A nit to pick

[The_Grinch]

Here's a thought I wanted to air out as admission decisions are coming out. I'm really sorry if this sounds pretty bitchy or portrays me as someone who is "tone policing" but I promise that is not my intent.

Anyway, listing your stats and simultaneous shock at being rejected is pointless and borders on belittling others. Maybe you had some great stuff on your record. Rejects happen for tons of reasons: funding, determined fit, maybe someone's LOR was written by a buddy of the POI and yours wasn't, maybe your GREs were low, or your SOP actually wasn't as perfect as you thought it was, or - if you're whining about being rejected here - maybe the adcom got a sense that you don't handle rejection well, which is not necessarily the best trait to have as a PhD student when experiments or studies or anything else goes wrong. Heck, while I really hope it isn't the case, universities are staffed by people so maybe someone was biased. Ultimately, you can't know what wrong in many of these cases. However, saying, "look at how good my stats are; I totally deserved to be the one accepted," to me, can be misconstrued as putting down those who did somehow earn an acceptance.

A suggestion for results survey behavior going forward: post your info, e.g. acceptance or rejection. If relevant, post other things in the comments. For example, do you know the number of applicants, etc.? Do feel free to post your stats, as well. But consider refraining from statements along the lines of "how much more perfect do I have to be?" None of us are; try not to take away anything from people who may be celebrating positive news.

Of course, discussion is welcome.

Here's hoping we can maintain a thoroughly positive and supportive atmosphere on TheGradCafe!

[Pink Fuzzy Bunny]

I 100% support the picking of this nit.

I doubt anyone would argue that people who post those things are assholes. Some people, after being rejected, wallow in sadness for awhile. Others feel the need to belittle others (or even the school they were rejected from) to make themselves feel better. It's a shame...

[nevermind]

I concur 100%. I think it's easy to read forums like this and see "well, my GRE scores were higher than theirs..." or "I have XYZ that they didn't have...why did they get in and I didn't?" We don't know the whole story behind anyone's application...and in some sense forums (don't nitpick my latin plurals) like these provide simultaneously an inflated sense of self worth and an overwhelming sense of defeat (at least it does for me). 

It's always important to remember that grad admissions aren't (always) a meritocracy. You can be nearly perfect on paper only to find that it simply wasn't your year. As many others on the forums have noted, candidates who were rejected one year might be accepted the next (even without significantly changing their essays/profile). 

Graduate admissions committees aren't rejecting YOU as a person. They may not doubt your aptitude for excellence. They are simply evaluating a fit for their department at a particular time, with lots of red tape involved (funding issues, having to reject a perfect candidate because they took someone in the same subfield the year before, etc. etc.). 

I sincerely hope that everyone gets their top-choice schools (including me). But for those of us who won't (including me)--deep breath everybody. It'll really be okay.

Edited January 20, 2016 by nevermind

[reddog]

9 hours ago, The_Grinch said:

maybe the adcom got a sense that you don't handle rejection well

I am sorry but I have to politely disagree with this statement. Self-promotion after failure is a way of handling rejection. People post something like that as an outlet, after which you are able to pick yourself up and try again. One post is not enough evidence to make such a bold claim as "you can't handle rejection".

Whenever I see posts like that, I want to pat them on the back and say "It will turn out fine". IMO if someone who complains about their own rejection takes away from your acceptance, maybe you should re-evaluate your reaction to these posts.

 

 

 

[gelologist]

+1 to OP. People complaining doesn't take away from any success, but does just kind of suck to read.

15 hours ago, The_Grinch said:

A suggestion for results survey behavior going forward: post your info, e.g. acceptance or rejection. If relevant, post other things in the comments. For example, do you know the number of applicants, etc.? Do feel free to post your stats, as well.

to this^ I'd love to see comments include whether or not their accept/reject came after a waitlist decision. Mods, any way to add this as a function to the result submissions page?

[Lexie16]

I don't necessarily have any qualms about self-promotion itself when someone has been rejected, but I have qualms that people are doing it on the results page. There is a rant thread on the forum, and I do agree that it can belittle others who have been accepted. I absolutely understand the need to blow off steam after a rejection, but I would prefer that they do it in a place where it is expected. (And, not only might it make people who have been accepted feel awful, but as someone who hasn't gotten their results yet, it makes me feel uncomfortable about my qualifications!)

[Eigen]

From grad school on, you have to go into everything with the assumption that there are a lot of applicants with just as good of stats as yours, and decisions come down to much less tangible details. 

Maybe you were an excellent candidate, but they're looking for more people in a different area. Maybe someone had worse stats, but had an amazing fit with one PI's research. Maybe the admissions committee had a crappy nights sleep before they read your application and were in a bad mood. 

Grad school, post-doctoral positions, fellowships, faculty positions- even jobs- get tens or even hundreds of applicants who would be great for the position, with usually only one position available. 

The important thing, in my mind, is that stats (GPA, GRE) are rarely relevant as to why you got accepted. Sometimes, very low stats might be the reason why you were rejected, but good stats rarely do anything more than make the admissions committee look a bit longer at your package. They certainly won't get you an acceptance.