Neither Here Nor There

L.A. Paul has a comment on Leiter Report last year justifying UNC Chapel Hill's use of a 'hidden wait-list', and I think this may be what Rutgers is doing (the pessimistic explanation is they are just slow). Here's her explanation: 
I am UNC’s Director of Admissions. I am aware that applicants would like more information, and I understand that this is a stressful time. However, I believe that, in UNC’s case, sending out rejection notices before the start of April is not in the best interest of the applicant or the Department. This is why we have not sent out rejection notices yet.
Let me explain: UNC does not have a “secret waitlist”, or anything resembling such. Rather, we have found that, on occasion, as our list of who is considering our offer of admission evolves after the campus visit (as prospective students with offers begin to make decisions), we need to revisit our waitlist. (We retain extensive notes on candidates at every round of the process.) In particular, we may revisit our waitlist because we are looking to have an entering class that is intellectually diverse, and as the season progresses and people start to make decisions, that diversity can be imperiled.
The reason we have not sent out mass rejections is that occasionally, when candidates who failed to make it past an early round are reassessed when we revisit the waitlist, a candidate is subsequently brought forward and officially waitlisted or admitted. If we rejected applicants early in the way that some people apparently think we should, we could not do this. (Rejecting candidates entails that we officially process them for rejection through the Graduate School.)
Candidates who have not been offered admission at this time from UNC can infer that their chances of admission are not high. Yet, they are not non-existent, and as soon as we can give candidates further information, we will. (We expect to begin sending rejections at the start of April. However, we are waiting on our current prospectives to make decisions, and so there is only so much we can do. We are doing the best we can, and we urge all prospectives to make decisions in a timely manner.)
My assumption has been that candidates prefer a small chance of admission to a zero chance of admission. (If they don’t, they have the power to change the situation. They can withdraw themselves from consideration.) It would be much easier to rush through the process and to send mass rejections early. But this is not in the best interests of the applicants or the Department. It is not appropriate for me to give further information about the internal workings of the admissions process, but I hope this explanation helps our applicants to understand why we have not been prompt in sending rejection notices. I am sorry that the process is drawn out and difficult, and for the anxiety this causes.
So, it's not a new phenomenon, and seems to be an accepted (if not universally accepted) practice. There's interesting but short discussion on the post itself, which reproduces a question by an applicant about why departments employ 'hidden' wait-lists. (http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2017/03/against-secret-waitlists-in-phd-admissions.html)

I'm starting to get very annoyed at departments that seem to be in no hurry to release waitlists, even though offers are out. It makes it hard for me to make choices when I don't know what mine are. 

I'm starting to get very annoyed at departments that seem to be in no hurry to release waitlists, even though offers are out. It makes it hard for me to make choices when I don't know what mine are. 

I'm starting to get very annoyed at departments that seem to be in no hurry to release waitlists, even though offers are out. It makes it hard for me to make choices when I don't know what mine are. 

You may be considered for the MA at SLU. But the PhD acceptances and waitlists came out last Thursday or Friday . . . just a few days ago. 

And I agree with your last statement. I'm beat up at this point and it hurts mentally to analyze it too much. 

Remember also to decline an waitlists if you are accepting on somewhere else. It will speed up the process for those of us on waitlists.

Remember also to decline an waitlists if you are accepting on somewhere else. It will speed up the process for those of us on waitlists.

Remember also to decline an waitlists if you are accepting on somewhere else. It will speed up the process for those of us on waitlists.

Remember also to decline an waitlists if you are accepting on somewhere else. It will speed up the process for those of us on waitlists.

Remember also to decline an waitlists if you are accepting on somewhere else. It will speed up the process for those of us on waitlists.

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

Much congrats. But I must say that this is the part of academy that really discourages me - the never  good enough. Don't get me wrong. I love it not being good enough in the sense that every day it gives me a reason to get up and work on new innovative projects, writing new papers in constantly new and better ways. But it is also healthy to go sledding and hiking and walk away from your work. To me, its not particularly useful to spend 20 hours a week for three months editing on one single paper. If that's necessary, the system is really broken; it is in essence only wanting people who want to edit all day and not wanting people to grow into better and more holistic people. I know the professors will argue that one can have both, and to a degree, the two do go together. But we best beware of when we turn philosophy into an idol, not we the student per se, but the system. 

To me, philosophy is always about the kind of person we become. Aristotle understood this. Augustine understood this. Dante understood this. 

We, 2018/2019 applicants, may not appreciate the value of this document, though 2019/2020 applicants will surely do. For this, I propose that this be pinned to the top of the philosophy subforum.

Ask. If they do not know, you can also go ahead and turn down all the others. For example, narrow it down to the top choice you are already admitted (and let go of the others in which you have been admitted) and let go of any waitlist that you would not choose over the one(s) you are already admitted.

Effectively, you can narrow it down to 2-3. And go ahead and let go of the others.

And believe me, there are many people living in high anxiety right now who will thank you for doing so. 

Ask. If they do not know, you can also go ahead and turn down all the others. For example, narrow it down to the top choice you are already admitted (and let go of the others in which you have been admitted) and let go of any waitlist that you would not choose over the one(s) you are already admitted.

Effectively, you can narrow it down to 2-3. And go ahead and let go of the others.

And believe me, there are many people living in high anxiety right now who will thank you for doing so. 

do we count saint louis as a january 30. they didn't start releasing them until yesterday. that one student was an isolated student. probably a fellowship. I owuld hate for studtents in 2019 to be checking their email and looking for something from them that early. their application wasn't even closed until February 15.

Just got waitlisted at Rutgers

Message current graduate students and ask them questions. You will probably learn more that way anyway. 

I worked as a software engineer for over a decade prior to entering a terminal MA. Having a viable backup plan has really made things easier for me. If I strike out this admissions season, I can go back into software, which is nice. You’d be in a similar boat, presumably, and that should give you lots of confidence that you can test the waters of academia at a terminal MA without worrying too much that you’re making a horrible decision. If you don’t like it, go back into engineering. If you do, well then apply to PhD programs. That, at least, is what I did.