Fall 2017 applicants

[Sigaba]

If you got into the University of Happyland or the College of the Golden Ticket, would you be saying that the process is arbitrary or centered around socioeconomic factors beyond your control?

Yes, you are competing against others who have advantages that you don't. Some of those advantages were earned, some were inherited, and some were obtained at others expense--maybe even yours. Some of these students took up spaces as "legacies" while more worthy individuals were told "sorry, we're full."

At the same time, you are competing against others over whom you have advantages. And some of these students got offers that you didn't.

All of these factors, for the time being at least, are completely beyond your control. What is in your control is how well you maximize your potential as an aspiring professional academic historian. How does questioning the efficacy of the process and the integrity of the people making decisions help you get to where you want to go?

[AfricanusCrowther]

1 hour ago, Sigaba said:

If you got into the University of Happyland or the College of the Golden Ticket, would you be saying that the process is arbitrary or centered around socioeconomic factors beyond your control?

[L13]

On 27.02.2017 г. at 8:17 PM, Sigaba said:

 

If you got into the University of Happyland or the College of the Golden Ticket, would you be saying that the process is arbitrary or centered around socioeconomic factors beyond your control?

 

I did get into one of those schools and yes, the process is arbitrary and the odds are stacked against low-SES applicants.

Edited March 1, 2017 by L13

[AnUglyBoringNerd]

This cycle is now officially over for me. (ugh, too fast!)

About me: international applicant, BA and MA in politics & area studies; focus is modern Japan (history of foreign relations, national identity, memory, gender&sexuality) I've studied in Japan for one year as a graduate and I've studied Japanese as my minor as an undergraduate. 

Results: I only applied to two programs because I was not 100% sure that I want a PhD in History (instead of in Politics) (lesson learned: be sure before apply or there will be serious identity crisis) and I got rejected from:

Harvard: rejected. (good fit)

reasons: err..because it's Harvard? Joking~ I talked about it with POI and he very kindly pointed it out to me that my main weakness is that my training is as much in political science as in history. (He is just so kind... ) lesson learned: need to demonstrate in my SOP that I am an aspiring historian instead of someone who is capable of transforming herself into a historian... (I talked to POI before I started my application and back then my non-history BA and MA are not a problem, so I assume it is more about how to present myself)

(not going to reapply to Harvard because it's unlikely that they will take someone who was once rejected)

U Penn: rejected after an interview (not a good fit but not a bad one either)

reasons: I was still not seeing myself as an aspiring historian but some timid outcast (I wonder if other area studies people feel the same way?) not belonging to any discipline. So when my POIs asked if I'd prefer to be a historian in X field or in Y field I was even thinking "wow, a historian, me?" =_= You know, like the guy you've been having a secret crush on suddenly asks you out on a date...on Feb 14th, and you are so happy that you totally freak out and give him a three-second silence? 

lesson learned: I really need to construct an identity as an aspiring historian or it will never work... also, while I did a lot work on/related to my topics of interest, I didn't really have an opportunity (as an Area Studies/Politics major) to think about history as a discipline or historic questions in general. (it's really hard to admit, but I was indeed not ready to pursue a PhD in history, especially not mentally prepared.)

(not going to reapply to U Penn because..well...I'm not proud of my performance during the interview and I don't think they'll give me another shot next year. That said, I am grateful that they thought I deserved an interview..)

I am going to reapply in this fall to more programs which i didn't even have time to think about last year.

One question: what did you do during the gap year? I'll have a research job at an LGBTI rights organization which is relevant to my interest in identity, gender and sexuality but not in history...will that be Ok on my CV?

Also....I know this is too early and too much to ask, but if anyone is interested in having a look at my future SOP in a few months, please let me know.   

Thank you all for sharing your story and valuable information!

 

[nevermind]

14 minutes ago, AnUglyBoringNerd said:

This cycle is now officially over for me. (ugh, too fast!)

About me: international applicant, BA and MA in politics & area studies; focus is modern Japan (history of foreign relations, national identity, memory, gender&sexuality) I've studied in Japan for one year as a graduate and I've studied Japanese as my minor as an undergraduate. 

Results: I only applied to two programs because I was not 100% sure that I want a PhD in History (instead of in Politics) (lesson learned: be sure before apply or there will be serious identity crisis) and I got rejected from:

Harvard: rejected. (good fit)

reasons: err..because it's Harvard? Joking~ I talked about it with POI and he very kindly pointed it out to me that my main weakness is that my training is as much in political science as in history. (He is just so kind... ) lesson learned: need to demonstrate in my SOP that I am an aspiring historian instead of someone who is capable of transforming herself into a historian... (I talked to POI before I started my application and back then my non-history BA and MA are not a problem, so I assume it is more about how to present myself)

(not going to reapply to Harvard because it's unlikely that they will take someone who was once rejected)

U Penn: rejected after an interview (not a good fit but not a bad one either)

reasons: I was still not seeing myself as an aspiring historian but some timid outcast (I wonder if other area studies people feel the same way?) not belonging to any discipline. So when my POIs asked if I'd prefer to be a historian in X field or in Y field I was even thinking "wow, a historian, me?" =_= You know, like the guy you've been having a secret crush on suddenly asks you out on a date...on Feb 14th, and you are so happy that you totally freak out and give him a three-second silence? 

lesson learned: I really need to construct an identity as an aspiring historian or it will never work... also, while I did a lot work on/related to my topics of interest, I didn't really have an opportunity (as an Area Studies/Politics major) to think about history as a discipline or historic questions in general. (it's really hard to admit, but I was indeed not ready to pursue a PhD in history, especially not mentally prepared.)

(not going to reapply to U Penn because..well...I'm not proud of my performance during the interview and I don't think they'll give me another shot next year. That said, I am grateful that they thought I deserved an interview..)

I am going to reapply in this fall to more programs which i didn't even have time to think about last year.

One question: what did you do during the gap year? I'll have a research job at an LGBTI rights organization which is relevant to my interest in identity, gender and sexuality but not in history...will that be Ok on my CV?

Also....I know this is too early and too much to ask, but if anyone is interested in having a look at my future SOP in a few months, please let me know.   

Thank you all for sharing your story and valuable information!

 

I've had lots of gap years (I'm 34). What committees seem to like is that you're trying something outside academia. If you can make real money doing something else (I was making 80K as a technical writer) and convince people that you want to give that up to barely make minimum wage to train and try to get an academic job in an uncertain economic climate...it shows that you have thought about why you want to go to graduate school and that you're willing to sacrifice to do it. Also, I wouldn't take a rejection as proof that you don't fit a program. It's possible that you can improve your SOP (with the insights you've mentioned) and try again. Sometimes the cycle is capricious or you may not have hit the mark. If you have a chance to do grant writing in your current position, that might also be experience that will benefit your application (e.g. Try applying for FLAS for example). All this to say, take what you've done/doing, reflect, learn from it and then position yourself to be a viable candidate next year.

[SarahBethSortino]

7 minutes ago, nevermind said:

I've had lots of gap years (I'm 34). What committees seem to like is that you're trying something outside academia. If you can make real money doing something else (I was making 80K as a technical writer) and convince people that you want to give that up to barely make minimum wage to train and try to get an academic job in an uncertain economic climate...it shows that you have thought about why you want to go to graduate school and that you're willing to sacrifice to do it. Also, I wouldn't take a rejection as proof that you don't fit a program. It's possible that you can improve your SOP (with the insights you've mentioned) and try again. Sometimes the cycle is capricious or you may not have hit the mark. If you have a chance to do grant writing in your current position, that might also be experience that will benefit your application (e.g. Try applying for FLAS for example). All this to say, take what you've done/doing, reflect, learn from it and then position yourself to be a viable candidate next year.

I completely disagree with the idea that committees like the idea that you have done something outside of academia. I have dealt with three official rejections and two unofficial ones. I'm 36 and have also had a lot of gap years, and the feedback I have consistently heard is that I've spent too long outside of academia (even though I have a masters). One POI said if I had applied five years ago then I would be a better fit, but I'm an unusual and risky choice at this point in my life. Not all of us have the benefit of walking a straight line from undergrad to graduate school, and I feel at this point that the path I've taken to finally be in a position to apply has only hurt me, in spite of the fact that I emphasized in my statement that I do not consider this a career "Change," i consider it going back to the career I always intended to have before a million perfectly legitimate complications got in the way (illness, a child, death of a parent, divorce, etc.) Right now I'm just so jaded - its probably because I received another rejection yesterday. At this point I really just want to say screw the whole thing. If schools don't want me because I'm not a traditional student then fine, I'm not beating my head against the wall for another year. And I definitely can't see myself going through the emotional hell I've dealt with since I submitted my applications.

[AP]

1 hour ago, AnUglyBoringNerd said:

This cycle is now officially over for me. (ugh, too fast!)

About me: international applicant, BA and MA in politics & area studies; focus is modern Japan (history of foreign relations, national identity, memory, gender&sexuality) I've studied in Japan for one year as a graduate and I've studied Japanese as my minor as an undergraduate. 

Results: I only applied to two programs because I was not 100% sure that I want a PhD in History (instead of in Politics) (lesson learned: be sure before apply or there will be serious identity crisis) and I got rejected from:

Harvard: rejected. (good fit)

reasons: err..because it's Harvard? Joking~ I talked about it with POI and he very kindly pointed it out to me that my main weakness is that my training is as much in political science as in history. (He is just so kind... ) lesson learned: need to demonstrate in my SOP that I am an aspiring historian instead of someone who is capable of transforming herself into a historian... (I talked to POI before I started my application and back then my non-history BA and MA are not a problem, so I assume it is more about how to present myself)

(not going to reapply to Harvard because it's unlikely that they will take someone who was once rejected)

U Penn: rejected after an interview (not a good fit but not a bad one either)

reasons: I was still not seeing myself as an aspiring historian but some timid outcast (I wonder if other area studies people feel the same way?) not belonging to any discipline. So when my POIs asked if I'd prefer to be a historian in X field or in Y field I was even thinking "wow, a historian, me?" =_= You know, like the guy you've been having a secret crush on suddenly asks you out on a date...on Feb 14th, and you are so happy that you totally freak out and give him a three-second silence? 

lesson learned: I really need to construct an identity as an aspiring historian or it will never work... also, while I did a lot work on/related to my topics of interest, I didn't really have an opportunity (as an Area Studies/Politics major) to think about history as a discipline or historic questions in general. (it's really hard to admit, but I was indeed not ready to pursue a PhD in history, especially not mentally prepared.)

(not going to reapply to U Penn because..well...I'm not proud of my performance during the interview and I don't think they'll give me another shot next year. That said, I am grateful that they thought I deserved an interview..)

I am going to reapply in this fall to more programs which i didn't even have time to think about last year.

One question: what did you do during the gap year? I'll have a research job at an LGBTI rights organization which is relevant to my interest in identity, gender and sexuality but not in history...will that be Ok on my CV?

Also....I know this is too early and too much to ask, but if anyone is interested in having a look at my future SOP in a few months, please let me know.   

Thank you all for sharing your story and valuable information!

 

I'm very sorry about your rejections but it is also inspiring how you are highlighting the take away. I agree with you that you don't seeing yourself as a historian may have hindered the AdComms to see you as such. I just wanted to say that 'Areas Studies' as a thing is fading away and you don't need to position yourself within that. Further, many of us do interdisciplinary work (that is, we take methods or frameworks from other disciplines). I am more of a 'traditional' historian and yet I use visual culture, architecture, urban layouts, and performance as part of my archival documentation. I am only saying this: if you were too areastudy in your SOP, this could be something to rephrase so that you speak to a larger audience. Don't drop the interdisciplinarity!  

I'd be happy to help you with your SOP. I am not an East Asianist so I could be a outside reader. PM me. 

 

[NoirFemme]

1 hour ago, SarahBethSortino said:

I completely disagree with the idea that committees like the idea that you have done something outside of academia. I have dealt with three official rejections and two unofficial ones. I'm 36 and have also had a lot of gap years, and the feedback I have consistently heard is that I've spent too long outside of academia (even though I have a masters). One POI said if I had applied five years ago then I would be a better fit, but I'm an unusual and risky choice at this point in my life. Not all of us have the benefit of walking a straight line from undergrad to graduate school, and I feel at this point that the path I've taken to finally be in a position to apply has only hurt me, in spite of the fact that I emphasized in my statement that I do not consider this a career "Change," i consider it going back to the career I always intended to have before a million perfectly legitimate complications got in the way (illness, a child, death of a parent, divorce, etc.) Right now I'm just so jaded - its probably because I received another rejection yesterday. At this point I really just want to say screw the whole thing. If schools don't want me because I'm not a traditional student then fine, I'm not beating my head against the wall for another year. And I definitely can't see myself going through the emotional hell I've dealt with since I submitted my applications.

Well, I'm going from undergrad to graduate school--at 30. And I worked in retail for most of the 7-8 years between high school and my associate's degree. Perhaps the concern and risk is that a decade out of the field is like a lifetime in academia--methoodologies, fields, theories, etc shift--and your application might not have shown admissions commitees that you can jump back into your geographic/temporal field as it appears today. And/or, it's the dreaded job market: maybe your topic/method was pretty healthy five years ago, but the jobs have shifted to other topics and your application didn't show you could apply new lenses to freshen up your topic for future placement.

All this to say that I know what you're feeling about time and rejection. I worked myself to the bone during my return to undergrad, desperate to make up for lost time. I've gotten two excellent acceptances for my efforts, but wrecked my health...heh. If it's a no across the board () I would say to try again later this year, but use the months in between to develop yourself as a present day historian of XYZ topic.

Oh, and another thing that might have prejudiced them against you is how you explained the gap between the MA and PhD. It sounds very "gendered" for lack of a better word. This may be 2017, but women still don't have the benefit of the doubt that caretaking won't make them quit jobs or drop out of school. I didn't mention anything about my gaps in education in my SOPs. One school did ask for an accounting of this time, but I worded it to show that I was still working through my research interests in various ways. 

Edited March 1, 2017 by NoirFemme

[SarahBethSortino]

1 hour ago, NoirFemme said:

Well, I'm going from undergrad to graduate school--at 30. And I worked in retail for most of the 7-8 years between high school and my associate's degree. Perhaps the concern and risk is that a decade out of the field is like a lifetime in academia--methoodologies, fields, theories, etc shift--and your application might not have shown admissions commitees that you can jump back into your geographic/temporal field as it appears today. And/or, it's the dreaded job market: maybe your topic/method was pretty healthy five years ago, but the jobs have shifted to other topics and your application didn't show you could apply new lenses to freshen up your topic for future placement.

All this to say that I know what you're feeling about time and rejection. I worked myself to the bone during my return to undergrad, desperate to make up for lost time. I've gotten two excellent acceptances for my efforts, but wrecked my health...heh. If it's a no across the board () I would say to try again later this year, but use the months in between to develop yourself as a present day historian of XYZ topic.

Oh, and another thing that might have prejudiced them against you is how you explained the gap between the MA and PhD. It sounds very "gendered" for lack of a better word. This may be 2017, but women still don't have the benefit of the doubt that caretaking won't make them quit jobs or drop out of school. I didn't mention anything about my gaps in education in my SOPs. One school did ask for an accounting of this time, but I worded it to show that I was still working through my research interests in various ways. 

I didn't put anything in my SOP about my child, my divorce, anything. In fact, I quite frankly avoided mentioning that I had a child at all. I stuck to completely professional reasons in my SOP. I wasn't going to go whining to them about how having a kid kept me out of school. I have in fact decided not to even mention that fact to anyone if I do go so as to not make myself seem less "serious." That's a thing I've seen many times among my friends in grad school. Nobody needs to know a thing about my personal life at school.

[Calgacus]

2 hours ago, SarahBethSortino said:

At this point I really just want to say screw the whole thing. If schools don't want me because I'm not a traditional student then fine, I'm not beating my head against the wall for another year. And I definitely can't see myself going through the emotional hell I've dealt with since I submitted my applications.

My take on the "nontraditional" student thing is that maybe it's not so much about what you do in between, but rather for how long? While the ethics of this are certainly questionable, I have heard faculty talk about how it can be difficult to make funded offers to older students because the investment isn't as much in the grad school's favor. If you think about it, schools are providing 5+ years of funding and tuition remission with the (less than realistic) expectation that people will graduate, get good jobs, and have a full career of publishing, etc. to boost the reputation of the school they graduated from. I guess it's harder to make the argument if schools don't think applicants will have a full career after the already lengthy time it takes to do the phd? Again, this is just an anecdotal thing that I've heard mentioned in passing and may very well be untrue. Obviously, it's not really fair and seems to be along the lines of age discrimination, so it might be hard to get anyone to actually admit that this is a consideration. But if you do apply again, maybe emphasizing your career aspirations post-degree might combat any potential for this concern?

I'd be curious to hear whether others have heard much talk about this from faculty or other grad students? Hopefully you'll all tell me that I'm completely off the mark, which would make a (small) dent in improving my opinions about the institutional administration of higher ed.

[SarahBethSortino]

4 minutes ago, Calgacus said:

My take on the "nontraditional" student thing is that maybe it's not so much about what you do in between, but rather for how long? While the ethics of this are certainly questionable, I have heard faculty talk about how it can be difficult to make funded offers to older students because the investment isn't as much in the grad school's favor. If you think about it, schools are providing 5+ years of funding and tuition remission with the (less than realistic) expectation that people will graduate, get good jobs, and have a full career of publishing, etc. to boost the reputation of the school they graduated from. I guess it's harder to make the argument if schools don't think applicants will have a full career after the already lengthy time it takes to do the phd? Again, this is just an anecdotal thing that I've heard mentioned in passing and may very well be untrue. Obviously, it's not really fair and seems to be along the lines of age discrimination, so it might be hard to get anyone to actually admit that this is a consideration. But if you do apply again, maybe emphasizing your career aspirations post-degree might combat any potential for this concern?

I'd be curious to hear whether others have heard much talk about this from faculty or other grad students? Hopefully you'll all tell me that I'm completely off the mark, which would make a (small) dent in improving my opinions about the institutional administration of higher ed.

As far as outlining my career aspirations I was very pointed and direct in that. My career goals are well thought out and were presented I. My SOP. Also, I'm 36, not 70. After graduation I have the expectation of a 20-30 year career.

Edited March 1, 2017 by SarahBethSortino

[Calgacus]

Just now, SarahBethSortino said:

As far as outlining my career aspirations I was very pointed and direct in that. My career goals are well thought out and were presented I. My SOP. Also, I'm 35, not 70. After graduation I have the expectation of a 20-30 year career.

Of course. I don't mean to suggest that 35 is particularly old, and I'm certainly not advocating against admitting "nontraditional students," as you put it. My undergrad advisor went to grad school when she was 35 and has since had a strong career. I took several years off myself, and I think it's probably more productive for programs not to be filled with 22 years olds. I was simply throwing something out that I've heard faculty reference, and wondered whether others had heard the same. Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your bad luck this cycle. I hope you get good news from the school you're waitlisted at.

[Owly01]

3 hours ago, SarahBethSortino said:

I completely disagree with the idea that committees like the idea that you have done something outside of academia. I have dealt with three official rejections and two unofficial ones. I'm 36 and have also had a lot of gap years, and the feedback I have consistently heard is that I've spent too long outside of academia (even though I have a masters). One POI said if I had applied five years ago then I would be a better fit, but I'm an unusual and risky choice at this point in my life. Not all of us have the benefit of walking a straight line from undergrad to graduate school, and I feel at this point that the path I've taken to finally be in a position to apply has only hurt me, in spite of the fact that I emphasized in my statement that I do not consider this a career "Change," i consider it going back to the career I always intended to have before a million perfectly legitimate complications got in the way (illness, a child, death of a parent, divorce, etc.) Right now I'm just so jaded - its probably because I received another rejection yesterday. At this point I really just want to say screw the whole thing. If schools don't want me because I'm not a traditional student then fine, I'm not beating my head against the wall for another year. And I definitely can't see myself going through the emotional hell I've dealt with since I submitted my applications.

My advisor shared some insight with me that some of the faculty who sit on admissions committees can be fickle and traditionalists and/or elitists, regardless of where they received their Ph.D. from or what school they're now at. At the heart of what my advisor was saying, is that quite often, working in one field without taking a breath now and then generates a myopic worldview, and sometimes causes faculty members to forget how difficult the journey going into, or even out of, academia can be. Sometimes, it goes as far as them taking their tenure track positions for granted. Even the nicest of POIs can be affected by this.

What I took away from this is that no matter how perfect of an application we submit, it will always be, although it really shouldn't, entirely subjective to the eyes and ears of those reading and grading our applications. More often than not, we're left beating ourselves up over things entirely out of our control. Yes, we can check grammar and punctuation, finely tune the angle from which we answer their prompts, and to a certain extent, up our GRE scores. But, at the end of the application cycle, a lot of us have been subjected to a sort of indescribable hell that was totally out of our control, regardless of whether or not we were admitted anywhere.

[laleph]

1 hour ago, Calgacus said:

Of course. I don't mean to suggest that 35 is particularly old, and I'm certainly not advocating against admitting "nontraditional students," as you put it. My undergrad advisor went to grad school when she was 35 and has since had a strong career. I took several years off myself, and I think it's probably more productive for programs not to be filled with 22 years olds. I was simply throwing something out that I've heard faculty reference, and wondered whether others had heard the same. Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your bad luck this cycle. I hope you get good news from the school you're waitlisted at.

This is purely anecdotal, but anyway… I've heard from friends already attending (in history and related disciplines) that the average age for entering students is around 27. (I had inquired about this more than a year ago when I began thinking about applying – I'm now 30.) It should be noted that students entering straight out of undergrad are pretty rare. According to a friend at a top program, only 2 people out of her cohort of about 20 were in that position. Like @Calgacus, I've heard that older students must make a stronger case for their potential to contribute to the discipline, given that they will graduate in their early forties. Yes, 40 isn't 70 – so you're not staring down the barrel of death from natural causes quite yet – but it does mean that you will be starting your career at the moment when your age-group peers have been publishing, teaching, and all the rest for 5-10 years already.

Second, @NoirFemme's comments about familiarizing yourself with the current debates in your subfield were spot-on. Those of us who've been out for a while must prove we have a handle on those debates right out of the gate. I was lucky enough to have access to a research library as I prepared my applications, which allowed me to update my knowledge of my subfield. I honestly don't know how I would have been able to apply without that access. (This goes back to the debate about how students' socio-economic status affects their applications, but that's for another post.)

The take-away, I suppose, is that 35 is not necessarily "too old," but you have a steeper hill to climb. If you know you want to go to graduate school – for all the reasons you mentioned in your SOP – then you should apply next year. As I wrestled with that question last year, I read this article, and it helped. 

Fingers crossed for your waitlist school.

Edited March 1, 2017 by laleph

[Sigaba]

The profession has been shaped by a generation of scholars who made significant personal sacrifices and took incredible risks to get where they are. Now, we take certain approaches to the past as best practices, but that's only because we're walking on a path blazed by those who went before us.

It is said that academic historians seek to replicate themselves in their graduate students. It may well be that even if you don't talk about the twists and turns in your life that "kept" you out of school, BTDTs are going to wonder about your commitment relative to theirs. (To paraphrase Darrell Waltrip, when you sit down for a breakfast of eggs and ham, the chicken is dedicated but the pig is committed.)

When you do the forensics on why you did not receive an offer of admissions from a particular department, was it because you weren't a good fit, or was it because you're a non-traditional student, or was it because of "arbitrary" circumstances "totally out of [your] control"?

Or did the professors making the decisions see in you a plate of eggs but no ham? 

This is a tough question to ask one's self; it can lead down a path of self destructive introversion rather than probing introspection. Yet, if you are disappointed by this application season, you may profit from asking it. 

 

[nhhistorynut]

I am a somewhat nontraditional student in that I am almost 30 (this may), took like 8 years to get my BA with several years off between, am married, own a house, and have a kid (shes 5). I will say that I mentioned some of the hardships I've experienced in my SOP, mostly just unsupportive parents who thought I'd be better off as a dental hygienist. That said, when it came to explaining why I wanted to go to grad school, I couldn't explain it without mentioning my daughter, because she was the catalyst that pushed me to finish my BA. I don't know if it helped my app, but it didn't hurt, either. I didn't make a sob story about being a parent or anything, and actually didn't mention  the other catalyst that made me decide to go for it (that is, my husband being diagnosed with acute leukemia and undergoing a stem cell transplant while I was pregnant with said child), but I did sort of "use" her to help explain my passion, drive, and devotion. I will also say that I spoke honestly about my lack of direction in my early twenties that led to poor grades and my eventual dropping out. I think honesty worked well for me.

Who knows though, I guess. In the end I think it all depends on who's on the admissions committee and how they feel about things like kids and the trials and tribulations of life. I took a calculated risk by mentioning my bad undergrad grades and kid.

[nevermind]

6 hours ago, SarahBethSortino said:

Right now I'm just so jaded - its probably because I received another rejection yesterday. At this point I really just want to say screw the whole thing. If schools don't want me because I'm not a traditional student then fine, I'm not beating my head against the wall for another year. And I definitely can't see myself going through the emotional hell I've dealt with since I submitted my applications.

 

 

 

1

I get it. I did a Master's degree at an unknown institution (because I did poorly in my undergrad for various reasons) and was told point blank that the high GPA and extra stuff (publishing, adjuncting) I did during 3 years wouldn't matter because my (new) high GPA wouldn't be considered since "the curricula isn't exactly rigorous". I took a year "off" to reconsider other options, working part-time and living at my parents' house (because I had everything invested in that dream). And yes, during that first cycle, I was rejected to all the Ph.D. programs I applied to.

After a year, I applied to ANOTHER Master's program at an Ivy and got in, non-funded. I did some networking and found some TA'ing opportunities using my previous Master's degree and got my tuition paid for. This was an interdisciplinary program and I took as many theory classes as I could and gained experience in a lot of other areas AND another high GPA. I was gun shy about applying to Ph.D. programs again, so I took a couple years off to see if there was something else that I could do that I loved and that wasn't the hamster wheel of academia.

There wasn't, really though. So I spent 6 months crafting applications and taking the GRE. And now I'm at an R1 and loving what I do. But before I got any offers, I received four straight rejections. And this was after getting two Master's degrees with a 3.9+ GPA and a 165 on the Verbal GRE. The competition is fierce out there, but I also know (in retrospect) I could've improved my SOP to position myself as more of a historian. 

Entering your program in your mid-thirties is not ideal but it's not insurmountable...I've spent 5+ years in grad school before heading into a Ph.D. program, which means that I was finishing my first MA when most of my cohort was still in high school However, it gave me a realistic sense of the workload and how to manage my time.

BUT. REAL TALK. The application process is the least stressful part of academia. If you can't handle getting rejections, then maybe you really should reconsider your options. I've been rejected for fellowships this year that I've applied to...and yes, although it sucks, you just have to learn that rejection is an inevitable part of this job. And you're only being rejected because you're trying to get ahead. It's really up to you if (1) it's worth it (2) you have what it takes to bounce back. There might be institutional biases at some places that tacitly practice age discrimination, but I'm proof (and so are the other 4 people in my cohort who are in their mid-30s) that this isn't true across the board, so I honestly don't think it's a viable excuse. 

Edited March 1, 2017 by nevermind

[dr. t]

1 hour ago, nevermind said:

The application process is the least stressful part of academia. If you can't handle getting rejections, then maybe you really should reconsider your options.

[SarahBethSortino]

1 hour ago, nevermind said:

I get it. I did a Master's degree at an unknown institution (because I did poorly in my undergrad for various reasons) and was told point blank that the high GPA and extra stuff (publishing, adjuncting) I did during 3 years wouldn't matter because my (new) high GPA wouldn't be considered since "the curricula isn't exactly rigorous". I took a year "off" to reconsider other options, working part-time and living at my parents' house (because I had everything invested in that dream). And yes, during that first cycle, I was rejected to all the Ph.D. programs I applied to.

After a year, I applied to ANOTHER Master's program at an Ivy and got in, non-funded. I did some networking and found some TA'ing opportunities using my previous Master's degree and got my tuition paid for. This was an interdisciplinary program and I took as many theory classes as I could and gained experience in a lot of other areas AND another high GPA. I was gun shy about applying to Ph.D. programs again, so I took a couple years off to see if there was something else that I could do that I loved and that wasn't the hamster wheel of academia.

There wasn't, really though. So I spent 6 months crafting applications and taking the GRE. And now I'm at an R1 and loving what I do. But before I got any offers, I received four straight rejections. And this was after getting two Master's degrees with a 3.9+ GPA and a 165 on the Verbal GRE. The competition is fierce out there, but I also know (in retrospect) I could've improved my SOP to position myself as more of a historian. 

Entering your program in your mid-thirties is not ideal but it's not insurmountable...I've spent 5+ years in grad school before heading into a Ph.D. program, which means that I was finishing my first MA when most of my cohort was still in high school However, it gave me a realistic sense of the workload and how to manage my time.

BUT. REAL TALK. The application process is the least stressful part of academia. If you can't handle getting rejections, then maybe you really should reconsider your options. I've been rejected for fellowships this year that I've applied to...and yes, although it sucks, you just have to learn that rejection is an inevitable part of this job. And you're only being rejected because you're trying to get ahead. It's really up to you if (1) it's worth it (2) you have what it takes to bounce back. There might be institutional biases at some places that tacitly practice age discrimination, but I'm proof (and so are the other 4 people in my cohort who are in their mid-30s) that this isn't true across the board, so I honestly don't think it's a viable excuse. 

No to seem short in my response, but I am very sick of hearing that the application process is the least stressful part of academia and if I can't take rejection I probably shouldn't do it. That is not the situation I am in AT ALL. I fully expected to get rejected to some places, though with my very good stats and very good letters of recommendation I never dreamed I would be in this position. I think what a lot of people don't take into account is that other life logistics are hanging in the balance. I'm trying to buy a house with my boyfriend right now and won't get approved for a mortgage if I don't have a funding offer. I have a seven year old who would kind of like to know where she's going to school next year. I have a job that would kind of like to know if I'm going to be here next year. I have custody issues to work out with my ex, child support, alimony: ALL of which is dependent upon what happens in this application cycle. So I have about 6 people in my life who are directly affected by my applications. So I think it's unfair to suggest that I'm whining about the rejections and can't take it. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by SarahBethSortino

[nevermind]

1 minute ago, SarahBethSortino said:

So I think it's unfair to suggest that I'm whining about the rejections and can't take it. 

 

Fortunately/unfortunately, we all have "good stats" and "good letters of recommendation". There needs to be more to your application than these factors. However, if your application showed even the slightest hint of the immaturity you've displayed on this page, I can see why programs might be hesitant to accept you. Everybody has "life things" that hang in the balance (e.g. finding summer funding to get you from June - September, for instance) and/or have families impacted by certain processes (fellowships, archival work that takes you overseas, etc.). Take the constructive criticisms from other people on this thread and learn from them. But if you want us to have sympathy because you can't buy a house yet, it's not happening (buying a house is a luxury, not a right). 

[etoile89]

Edited

Edited March 2, 2017 by etoile89
Wanted to remove post

[SarahBethSortino]

41 minutes ago, nevermind said:

Fortunately/unfortunately, we all have "good stats" and "good letters of recommendation". There needs to be more to your application than these factors. However, if your application showed even the slightest hint of the immaturity you've displayed on this page, I can see why programs might be hesitant to accept you. Everybody has "life things" that hang in the balance (e.g. finding summer funding to get you from June - September, for instance) and/or have families impacted by certain processes (fellowships, archival work that takes you overseas, etc.). Take the constructive criticisms from other people on this thread and learn from them. But if you want us to have sympathy because you can't buy a house yet, it's not happening (buying a house is a luxury, not a right). 

Ok, I suppose I'll take trying to be a responsible parent and figure out how my daughters life is going to go for the next few years as immaturity. I mentioned my good stats and letters of recommendation to say that I genuinely thought I had a good chance. I worked hard on every part of my application as everyone else did here. You don't know me, and you have no idea how good or bad my application was. You also have no idea about the various circumstances that brought me to this point. Im not asking for sympathy because I want to buy a house, I'm stating the fact that I can handl le professional rejection, it's the supplemental things in my life - not to mention the people who actually depend on me - that are making this a stressful process. I find your ability to dismiss those other things as immature to be a little insulting. I guarantee you if we had a conversation about all the things that kept me out of grad school for 10 years you perhaps wouldn't be so quick to dismiss me as being inappropriate for graduate school. You might actually say, I'm sorry, that really stinks. I can see why this is so difficult for you. I came here for commiseration and the kind of compassion I've seen afforded to other people in this board, not to have someone wave their hand at me to shoo me away from graduate work because I'm rightfully upset about the state of things. Furthermore, to your point about buying a house, it may not be a right, but it's something I have worked ten hard years to save up for and I think I have a right to be proud of that achievement and nervous about the outcome

Edited March 2, 2017 by SarahBethSortino

[NoirFemme]

48 minutes ago, SarahBethSortino said:

 I came here for commiseration and the kind of compassion I've seen afforded to other people in this board, not to have someone wave their hand at me to shoo me away from graduate work because I'm rightfully upset about the state of things. 

Here's the thing--what more can anyone say except "I know how you feel", "it's not over until it's over", "try again next year", "[insert story of adversity and what changed]"?? I've seen you post about your personal life over and over again in this thread and the one you started about 30+ year old applicants. Everyone has given you sympathy with every post.

I spent a full day crying over a rejection that really really sucked because, as I said, I worked hard despite having so many odds stacked against me. And honestly, from my perspective, I'm a little jealous you have a MA--a lot of the obstacles I've had to overcome to get to this point would have been a less difficult to jump over if I'd finished my BA a long time ago and was applying right now with an advanced degree. I basically crammed the professional training most get at the master's level and finishing a BA into the past three years.

So I was pissed at not getting into the program I wanted the most and busted my ass to prepare for. My mom and faculty advisers commiserated with my disappointment, but it's not like they could call the DGS and demand I be admitted!!

And on a non-academic topic, I dreamed of being a published author. One year I finally lucked out on getting an agent and a small book deal...and then I couldn't seem to sell another piece of writing. Every rejection was "sorry, we already have stories/articles with this topic." It was devastating and demoralizing. I stopped writing for two years and foolishly dropped my supportive agent out of the assumption that they didn't know what they were doing. And then recently, I suffered the painful realization that I took myself out of the game, not the industry. I only hurt myself by quitting, not all of the editors who rejected my work. I could have written multiple stories during the two year hiatus and at least had a better chance of selling if I kept submitting. You can't sell a book that doesn't exist (unless you're a celebrity). 

If the PhD is your dream, then do it. But if you see way more obstacles and difficulties than success in its pursuit, maybe the universe is giving you a sign to either reassess your purpose/goals or reconfigure your life. Because the house buying thing seems like you want a settled life--grad school doesn't seem very settled to me (what are you going to do in 5-7 years if the postdocs or TT jobs you want/get hired for are far away from where you're making a home?). 

If it's teaching and research you're keen to do, why not look for those types of jobs right now? Or get a postgraduate certificate?

Edited March 2, 2017 by NoirFemme

[viridian]

deleted.

Edited March 2, 2017 by viridian

[SarahBethSortino]

2 minutes ago, NoirFemme said:

Here's the thing--what more can anyone say except "I know how you feel", "it's not over until it's over", "try again next year", "[insert story of adversity and what changed]"?? I've seen you post about your personal life over and over again in this thread and the one you started about 30+ year old applicants. Everyone has given you sympathy with every post.

I spent a full day crying over a rejection that really really sucked because, as I said, I worked hard despite having so many odds stacked against me. And honestly, from my perspective, I'm a little jealous you have a MA--a lot of the obstacles I've had to overcome to get to this point would have been a less difficult to jump over if I'd finished my BA a long time ago and was applying right now with an advanced degree. I basically crammed professional training most get at the master's level and finishing a BA into the past three years.

So I was pissed at not getting into the program I wanted the most and busted my ass to prepare for. My mom and faculty advisers commiserated with my disappointment, but it's not like they could call the DGS and demand I be admitted. 

And on a non-academic topic, I dreamed of being a published author. One year I finally lucked out on getting an agent and a small book deal...and then I couldn't seem to sell another piece of writing. Every rejection was "sorry, we already have stories/articles with this topic." It was devastating and demoralizing. I stopped writing for two years and foolishly dropped my supportive agent out of the assumption that they didn't know what they were doing. And then recently I realized I took myself out of the game, not the industry. I only hurt myself by quitting, not all the editors who rejected my work. I could have written multiple stories during the two year hiatus and at least had a better chance of selling if I kept submitting. You can't sell a book that doesn't exist unless you're a celebrity. 

If the PhD is your dream, then do it. But if you see way more obstacles and difficulties than success in its pursuit, maybe the universe is giving you a sign to either reassess your purpose/goals or reconfigure your life. Because the house buying thing seems like you want a settled life--grad school doesn't seem very settled to me (what are you going to do in 5-7 years if the postdocs or TT jobs you want/get hired for are far away from where you're making a home?). 

If it's teaching and research you're keen to do, why not look for those types of jobs right now? Or get a postgraduate certificate?

Certainly I've had a lot of people in here offer words of encouragement. And I've worked very hard to do the same. What I take issue with is being told that the circumstances that go into trying to get to this point make me immature. It was the other posters comments I was directly speaking to. 

I won't  even begin to go into my reasons for buying property right now (long story short, I have an opportunity to buy a great place at a cheap price and plan to rent it out for additional income when I have to move for work at some point). I have a plan and I've thought ahead to all the contingeneies you speak of. But perhaps so many people in here are correct. Perhaps I'm just not cut out for it.