Grades versus Writing Samples/CV

[kaiphi]

Hi there, I'm a junior in university looking into grad programs for literary criticism (eventually).

My GPA isn't fantastic—probably horrendous considering the schools I dream of going to—but I'm working on a senior honors thesis and I was chosen to be published in a forthcoming volume of lit criticism, which apparently doesn't happen very often for undergrads.

I've also published some literary criticism through The New Inquiry.

I'm not particularly wild about going to grad school right now but since I'm in the McNair Program and have shown interest in research in the past I want to at least be eligible in case, maybe 10 years from now, I decide to go into academia forreals.

So, how much do grades matter compared to writing samples? I've read that writing samples matter more but just wanted to be sure, I guess

[Guest]

It's impossible to know without seeing your particular writing sample or without knowing what programs you're trying to get into.

I think it would be very difficult to get into any program without a 3.0 GPA at least, though circumstances can always vary. 

And while I think that taking time off from schools is a really great idea and one I fully endorse (especially with the market being what it is), ten years out might diminish your chances considerably. Literary criticism tends to go out of style quickly, and recommenders tend to forget who you are after a little while.  

[silenus_thescribe]

How is your GPA in English classes? That will be far more determinative of your likely application success than your overall GPA. I've heard stories of people who start out as science majors, do poorly in science classes, and then switch to English before applying to grad school. In those cases, while the bad grades in the science courses did drag the overall GPA down, the students did well enough in the English major to get accepted. Many websites for grad programs I saw specifically stress major rather than overall GPA. However, my_muse is right in that a 3.0 at least is desirable. 

That being said, almost every program I applied to stressed the importance of the statement of purpose and the writing sample. You're applying to graduate school to do highly specialized work, and as such showing your skill in tackling a specific topic will be the most likely to catch the attention of admissions committees. This is especially true since most people applying to grad school have excellent GPAs, so there's a bit of an equalizing effect there. 

That publication of yours also sounds quite promising. You are correct; that doesn't happen for most undergrads. 

[Warelin]

On a separate note, you might consider going into a Master's program first to see if you like grad school since it tends to be very different from doing an undergrad degree. Also, the grad degree would most likely override any grades from your Bachelor's.

[ExponentialDecay]

This is slightly off-topic, but if grad school is something you want to try, you're better off trying it sooner rather than later. Being back on the corporate job market after striking out on the academic one is tough enough at thirty, but at 40+ you're pretty much dead in the water.

[mk-8]

I can't speak on this topic myself, but my boyfriend (communications major) had a less than stellar GPA (above 3.0, but still not great) and got into all the schools he applied to AND received funding at one of the schools. He had a really great writing sample and conference experience, so what I've come to believe is that as long as you can meet the minimum GPA (usually set by the graduate school), you should be fine. Obviously a super amazing GPA is preferable, but you can get by without it.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, ExponentialDecay said:

This is slightly off-topic, but if grad school is something you want to try, you're better off trying it sooner rather than later. Being back on the corporate job market after striking out on the academic one is tough enough at thirty, but at 40+ you're pretty much dead in the water.

No. Not if one already has work experience and has cultivated a professional life outside of the university. I would rather be transitioning from academia to the corporate world at 40 with a more diversified resume rather than writing first non-academic resumes at 30 with absolutely no professional experience except being a grad student and TA.

Having said that, if grad school is your ultimate goal, then you should get started on it sooner rather than later. Academia is particularly cruel when it comes to ageism. It's difficult to get into a really good program after age 30; it's exceedingly difficult to land your first academic job after 39. Schools like to hire young people who have long careers in front of them.

[EmmaJava]

12 minutes ago, my_muse said:

No. Not if one already has work experience and has cultivated a professional life outside of the university. I would rather be transitioning from academia to the corporate world at 40 with a more diversified resume rather than writing first non-academic resumes at 30 with absolutely no professional experience except being a grad student and TA.

Having said that, if grad school is your ultimate goal, then you should get started on it sooner rather than later. Academia is particularly cruel when it comes to ageism. It's difficult to get into a really good program after age 30; it's exceedingly difficult to land your first academic job after 39. Schools like to hire young people who have long careers in front of them.

Sure, I agree with all of this minus that actual the numerical values, as if they corresponded as exactly as, say, the drop-off in production of a running back at 30 or the tread on your tires after exactly X miles, or something like that. I think here is one case in which generalizing is actually more beneficial than dialing into something more specific. I say this as someone who will be 40+ after I graduate, so you can take that as my defensive stance or else as someone who has given it years of thought and research. Or maybe a little bit of both. Also, for those who do want to say actual numbers (like 39), we have to take ageism into account, which works both ways. I get a kick out of how ageism laws and principles are so often invoked one-sidedly (not saying that's what my_muse was doing, just sayin' in general), especially given that 40 is the age around which the whole concept is framed.   

[Dr. Old Bill]

Highfive, @EmmaJava, you fellow oldster you.

Honestly, I hear the "age is a benefit" argument as much as I hear the "age is a detriment" one. The numbers surely skew toward younger applicants, but there are more younger applicants period.

Maybe it's just because I'm in my mid-thirties and people are just giving me fabulous lip service, but I've been assured repeatedly by a sizeable number of professors and other graduate students that age isn't really a big factor when it comes to getting into programs or hitting the job market.

Edited April 13, 2016 by Wyatt's Terps

[Guest]

I fall on the older side of things myself, so my recommendation there is undoubtedly tainted by my experience. I honestly wish age wasn't an issue (and it absolutely shouldn't be!) but there are some interesting studies out about this:

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2014/08/13/essay-age-discrimination-faculty-hiring

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/17/age

http://theprofessorisin.com/2012/04/24/ageism-and-the-academy-my-thoughts-and-a-request-for-yours/

[ExponentialDecay]

1 hour ago, my_muse said:

No. Not if one already has work experience and has cultivated a professional life outside of the university. I would rather be transitioning from academia to the corporate world at 40 with a more diversified resume rather than writing first non-academic resumes at 30 with absolutely no professional experience except being a grad student and TA.

Having said that, if grad school is your ultimate goal, then you should get started on it sooner rather than later. Academia is particularly cruel when it comes to ageism. It's difficult to get into a really good program after age 30; it's exceedingly difficult to land your first academic job after 39. Schools like to hire young people who have long careers in front of them.

With all due respect, I never said she should go in right after undergrad. All I said is, sooner is better than later. You can't argue with that. Not only because of ageism in academia (or the corporate world, for that matter, which is no kinder than academia in this regard), but because, the more entrenched you get in "secular" life, the harder it is to break away. People have this tendency to fall in love, get married, have children, buy houses, take care of sick parents, and take on other huge responsibilities as they age. For most of us, our ties and commitments are going to get bigger, and our geographical mobility and ability to work insane hours for years at a time is only going to diminish. OP can do whatever they want, but time is an important factor to keep in mind.

That said, your perspective is rather limited by the kind of work you do, the industries you're in, and where you live. In any recession, mid-career is always the slowest demographic to pick back up. Businesses always need the entry levels and the linchpins, but the stuff in the middle is both not experienced enough to be essential and too experienced to keep on payroll. This is by no means a general statement, but an individual doing a cost-benefit analysis of their private situation does well to keep current that a 5+ year employment gap, a degree that an employer may or may not find relevant or overqualified, and the fact that they're competing for the same jobs as people 5-10 years younger are not always factors that are looked upon favorably. Diversified resumes are nice, but the best resume is the one that fits the job specifications, you know?

[kaiphi]

Hey all,

Thanks! This has given me a lot to think about!

To clarify, my GPA is about a 3.2 with a 3.6 in the major—but thanks to outside projects that'll undoubtedly take a hit after this semester, though I'm taking very easy classes this fall so it'll go back up, it's fluctuating right now lol—and I've just accepted a position as Arts & Humanities editor of our undergraduate research journal.

[GradSchoolTruther]

The writing sample probably is one of the last things departments look at. Grades, GRE scores, LORs, and the statement of purpose have more weight.

[lyonessrampant]

Perhaps that is true at Grad School Truther's university, but it certainly is not the case at mine.  The writing sample and statement of purpose are the most important pieces of the application for the final stages of review.  GPA and test scores matter when it comes to making initial cuts and may factor in when deciding between similar applicants.  

[echo449]

5 hours ago, GradSchoolTruther said:

The writing sample probably is one of the last things departments look at. Grades, GRE scores, LORs, and the statement of purpose have more weight.

Yeah, I think this is pretty much wrong. 

[GradSchoolTruther]

I don't know what to tell anyone if they think GPA and GRE scores aren't the first items reviewed. Your file may not even be read if you don't make the cutoff.

Also, master's is not capitalized.

Edited April 19, 2016 by GradSchoolTruther

[unræd]

It's certainly true that gre and gpa are often first reviewed, and often for purposes of cutting out applicants/meeting requirements set by the grad school as opposed to the department. But they don't have "more weight" than a writing sample, at all, at least in English (and the humanities more broadly) assuming your scores aren't beyond the pale. Maybe this is a disciplinary disconnect--are you in a field in the humanities, GradSchoolTruther, or something else?

[ExponentialDecay]

10 hours ago, unræd said:

It's certainly true that gre and gpa are often first reviewed, and often for purposes of cutting out applicants/meeting requirements set by the grad school as opposed to the department. But they don't have "more weight" than a writing sample, at all, at least in English (and the humanities more broadly) assuming your scores aren't beyond the pale. Maybe this is a disciplinary disconnect--are you in a field in the humanities, GradSchoolTruther, or something else?

He's Chair of the Trolling Department at Under The Bridge University. In my experience, most Trolling departments are interdisciplinary, but they try super hard to hang out with the STEMlords so they can be Science.

[GradSchoolTruther]

Exp, I'm sure you'll have a fine career at Starbucks or Barnes and Noble.

[ExponentialDecay]

2 hours ago, GradSchoolTruther said:

Exp, I'm sure you'll have a fine career at Starbucks or Barnes and Noble.

Hey, at least they don't pay in internet karma!

Edited April 20, 2016 by ExponentialDecay

[kurayamino]

Lol @ anyone with "truther" in their name.

[jrockford27]

I'll just second that it's pretty conventional wisdom that yes, your GPA and GRE scores are often important for getting you in the door, or surviving the earliest cuts. But having actually spoken to people on the adcoms in my department, and also been privy to discussions about our admissions process, selection is much more nuanced in the later stages.  Different profs privilege different aspects of the application, the biggest factor in grad school admissions seems to me to be "who's on the admissions committee."  

I was told that the success of my application was owed primarily to two profs on the adcom really believing that my proposed research would bring a unique perspective to the cohort and strongly advocating for my admission.  If those two profs weren't on the adcom, then perhaps my high GPA and GRE scores would not have meant anything.  It wouldn't have meant that my app was bad, it just would have meant that it was an unlucky draw.  If you're say, really excited to get in the stacks and reveal something new about Milton and there's no early-modernist on the adcom, then you're at the mercy of the other members of the adcom to say, 'hey, this student would be a good fit to work with our early-modernist'.  

So in considering what's most important in the process, then yes, in the first round of cuts GPA and GRE are very important.  They become vastly reduced in importance after the initial field has been sufficiently narrowed.  The different steps of the process involve different contingencies.  

[GradSchoolTruther]

In all for people attending grad school, if they are prepared. "Chance me" and "what should my paper be about" threads highlight weaknesses of some potential graduate students who don't possess the basic skills needed to find these answers on their own.

You clearly haven't read my posts, I provide valuable help. I'm trying to push potential grad students to not rely on being spoon-fed.

[GradSchoolTruther]

Sometimes, a dose of reality doesn't hurt.

Edited April 21, 2016 by GradSchoolTruther

[Danger_Zone]

42 minutes ago, GradSchoolTruther said:

In all for people attending grad school, if they are prepared. "Chance me" and "what should my paper be about" threads highlight weaknesses of some potential graduate students who don't possess the basic skills needed to find these answers on their own.

You clearly haven't read my posts, I provide valuable help. I'm trying to push potential grad students to not rely on being spoon-fed.

I wouldn't be so quick to judge somebody who does this while initially learning about grad school. When I was a junior in university I had just begun to think about grad school myself, and was full of a lot of questions, doubt and confusion. I don't think reaching out for advice necessarily means that they can't think for themselves, but maybe that they are overwhelmed or a little unsure of if they have the right credentials. I wondered myself if my grades were high enough for grad school (3.7 major and 3.3 cumulative, the latter of which was caused by some problems earlier on in undergrad). I ended up talking to one of my professors who said I did have a chance, especially if I worked on other aspects of my application. So while you cannot definitively tell somebody whether or not other credentials can offset a bad GPA, it can still be reassuring to ask and know what kind of chances you may have based on others experience.