philstudent1991

Certainly. I'm not looking for journal quality data here. Just for fun. If nothing else, it shows how highly the average applicant thinks of herself

The average PGR rank of schools you are applying to? I know there are unranked schools, MAs, and lingering questions about the reputation of the PGR. This ignores such issues. This is just a fun poll to observe the applicant pool.

Most departments ask for 12-25 double spaced or 5,000 max, right? So yours, double spaced, would be 46 and 12,000? Seems like that's really pushing it to me. They've got 300 apps to read (well, probably like 40 after the secretary throws out the ones not from PGR departments ). No one's going to read 50 pages from one applicant, even if it's very good. If I were on the ad comm, I'd be annoyed, think you didn't bother to read the application instructions, and toss it.

Virginia Tech and Georgia State are both reputable MA programs in the SE, not in DC or immediate vicinity but like you said, can't be picky.

Everyone says it's best to waive the right to view letters. But, after apps are submitted, it seems like a student could benefit from viewing their letters later. Should a student ever approach a faculty member with that sort of request? Thoughts?

Seems to me like an across the board limit doesn't make much sense. I have full confidence that NYU or Stanford or Harvard can place a high number of their graduates into very good jobs, and would be skeptical that "low ranked" or "unranked" schools could place even 3-4 into good (TT, say) jobs. I think any program worth attending will be open about their placement. And sure, placing graduates into teaching jobs is not the only measure of a PhD program. But it's safe to say it's the main one. That's one thing that struck me as weird about the folks at South Carolina responding to Leiter's post. They didn't respond "hey, our placement is actually good." They said, "well, we place people into other kinds of jobs." Fine, if true, but they need to be open about this. I had no idea that South Carolina was a program that was more interested in placing their graduates into non-academic careers, or whatever, rather than teaching positions. Did anyone know this? Their website certainly doesn't make any indication of this. In fact, it doesn't seem to give any information about what their graduates do at all. And this seems like a red flag. I don't think they should be forced to shut their doors or anything. But they definitely should be upfront with applicants about what the prospects are (for an academic job or otherwise) for graduates of their program. It seems like Leiter has the moral high ground to me. Students are making huge investments of their prime career building years by pursuing the PhD. Certainly programs have an obligation not to be shady about what the outcome of such an investment might actually be. Just my 2 cents.

Georgia State funds all students they admit. Not sure if other programs are similar.

This is where I've come to as well. I won't go as low as four, but I've gone from 12 to 10 to 8 and maybe I'll go as low as 7. I want to get a PhD in philosophy and be a professor one day, but I know that the chances of a healthy career plummet the lower down the rankings one goes, and I know there are other meaningful ways to spend a life outside of academic philosophy, so that's why I've decided to apply just to a few excellent fits and not throw myself into 14 apps (like I did last time) just to be admitted anywhere.

I agree with this. However, I also think there is no reason to apply to programs that you cannot imagine yourself attending. We all know how competitive academic jobs are in philosophy, and we all know that pedigree ends up being weighted pretty heavily in hiring. So, if your aim is to get a job, it seems to make sense to stack your applications towards the top and not worry just about getting in somewhere. Yes, in all likelihood you will be rejected from NYU (and I say that knowing nothing about you as an individual, instead reasoning from how competitive NYU is). So if you want to spend your 100 bucks more frugally there are probably better investments. But I would consider cutting schools at the bottom of your list too, since I think there are only a handful of schools worth attending if your main goal is a tenured, research position in philosophy. If you just want to get a PhD in philosophy from whoever will have you, apply wherever, but I don't think that's a good idea

I can't say if it would be a good fit beyond what I've already pointed to, but I can say it is not mostly focused on Kant. Nietzsche and Rawls get far more attention.

May as well apply to MAs, and if you're interested in Continental and already live in Atlanta, Georgia State seems like an obvious choice. LSU might also be a good fit.

Well, Georgia State offers the terminal MA, and they have people working in German philosophy as well as Kant. Berry does Nietzsche, Rand does German Idealism incl. Hegel, Wilson does Kant, Moore does Nietzsche and aesthetics, and Weiskopf does philosophy of art as a side interest I believe. Leiter has called GSU the place to be to do Nietzsche and German philosophy among MA programs. Especially given how crazy competitive your list is, I'd add GSU.

That's where I've come to in my admissions quest as well. So many things to think about that maybe it's best to tune it all out and just do your work and hope. Yet here I am on gradcafe lol.

I haven't attended either, but my understanding is that they are not funded. Brandeis offers some tuition remission I think. What I mean by funded is full tuition remission plus a living stipend. I think it would be unwise to attend an unfunded MA, except in special circumstances (independently wealthy, for example).

To get into a PhD, you will need to have background in philosophy, including upper level coursework in philosophy and letters of recommendation from philosophy faculty that have worked with you. There are some good, funded MA programs that might suit your interests. Northern Illinois University has people that do mind and language, and Georgia State University has faculty that do Marx and German philosophy.

Ok good, I'm not aware of any that require it for admission either. Unfortunately, it seems that an upper level logic course is something of a rite of passage, though programs vary in requiring first semester vs whenever. I don't have program specific details though.

Just to be clear, do you mean require for admission or require for completion?

No, I just had in mind Wisconsin as a T25 department, with nothing specific in mind about whether they require the GRE or not. If they do not require it, then it seems like retaking it would not be a priority, though of course almost all reputable programs do (for better or worse) require it, so Wisconsin's not wanting it might not matter.

so, low 150s? Ya unfortunately I think that means a retake is probably necessary. But, most ad comms will say that the GRE is the least important factor in admissions. Then again, I don't know much about "miscellaneous schools in Illinois." For Wisconsin or Indiana though, I'd shoot for 160+ for sure.

Sorry, I didn't mean that UCL didn't have one. I guess I was lumping in those schools that don't and those schools that are not as well understood in the US. Yes, I think most of what I said is right

So the question is will the degree from GSU help? I'd say probably. Degrees from the UK may be tough for American ad comms to evaluate, whereas a degree from Georgia State is more widely recognized. I think that strong letters from an MA program are immeasurably more helpful than letters from places without a strong tradition in philosophy. That said, even the top MA programs can have a wide range of outcomes. So at GSU for instance, last year's cohort had a student accepted at Yale, Michigan, UNC, Arizona and Brown. Other students in the same cohort were shut out. So the degree itself is not a credential you can ride to PhD admissions glory; you have to put a lot of work into your seminars and getting a seminar paper (most likely) into writing sample condition, getting good letters, making good grades, etc. While doing well at a program like Georgia State is good evidence that a candidate can perform at a high level in a PhD program, a poor performance at a place like Georgia State would be decisive evidence that they cannot handle the workload and rigor of a PhD. I also think that being in a philosophical environment is better for helping motivate you in working on your sample and apps than being on your own. You will get more feedback from faculty that actually have an obligation to you than those from your undergrad, who frankly have more pressing things to do than helping former students with their work.

You might take off one of those top schools and add UC Riverside. Brown's placement isn't very good for their rank, whereas Arizona and MIT have exceptional placement for their rank. Just a thought.

Just being at a "non-elite" program won't sink you, although I do think it's a pretty big handicap. If one is truly amazing, I agree that one can overcome pedigree. But that's a tough road. That's what terminal MA programs are for. For one thing, I would note that stacking up favorably with your peers at a non-elite school probably means nothing. The applicants coming from the Ivy League and similar schools, departments with PGR philosophy programs and from the top MA programs (Tufts, Brandeis, Georgia State, NIU, Wisconsin-Milwaukee, etc.) are going to be outstanding. Another element related to pedigree is the reputation of your letter writers. Having famous letter writers helps, which again counts against non-elite school people. Your list looks good, but 6 top 20s is very ambitious. I'd cut a few in the T20 and add a couple in the lower end of the PGR (30-50). Having four MA programs, as you do, seems wise (as long as they are funded or you are independently wealthy).

If you have three well known letter writers, and the fourth is an unknown adjunct, then it doesnt sound like you have a compelling reason to submit four.

My understanding is that it is used to evaluate who the competition is, and can be useful for departments when they approach administrators for funding. For example, in philosophy Rutgers and Pitt are top ten departments along with places like Harvard, Yale and Stanford. Rutgers and Pitt might use that data to show administrators they are competing with the Ivies for students and thus need better stipends for their grad students and such. I don't think the information is ever used in evaluating an applicant, though of course I can see why one might want to apply strategy to the section. If the school you are applying to is a wild reach among more modest apps, it doesn't seem like you do yourself any favors by reporting that in the app, whereas if the school is right in the range of the rest that might be a good sign to the ad comm that your advisors have given you a list of places where you'd be competitive and their school is one such place.