2015 Rejections

[pannpann]

Just got rejected from Hopkins. I knew it was a long shot since their program is so small and my POI is in both English and Creative Writing, but my mentor went there and wrote the letter specific for the school so I was hoping I had a shot at the waitlist. This is so much more devastating than I imagined.

 

I remember in high school (many moons ago) I got rejected from my first choice school and I burned the letter and that was cathartic. And the second rejection letter from a school I really loved came when it was raining so I dropped it in a puddle and dropped food coloring in it and it came out tie-dyed. What in the world can I do with all these emails?

 

I am definitely turning to knitting and Ben and Jerry's tonight. Grad rejections are the worst kind of breakup.

[fancypants09]

Just got rejected from Hopkins. I knew it was a long shot since their program is so small and my POI is in both English and Creative Writing, but my mentor went there and wrote the letter specific for the school so I was hoping I had a shot at the waitlist. This is so much more devastating than I imagined.

 

I remember in high school (many moons ago) I got rejected from my first choice school and I burned the letter and that was cathartic. And the second rejection letter from a school I really loved came when it was raining so I dropped it in a puddle and dropped food coloring in it and it came out tie-dyed. What in the world can I do with all these emails?

 

I am definitely turning to knitting and Ben and Jerry's tonight. Grad rejections are the worst kind of breakup.

 

Big hugs! As with all break ups, time will heal. In the meantime, I suggest indulging in sappy break-up songs and wine, in addition to the ice cream. 

[Dr. Old Bill]

I am definitely turning to knitting and Ben and Jerry's tonight. Grad rejections are the worst kind of breakup.

 

I had not one, but TWO pints of ice cream this past weekend. I've been eating healthily since last summer, but I took the weekend off...and I feel NO guilt for it whatsoever.

 

Sorry for the rejection to Johns Hopkins though. The only reason I didn't apply there was because of the smallness of the program. One of my LOR writers went there too, but even so, I figured that it would be too hard of a nut to crack (and yes, I recognize the absurdity of that statement given all the other "nuts" I thought I could crack...)

[InHacSpeVivo]

pannpann: you can always print and burn.

In any event, sorry about Hopkins.

Edited February 18, 2015 by InHacSpeVivo

[fancypants09]

Joining the crowd here. Officially rejected from non-English national lit department at Columbia. I had expected a rejection since acceptances were announced earlier (thank you, Results page!). No hard feelings since I knew that a rejection was most likely in the works, but oh man, rejections suck all the same!

[pannpann]

Thanks guys! I have to say, before I found this site (literally last week) I had no idea I'd hear back so early, had never heard of "implied rejections" and, based on this article I thought GC would just enable me to be more obsessive with my applications. But it's been a wonderful community and a great place of support. Here's hoping my next four schools go better than the first four.

[CarolineNC]

Rejected from Virginia. I'm lucky to have the offers I do, but I am kind of bummed. Virginia has been a dream since after my first undergraduate English class when I started ferociously researching phds. Oh well. 

[jhefflol]

Rejected from ucsd. Not surprised, it wasn't a good fit. I applied there to appease my boyfriend. Also, who wants a 25 page minimum writing sample?!?! Ridiculous.

[lazaria]

Rejected from ucsd. Not surprised, it wasn't a good fit. I applied there to appease my boyfriend. Also, who wants a 25 page minimum writing sample?!?! Ridiculous.

 

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. 

[jhefflol]

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.

Seriously! I was looking through the grad student handbook about a week ago to keep myself busy, and the program seems very difficult. Not that I wouldn't be grateful for that had I got in, but it just surprised me considering that I don't think of UCSD to be a top tier program, yet its structured like one.

[lazaria]

Jhefflol, I just noticed where you are from. You must work with Susan Carlisle! She's brilliant. 

 

Apologies for highjacking the thread. Would love to chat with you over PM.

Edited February 18, 2015 by lazaria

[jhefflol]

Jhefflol, I just noticed where you are from. You must work with Susan Carlisle! She's brilliant.

Apologies for highjacking the thread. Would love to chat with you over PM.

I've actually only taken one class with her, and it was when I was on track to get my teaching credentials. She's one of the nicest ladies I've ever met, though. Feel free to message me if you'd like!

[1Q84]

Rejected from ucsd. Not surprised, it wasn't a good fit. I applied there to appease my boyfriend. Also, who wants a 25 page minimum writing sample?!?! Ridiculous.

 

I was originally going to apply there and I remembered some really nasty responses I received from POI a year ago and decided not to. Not to take away from anyone accepted there but I'm glad I cut them from my app list last minute.

[jhefflol]

I was originally going to apply there and I remembered some really nasty responses I received from POI a year ago and decided not to. Not to take away from anyone accepted there but I'm glad I cut them from my app list last minute.

Yikes, sounds like I dodged a bullet!

[SilasWegg]

Everyone... please forgive this rant... I've had a lot of coffee and there's something on my mind...

 

I'm one of those applicants with a major undergraduate disaster. I'm talking SUB 3.0, multiple failures, ineligible GPA. However, I've also made a pretty surprising comeback: near perfect MFA GPA and perfect GPA in MA. However, it seems like my undergraduate record has set the ceiling for admissions. Schools in the Top 30 (whatever that might mean) don't seem to want to even give me a look whereas schools just outside of the Top 50 are happy to have me. I realize I might have been able to do a bit more to strengthen my applications in terms of stating my research objectives more clearly and convincingly in my SOP, but I'm beginning to wonder if this would even matter.

 

I'm not seriously considering reapplying... I have good offers from strong programs. Whats more, I would never want to ride this emotional roller coaster again. But given the amount of angsty discussion on GC lately about the relationship between an institution's perceived prestige and the career outcomes of graduates, I've begun to feel disappointed with the elitism I see in the admissions process. I wish someone had told me that no matter how much I achieve in graduate programs, my undergraduate performance precludes me from consideration at top programs. Sure, there might be a million other reasons why I won't get an offer from top schools, but the only real weakness I can see in my application is this undergraduate disaster from ten years ago.

 

The application season is still young and I still have some schools that haven't reported. I really want to be proven wrong. Also, I'm generally really happy with the way my season has gone. But this is definitely an eye-opener for me. In the future, when we advise prospective applicants, be it here on GC or in our discussions with our students, the sugar-coated truth that "anything can happen" might be a little misleading. The fact is, because of the selectivity of these programs and the competition for TT jobs, some applicants just won't compete at more prestigious institutions.

 

As you can see, I'm a bitter beatrice today. And isn't that what the rejections thread is for? I just had to get this off my chest. Thanks for reading and I welcome your responses.

[Dr. Old Bill]

Well put, Morristr! Have another coffee.

 

In fact, I think I'm finally going to go and brush the snow off my car so that I can head out and grab an Americano. Maybe when I return, I will have as interesting and insightful things to say.

[HesseBunuel90]

I just received another PhD rejection/MA offer, this time from BU. What this apparently tells me is that while I'm good enough to be a graduate student, I'm not quite elite enough to be a direct admit PhD student. Still, I have a handful of schools to hear from. These two offers are still an ego boost.

[empress-marmot]

I'm not seriously considering reapplying... I have good offers from strong programs. Whats more, I would never want to ride this emotional roller coaster again. But given the amount of angsty discussion on GC lately about the relationship between an institution's perceived prestige and the career outcomes of graduates, I've begun to feel disappointed with the elitism I see in the admissions process. I wish someone had told me that no matter how much I achieve in graduate programs, my undergraduate performance precludes me from consideration at top programs. Sure, there might be a million other reasons why I won't get an offer from top schools, but the only real weakness I can see in my application is this undergraduate disaster from ten years ago.

 

Thanks for bringing this up. I remember deciding between two college offers as a high school senior. One was a prestigious program which had placed Important People in Important Places, and one was an open-admissions school in the middle of nowhere. The difference was whether my bachelor's degree would cost $20,000 or $100,000. 

 

I pulled up the English department websites of Princeton and Stanford. I looked down the lists of faculty, and I felt the first twinge of bitterness as I saw that most of the professors had undergraduate degrees from top-tier schools. They followed up their top-tier undergraduate education with top-tier graduate degrees, and then they were insufferable enough to be tenured at a top-tier university. 

 

To some extent, I knew when I enrolled at my undergraduate institution that I was not helping my career. I don't think I necessarily hurt it, because I've seen so many inspirational examples of fantastic people from small universities being accepted to very, very wonderful programs. I'm certainly jealous of top-tier students--they have access to so many resources. 

 

It's tempting to believe that if I can just do this or that, then graduate programs will accept me. I am trying to break myself of this way of thinking. Academia is my dream, and one I'm going to work insanely hard to achieve. I won't let academia's rejections define me, though. (For me, this means that I'm leaving whenever the cost is too high.) I just have to remember that I'm worth way more than my application. 

Edited February 18, 2015 by empress-marmot

[pannpann]

 

I just have to remember that I'm worth way more than my application. 

 

[kurayamino]

Everyone... please forgive this rant... I've had a lot of coffee and there's something on my mind...

 

I'm one of those applicants with a major undergraduate disaster. I'm talking SUB 3.0, multiple failures, ineligible GPA. However, I've also made a pretty surprising comeback: near perfect MFA GPA and perfect GPA in MA. However, it seems like my undergraduate record has set the ceiling for admissions. Schools in the Top 30 (whatever that might mean) don't seem to want to even give me a look whereas schools just outside of the Top 50 are happy to have me. I realize I might have been able to do a bit more to strengthen my applications in terms of stating my research objectives more clearly and convincingly in my SOP, but I'm beginning to wonder if this would even matter.

 

I'm not seriously considering reapplying... I have good offers from strong programs. Whats more, I would never want to ride this emotional roller coaster again. But given the amount of angsty discussion on GC lately about the relationship between an institution's perceived prestige and the career outcomes of graduates, I've begun to feel disappointed with the elitism I see in the admissions process. I wish someone had told me that no matter how much I achieve in graduate programs, my undergraduate performance precludes me from consideration at top programs. Sure, there might be a million other reasons why I won't get an offer from top schools, but the only real weakness I can see in my application is this undergraduate disaster from ten years ago.

 

The application season is still young and I still have some schools that haven't reported. I really want to be proven wrong. Also, I'm generally really happy with the way my season has gone. But this is definitely an eye-opener for me. In the future, when we advise prospective applicants, be it here on GC or in our discussions with our students, the sugar-coated truth that "anything can happen" might be a little misleading. The fact is, because of the selectivity of these programs and the competition for TT jobs, some applicants just won't compete at more prestigious institutions.

 

As you can see, I'm a bitter beatrice today. And isn't that what the rejections thread is for? I just had to get this off my chest. Thanks for reading and I welcome your responses.

I'm sorry you're feeling so down and out about the process. It really is a heart wrenching and eye opening process.

My own experience counters a little of what you suggest, but I think it just means that this whole thing is just so random. I don't even thing it's particularly biased, but so much of what happens depends on your first initial reading by an adcomm. What if everyone was sick that day? Or feeling grumpy about how a colleague got a book deal on Joyce and so anything Joyce related is going to make them act like a jerk? It's horrible, but this is human nature we're talking about.

My academic journey is... checkered, to say the least. I've changed majors five times and started college 12 years ago after getting my GED. I Started, stopped, dropped out, flunked out, transferred to 4 different schools. I was an absolute wreck. I didn't even go get a masters degree because I simply couldn't afford it. Instead, I took a fifth year and in that fifth year I did everything I possibly could to make my research interests razor sharp. I applied to top schools almost as an act of defiance. No one was more surprised than I was when UCLA emailed me. I had wished and hoped for Bloomington or Rutgers, but never in my imagination did I think I'd get into a Tier 2. My GRE scores were passable, but my subject test was abysmal. My LOR were from new faculty that I knew well, but my primary mentor hadn't even published anything yet. My institution is a non-ranked public city college.

 

All of this is to say, I feel where you're coming from because it seems like maybe you stacked the deck against yourself. And if you didn't stack the deck then it was everywhere else that did. Honestly, after checking to make sure all the information they need is there I swear they just pick them at random. Feel better Morristr, you got into two excellent programs and while prestige matters in some ways, in terms of life fulfillment it doesn't matter one iota.

[Dr. Old Bill]

Yeah, I don't think there's any one thing that makes or breaks an application. I don't think there's any five things. It's such a hard thing to figure out, really.

 

For my own part, I'll be getting my B.A. in May from a very prestigious college, wherein I have a very high GPA, and some great LOR writers...all at said high prestige institution. It hasn't helped me, really (assuming that "helping" means a Ph.D. acceptance).

 

Once the application season winds down, I'm sure those of us Ph.D. shut-outs will convene to figure out what to do next. I know Pol4is just put up a thread yesterday in that vein, and more will surely follow. I don't anticipate any groundbreaking or enlightening points to come up, however. Until graduate admissions become a transparent process, all we'll be able to do is tweak our apps and get as much feedback from as many sources as possible, and perhaps contact as many POIs as we can to establish mutual interest and "fit." beyond that, I'm trusting in Hannalore's alchemy.

[jhefflol]

Rejected from BU. I knew that was coming since before I applied! It was a stretch considering my subject GRE score.

[HesseBunuel90]

I got rejected too. I did receive a MA offer, but the tuition is ridiculous.

[Man in the black hat.]

Props to PannPann.  Actual cannibal Shia Labeouf making an appearance.  Nice.

[__________________________]

Everyone... please forgive this rant... I've had a lot of coffee and there's something on my mind...

 

I'm one of those applicants with a major undergraduate disaster. I'm talking SUB 3.0, multiple failures, ineligible GPA. However, I've also made a pretty surprising comeback: near perfect MFA GPA and perfect GPA in MA. However, it seems like my undergraduate record has set the ceiling for admissions. Schools in the Top 30 (whatever that might mean) don't seem to want to even give me a look whereas schools just outside of the Top 50 are happy to have me. I realize I might have been able to do a bit more to strengthen my applications in terms of stating my research objectives more clearly and convincingly in my SOP, but I'm beginning to wonder if this would even matter.

 

I'm not seriously considering reapplying... I have good offers from strong programs. Whats more, I would never want to ride this emotional roller coaster again. But given the amount of angsty discussion on GC lately about the relationship between an institution's perceived prestige and the career outcomes of graduates, I've begun to feel disappointed with the elitism I see in the admissions process. I wish someone had told me that no matter how much I achieve in graduate programs, my undergraduate performance precludes me from consideration at top programs. Sure, there might be a million other reasons why I won't get an offer from top schools, but the only real weakness I can see in my application is this undergraduate disaster from ten years ago.

 

The application season is still young and I still have some schools that haven't reported. I really want to be proven wrong. Also, I'm generally really happy with the way my season has gone. But this is definitely an eye-opener for me. In the future, when we advise prospective applicants, be it here on GC or in our discussions with our students, the sugar-coated truth that "anything can happen" might be a little misleading. The fact is, because of the selectivity of these programs and the competition for TT jobs, some applicants just won't compete at more prestigious institutions.

 

As you can see, I'm a bitter beatrice today. And isn't that what the rejections thread is for? I just had to get this off my chest. Thanks for reading and I welcome your responses.

 

 

 

I pulled up the English department websites of Princeton and Stanford. I looked down the lists of faculty, and I felt the first twinge of bitterness as I saw that most of the professors had undergraduate degrees from top-tier schools. They followed up their top-tier undergraduate education with top-tier graduate degrees, and then they were insufferable enough to be tenured at a top-tier university. 

 

 

 

Yes, Academia is super tiered and ruled by hierarchy.  Economically, the system is completely broken.  The elitism of the universities, though, extends, as empress-marmot implies, to individuals as well.  That includes us.  The statistics about jobs include a bias that extends to the way we look for jobs: we cherish the "dream jobs" off TT gigs at R1 schools.  We have to stop feeling entitled to that.  I can think of no other industry (and yes, it is an industry) where people expect that getting the dream is the norm -- we need to start diversifying and becoming more flexible just anyone else.

 

I dunno.  I think the job market won't be easy for anyone.  Some "Lower tier" schools have benefits that "elites" don't -- more teacher training, more workshops and resources for job searching (including for alt-ac and non-ac jobs) and, in general, from what I can tell, more realistic outlooks.  It's something I'm definitely considering as I consider my "differently tiered" offers (OSU and UChicago).