how to write grad school app essays

I disagree a bit. On the essay, I don't want to know how you did in advanced E&M, or whether or not you took serious math classes. I know that already from your transcript. If the transcript doesn't reflect your preparation accurately, I do want to know *that* ("Yes, I got a C- in Quantum Mechanics II, but that's because they taught it in Sanskrit, for crying out loud.")

What *I* look for is whether or not you can speak science, ideally by telling me about your research experience. What did you do? Why is it an interesting project? What were the results? What skills did you bring to bear? What kind of research are you interested in doing in graduate school? Why?

And what I mean by "speak science" is can you convey these ideas in a way that is intelligible to an educated (but not expert) audience. That is, I don't want to see a "it's interesting because mankind has always wondered about the sky" kind of essay, and I also don't want to suddenly find myself in the middle of an essay about absorption cross-sections and radiative diffusion in Ap stars without any context.

And I really, really, really don't give a damn about you always wanting to look at the stars ever since you were three years old. That's a warm-and-fuzzy story to tell your mom, but I need to hear whether you can do science...

Chris

Chris, the problem as I see it, is how can a free-form essay actually convey whether you can do science or not? What it shows is whether you (or the ghost-writer you hire if your family has the dough) can compose a readable text _about_ doing science, not whether you'd actually have any ability doing so. It's a great data-point for someone aspiring to be a science writer, perhaps, and some indication as to whether you'll be able to string together a readable paper.

I can probably write a decent essay about the experience of pregnancy and giving birth, but seeing as how I am male that obviously does not give a reliable indication as to how I would do if I actually tried to get pregnant.

Sure, Janne, I agree that the essay wont tell me if you can do science. That's what I hope to get out of the grades and letters. If someone writes a great essay, but has poor grades and poor letters, I'm not interested in their application.

My point is that I believe that being able to communicate your science well is very important, and if I see that someone doesn't communicate well, that makes me think twice about accepting them into the program. Particularly if I have in my other hand another application with good grades, good letters, AND a well written essay.

Ultimately it's a flawed system -- reading an application package (grades, letters, writing all together) will never tell you absolutely whether or not someone can succeed. But, we have to work with the information that's in front of us.

(Not the same Chris as before)

Back to the topic of Steinn's anecdote, I did something somewhat similar for my undergraduate application essays. I was a bit tired of the attitudes of my circle of friends, who were being pressured by their parents to apply and be accepted at all the Ivys. They had all gone to SAT prep classes and had been coached on how to write the best focus-group-tested Miss-America-pageant-answer type essays ("I want to come to your school because it is the best avenue for me to achieve my goal of ending world hunger"). Everyone was digging out the family typewriter to type their essays, because the conventional wisdom was handwriting anything was a certain path to doom.

My girlfriend (who had *really* overbearing parents) outright told me that unless I typed my essays, no college would be willing to accept me.

So, I handwrote my essays, and to be even more insufferable, the *topic* of my essay for Notre Dame's application was this one -- I wrote about how sad it was that my graduating class felt that typing an essay was a requirement for getting in to college.

I got in to ND, but went to Penn State anyway, where at the time they didn't even require an essay.

Chris, agree on communicating being important - and after reviewed some conference submissions just recently I _really_ agree.

But then, asking for an essay about them doing science may not be the best subject. It is after all something they almost by definition know rather little about. Better in that case to ask applicants to find a paper in the field they want to work in, and write a two or three-page popular summary and explanation of it as they see it, and turn it in together with the original paper. That would probably reflect the applicants' ability to write about science (rather than writing about doing science) better; it would test their ability to read and absorb science writing; and their approach to the task would probably also tell you something about their view of the science field in general.

Janne,

Maybe you misunderstood (or I explained poorly) what I mean about "doing science" -- I meant pretty much what you just described: pick a paper/project, explain it (the background/context, what was done, what the results are, why it's important, etc), etc. But I'm looking for it to be a project that they've worked on -- ie their undergraduate research experience.

Nearly all students applying to our graduate program have done undergraduate research, so they should be able to do that. If they *haven't* done any research, then I agree your model (picking something from the literature) works well. But I find it a rarity, at least in my field, to get applications from students who have had no undergraduate research experience.

Chris

I worry a bit about the push to have undergrads do research - most ugrad research is not quite the same as long term grad projects, necessarily. In some fraction of cases the ugrad research also puts people off, although better to know sooner than later, assuming most of those would not enjoy grad research either... but undergrad should primarily be about preparation and aptitude (including aptitude to soak up the workload).

From my perspective the "essay" ought to primarily inform me that the applicant is enthusiastic about something, and secondarily that they have some notion of what they are getting into.
I'm a cynic on undergrads knowing what field they really want to get into, some do, but that may be primarily due to their limited exposure to the opportunities.
Some notion of theory vs observation vs experiment is useful; though some of that is obvious from the transcript.
Some notion of preference of sub-field is useful, since it is somewhat indicative, and can also filter people out (we don't do THAT!).

The essays should be short, light on personal or anecdotal issues, and quite unlike undergrad application essays (which should also be quite unlike themselves...)
Personally I want to see some statement of desire or motivation, discussion of research experience if relevant, and some statement of the nature of the stuff they might be interested in.

YMMV