Needle in the Hay
-
Posts
73 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Needle in the Hay
-
-
8 hours ago, Scoots said:
How do you go about doing that? Is there a separate application?
I don't know because I never tried. I'm sure there's info online. Otherwise, you might consider contacting Richard Edwards, a very helpful admin in the philosophy dept at UCL.
-
Bear in mind also that if you are not funded by UCL you can apply for central funding through the AHRC.
-
I got an MA at UCL and had an offer to go back for the MPhil Stud but did not receive funding. I gained a very favorable opinion of the faculty at UCL while I was there. Mark Kalderon and Mike Martin are doing really cool research in the philosophy of perception. Also, Lucy O'Brien is a very good philosopher of action. Doug Lavin is also interesting for metaethics and action. Snowdon was my other favorite there. He's no longer on faculty but he may still teach 'modules' from time to time; you might want to look into that because he's really awesome both as a philosopher and as a human being. And London was an amazing place to live for a year, but very expensive. Congratulations on your offer! My understanding is that if you complete the MPhil Stud in good standing you are automatically allowed to progress to the PhD. You have to apply, but the application is more-or-less a formality. That is what I was told when I was considering the program, though perhaps it has changed. That said, UCL's faculty are somewhat limited in their research areas from my point of view. Gardner is great for continental stuff but as far as I'm aware there are very limited opportunities to study medieval (a problem for me, though it would likely not bother others). Leigh is good for Ancient, but she was the only person doing ancient while I was there.
-
MA GPA
in Philosophy
I have two MA’s with roughly A- averages and in my first semester of my second MA I got a B and a B+ (in all honesty I do not believe that either of these grades were fair and many of peers agreed with me at the time, but that’s neither here nor there). You can see my results below, in my signature, but know that I was also on the top third of a short waitlist at Fordham. My results may not seem spectacular (I’m not as interested in PGR rankings as I am in fit and placement) but I’m very pleased with them and especially with Baylor. Note also that only five students were admitted at Baylor, so the fact that they were not deterred by the grades I mentioned is more significant even than it might seem. The tricks in my case were very strong LOR’s and a solid writing sample. I hope this information is helpful to you.
Also, my undergrad GPA was downright low.
- Axil and total_ noob
-
2
-
16 minutes ago, Eigen said:
Another fundamental rule of marketing is that if it isn't broken, don't fix it. Changing a slogan that's been around and (judging from the user base) working for years doesn't seem like the best move.
Its an interesting thought experiment, but I think starting with a statement that e slogan is "bad" when it's been working well for over 10 years might be a bit overstated.
OK fine, perhaps a bit overstated.
Any ideas though, anyone?
-
From Wikipedia:
“Dass, Kumar, Kohli, & Thomas' (2014) research suggests that there are certain factors that make up the likability of a slogan. The clarity of the message the brand is trying to encode within the slogan. The slogan emphasizes the benefit of the product or service it is portraying.”
How does the current slogan emphasize the benefit of the site? I don’t think it does.
Perhaps this is a different criticism than my original one, but perhaps not—the purpose of the site presumably coincides with the benefits it provides to the user.
-
16 minutes ago, Eigen said:
It seems like you're starting with an assumption (the slogan isn't cutting it) and then working from there.
Perhaps you'd like to share why you think the slogan isn't cutting it?
As I said in the original post, it does not in any way clarify the purpose of the site. Maybe I’m wrong, but that strikes me as a defect.
-
Hi all,
The current slogan for Grad Café, “Where something is always brewing,” really isn’t cutting it. In fact it gives no indication whatsoever about the purpose of the site. I am going to start brainstorming other possibilities and I wanted to enlist your help. Maybe we can send the top three suggestions to the website managers.
I realize that this is not about Philosophy, but (a) you philosophers are my people and (b) I think that philosophical training can help one to think creatively and logically about these things.
Thank you,
NitH
- prtrbd and akraticfanatic
-
1
-
1
-
19 minutes ago, falafelizer said:
I am so super sorry if what I said came off as even the least bit argumentative. That was me trying to explain why it wasn't making sense to me and asking for a clarification. All you've contributed to my question has been helpful; I'm familiar with Baylor's program and in fact applied there and am on the WL. That your insights came from Francis Beckwith I will take to heart. Most appreciative thanks for your contribution and for clarifying. Very best wishes to you this season as well ?
That's alright, thanks, and I wish you the best in making this difficult decision, if it comes down to it!
-
2 hours ago, falafelizer said:
Thanks for responding Needle in the Hay!
It looks like 4) depends largely on 2) and 3) here. And of the schools I listed I think Riverside does the worst at permanent placement (42%) without differentiating between SLAC's and research departments; whereas the institution where I am admitted has a 38% placement into permanent spots.
To me, that looks like enough to raise doubt about 2). But that's with the caveat that you did say placement "starting out," and the figures I gave reflect not that, but the ultimate (best) result to date.
As far as 3), I would like it to be true, but departments would not forget to include that kind of information in their placement records, which unfortunately do not seem to bear out that claim. I'd love to see some counter examples, but I haven't found any in the records of the 26 schools where I applied this season. Could you give me a few examples, please? Otherwise, as it seems now, 3) is also suspect; accordingly, so is 4).
It still seems like I can only do better by accepting the offer and applying out for the next couple of seasons.
Well, yes, a better way for me to express 2 would have been to say that some unranked programs have way better placement percentages than a lot of the top programs, and specifically 10-20 ranked programs, because they place so many people into SLACs.
I don’t have data to support 3, ie that “upward mobility” is fairly common. I was just told that it was true, namely by Francis Beckwith and Mike Beaty at Baylor, who themselves both started at SLACs, for what it’s worth. One reason it might not show up in placement records is that it takes time for this kind of movement to occur, and also because a lot of people are, reasonably enough, happy with their jobs at SLACs (meaning that even if they could get jobs at research institutions if they tried—which is really what is relevant here—they don’t try).
4 actually does not depend on 3 if you are OK with a career in a SLAC.
Anyway, I’m not interested in debating you about this, so if this advice is not helpful then just ignore it. Good luck!
-
Good questions. I have a few thoughts:
1) Chicago has never accepted anyone from GSU. They have accepted at least one person from Tufts on the other hand.
2) My uninformed speculation is that it is probably safer to go to a school with a really strong placement record for small liberal arts colleges, i.e., SLACs, than it is to go to a PGR #10-20 with relatively strong placement at research institutions. If you go to one of the former schools, your guarantee of finding some kind of tenure track (or equiv) position teaching philosophy starting out is generally much higher.
3) I have heard that it is fairly common for teachers to start at SLACS and "work their way up" to research institutions.
4) A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
- PhiloStorian and falafelizer
-
2
-
I've just accepted Baylor's offer and...
Declined: FSU
Removed myself from the waitlist: SLU, Fordham, Ave Maria (Theology)
Withdrawn my applications from: University of Dallas; University of St. Thomas, Houston
I hope that this helps someone!
- Duns Eith, Goonasabi, PhiloStorian and 3 others
-
6
-
I've just declined FSU, removed myself from waitlists at SLU, Fordham, and Ave Maria (Theology), and withdrawn my applications from the University of Dallas and the University of Saint Thomas, Houston.
All were PhD programs.
I hope this helps someone.
- Duns Eith and SlumberingTrout
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Kantattheairport said:
Out of interest, do people think there are any significant do's and don't do's with regard to being on a waitlist? Are people inclined to reach out, send more materials, etc, or just wait until the university/ies contact you?
Once I wrote up an endorsement of myself and asked a letter-writer if he wouldn’t mind sending it into the uni where I was (more-or-less) WL’ed. He said that he thought it risked annoying the faculty and that it was better to go by the book in these things.
At this point I am even wary of asking one’s place on the waitlist because there are various reasons why they might not want to communicate that information. I think it is better to ask a leading question like “is it common for students to get in off the WL?” Then, if they want to tell you your place, they will.
Basically it is best to keep in mind that asking your place won’t actually help your chances and asking too many questions could actually hurt by suggesting you aren’t confident or that you need too much.
On the other hand, if you know you would accept the offer if it came through, it can sometimes help to tell the faculty, or have a letter-writer tell the faculty, that you would do so. They want to give offers to students who will accept them, of course.
Those are my two cents.
-
37 minutes ago, Hekkue said:
Vanderbilt:
"Our initial offers have gone out. We will conclude admissions on April 15th. If you don't hear from us, it means you did not get admitted".
Deplorable.
-
1 hour ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:
I may just be way behind the times, but @Neither Here Nor There just told me that Boston College acceptances have been out for quite a while now. @LORDBACON, @Needle In The Hay, I feel like you guys were waiting to hear back from them too? I take it we're all more or less rejected at this point.
I was, indeed, rejected. And yes, I was surprised when you were asking about BC acceptances, since they were released a long time ago. I figured you must have been asking about a second wave of acceptances after that. If you have not heard back then it is possible you are on a waitlist, but bear in mind they send out their notifications by snail mail, so your proximity to Boston might be a factor.
-
19 hours ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:
Maybe "waitlist" means "the top 5 people we haven't rejected outright" or something. So everyone else who hasn't been rejected outright is de-facto waitlisted.
I was actually waitlisted at Fordham. The notification was posted on my portal.
-
Waitlisted at SLU by email, just now.
-
-
Can we take a second to appreciate the “Sitford” rejection in response to the “Standford” acceptance tho? ???
-
1 hour ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:
Hey, Needle... I don't have plans yet. If Boston College, SLU, and three MA programs would get back to me, I could come closer to a decision. I will say that I'm inclined to accept Fordham's offer, but not totally set on it.
Thanks for letting me know! If you don't mind keeping me posted with your decision, once you've made it, I'd really appreciate it. Good luck with the rest of your apps!
-
1 hour ago, Goonasabi said:
That was me haha. I needed to heal my pains with humor....
You inspired me to have some fun too. The poster who claimed to have been rejected by Princeton by phone call, and despite never applying, might not have been telling the truth. One thing is true actually—I did not apply to Princeton.
-
UCL and the Mphil stud
in Philosophy
Posted
Thanks for the corrections and sorry for any confusion I caused!