General Anxiety/ Thank you from a long time lurker

[Sunsy]

Hello everybody,

This is my first application season (just finishing up applying to ~13 schools for early modern lit out of a BA) and although I've never posted here before, I've been diligently following this board for about a year now as I've worked on my apps. Just want to say thank you all for having such a helpful and supportive board! I wish you all luck in the coming months!  

Anyways, seeing as this is the first time I've gone through this (soul-crushing) process, I'm wondering if anyone who has done this in the past has any tips or tricks for not feeling as anxious and regretful about the whole thing as I do now. As far as my undergrad record is concerned, everything is super cool; great GPA, reccomenders, GRE scores, awards, etc. but everytime I think about my writing sample or SoP I feel like everything I've done is hopelessly outdated, irrelevant to recent scholarship, and not making a clear point. Anyone else feel this way? I know i'm definitely not alone in this, but I'm also probably not alone in feeling that I'm alone in this, if that makes any sense. As I was working on the apps, putting less effort into them than I should have admittedly, I felt great about them. Now, however, whenever I remember them and think that people are in the process of reading the stuff in them, my stomach drops.

I guess I just wanted a place to vent/complain, but I'd also like to hear more about how all of you are dealing with this stuff, seeing as you all are so very supportive in everything I've read on here. Also, people who made it to the other side and actually got admitted into programs, did you feel the same way? If you did, how did the feeling that the writing in your app was awful (if you felt that way, of course) change or not change once you actually got to grad school? From where you're sitting, are my worries about relevance to the field and all that unfounded? 

Thanks.

[angel_kaye13]

What you're feeling is very natural. I came in with a BA, looking for MA or PhD-track schools, after a 5-year break. I knew I wanted this, but I felt hopelessly behind my peers. (Most of whom were already finishing their PhDs or in the field teaching.) Additionally, as I looked at programs that I REALLY wanted - like Notre Dame - I realized how completely ill-prepared I was for even their baseline acceptance (and, consequently, I did not apply there, because of my lack of training in Latin and Medieval studies in general).

But when I got accepted - because I did, 1 out of my 3 schools applied - I entered in with an amazing cohort, and I realized we all were struggling with the same thing: this sense of not belonging, worries of jobs, are our interests "interesting" enough, etc. I will tell you my SoP was based off of a Biblical studies exegesis, because it was the only paper of suitable length I could find! ...All this tangent to say: you're good enough. People always fret about their scores, their SoP...and that's valid. But if you've put in the time, and tried your best, these are just factors, everything else is just timing. I was anxious the first year, because I didn't realize I could plot the timeline of when I'd be accepted, and I frankly didn't understand what grad schools are looking for. But now, on the other side, having taken a recommended Intro to Grad Study with the majority of my awesome cohort [where we had the BEST professor break down the application process, what academia is all about, job prospects, how to survive grad school, etc], we've all pretty much reached a consensus that is hard to get others to realize until you experience it for yourself. Just know that you've tried your best, and, if you've done your research well, you'll likely do fine. It's a lot about timing (available space - do they have too many of a certain period, are they trying to build another program?), but...{shrug} there are so many factors outside your control.

I also wish I'd known that what admit committees look for in an MA applicant and PhD applicant are quite different. Going in, I would have KNOWN my application could only ever be an M.A. application, that was my greatest realization this cycle - the way I constructed my SoP and the writing samples at my disposal. The acceptance I got - while I got the impression they were impressed with my sample - was CLEARLY an MA accept, not PhD. (I had applied for direct-to-PhD, but got accepted as an M.A., because someone else got the PhD-track one.) THIS also turned out to be a great thing, because my school - while having great medievalists, does not have THE programs for Medieval work. So if I HAD gotten in on the PhD...I don't know if that would have been best for my career, which my medieval professors have advised me as such...I don't know if I would chalk everything up to "if it's meant to be..." but I do want to encourage you that...whatever happens, acceptance or not, is not automatically a failure, but an opportunity for the thing that makes you come alive. It MAY be grad school, but it may not, if things don't go the way you and I and countless others hope most for. And that will be a bitter pill, I think, but one that I remind myself constantly of. I've heard SO many people regale the alt-ac paths their careers have taken, after grad school or rejection from...So reminding myself of that, that it will be okay, whatever happens, is another way that I stabilize my emotions.

This is quite rambling, so I'll leave off here. But you're feeling natural, I don't know if there is anything I can say to make it better, but I do encourage you to rest until you see what happens. (Even while knowing we all check this site entirely too much, all knowing that results won't be in for another 2 weeks at least!) I actually feel like you'll get at least one acceptance, and, after that, I think you'll be quite surprised at all the things you'll learn and realize, that will make all the frustration and stress seem silly, or "if I'd ONLY known that earlier!" We all do (those who have been through the process and made it to the other side, if only the M.A. side). But just try and focus on life. The what-ifs will soon become a reality, and you've done your best. I do wish you the best of luck and hope you'll do great!

[Yanaka]

1 hour ago, angel_kaye13 said:

I also wish I'd known that what admit committees look for in an MA applicant and PhD applicant are quite different. Going in, I would have KNOWN my application could only ever be an M.A. application, that was my greatest realization this cycle - the way I constructed my SoP and the writing samples at my disposal. The acceptance I got - while I got the impression they were impressed with my sample - was CLEARLY an MA accept, not PhD. (I had applied for direct-to-PhD, but got accepted as an M.A., because someone else got the PhD-track one.)

Would you mind developing on those differences?  

[angel_kaye13]

@Yanaka: There are little things, but the biggest one was that my M.A. cycle, my statement of purposes were more anecdotal, versus, for my PhD cycle, I knew exactly where I wanted to focus in on, who I wanted to work with and why, and I had more recent, relevant experience. I can't say if these same things apply to you, but this was the big flag that set me apart as a definite M.A. applicant, in my mind - the lack of experience and direction, and how I thus was able to set up my SoP.

[Yanaka]

Thank you @angel_kaye13! I think my SOP's reveal that I have rather precise ideas and directions that I wish to follow to begin with, but I think it's also clear that I haven't been able to dive into it just yet. I wonder however how they differentiate MA's from the first two years of a PhD track. Aren't they supposed to be pretty equivalent at some schools? 

[angel_kaye13]

5 minutes ago, Yanaka said:

Thank you @angel_kaye13! I think my SOP's reveal that I have rather precise ideas and directions that I wish to follow to begin with, but I think it's also clear that I haven't been able to dive into it just yet. I wonder however how they differentiate MA's from the first two years of a PhD track. Aren't they supposed to be pretty equivalent at some schools? 

No, they are not. Now, if you're talking direct-to-PhD? Yes, definitely. But students going in to a PhD degree are generally at a different place (or should be, in my mind) than those who are coming in as direct-to-PhD. Students coming with an M.A. have a thesis, and other relevant experience. Direct-to-PhD will have different requirements than those needed for regular PhD requirements. (You can take a look at any school's graduate handbooks, for the differences in programs in these regards.) I did feel on a similar level as some of my colleagues who were the direct-admits, but I was also aware that they had better prepared than me, whether in terms of doing capstone projects, having already published, and various other accolades.

These are just my observations of my experience. When I write about my different SoPs, it's not just the content, but that I presented myself in a different way, which is revealed in your writing/how you write about yourself; admit committees are pretty good at reading between the lines/can parse any bullcrap, because...that's what we do, as English majors. ;-) This isn't to frighten you! It sounds good that your SoPs are so thoughtfully prepared, like you are on the right track. I simply wanted to clarify how I meant, about the way I presented myself in these two cycles. ^^

[Yanaka]

I apologize, I did not want to seem contemptuous or anything--I was writing my thoughts, "thinking out loud" whilst comparing your instructive observations with my current SOP's' content :-) I totally get what you mean, and I am probably completely oblivious to what my writing says about me. 

However, I am a little confused about the direct-to-PhD thing. I was addressing the difference between a terminal MA, and the first two years of a PhD track when you come from a BA. Were you, too?  What are the differences between a regular PhD and a direct-to-PhD if they're the same program? Maybe you mean a PhD program that separates textually the MA part and the Doctorate part.

[angel_kaye13]

25 minutes ago, Yanaka said:

"I apologize, I did not want to seem contemptuous or anything--I was writing my thoughts, "thinking out loud" whilst comparing your instructive observations with my current SOP's' content :-) I totally get what you mean, and I am probably completely oblivious to what my writing says about me. "

Oh, no, I understand. I assume, because of your location, that English is not your first language, so I did not think you were being rude or anything. Even if English IS your first language, I TRY not to assume too much. Not always do I succeed, but language barriers are difficult, and online communication is not the same for everyone, even if we DO speak the same native language!  Thanks for being so kind, though, I was actually wondering if I needed to alter my first sentence, to let you know I didn't think you were being rude; I was afraid I sounded rude! Yay, language!

So, terminal M.A.s - if you look online - are degrees that only go up to an M.A. I was not considering terminal M.A.s in our discussion at all, as we've all been discussing our doctoral aspirations. Direct-to-PhD means a university allows you to apply, regardless if you have a Masters or not - so, applicants who only have a B.A. and applicants who have a Masters are both able to apply, but this would be referring solely to those applicants who only have a B.A. (This is desirable for many reasons, but mostly because it would save an applicant time (letting you get your M.A. and your PhD, basically), and, as an ego-stroke, it let's the world know you're pretty bamf for your age. ;-)

PhD and Direct-to-Phd are basically the same, in terms of the courses you can take, just the people who are entering as regular PhD applicants likely have their Master's thesis and other relevant experience (teaching, publishing, et al, although these things are not relegated only to the PhD applicants, anyone may ostensibly do these things.) I think I'm correct in stating that not all schools have a specifically "direct-to-PhD" application, but will still allow students to enter with only a B.A. But, if this is the case, they usually talk about this, in either their FAQ section or Admission page.

I hope this is helpful!

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by angel_kaye13

[unræd]

8 hours ago, Sunsy said:

I feel like everything I've done is hopelessly outdated, irrelevant to recent scholarship, and not making a clear point.

Welcome to being an academic! If you get in to a PhD program, you'll fit in just fine.

I don't mean to be flip, and without further details it is of course entirely possible that your materials are indeed all those things. But I'd doubt it on spec, just because your own feelings are not a really very good guide to that. They're actually a horrible guide to that!

Take heart: everyone feels this way applying to graduate school. Everyone (alas!) feels this way in graduate school. Everyone feels this way on the job market (where, admittedly, the pressures are far, far tighter than at any other point along this timeline), everyone feels this way as they struggle for tenure, and even professors with fancy endowed chairs who've been teaching for 30 years sometimes feel this way, too. It's normal, it's natural, and it's even a (potentially) good sign, in that your worry about not being in pace with the field shows you know there is a field to keep pace with, and that you're not applying blindly with no idea of what the conversations is academic literary study are really like, which is often an issue for (some) candidates direct out of undergrad. (And I say that as someone who went directly from a BA to a PhD program myself, and who thinks a lot of the "you've got to get a Master's first"/"schools prefer MAs"/"MAs are necessarily stronger candidates" advice on GradCafe is often too strongly stated, occasionally misplaced, and sometimes even downright wrong.)

The bigger question is coping with it. Short term, there's not a lot to be done: waiting around for admissions is shitty, and there's no way around that. Myself, I avoided GC between the time I submitted my last app and got my first acceptance, and tried (with naturally relatively little -- but some! -- success) to prevent myself from obsessing about my applications by spending time with non-academic friends and throwing myself into non-academic hobbies. In the longer term if you're admitted to a program, imposter syndrome's a beast, and there are all kinds of ways of trying to build yourself (and your colleagues, who'll be feeling the same things!) up and, often more importantly, keep things in perspective.

[Yanaka]

Thanks @angel_kaye13, my native language is an ambiguous subject even for me, but I'm much more fluent in French than in English despite my origins, for sure.  

Hum so, no, I know about the differences when it comes to admissions etc.! My interrogations were actually on how courses and the cohort were different, between people entering with a previous MA or entering directly after their BA. Ha, language--we'll get there, angel_kaye13! lol

I'm asking because you said that direct-to-PhD people were generally badasser? If I understood correctly!

Edited December 29, 2016 by Yanaka

[angel_kaye13]

Lol! Re: our language difficulties: indeed! 

Okay! So, for how courses will work, there will be no difference. If you are an M.A. student or PhD, all the courses that are "graduate" courses are open to you, and you will be in classes with people from all over. I have been in classes with not only PhD students, but also MFA students and older adults who simply want to audit a course, because they love learning. There is no distinction, in this case, between any graduate student. (The only caveat to this is where students are either taking Independent Studies, with a particular professor [in which case, only those students who have filled out the proper paperwork have permission to join that class] or classes specifically for Thesis or Dissertation hours; these are the only situations I have seen distinguishing points, in regard to coursework and level.)

Cohort is a very different thing: your cohort is who you come in with, in the same grouping. So when I talk about my cohort? I'm talking ONLY about other Master's students, who are fulfilling the basic program standards. (In my school, Rhet-Comp and English Literature students have different programs, but we are still technically considered one cohort, because we came in at the same time, and are all Master's students only.) So that is a distinguishing thing. If you were a Master's student, you would NOT be in the same cohort as a PhD student or Direct-to-Phd student, because their programs are very different. I haven't examined the programs in-depth, but I consider the direct-to-Phd students and Phd students as a single cohort. But this might not be the case. I just know that that is how my particular school groups their distinguishing programs - Masters and PhD.

There are other items that can distinguish students - such as fellowships received - but my understanding is that they are still considered within the same cohort.

[Yanaka]

Wow!

Thank you for being my grad school dictionary and encyclopedia 

So when you say this:

1 hour ago, angel_kaye13 said:

I did feel on a similar level as some of my colleagues who were the direct-admits, but I was also aware that they had better prepared than me, whether in terms of doing capstone projects, having already published, and various other accolades.

There's a distinction between MA to PhD and BA to PhD that you have observed, and that I'd like you to expand on as well  

[angel_kaye13]

4 minutes ago, Yanaka said:

There's a distinction between MA to PhD and BA to PhD that you have observed, and that I'd like you to expand on as well  

Hm. I don't understand your question here, I'm sorry: it seems like you are asking how I distinguish between candidates who are M.A. to PhD versus B.A. to PhD, which I think I already mentioned, in one of my previous posts? In terms of our being applicants, the only distinction is in our level of preparedness, usually. (An M.A. candidate will have a Master's thesis, and graduate-level coursework.) Of course, this does NOT necessarily make the M.A. candidate a better applicant, necessarily, especially if the B.A. applicant has projects, publications, etc. to their name; it's all about relevant fit and the quality of work.

In terms of acceptance to a program, they are the same, if that is what you are asking. (Like if you and I were to get into the same program, both PhD, we would be the same, even though you [I assume] are applying with a B.A. and I am applying with an M.A. If we both got accepted to the same program, we would both still be eligible for the same courses and required to meet the same program requirements. The only variation would be our respective experiences, of course.)

[Yanaka]

Okay thanks. I was only under the impression that you thought BA > PHD applicants did better in their PhD, but I guess I misunderstood!

[kayrabbit]

10 hours ago, Yanaka said:

Okay thanks. I was only under the impression that you thought BA > PHD applicants did better in their PhD, but I guess I misunderstood!

It sounded to me like the suggestion was that her "colleagues who were the direct-admits" to PhD programs with only a BA were better prepared (at time of application) than those who applied with BAs and were admitted to the MA rather than the PhD, and that's the reason those direct admits were admitted to the PhD while others weren't. I could be wrong about what was intended and won't dive further into the questions of interpretation that Yanaka and angel_kaye have been discussing, but I can weigh in a bit on the difference between applicants with a BA who are admitted to an MA vs "directly admitted" to a PhD program, at least in terms of perceived difference in qualification. As far as differentiation within a PhD program between those who enter with a BA vs an MA, it's basically just a difference of requirements, depending on the program. I had to take more classes than my cohort mates with MAs, and took my qualifying exam about a semester later than their average, but there's no distinction within the program between those who entered with BA or MA, and people often forget who came in with what.

Regarding differences in application quality or preparedness, the answer isn't a clearcut one by any means: I was admitted with a BA directly to a PhD program, but I don't feel that I was significantly more prepared than others who were admitted to the MA. There are so many factors at work in determining who is admitted where. I did write a BA Honor's Thesis and was able to sketch out a direction of research and state who I wanted to work with, and the person I identified as my primary POI at my eventual program is my director now, but there was so, so much I didn't know at the time as well. Perhaps my interests were more defined than some students who were admitted to the master's program, who went on to switch their research fields, but there are also PhD students at my university who entered with MAs and went on to switch research fields during PhD coursework. I do think that having two more years to develop your interests, particularly in the context of graduate coursework, is a huge advantage for those applying with an MA (and angel_kaye makes a great point that students who complete the MA can then choose which PhD programs to apply to with a more developed understanding of their research interests). But I've known students who were accepted into an MA who had more thoroughly defined research interests (and were certainly more well read) than me, and PhD students who entered with MAs who still felt they were starting from scratch with their research interests. It's a mixed bag. Angel_kaye seemed to suggest that her initial application was clearly only suitable for MA acceptance, but I could say the same thing about the straight-from-BA application that did end up getting me into a PhD program. My writing sample and SoP had plenty of problems, revealed massive ignorance about what constitutes a research field, and were outdated and canonical in focus. The problems with my writing sample and stated interests were problems that I wouldn't have even been able to identify until I completed my first year or two of grad school. Many of the straight to PhD applicants whose posts I read on GradCafé seem far more in touch with current conversations and trends in their fields than I was when I applied. Yet, I got into a PhD program, and plenty of students with extremely developed research interests (some of them formed over breaks between BA and graduate work) begin in the MA program instead. It's a complex process, and I don't think it's very easy to label any application as "only MA material," because there are so many factors at work. Certainly, if I hadn't gotten into a PhD program during my cycle, I probably would have said that my application was clearly not suitable for PhD entry. Regardless of the results of a particular application cycle (which I hope are positive for both of you!), in addition to the qualities we can analyze in our own work, applications have less definable strengths and weaknesses that are specific to the programs, the people looking at them, and the moment. I suppose the moral I'm going for is that, given the fairly strong base qualifications common to most applicants (GPA, GRE, sophisticated writing), there's no hard and fast way to count anyone out. I can't say exactly why I was accepted into my program — I'm very happy that I was — but I think my application could have just as easily, and not necessarily inaccurately, been labeled as "not quite at PhD level yet."

[Yanaka]

Thank you @kayrabbit for your detailed answer! You understood my interrogations correctly, and gave me a little more hope with regard to my applying with a BA. It still seems strange that undergrads were more prepared than MA holders for their PhD!

[kayrabbit]

1 hour ago, Yanaka said:

Thank you @kayrabbit for your detailed answer! You understood my interrogations correctly, and gave me a little more hope with regard to my applying with a BA. It still seems strange that undergrads were more prepared than MA holders for their PhD!

No problem @Yanaka! I wouldn't say undergrads who are admitted to PhD programs are typically more prepared than those who already hold an MA — I was primarily comparing those who are admitted direct from BA to PhD and those who are admitted to MA programs with a BA, but it does vary across the board. Completing an MA first is certainly the best preparation for a PhD (though not necessarily the ideal path or timeline for everyone), and consequently those who have completed an MA are usually able to move more quickly through the process of defining a research field and developing a dissertation project than someone who enters with a BA. Regarding admissions, however, I just think that being prepared in the sense of having established and fixed research interests doesn't always translate directly to how an adcomm evaluates candidates or determines who will be admitted. Definitions of "prepared" or "desirable" candidates vary across programs, which I suppose is essentially what can make admissions results feel confusing or arbitrary.

[angel_kaye13]

@Yanaka: regarding the "It still seems strange that undergrads were more prepared than MA holders for their PhD!" I think you might be looking at it the wrong way. @kayrabbit already put it very nicely, but I simply wanted to add that you have to consider your preparation in undergraduate. I LOVE-love-love my undergraduate alma mater, I wouldn't change it for the world. But the fact remains that I went to a university that doesn't specialize in Medieval Studies - or anything near it - had no Special Collections that I was aware of, and didn't get an Honors College until after my freshman year. Conversely, one of my close colleagues who got admitted to her direct-to-PhD had publication experience, encouraged and stoked by close counseling of a faculty member. (I had presented at a conference, and close relationships with my professors and advisor, but the idea of publishing had never been advised me or been anything that I'd ever thought about, which I think would have come up, if we'd had an Honors College earlier, or at least having some kind of Capstone project.) This is what I mean by preparedness, among other things: how your undergraduate career and experience has set you up for success. (In all fairness, my university offered me other wonderful benefits, which certainly DID and DO play a part in my educational success, just not as much as I feel I have from my Masters and hope for in my PhD.) As Kayrabbit said, this was a good fit for me, and I do ultimately feel better not going directly to PhD (as much as my ego would have liked it  ). 

Oh, and @kayrabbit: I think we have twin cats! Is yours fat and gray, too? (Mine started out at 1lb, and is now a proud 15!!! Eeks!

[Warelin]

Small note on BA-to-phd Applicants: Some programs *may* prefer to train candidates to their way of doing things. They might think it's easier to get them to learn how to do things under their style.
Small note on MA-to-phd Applicants: Some programs consider MA applicants to be more ready for the PHD since they have previous graduate work. They may consider them less likely to drop out.

Some programs are generous in the amount of coursework they allow you to "transfer" in for credit. Others accept little-to-no previous graduate coursework. Most programs do accept a mixture of MA and BA applicants into their phd program.

 

 

[angel_kaye13]

^ Out of up-votes, but these are great points, @Warelin

[Dr. Old Bill]

2 hours ago, angel_kaye13 said:

^ Out of up-votes, but these are great points, @Warelin

Yeah, me too.

Those "you are out of upvotes!" warnings are rather dramatic. I imagine that's the kind of warning that happens when you try to access restricted files at the CIA, only with more beeping and sirens.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Wyatt's Terps

[Yanaka]

I was only trying to understand you guys' own words, but I think there's some kind of mental blockage that prevents me from understanding the detail of this particular topic

[kayrabbit]

19 hours ago, angel_kaye13 said:

Oh, and @kayrabbit: I think we have twin cats! Is yours fat and gray, too? (Mine started out at 1lb, and is now a proud 15!!! Eeks! 

Mine also started as the tiny runt of the litter, @angel_kaye13, but she's remained small — she's five years old and only five pounds. I love grey and white cats, though, I have three cats and consider this one to be the cutest, lol. (And yes, I feel rather crazy to have three cats and a Siberian Husky in grad school. Ah well. My only defense is that the third cat wasn't exactly intentional.)

Edited December 31, 2016 by kayrabbit

[dazedandbemused]

17 hours ago, Yanaka said:

I was only trying to understand you guys' own words, but I think there's some kind of mental blockage that prevents me from understanding the detail of this particular topic

Maybe I can provide some more context? I mentioned in your thread about NYU that I'm at UT Austin, and it's one of those programs with no terminal MA, but each cohort is composed of about 60/40 BA holders to MA holders. The only major difference is that MA holders have one less year guaranteed funding and BA holders are required to write a short MA thesis at the end of the second year. This also means you can't really transfer any outside credit.

I was a BA only entrance in 2013, and I'd agree with everything @kayrabbit and @Warelin said (hey y'all!). In particular, I want to focus on the idea that BA holders are substantively better applicants because that's sooooo not the case. It is becoming more common for programs to want to solely train their students, as there is a wide variation in departmental styles and concerns. Some departments are theory heavy, while others are more historicist or ecocritical in focus. Some require a wide ranging knowledge of the field through coursework, while others allow students complete control to study what piques their interest. It can be hard for someone to receive an MA from one type of program and then move to another institution for the PhD, and it's almost impossible to understand a program's true culture without actually being immersed in it. That's just part of the many reasons why programs could prefer BA holders.

On the other hand, I've just thought back on my cohort (which we consider whoever you entered with), and having started with 13 other BA holders, 4 of those people have left the program; two wrote their MA report and left, another left after a year, and one stayed for three years but left before comps. On the other hand, all of the people from my cohort with MAs are still here,  and that's because they, for the most part, were aware of what they were getting into, having done it (to a lesser extent) for two years. That didn't mean they had a better grasp on their actual research or that they were leaps and bounds ahead of the rest of us, but the BA holders were also fumbling idiots. As someone who is actually writing about what I said I would in my SOP, trust me. I was still an actual idiot who rambled on about my half-baked ideas that I was excited about, but I've been able to take any class I wanted and that strange mix of influences has helped me articulate an actual dissertation topic where before I just had interests. My roommate otoh came in with an MA, and very much felt like she was starting from scratch, but she also came in with an approach to doing the work that can only be gained from experience. Our progress through the program has been right on schedule, but our actual day to day experience of working with professors in our fields is so radically different that we can only laugh/cry sometimes.

All this to say, if you get in with a BA, thank whoever you swear at and don't worry about feeling inadequate. If you have to do an MA and apply again, you'll gain some useful knowledge that will cut down the ridiculously steep learning curve that is coursework. I went to a small university that no one's ever heard of for my BA, and one of my friends from there is also pursuing her English PhD. She chose to take an MA acceptance the year we applied, whereas I took a break year in Pittsburgh and got into a straight to PhD on my second try. Five years later, we talk regularly about how our experiences have differed now that she's in her second year at her PhD institution, whereas I'm a fourth year at Austin. The differences in experiences are huge, but we're both happy with our choices. Neither way is the only right way, and you'll get where you need to go.

Edited December 31, 2016 by dazedandbemused

[Yanaka]

I think it's more than okay to have only ideas and directions when you're an undergrad and are applying for a PhD, because I don't think faculties are really comfortable with someone who doesn't seem open and flexible. But maybe my ideas are like baby carrots and might be relevant but completely miss the point of actual carrots, which is that they be eaten even if only to try stuff and choose better carrots, instead of being just nibbled at.