ianfaircloud

That's completely false. I will gladly post a screen-shot of a Brandeis admission letter to show otherwise. If anyone is interested, send me a message in private. I'd be glad to demonstrate that mightymike11 is wrong about this. EDIT: I just checked again with a source on this. I'm 100%, absolutely positive that mightymike11 is mistaken. And I will be glad to demonstrate it to anyone who sends me a private message. I don't know the motive here -- I'll assume that mightymike11 means the best and has simply misread his letter. But I know from a personal connection (and have now seen with my own eyes) that Brandeis only asks that admitted students give them an idea, in some number of weeks, of whether they remain interested in the offer. The request is *not* to commit. No legitimate department asks students to commit early. And frankly, it's extremely irresponsible to offer up such a claim in a forum like this. If anyone is under the impression that Brandeis has made this kind of demand, that person should ask the department to clarify. Because I'm 100%, absolutely, positively sure that the department makes no such demand. EDIT 2: I was so disturbed by the comments of mightymike11 that I have decided to post a GIF of a Brandeis acceptance letter. Everyone on this site may view it and see that mightymike11 is mistaken. See http://faircloudblog...-acceptance.gif. The letter is legitimate. Berislav Marusic was the co-director of graduate studies that year.

Yes, and just to beat this dead horse a bit more: If you have a family or a spouse, and if you are rightly worried about money, then Georgia State is "ranked" higher!! That's why I like what Brian Leiter has done with law rankings recently. He gives multiple rankings: faculty quality, student quality, quality by area of interest, etc., and allows the reader to give an 'overall quality' ranking. Frankly, the 'overall faculty quality' ranking of philosophy programs is arguably unhelpful to us, which is why Leiter's 'ranking by specialty' is such a nice feature of the Philosophical Gourmet Report. If someone is admitted to MIT in the area of ethics, that's much less impressive than being admitted to UCLA in the area of ethics (in my humble opinion).

This is bold advice but seems reasonable to me. For some people (not necessarily you!), it takes a lot of debt and years of service before these people realize that they will never be able to be professional philosophers (in a way that passes a cost-benefit test or allows them to meet obligations). Nobody wants to hear, "Give it up! It's not worth it!" But we all know people whose lives would be better if they heard this. I feel particularly qualified to speak on the subject right now! Think of the number of ways that you can remain philosophical without being a professional philosopher! As far as I know, Ronald Dworkin never earned a PhD in philosophy. Many of the greatest philosophers (even in recent years) did not earn graduate degrees in philosophy. Many current teachers of academic philosophy do not hold graduate degrees in the field, because, simply put, one can competently teach philosophy without such a degree. It's possible to take a degree in a related field -- politics, psychology, and law come to mind -- and remain very active in philosophy. Many competent teachers of legal theory, of course, have earned graduate degrees only in law.

I had to email Columbia to receive my official rejection letter. It's a shame that their system didn't work. Nobody should have to go to extra double to get denied admission...! While I'm complaining, I think a few programs were way too late in sending admission decisions. Some that come to mind immediately: University of Michigan, UCLA, Brandeis, UMass Amherst, Florida State, Carnegie Mellon, and Ohio State. Why did it take so long for these programs either (in some cases) to send initial acceptances or (in other cases) to send rejections? UCLA is one the worst of these, in terms of timing.

Yes, agreed. I really like the way GSU does the placement record. It's ideal. Brandeis's is OK, but it isn't as informative as the GSU record. Tufts's record could be misinterpreted. The list of "other programs to which our students were admitted," listed by year, may lead someone to conclude incorrectly that this success was evenly distributed among applicants that year. My only thing about the GSU record is this: Many students don't want their detailed records on a site for public consumption. I know that in my program, some people wouldn't want the world to see where else they were admitted, wait-listed, denied, etc. I'm not sure how GSU talks its graduate students into being *so* open with the record.

MattDest, a few years ago, the placement record indicated otherwise. This update is news to me! I'm glad you mentioned this. I promise you that when I looked at the record about three years ago, the record suggested that the master's program had placed someone at Rutgers. EDIT: In fact, I thought I emailed with Prof. Brogaard about this very placement, but I can't seem to find it in my email. But I see that the website now states explicitly that the placement came out of the BA. Perhaps the placement record formerly did not specify whether placements were out of the BA or the MA, and perhaps I assumed that they were all out of the MA. (Still, that's very odd to have a placement record on the website for BA students. Isn't it?) I feel like this is a lot of speculation, and I don't want to undermine the credibility of the good folks at UMSL. (In fact, I like UMSL. I even started an application to UMSL before I was admitted to a program that I like a little better.) Did someone suggest that UWM is "behind" GSU, in terms of ranking? Actually, in my opinion, weighting what I find important, UWM is third, behind Brandeis and Tufts. GSU is fourth. That's my opinion, and it's based on factors that I find important in programs. But I hope that my message here and in another thread is that the numerical ranking of 'overall quality' is not a good way to determine which is the best place. Suppose that a person thinks that location is more important than placement. Now, I think that's a fairly strange way to decide on a master's program. But you get the idea. There are various factors that must be weighed according to personal preference. For me, placement is extremely important. Reputation of the institution is important. Size is important. Community is important. When I evaluated master's programs for my own purposes, I found that UWM is behind only Brandeis and Tufts.

It's easier for me to say this, because I'm not in your shoes. But I would absolutely ask about it. Professors expect that smart applicants will want a straightforward answer questions about funding. Just be direct. Say something like, "I know that you plan to release funding information as it becomes available. And I certainly want to consider all the facts before I make a decision on a graduate program. If I am admitted to your program, where do I stand, in terms of funding? Do all admitted students receive funding?" Etc. If the email is straightforward and concise, your message will come off as sincere and mature. That's a good thing.

WHOA, WHOA, WHOA... This cannot be right. There's no way this is accurate. Sorry to call into question your authority here, mightymike11. But I'm absolutely positive that you misread your letter of admission. The letter says that the school would like to hear whether you are still interested. They are not asking you to commit. Please, please re-read your letter.

I saw this tonight (http://www.philosophynews.com/post/2013/10/20/Graduate-School-in-Philosophy-Terminal-MA-Programs-In-Philosophy.aspx). I saw it many months ago (or saw something very much like it), but I hadn't taken the time to read it carefully. Now that I've read it, I just want to say that I think people should be very careful interpreting these results! There's SUCH a temptation to make this process easy on ourselves by reducing programs to a numerical ranking. Unfortunately, it's not that straightforward!!! I know a T-7 master's program whose students are back-stabbing and whose environment is cut-throat competitive. You don't want to attend a program like that, even when it does have a marginally better placement record! And that kind of thing can't be factored in these rankings and charts. The data in these tables may not be very meaningful. I just looked at Georgia State's 2013 placement record, and I gotta say, I think it's outstanding. Sure, the average placement isn't as strong as what's at Tufts and Brandeis. But there are some nice programs on that list! Look at all the UCSD offers, for one thing. That tells you something very specific about the relationship between Georgia State and UCSD. And UCSD is on the cusp of the T-20. Note also the placements at Cornell, Pitt, and Penn. The data about Brandeis is almost meaningless, frankly. Brandeis hasn't been around as long, so there isn't enough data to come to a very meaningful conclusion. Having said that, if you just look at what Brandeis has to offer, then common sense suggests that it's a very, very strong program, particularly for someone with interests in metaphysics or epistemology. Also, Brandeis offers a smaller size; that could be a nice feature, for some people. Tufts is Tufts. If you're considering Tufts, please talk to the students. The placement record tells a very good story. And the location cannot be beat (among the T-7). Also regarding the philosophynews website. The author ranks programs according to average rank of PhD programs to which admitted students are placed. But sometimes a candidate will drop a #5 offer to attend a #12 program. So the rankings posted by philosophynews (or whatever), with regard to average ranking of programs to which students are admitted, do not tell you the whole story. This year, I know one MA student who is entertaining a #15 or so offer over a #8 or so. That's a significant difference! The best way to learn about master's programs is to consider all of the data, talk to the students, learn about the faculty, and consider matters of personal importance (like location and expense). Please don't hurt yourself by reducing this to a matter of a few charts on a website, charts which are only somewhat helpful.

Vineyard, I know someone at Brandeis who was admitted to a 30-something-ranked PhD program, wait-listed at a top-20, *before* she decided to attend Brandeis. This person now, two years later, has several top-20 offers, including a top-10 offer and a top-10 wait-list. So I gotta come to the defense of Brandeis (and other similar programs). I'm not saying that this proves anything, but I guess I don't completely agree with your assessment. I appreciate this, and I'm glad you posted it. I MUST point out something that is often overlooked about this table. This table does not show what share of students are admitted to T-50 programs. If one considers the SHARE of applicants who are admitted to T-50 programs, that will change things. Consider an extreme case: Suppose a program admits one person to Rutgers and its other nine applicants are shut out. This is virtually what happened a few years ago at UMSL. Now, UMSL would have a nice "average" that year. But certainly this means next to nothing about UMSL's placement record (for that year). Also, some of these programs haven't been around long enough for this data to tell us anything. Brandeis is the obvious example, since that program started only a few years ago. A few other things to say: Georgia State's placement record is more revealing than the ones posted by Tufts and Brandeis. Georgia State's placement record indicates data per student. Tufts and Brandeis don't do this. So Tufts can post that its students were also admitted to X, Y, and Z. But we have no idea whether just one student was really, really successful. And I happen to know that this is frequently the case at Tufts and Brandeis. You get a few rock stars who take home a dozen acceptances to top programs. But then the rest get into one place each. Finally, sometimes a candidate will drop a #5 offer to attend a #12 program. So the averages posted in this graphic are only somewhat helpful. This year, I know one MA student who is entertaining a #15 or so offer over a possibility at a #8 or so. That's a significant difference!

Someone wrote me a message, asking: "What's the most challenging thing about graduate school (in contrast with undergraduate study)?" Here are the things that come to my mind. My answers are based on a typical American's experience in graduate school. 1. Graduate study is and ought to be self-directed learning. You set the standards, the goals, the agenda. For some, the freedom is quite challenging. 2. There's probably more pressure to do well in graduate school. More is on the line, and there's more competition for positions, attention, funding, etc. Many graduate students also place a lot of pressure on themselves to do well; perfectionists will have a great deal of trouble in graduate school. 3. People typically must devote more time during graduate school to self-care and caring for others, just by virtue of the fact that people who are in graduate school are typically older and looking to accomplish things in personal life. People with spouses or children, of course, must devote time to them. And for many people in their 20s or early 30s, life is challenging on a personal level. People often lose social connections from childhood and have no obvious place to make new social connections. The stress of graduate school can make matters much worse. People who fail to take care of themselves in graduate school may hurt themselves and others. 4. There is a great deal of financial pressure for most people in graduate school. At age 25, some people are buying a first home and landing a six-figure salary at a law firm. Others at the same age are matriculating at a graduate program in philosophy. Psychologically there is a great deal of financial pressure on 20-something year-old graduate students. 5. Graduate students often feel pressure to figure out where they are going with their lives. When things in graduate school don't go well, graduate students may feel a lot of anxiety, depression, or anger. There is tremendous pressure to set a final goal and reach that goal before the time and money "runs out."

What do you mean by unfunded? Do you mean that you get a tuition waiver but don't get any funding beyond that? Or do you mean that you have to pay tuition and you have no sources of income (other than outside employment)? Do you have access to savings or wealth? I assume, based on your questions, that you don't. I mentioned in another thread that I think people need to consider what's at stake when taking on additional debt for a graduate degree in philosophy. If another person's welfare is at stake, morality may require something from you that it doesn't require of someone who has few or no connections. How many people earned an MA in philosophy at Marquette and eventually landed a job in philosophy that pays the bills? Yes. Vineyard's warning may sound extreme, but the message is reasonable. The message is that taking on additional debt to earn a master's in philosophy is extremely risky for some people. Here are the relevant questions: 1. Do you have access to wealth or savings? 2. Do you have a fail-safe backup plan, in case philosophy doesn't work out? What would you do if philosophy doesn't work out? 3. Is earning the graduate degree in philosophy something that's only valuable to you as a means to the end of having a career in philosophy (or something closely related)? Or is there a great deal of 'intrinsic' value in earning the degree? 4. Does this particular program have a strong record of success? 5. What would happen to you and other people near you if you pursue the degree and "fail"?

Good point!!

On the master's program side of things, funding situations are more difficult to compare. Brandeis offers at least (about) 50% tuition to every person admitted. (Some get more.) And then Brandeis offers TA positions with reasonable salaries. Tufts is similar to Brandeis. You pay some tuition, so you'll be out money. And Tufts and Brandeis will require you to spend more on living. But the placement records are better at these two schools. Brandeis is doing particularly well in placing M&E candidates. Compare these with schools like NIU and Georgia State. The funding situations at these two schools are really nice, and the cost of living is quite low. However, you do get stuck with quite a bit of teaching/assisting. I happen to know that the load is quite heavy for some people at Georgia State, though some would say that the weight of the load is exaggerated by a few. Still, if one weights the financial considerations pretty heavily in choosing a master's program, one would be right to choose NIU or Georgia State over Brandeis or Tufts. If one weights the placement record and quality of the faculty, Brandeis and Tufts win. (Consider your areas of interest. Tufts is better for people with interests in philosophy of mind, while Brandeis is better for people with interests in metaphysics.) A small complaint about Virginia Tech and NIU: Both of these institutions (at least in recent years) have admitted some students without funding. I would spend money at Tufts over getting no funding at NIU. But I know others probably attach different values to these factors that I do. All of the above institutions are fine places to receive an MA in philosophy. NB: UW Milwaukee, in my view, is the third-ranked program. Milwaukee is a great place to live, too. Cost of living is low, but you're well-connected.

Also bumping up this thread today. Please submit your funding data to the funding page! There's a very valuable resource available at http://faircloudblog...ss.com/funding/. Already we have data on 30+ programs. Not surprisingly, the best funding situations are generally at the top programs, particularly those programs associated with top-ranked institutions (like Harvard). Some disappointing places for funding: UT Austin and UW Madison. Even when you figure the lower cost of living, these numbers are too low. A better-than-I-expected place for funding: Vanderbilt! Who would have thought?

I'm bumping up this thread (and will continue to bump it up occasionally until the end of April). Please take the survey! Let your fellow applicants know to take the survey, too. Again, the survey is here: http://faircloudblog...issions-survey/

How did this thread get "pinned"? Is it "pinned" for everyone, or did I do something so that it is pinned for me?

We have a lot of responses to the survey, but we really need quite a few more before the results will be very meaningful (in my view). I'm hoping for at least 100, perhaps 200, responses. If you've taken the survey, you know how valuable this data could be!! If you know people personally who applied this year, please encourage those people to complete the survey. A lot of people don't use this forum and will not hear about the survey unless someone like you tells them about it! Again, the survey is here: http://faircloudblog...issions-survey/ . Just send a quick email, please, to people who applied out of your program. Give them a sense of our common goal here. Thanks very much for your help.

I'm glad you all chimed in. I guess I stand corrected! Maybe some are more willing than others to speak up in written form. I, for one, avoid going on the record on some things -- perhaps I'm cynical!!

Everyone: I highly recommend that you check with current students to find out the placement records this year at the MA programs. Keep in mind, when you ask for these records, that it's more impressive to see 80% of those who applied get admitted to one or two good programs each than it is to see 20% of those who applied get admitted to a long list of good programs. You don't want to be somewhere that has one awesome success story and only a little more than that. I know that my program (which I won't name here) is going to have an impressive record this year, but the administrator hasn't updated the record on the website. Also ask current students for their general feedback. Ask specific questions: How do the students treat each other? How much cooperation is there among the grads? What's the culture like? How competitive is the environment? How often do students share papers with one another for feedback? How often do faculty hold additional sessions, reading groups, etc.? Also ask whether the placement is much better in any particular area of philosophical interest. E.g. Take note whether a department seems to place better in metaphysics or ethics, etc. If the department rarely places well in ethics, that could indicate that the faculty in ethics is weaker, writes poor letters, etc. Ask whether the students who did well, did well because of the department/program or simply because they were really, really strong from the start. The people answering these questions may not *know* the answers to them. But it seems to me that it's better to have their thoughts than not to have their thoughts. Keep in mind a few other things: 1. Students will be MUCH LESS CANDID in email communication than on the phone or in person. When I applied, I spoke with a current student on the phone. He was very candid. I can't imagine that he would put in writing what he told me on the phone. 2. If you hear an unwillingness to help, that's a sign that these aren't students with whom you want to work. 3. Students are interested in being honest, particularly the first-year group (at two year programs). After all, if they talk you into going somewhere, and it turns out that they weren't honest, you'll be there to hold them accountable. 4. Talk to students in more than one cohort (first year, second year, etc.), not just one cohort. The group that just applied is going to have a different angle than the group that will apply next fall. 5. Reach out to students. Don't let the graduate director hand pick whom you will talk to!!

Thanks, Vineyard. I think you're right. It's much tougher to make a decision without all of the relevant facts.

Just a reminder about funding: http://faircloudblog.wordpress.com/funding/ A lot of people are receiving new offers. Please take a moment to let us know what those look like!

Ditto for other T-7 master's programs. Sometimes the T-7 progs just attract people who would have done well at non T-7 progs. But of course, surrounding yourself with others like you -- that's worth something.

I have a lot to say about this. I've not read the thread, but I'd like to chime in anyway. If you're asking yourself whether to turn down a PhD offer for the MA, then my guess is that many of you have already decided and are looking for permission. I give you my permission to turn down the PhD offer for the MA offer. Two years ago, I turned down a $100,000 offer from a decent PhD program in order to attend a T-7 Master's program. Though I ultimately failed in admissions, I really, truly don't regret the decision to try the master's program. Years from now, I'll know that I gave this my best shot. Also, for me, I aimed very high and was only willing to attend programs with really good placement records. That's because I hope to have a family fairly soon, and I can't afford not to have a reasonable amount of security. (I realize there's some contradiction here. Philosophy is never secure. But what I mean is that "better" schools often bring more security.) I think the answer to the question really depends on who's asking the question. If you're someone who will be disappointed by a Rochester or a Syracuse or a Florida State, then I'm not here to judge you. I'll say this: very, very good people attend these programs and have great careers, which is why so many people on this forum, who I have come to respect, are excited about their offers to these schools. But I, too, was disappointed by a fully-funded offer to a decent program. Here are some things to consider: Do you have the time and money to devote to more years in school? Unless the MA is like a Georgia State (where you get $15k + tuition waiver), then the MA will be an investment of both time and money. If you're 28 years old and want to have a family in the next five years, then the MA may be too risky. Will you be disappointed by not giving it a shot? And if you give it a shot and don't do any better, will you think you made a mistake? Or will you think, as I do, that you are glad that you at least gave it the very best shot possible? Do you have another career in mind, in case you don't end up in philosophy? This is relevant. For me, I think knowing that law would be a backup actually made my failure this season a lot more bearable. Have you visited the PhD program to which you were admitted? How good did you feel about it? What's your ultimate goal? Is the T-20 really important to you, as it seems to be to a lot of people? Do you want a research job someday? Is that your dream? Are you giving up that dream by attending this PhD program? I have a lot of trouble making big decisions. My significant other sent the email to my T-7 master's program to accept the offer of admission, because I couldn't do it. I felt so bad turning down other good offers. One thing that helps is to ask myself whether I just need permission to do what I want to do. Unless there are high stakes -- a spouse, children, livelihood -- then doing what you truly want to do may be worth it. But if you're putting other people or yourself at risk, say by taking on an immense amount of debt, then that may change things for you. Of course, if you're pursuing philosophy, you've already taken on a risk. Another thing that helps: Make a decision, and tell someone important to you. Start planning as if the decision is made. How do you feel, now that you made your decision? So my answer is heavily psychological, but I think it has to be. I don't think there's a formula to answer this question.

Ahh, makes more sense now!!