Story-telling vs. theme-based structure?

[meow]

Hi everyone,

I am an applicant to engineering PhD programs in Operations Research.  I've shown my SOP to two people so far, and received very different feedback.  Hoping to know what you guys think.

1) Story telling: you already went to a top school, was a top student, have research experience and professional experience.  You don't need to try as hard to sound smart -- instead, focus on what you learned, how you felt, why you did what you did etc.  Tell your story.

2) Theme-based structure: do less of chronological/narrative story telling, group your experiences by themes and concisely deliver your messages.  Focus more on writing about your potential research topics.

Obviously there is no right or wrong answer but I am not sure which approach to follow.  My current SOP looks more like #1 and my letter-writing professors didn't have much comments... but I also understand what #2 means.

What are your thoughts?

[fuzzylogician]

I vote for 2. I don't need to hear your life story, I want to know why you want to study X at university Y. Tell me that. 

[meow]

Agreed, but could that be more applicable to humanities than engineering?

I have a paragraph on why I want to study X at university Y, but it's hard to elaborate much further beyond why it interests me and what I think might be interesting topics.  After all, part of the reason I need graduate education is that I don't yet have the mathematical/computational depth from my undergrad studies.

Also, by story telling, I don't mean my entire life story, but my motivation, past research and professional experiences that lead up to current research interests and my decision to pursue graduate school.  All college onwards.

Thoughts?

[TakeruK]

I think you can write it as style #1 or style #2. I don't think there is only one right way to write a SOP---as long as you communicate the reasons why you want to study X and University Y and also highlight your experiences that will let you succeed, then you will be fine. 

That is, I think both #1 and #2 are valid styles to write a SOP and with the limited detail here, it's not certain which way would work better for you. It certainly depends on how you interpret and implement #1 and #2 too. And, also would depend a lot on what you have to say (for example, one case where #1 might work better is if you have some complicated history or a large amount of experience and it would be confusing to be jumping around because it's not clear what you did in early undergrad, late undergrad, Masters, or after graduation etc.)

In physical science fields, #1 is a common style but certainly not the only style. But you can still achieve what fuzzy is saying to do in this framework. 

My suggestion would be to write two SOPs in both #1 and #2 styles. Then, take a look at it again and see what communicates your message better? You can also show it again to those who originally reviewed your SOP. Also, through writing the "other" style, you might pick up on some things that you were missing from the "first" style and be able to improve whichever way you choose in the end.

[fuzzylogician]

57 minutes ago, loveor said:

Also, by story telling, I don't mean my entire life story, but my motivation, past research and professional experiences that lead up to current research interests and my decision to pursue graduate school.  All college onwards.

In that case it's not all that clear to me what the difference is between #1 and #2 for you. Of course you need to talk about your motivation, past research, and professional experience. That would happen under any structure of the essay. It's a relevant "theme," if you will. 

What I mean by theme-based is that you discuss what particular interests you have, your background in them, and why they are important, in some order that makes sense internal to the essay -- for example, from big question to small, or from theoretical to practical, or whatever it is. That could be in a different order than the one in which you discovered these interests or had your prior research experience, which is what I understand to be your "life story." That's all. The content shouldn't change either way.

[Mystic_Fog]

I'm actually doing a mix of both. I'm grouping things into themes with subheadings (which is a disciplinary convention, to be clear) and within each subheading talking about what I've done and how it's prepared me for advanced study.