Thanks cris. I see Michele's point and am very glad to have what
seemed like such arbitrary rigidity explained. I take her point and
it's a good one. I'm with David though about going ahead and telling
people they're waitlisted. If Michele's only willing to go one down
the list, that's fine, but I'd like her to do at least that if she's
willing.

When students from Miami apply to grad programs and are waitlisted, I
usually explain to them that it's a numbers game and doesn't
necessarily reflect the enthusiasm that faculty may have felt for
their work -- they might have been someone's top pick -- and that they
wouldn't be waitlisted unless the faculty really wanted to work with
them. I think we can convey these sentiments to our waitlist and
defuse potential toxicity.

Cathy

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Schloss, David <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks, cris (aka Dodgy Waters?)
>
> So Kalmbach the ecology poet will be offered one too? Thought she deserved
> it-- in tie with Tadeyeske. Thompsoin and Corwin would be nice to have here,
> too... Ids Fiction ok with Dong as a possible 4th, not GA?
>
> DAvid
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Cheek, Christopher <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>>
>> HI David,
>>
>> 4 poetry 3 fiction as it stands. Although, as i say i think we might not
>> be able to snag Rambharose, in which case it would go 3 and 3.
>>
>> Things DO move late in the semester and even over the summer of course and
>> we often come out of that timeline sitting pretty. I know that Lit has
>> already lost a couple of its top MA candidates.
>>
>> Dong would be a fee waiver but not a line. Already dodgy waters.
>>
>> c
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Schloss, David <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear cris,
>>>
>>> I missed one specific: 4 fiction, 3 poetry offers? Will we keep 7 lines
>>> to offer if Rambharose turns us down and we (or dept) lose the extra AAA and
>>> DEP?
>>> Is Dong the added line?
>>>
>>> We've always in the past told people they were on our wait-list and I
>>> never noticed any demoralization from those who eventually attended, with
>>> and without funding, btw, as the case would be. Except the pain of paying.
>>> Other jobs were often seen as freedom from grading freshman papers by those
>>> without assistantships from English. I think the choice to go into
>>> debt--foolish perhaps--is up to the applicants.
>>>
>>> I do not think our already marginally attractive grad cw program can
>>> afford to ask all students to pay something--an MA is not a very attractive
>>> degree to many, as seen in our application numbers. Perhaps I'm
>>> misunderstanding, but the idea of spreading the financial pain among
>>> admittees for a feeling of equality--when in a sense there really isn't
>>> one-- we DO rank them, after all--is disadvantageous for almost all but,
>>> perhaps, the marginal applicants at the bottoms of our admit lists. Some of
>>> whom have come in the past, in fact. Everyone's treated equally in the
>>> actually workshops.
>>>
>>> I really don't believe protecting feelings is at all relevant here--what
>>> is relevant is losing people who we have to wait to contact for ridiculously
>>> long times while they go elsewhere. we are in dire circumstances every year
>>> about getting people here to keep our grad workshops going with reasonable
>>> numbers and at the best potential quality we can get. It's often not that
>>> there's great distinction between the top candidates and some we simply have
>>> too pitifully few GAs to offer something to at the start of the process.
>>> Often, admittees with funding wait till the bitter end to let us know--by
>>> that point our best alternative candidates are often gone elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Morale is a theoretical; our underfunded desperate situation is a
>>> reality. I think. I'd strongly vote for at least the first, and preferable
>>> the first three runners up to be contacted and told we want them but can't
>>> offer a GA at this time, I wonder if Michelle is the best salesperson of
>>> what we offer to these wait list people, ultimately. We can make our real
>>> enthusiasm clear to those who'd come if a place with funding were offered
>>> but may not buy the time they're told, presumably looking hard elsewhere
>>> while we worry about their morale. Some would choose to pay their own way:
>>> not fair to those who can't--but this whole system is ultimately not
>>> pristinely fair.
>>>
>>> My thoughts, for what they're worth. For free!
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Cheek, Christopher <[log in to unmask]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> i wanted to try to update you all on the current state of play regarding
>>>> graduate admissions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It does look as though with Amber Rambharose in potential play as both a
>>>> AAA and a DEP candidate we are currently making 7 offers. In addition Dong
>>>> Chengeng is the likely recipient of a fee waiver, a discretionary offer for
>>>> international students that Lu is keen to make and that Michelle is happy to
>>>> support. It's also possible that we lose Rambharose, but let's cross that
>>>> bridge et cetera.
>>>>
>>>> I've told Michelle that we will proceed to make offers down our full
>>>> list once we have an acceptance or rejection from candidates that we make an
>>>> offer of funding to. She already knew that from last week's meeting, but i
>>>> confirmed it with her in conversation last evening.
>>>>
>>>> I also talked with her about making offers to students for whom we do
>>>> not currently have a funded place.
>>>>
>>>> I am going to try to convey as clearly as i can muster the tenor of the
>>>> conversation.
>>>>
>>>> Michelle's concern is that if we are letting students know that we are
>>>> offering them a place but that we are not currently offering them funding is
>>>> that it inscribes a class system in any cohort that might result. In other
>>>> words, students will know that they are not our favored choices and that
>>>> such a feeling is toxic. The alternative is for those students to consider
>>>> paying for their MA - - which i think we ought to fully discuss as a group.
>>>> I know that some of us are opposed to encouraging student debt by dangling
>>>> the carrot. I have sympathy for Michelle's position. I asked her to use her
>>>> best judgment when making offers to gauge likelihood of acceptance. However
>>>> that's a tough gauge to operate.
>>>>
>>>> I do think that Michelle has the best interests of all the programs in
>>>> heart and mind and that she wants them all to move into next year in as
>>>> strong a position as possible.
>>>>
>>>> I also know, from last week's meeting, that it is important to avoid
>>>> rancor circulating between factions during this process.
>>>>
>>>> My main aim in circulating this info is to ask for a straw poll about
>>>> how to deal with what i see as a very real ethical position that Michelle is
>>>> taking??
>>>>
>>>> She asked me consult. She is certainly prepared to go at least one
>>>> further down the list if the cohort wants her to proceed in such a way
>>>> (offering unfunded places).
>>>>
>>>> What do you think??
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> cris
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>              cris cheek
>> director, creative writing
>> miami, ohio
>
>