TheVineyard

Report them to the administration? What and put them in timeout? I know several people who had successful teacher/student relationships. They are older folks, but they are in very healthy relationships and lived happy lives. I'm not in the business of nosing my way into consensual relationships and meddling with them, and I don't know why others do either. If they willingly want to have a relationship with each other, then that's between them.

Why not rewrite this entire post but replace "professor" with "student" and visa versa? These students are of age and able to make their own decisions too...

Do you listen to Tech N9ne? How about Rittz? If not, you need to get on that.

As far as average GRE scores, both Wisconsin-Madison and Duke publish this, and the scores are on average around 163-165 verbal and 155-160 quant.

I thought I was the only phil applicant that listens to rap.

I think it is important to have letters from professors who the adcom has heard of, and preferably worked with, in a good context. This will roughly correlate with the pgr. It isn't essential to have this, but I believe it is the kind of thing that gets you automatically into the waitlist/acceptance discussion. Doing it without profs known by the adcom gives you a higher burden that you must overcome with the rest of your app. Not impossible, but more difficult.

I turned in almost every single one of my applications on the due date. I waited to collect info and tailor my personal statements, which I did for every school. I almost got burned once, as some schools (Berkeley this year) have a year-old due date listed on their site which is off by a day or two. I applied all up and down the top 50, and I think everyone ought to throw in a good variety of schools, both higher and lower than they expect. For the last few years, I worked my ass off getting the right people to support me. Getting accepted is largely a political game. The key is putting together the best possible app. Focus there, and don't spend too much time doing stuff that won't help your app at the expense of stuff that will (i.e., building connections with the connected matters more than reading that interesting new article that isnt directly related to your writing sample.) When it is all done for me, I will post my acceptance/rejection info and you will see that although there might be a trend in who chooses me, I'm in at a top 5, #1 in subfield (not presenting any details, need to remain anonymous to be safe) but got rejected to a school at the very bottom of the top 50 (and I even had a good fit there!) I'm starting to suspect that region has a bunch to do with it... We'll see. I will have much more to say when this is all over and I have made my decision.

I no longer post all of my acceptance/waitlist/rejection info for fear of losing anonymity.

Those aren't no-name schools...my entire post is about no-name schools...

There are more significant risks for accepting an unknown student from an unknown department recommended from unknown people. I see no rational reason for taking that unnecessary risk when there will be an abundance of fantastic applicants with fantastic writers from PGR ranked schools. In my opinion, those coming from unknown schools have to absolutely wow the adcom with their writing sample, as it is the "great equalizer" in the sense that brilliance can shine through.

Did you think that maybe your advisor isn't in the adcom (he isn't, as you said) and that he has better things to do than babysit your application and try to extract adcom decision information every hour of every day? Maybe he didn't think it was your business to know exactly what offers were being sent out to exactly which people the moment it happened?

I think you should restart the poll anew with these questions firmly answered. You can't have everyone click everything that applies to them...that doesn't really make sense, because most applicants will be all 3... accepted, waitlisted, and rejected. I would do the finer graining on what ranking of school they were accepted to, and have them choose in a hierarchical order. Now I just don't know.

Waitlisted at Wisconsin. Live possibility for me.

Waitlisted at Wisconsin. Live possibility for me.

Sunken cost fallacy. It is actually a bigger waste of their resources for you to visit, considering the non-refundable flight.

You really think that a department with Chalmers, Dennet, and Knobe would be ranked mediocre in philosophy of mind? You've lost yours, sir!

Damn, those must have been some really bad applicants if they got rejected a full year early!

Don't you know how this game is played? You get the notification, and then you tell us how+details. Only then are you allowed to Horray

Except as I said in that thread, I haven't seen any Duke rejections posted.

I see no Duke rejection postings on the main site...

I think most critiques of Leiter's rankings fail. The Continental thing is just patently false...some of the top rated programs are focused in Continental, there are several subfields that are "Continental" and ranked so you can view the school rankings there and make your judgements based on subfield... Saying that the report is biased towards big departments...well, big departments offer a larger pool of philosophers, so saying that the report is "biased" towards big departments is like saying that pie-eaters are biased towards large pies....it is completely justifiable to believe that better departments are larger ones, due to having either very strong focus, or a broad base of subfields. If you take Leiter's rankings as a ranking of how prestigious/quality the department was viewed by other philosophers in 2011, then nothing can be taken away from it. The subfield breakdowns are even more important and even more helpful.

Oh no offense taken. I am not at all sure that I will be waitlisted. I'm just saying that I can't help but assume that I am at this point. I know there are a thousand reasons why I might not have received word yet...I just am confirmation biasing them out of the way to make room for that waitlist letter.

You have left out a couple important categories that give important context. Namely, "rejected with M.A." and so on. Here's why you need the "rejected" categories. 6 people have posted "accepted with B.A. from non-top 50" and that is the most common category, which makes it seem like being at a non-top 50 was more successful than coming from a top-50. However, there are probably farrr more people applying from non-top 50s, but we can't really know because the only ones that can answer this poll are the accepted/waitlisted ones. If we wanted to make this really awesome, we would have subcategories of what school the person was accepted to...such as "accepted to top 10", "accepted to top 25", and "accepted to top 50."

I also have heard nothing. However, since waitlists and acceptances have gone out (but no rejections have), I see absolutely no reason to think positive news is coming for us.

Mine still says pending. Assuming waitlist at this point. Fit is perfect, strong connections with my writers, etc.