next »

[zhenzhen]

Hi everyone,
I'm really worried about my best friend and wanted to see what she can do. Like her, I'm in East Asian Studies. Early on in her undergraduate career, she was in a program for 3 years and withdrew from one of her practicums. She retook the practicum and failed. She then switched programs (unofficially because the university doesn't know about it) and had a horrendous year the next year with a low GPA (around a 2.2). She withdrew from one course and failed another one. She was diagnosed with depression around that time and didn't want to report it to the university. She made an official switch to another faculty and got admitted. She has added 2 W's on her record but got good enough marks to enter the honors program at her university. This is her last year and she wants to go into grad school. For the past two years she's had excellent marks in her honors program and her profs have written her really good letters of recommendation. She's taking this year off to travel, but I wanted to know if she will she still be able to make it into grad school? She's such a strong person, and I really want to see her make it in.

[expatinuk]

have you friend ask the question.

[zhenzhen]

Yeah, I probably should. How so I delete a thread here?

[zhenzhen]

Yeah, I probably should. How so I delete a thread here?

Sorry, I can't type this late at night. I meant "How can I delete a thread here?"

[grasshopper]

Ask the moderators.

Or just forward the thread to your friend, and she can post here.

[psychprof]

I think its fine to ask questions here yourself, although I think your friend will benefit more by asking herself. You don't have to delete the thread; just point your friend to it and let her participate.

To answer your question, I'm sure that some grad programs will be concerned about what seems to be poor academic performance in the early part of her career. It really didn't help her to "keep secrets" from the university and not seek help or seek better guidance on what to do during the difficult times.

Two years of very good academic performance along with excellent letters will be very helpful in grad school admission. Probably has to also get very good scores on any admissions test required (GRE) and has to still do good work on a statement of purpose and communicating to the prospective programs why she is a good fit for the program to which she is applying.

I'm a little concerned about her "taking a year off." I know that this may be a bias of mine (and others in academia, perhaps) but she may want to consider applying now for admission next Fall. Just an opinion here.....

Hope this helps.

[iomhaigh]

I think the "year off" issue might depend on the field.  Most grad faculty I know in the humanities, if given a choice, prefer that students take some time off rather than being perpetual students.  Scientists, I am told, can get too far behind on the latest developments and are more concerned by grad students who have been out of the loop, particularly in non-field related jobs.  (This last bit may be horse-puckey, so please listen to real scientists who post and not the second-hand info I learned from my science colleagues over beer and ribs.)

[zharkov]

The "year off to travel" seems like it could be an issue, albeit a minor one.  Taking a year off to gain experience in the field is great, as is mastering a secondary talent, or working for a non-profit, or getting a job as an intern in a corporation, or etc.  But "taking a year off to travel" sound like someone is going on vacation, and a someone who needs to accumulate "brownie points" to get into grad school.

[litcrittr82]

When I indicated to one of my (English) professors that I wanted to take a year away from academia to make sure I really wanted to go for my doctorate, she suggested that I spend the time traveling the world, as she had done before starting her PhD.  I thought that was a great idea, but my response was "with what money?"  I have a few wealthy friends in PhD programs (comp. lit.), as I'm sure many others do, who were learning their third and fourth and fifth languages while spending a year in Milan, six months in Budapest, Paris, Berlin.  I confess that, having never been in a position to afford these kinds of luxuries, which are themselves (as Anthony Appiah writes, and I agree) extremely beneficial to a humanities student. I'm a little bitter toward people who say they have "spent a year traveling the world."  It will be a long time before I'm actually the person who evaluates the applications, and hopefully by then I will have shed this prejudice completely; but it wouldn't surprise me if others would consider the world travelling an issue, however beneficial it may be to one's course of study.

[ideagirl]

I'm a little bitter toward people who say they have "spent a year traveling the world."  It will be a long time before I'm actually the person who evaluates the applications, and hopefully by then I will have shed this prejudice completely; but it wouldn't surprise me if others would consider the world travelling an issue, however beneficial it may be to one's course of study.

That utterly boggles my mind. Would you treat an applicant who took a year off and stayed in the United States more favorably?! How could it not be a good thing to take a year out of school to explore the world, mature a bit, perhaps learn a language, perhaps--this is often what "traveling the world" means--volunteer in some foreign country? Wouldn't you rather have someone who is a little more seasoned, a little more mature, and more certain of their decision to enter grad school due to having taken the time to think about it and "find themselves"? Or would you really rather have a 21/22-year-old who has never done anything but be a student and never been anywhere but college?

I started grad school for the first time two years after getting my BA, and I spent those two years in Europe, so obviously my perspective is different. But let me clarify that we're not all rich: I went $12,000 into debt on credit cards to make it through those two years (spread that figure over two years and you can imagine how low my standard of living was), and I moved back in with my mom once in grad school to pay the debt off. During those two years I became dramatically more proficient in my chosen language, which made a graduate degree in that language and its literature vastly easier.

So obviously, I'm all for that kind of plan...

[pink_]

When I indicated to one of my (English) professors that I wanted to take a year away from academia to make sure I really wanted to go for my doctorate, she suggested that I spend the time traveling the world, as she had done before starting her PhD.  I thought that was a great idea, but my response was "with what money?"  I have a few wealthy friends in PhD programs (comp. lit.), as I'm sure many others do, who were learning their third and fourth and fifth languages while spending a year in Milan, six months in Budapest, Paris, Berlin.  I confess that, having never been in a position to afford these kinds of luxuries, which are themselves (as Anthony Appiah writes, and I agree) extremely beneficial to a humanities student. I'm a little bitter toward people who say they have "spent a year traveling the world."  It will be a long time before I'm actually the person who evaluates the applications, and hopefully by then I will have shed this prejudice completely; but it wouldn't surprise me if others would consider the world travelling an issue, however beneficial it may be to one's course of study.

Aren't you going to Oxford?
Haven't we had a bunch of discussions about the value of the overseas experience in graduate study?

Ring, Ring . . .
Pot, this is Kettle calling . . .

[dreamingofslac]

If this were my student (as a TA) and they asked me for advice in this situation, I would tell them not to go to graduate school.  In a few years, if they are still convinced they want to go, then yes, apply.

[litcrittr82]

ideagirl and pink lady:

I thought I was pretty clear when I wrote...

...these kinds of luxuries, which are themselves (as Anthony Appiah writes, and I agree) extremely beneficial to a humanities student.

...that I see tremendous value in getting a broader, more global perspective, learning new languages, etc., especially for humanities students.

ideagirl:

I'm not sure how you got FROM me confessing some bitter feelings toward some of the more privileged classmates and friends I've had who had the luxury of spending extensive periods of time all over the world on their parents' dime TO me being somehow against taking time off from being a student.  I took time off myself, doing nothing particularly admirable (in fact, I probably sold my soul).  The fact is, "traveling the world" and "volunteering in Cambodia" mean two very different things; and I'd be surprised if someone who taught English in Estonia or volunteered in Tanzania or even worked at a nonprofit in Zurich would describe their time off as "traveling the world."  I think this is more than semantics, and I think the phrase "traveling the world" connotes considerable privilege.  And I'm not afraid to admit that I'm a bit put off by the idea of "world traveling" in that context.   

Permit me to rearrange your question: would I rather have someone who volunteered in the Peace Corps or did a Fulbright in Bolivia than someone who attended a $10,000 language institute in Rome for the summer (all else being equal, of course)?  Yes, probably.  Would I react differently to someone who worked a year in London than someone who spent the year "traveling the world"?  Absolutely.

I'll add that if "finding yourself" is really even an important life experience and not merely a cliche, is it really necessary to travel to someplace exotic to find oneself?  I'm not trying to be flip here; if I understand at all what it means to find oneself, I'm pretty sure I did that while working 60 hours/week in a soul-sucking corporate job this year.

pink lady:

Given what "traveling the world" means to me, I see a huge difference between "traveling the world" in the above context with no particular aim and spending a few years saving for grad. school, applying for grants, and going to a grad. program overseas to reap the benefits of overseas study (particularly if the overseas part is a huge part of your research).  I can't say enough how beneficial I think this is.  But this isn't exactly "traveling the world," in hardly any sense at all.  I'll be lucky if I can afford to go into London once in a while.  Hardly the pot calling the kettle black; two VERY different things, in my view.  You don't have to be a "world traveler" to realize the benefits of broadening horizons or studying abroad.

[pink_]

I think a cliche like "traveling the world" can mean a lot of different things to different people.  The fundamental point about "do something else for a little while and then apply" is fundamentally sound advice for grad study in the humanities, although I try to add the "and save some money" clause in for good measure.

We have no idea whether the OP's friend is on a luxury cruise or off with the Peace Corps, and I don't think it really matters all that much.  The reason that taking time off is important, IMO, is not for a vacation or to acquire stamps on a passport, but because there are a lot of students who want to go to grad school, particularly in the humanities, not because they actually have any idea what a Ph.D. program will entail, but because they really aren't sure what else to do with their lives and that uncertainty is making them nervous.  I did my degree at a very good R1 with a very large dept., and the undergrad students there, while often very bright, often didn't have the faintest clue what they'd be getting into if they pursued grad study.  They figured (and if I had a dollar for each of the conversations I had about this with a student I could single-handedly have bailed out AIG) that since they had gotten good grades as an undergrad that they'd apply to a Ph.D. program since they didn't want to go to law school/med school/business school, but all their friends were going, so they should go somewhere too so as not to be left out/behind.

As I'm sure most people here know, this is not a good reason to go to grad school.  It is especially not a good reason to go to a Ph.D. program in the humanities.

Taking some time away forces the potential application to really consider their options, and it requires them to think for themselves.  If they really have the focus and the desire to continue their studies, they'll find their way back to academe.  If not, that's perfectly okay too.

But the OP's question, as I understood it, was about about the potential downside of taking a year off, *not* about the different kinds of travel one could do in the meanwhile and the relative value of those experiences.  Obviously, I think that certain experiences might be more valuable than others in that context, but we certainly don't have that kind of information here.

[ideagirl]

Permit me to rearrange your question: would I rather have someone who volunteered in the Peace Corps or did a Fulbright in Bolivia than someone who attended a $10,000 language institute in Rome for the summer (all else being equal, of course)?  Yes, probably.

What if the graduate program those people were seeking admission to was Italian language and literature? What if it was art history, and the Rome language institute person had a very clear idea of some aspect of Italian art history that hu was passionate about studying, and that's why hu went to Rome--to learn the language in order to read the scholarship, and to see the art or architecture in question first-hand? Surely it would not make sense to prefer the other candidates just because, as far as you can tell from their application packets, they did something you consider nobler. Even if going to Bolivia is nobler, which candidate is better prepared for a PhD in Italian literature or in art history focusing on Italy?

I just think your own bitter feelings about people who have the money to travel (or who don't have it, but borrow it because they passionately want to travel) should not be influencing your judgment here. And apart from the fact that you're not acknowledging that the Rome student may well have put the whole shebang on hu's credit card and be ready to spend the next several years paying it off huself, how do you even know whose "dime" the travel was on? For all you know, the student in question got hit by a car and used the insurance settlement to travel to Rome. For all you know the Fulbright holder in Bolivia spent the whole time living in La Paz's snazziest hotel on hu's parents' dime, or staying with friends or cousins who rank among Bolivia's ultra-elite.

Would I react differently to someone who worked a year in London than someone who spent the year "traveling the world"?  Absolutely.

Here are two candidates for admission to your graduate program in, say, philosophy, or English literature, or history:
(1) Madison Tiffany Snowflake spent a year working as a receptionist in a London art gallery that her parents own, and in her ample free time she went shopping and hung out in pubs.
(2) John (and now I'm describing a friend of mine--apart from the name, I'm not making this up) spent a summer studying dance with a ballet corps in Paris, then spent a few months riding all over Europe by motorcycle with a tent strapped to the back that he slept in, then sold the bike, flew to India, and spent a year living in an ashram and studying with a guru.

Which candidate would you prefer? And why?

I'll add that if "finding yourself" is really even an important life experience and not merely a cliche, is it really necessary to travel to someplace exotic to find oneself? 

For some people, yes, it is. Those people know who they are; they have an insatiable urge to travel, and they figure out, by hook or by crook, how to make it happen.