (or rather, don't notify) their candidates, regardless of the news that is to be relayed.

 

Oh, boooo! That is insanely frustrating. 

[softcastlemccormick]

Whelp, my official rejection from Michigan just came in. Not in the least bit surprised, but yeah, there it is, darkening my inbox.