ZiggyPhil

"But really, even with an amazing sample, a low GPA may prevent readers from taking a serious look at the sample. Maybe some professor who would have loved the sample never got to read it, because that professor placed Ziggy's application in the "low numbers" pile." This is the nagging doubt that makes it so frustrating - the feeling that some fraction of my applications (and who knows what fraction that is) were not even seriously considered. If that fraction is large enough, then I really have no chance. What I might do, if I decide to apply next year, is email departments and ask for a candid answer as to whether, with my stats, I should even bother applying. But I suspect that answers will be of two types, either refusal ("we can't give advice on specific applications") or a pat and overly optimistic answer ("we evaluate all applications holistically") Without even a waitlist, the only bright spot in my results is that I know not every school dismissed me out of hand, as someone at one of the programs was interested enough to google me and find my academia.edu page. I'm tempted to go the law school route. That was my original plan, and I've already got a 99% LSAT. I know it would be much easier to secure admission to a decent law program, but I would so much rather be a philosopher than a lawyer.

"Nobody will care about your non-phil GPA if your phil and grad GPAs are that good." Unfortunately I just don't think this is true - I see no reason to believe it and every reason not to. And I'm not even saying they should disregard it - it's obviously a big mark against me - but there is really little else I can do to compensate that I have not already done. This is part of why this is so frustrating for me, because if I am correct in my assessment, there is little I can do to improve my standing in subsequent years. There is really no point in discussing the writing sample, since I'm not going to share it - suffice it to say that both I and others whose judgment I respect are confident in it, which is ultimately the only way we have of evaluating our writing samples. But, it seems to me a mistake to lay the blame on the sample, when there is simpler explanation available. Anyway, I'm sorry if I'm coming across as defensive or pissy - I'm just having a very bad day. I've spent the last two years reading every piece of advice on philosophy admissions available, so right now I just wanted to kvetch. I should really be drinking, not typing.

And so it ends... With the Rice acceptance posted today, I'm now 99% percent sure I've been shut out. Official rejections from 9/15 schools, strongly inferred rejection from 4/15, and weakly inferred rejection from 2/15 (they haven't sent out waitlists yet). Unlike many, I have a pretty good idea what has kept me out (just look at my stats). It is frustrating beyond words to have dedicated the last three years of my life to philosophy, earning A's in almost 20 philosophy classes at both the undergrad and graduate level, and picking up two additional degrees in the process, not to mention TAing and running my own intro sections, and knowing that to admissions committees none of that is as important as having blown off a handful of non-philosophy classes almost a decade ago.

Ugh. This process makes me want to curl up in a ball and cry. Started with 15 schools. 2 official rejections and 8 inferred. Of the five schools I have left, two are why-not-take-a-shot-even-though-I-know-I-won't-get-in reaches (Pitt and MIT), so I'm really down to just three chances. The stress of this process is making it absurdly difficult to work on my thesis, which is hugely counterproductive because if I don't get in it will be all the more important to finish my M.A. program strong.

Anyone want to claim the Indiana acceptances? I'm mostly keen to know if it's a standard funding offer or a special fellowship offer. I'd also like to confirm that it's an admit to the philosophy program, and not one of the HPS acceptances that went out a few days ago.

I had similar stats to yours, and I got into a funded M.A. program (note I did go back to undergrad first, but that's because I didn't major in Philosophy the first time around). I think you could get into a Master's program with those numbers, particularly if you're not looking for funding. The bigger problem would be securing good letters of recommendation, since it seems you are some years out of your B.A. Besides doing more undergrad and then a Master's, you may want to consider taking a few grad classes as a non-degree-seeking student. Admissions for such students are usually not competitive, but there may be administrative hoops to jump through. BC's page on this subject can be found here: http://www.bc.edu/schools/gsas/academics/non-degree.html

Others are correct to recommend you go the M.A. route, but in your case I would also throw out an application to Carnegie Mellon (assuming you'd be interested in going there), and perhaps another logic-heavy program as well (Not my area, so I don't know what other program to recommend). Such programs are apt to look more favorably on your background, and there's little to lose and a lot to gain by applying there in addition to M.A. programs.

Berkeley puts out a huge number of courses in a variety of disciplines at http://webcast.berkeley.edu/ I've greatly enjoyed Campbell's and Searle's courses on philosophy of mind and language (respectively), and they both have others I haven't gotten to yet. Yale also has a decent number of courses at http://oyc.yale.edu/ though unlike Cal (and to my dismay), they have stopped adding more. Kagan's course on death is pretty good, but I really recommend Gendler's course - lots of interesting stuff at the intersection of philosophy and science. Berkeley's and Yale's videos are also available on itunes and youtube. I should note that I cannot comment on the quality of the video, since I only listened to the audio versions.

But, but, it was time to ( D ^ B ), not ( D v B ). What about the books? Kidding of course - though I do find that drinking goes well with talking philosophy, but not so much reading it.

Mostly school stuff. Articles on epiphenomenalism for the thesis, plus a handful of articles for a paper on how far Pogge can push his negative duties claim. I'm also reading some stuff on event-causal libertarian conceptions of free will, in order to beef up my writing sample. I'm about to put the thesis work on hold to really dig into this stuff and get the sample done, since deadlines are fast approaching. For no particular reason I'm reading Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil. I generally stay away from continental stuff, but Nietzsche is an easy read (and entertaining), and his arguments - those few that he gives anyway - are pretty clear. But honestly, a too-large part of my reading time is being spent here and on philosophy blogs, scouring old posts for application advice and just generally wasting time.

I have no advice, only congratulations!

I'm all for broadening your interests, but since you say "I'm not sure if this is a ploy to make more money for the University?" I assume that either your program is not funded, or that these outside classes will not be covered by your funding. In that case, it seems like sitting in on the classes (with the instructor's permission, which most are happy to give), would be the best option. As to what classes would be helpful, I suppose that depends on your specific interests. I imagine classes in social/political philosophy, economics, anthropology (If it's a different department), history, and cultural studies departments would be interesting to many sociologists.

Absent specific instructions, I would pick whichever test date you think is best and report those scores, rather than merging the best parts from multiple occasions. How much will the extra .5 on the writing section help you, and is it worth the risk that someone tosses your application because they deem you misrepresented your score? (Note: I'm not saying it would be misrepresentation - I just think the risk/reward situation is such that you should play it safe.)

Most M.A. programs are generalist, and the specialist ones I've seen do not specialize in the areas you're interested in (There's one M.A., for example, that focuses on environmental ethics). As far as fit, I'd look at faculty lists and make sure there's at least one prof. who does work in those areas. Outside of that, I'd go with the best overall program you get admitted to (and funded for!).

I can't imagine you've ruined an advisor relationship by being not talkative enough in class, especially since he's never said anything about this before. Considering he is known to be moody, I doubt this had that much to do with you, so I'd just go into the meeting as if nothing is wrong.

No one can really give you this advice, even if they've taken the same classes, because we don't know just how much catch-up you have to do. But I will say, don't try to get a degree you're not really motivated to get (ie don't switch to an MBA program), that's a recipe for disaster, since a lack of motivation can be just as bad (if not worse) than a lack of preparation. If you really feel you're not up to the courses drop them and reapply for the degree you want later.

I suppose that would depend on what kind of philosophy has comprised the bulk of your studies. If you've done a lot of political & social philosophy stuff, I imagine that would be helpful. If you've been studying metaphysics and Leibniz (to pick two random examples), you'll probably be seen as ill-prepared. You could always take some additional classes in the areas in which you are deficient (grad-level classes will look particularly good). A more important question, I think, is that if you aren't very familiar with the public policy world, why are you looking to go to grad school in that subject? As to your chances at different programs, I think you'll have better luck getting an answer in the discipline-specific part of these forums.

Whether or not it's a strike against you probably depends on the particular person reading your application. There's little you can do but mention in your SoP what benefits you think the CompSci Masters will yield for your Ph.D. work, and hope for the best.

Oh, I certainly agree, but a lot of programs don't list grad student interests, so for many schools it would be difficult to get this kind of information.

Silence then, and nothing more.

I took a long break from GradCafe over the summer and early part of this semester, but now that I'm back I thought I'd share some data I collected that I think could help other people make a decision. I used department websites to get these numbers. The APA collects some similar data but it is self-reported and incomplete, and I haven't seen any chart like this that can be used to compare different programs. I've got data for the entire PGR top 50, as well as a few unranked schools I was interested in. The first column (FTF) indicates how many full-time, Tenure or TT professors are in the department (so, this doesn't count lecturers, adjuncts, visiting professors, or affiliated professors in other departments). The second column (GS) indicates how many grad students are in the department (both M.A. and Ph.D. students, for deprtments that offer both). The third column is simply column 2 divided by column 1. How might this be useful? It seems to me that everyone should care about column 3, which indicates how many grad students there are for each professor. A high number here may cause concern that students will find it difficult to get the kind of intensive, one-on-one interaction with professors that is highly beneficial for graduate studies. I think we can expect that, on average, professors in departments with a high number in column 3 will be less available to students than professors in a department with a low number. As can be seen, there is quite a lot of variance in the student-teacher ratio at various programs - more than I expected. It also seems useful to know the absolute size of departments, not just the student teacher ratio. There are advantages and disadvantages to both small and large departments. It's probably easier to feel a sense of community in small departments , while large departments probably offer more variety in courses and choice of dissertation advisors. I would encourage applicants to consider what kind of department they would like to spend their time in - going to a huge department like CUNY is bound to be a very different experience than going to a small department like MIT, despite the fact that they have similar student/teacher ratios. (please forgive the wonky formatting - copy/pasting from excel doesn't work very well) Name FTF GS GS/FTF NYU 27 42 1.6 Rutgers 29 42 1.5 Princeton 22 54 2.5 Michigan 30 39 1.3 Harvard 22 50 2.3 Pittsburgh 19 47 2.5 MIT 11 29 2.6 Yale 25 39 1.6 Stanford 27 58 2.1 North Carolina 25 33 1.3 Columbia 23 71 3.1 UCLA 17 50 2.9 USC 23 34 1.5 CUNY 40 95 2.4 Cornell 19 46 2.4 Arizona 26 30 1.2 UC Berkeley 24 49 2 Notre Dame 42 66 1.6 Brown 16 31 1.9 Chicago 23 57 2.5 Texas 33 56 1.7 UC San Diego 23 38 1.7 Wisconsin 22 43 2 Duke 16 29 1.8 IU 14 38 2.7 Ohio State 20 40 2 Colorado 25 43 1.7 Umass 14 48 3.4 UC Irvine 10 25 2.5 Penn 14 40 2.9 Northwestern 19 38 2 UC Riverside 17 36 2.1 Maryland 20 32 1.6 Miami 14 27 1.9 WUSTL 20 30 1.5 Georgetown 29 38 1.3 Johns Hopkins 12 34 2.8 Syracuse 20 41 2.1 Virginia 17 33 1.9 Carnegie-Mellon 17 35 2.1 UC Santa Barbara 11 28 2.5 Illinois @ Chicago 16 32 2 Washington 18 34 1.9 Boston 22 47 2.1 Florida State 15 48 3.2 Rice 12 22 1.8 UC Davis 13 23 1.8 Minnesota 14 25 1.8 Rochester 15 21 1.4 Connecticut 19 31 1.6 Missouri 16 29 1.8 Purdue 20 47 2.4 Illinois @ U-C 13 30 2.3 Iowa 13 22 1.7

Well, I'd start with Leiter's area rakings. Phil Language: Group 1 (best): NYU Oxford Rutgers USC Group 2: CUNY MIT Princeton Berkeley UCLA Michigan Texas Wittgenstein doesn't have his own group, but you could check out the schools that are highly regarded in History of Analytic, and see who has someone interested in W.

You're missing several for the general list (I have no idea about international students): Kent State University of Toledo Oklahoma State Colorado State University of Wyoming This is based on online research I did when applying to M.A.s

The only difference now that I'm old is that I can't really party the day I'm done - I'm just too exhausted. But after a day or two of recovery I'll be celebrating with copious drinks.

Yes, I think you're going to have trouble getting into an M.A. w/o any classes in analytic philosophy, and perhaps more importantly, without any recommendations from analytic professors. Of course, you may get into a good program w/o such things, but it's going to be much harder. I also suggested it because you'll be applying for the M.A. starting fall '15 (presumably) so it wouldn't delay your plans to take some courses over the next two semesters. Of course there is the money to consider, and if you have to pay $5k per course at a private university this plan may not be worth it. But if you can get relatively cheap in-state tuition somewhere, I think it's definitely worth it, considering how much better it will make your application. (btw, the advice I'm giving you is essentially what I did.) Regarding general liberal arts M.A.'s, I don't think the degree will give you any advantages over simply taking the classes you want, and it has two drawbacks. First, you're going to have to take at least some classes that won't help you (and that you may or may not care about). Second, and more important, they cost a ton of money, and there seems to be a wide-ranging consensus that, even if the classes are good, your career prospects are not sufficiently enhanced to justify the cost.