Jump to content

overoverover

Members
  • Posts

    243
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by overoverover

  1. I guess this illustrates the problem: there are different kinds of auditing. You can audit-1 a class just by showing up to the lectures. You can also audit-2 a class by doing all the assignments, going to lectures, and maybe even having the professor evaluate your work. Just saying that you've audited a class doesn't let your readers know whether it was audit-1 or audit-2. TBH, audit-1 sounds basically useless in a logic class (this isn't true of all philosophy courses—sometimes deciding to audit-1 might be beneficial), and audit-2 sounds like you should just take the class for a grade. But if you decide to audit-2 and not take it for credit, maybe ask a letter-writer to mention that you actually did all the work for the class, and that you have a grasp on the material. They'd only find this out through conversation with the logic professor, so you should encourage that conversation. Basically, I don't think you should expect ad coms to read that you audited a logic class and assume that means you can do logic.
  2. Not saying you shouldn't audit, but do what IZ suggests and get the professor (if they are a letter-writer) to mention your performance.
  3. Some profs are very skeptical of claims of having audited courses—basically, there's no reason for them to believe that you've understood the material at all unless the professor actually looked at your assignments and gave you a grade. That's probably particularly true in logic classes, as IZ noted, because working through a proof is much different than reading one on the page and just sort of 'getting it.'
  4. That's exactly what I do. I have a better chance of reading for long periods of time with lots of noise/chatter that isn't directed toward me.
  5. Thanks again for all the input, everyone. I'll be doing some tailoring, though I've decided against naming names—I also spoke to my advisor, and she recommended I avoid it (her reasons: it can look like filler, department politics can be strange/hard to navigate as an outsider, and everybody knows that incoming graduate students' interests might change). But I do appreciate all the replies! I'll be keeping your words in mind as a finish up my statements.
  6. Thanks for the input so far. Here's what I mean in more detail. By 'tailoring' I mean something like 'naming specific professors.' Currently, my statement is set up like this: Introduction: I explain quickly why I'm applying (since I am attempting to transfer from a PhD program), which leads me to my areas of interest. Areas of Interest: I have two paragraphs in this section. One is on metaphysics and the other on philosophy of language. I explain what I've done so far and what I could see myself researching (emphasizing the connection between my interests). Conclusion: Here, I mention some more about my background–—particularly, some workshops and conferences I've attended, most of which were more formally oriented. I also mention the extent of my logic education (this was recommended to me by a letter-writer). The way I see it, I make it really clear what my interests are, and thus anybody in the department would know who I'd be a good fit to work with. However, if I were to exclude someone that to them was an obvious fit, then that could be a detriment (that advice is straight off the Splintered Mind). Consider a place like Rutgers. They have tons of philosophers of language. I can't feasibly name them all; it'd be obvious I was just listing every philosopher who had a similar interest to mine. But excluding some professors (which would be more due to ignorance—I haven't read the work of every professor that works at every department I'm applying to) could also be bad. Does this worry make sense?
  7. This is probably old hat at this point, but I couldn't find a discussion elsewhere. I'm basically done with my sample (all of the profs who have read it agree), so now I'm revisiting my statements of purpose. I originally tailored each statement for each school. However, it's hard for me to shake the feeling that they all read a bit ad hoc, as if I wrote a generic statement and then sprinkled in some stuff about each department (because this is exactly what I did!). I'm considering just sending in my generic statement. I think it flows better. And now that I'm seriously thinking about whether to tailor or not, I'm not really seeing any pros, just cons. Thoughts?
  8. Thanks, everyone, for the input. I think this will be what I end up doing. I have three philosophers writing, and so I'll use his letter as a supplement.
  9. Here's a question (sorry if I'm jacking the thread): I may have a letter-writer from mathematics willing to write me a letter (he's indicated to a professor of mine that he'd be willing, but I haven't asked). He's a very 'philosophical' mathematician, by which I mean he's co-authored some formal philosophical work and his courses are regularly cross-listed. But I've been told by a lot of people that a letter from outside of philosophy is a bad thing—does this perhaps constitute an exception?
  10. The Midwest thing is odd. I've met tons of people from the Midwest who are in philosophy PhD programs (myself included)!
  11. It's hard to tell from your description. But here's one thing I've been told a few times: your letter-writers don't have to be in your areas of interest, and in fact only having letter-writers in your areas can indicate that you overspecialized and don't have a strong, general philosophical background.
  12. Well, I do think it's appropriate to also consider the reputation of the letter writers. But that is mostly secondary. Figure out who can write you the best letters and, if you have more than 3 professors in mind, start considering who might be better based on reputation.
  13. To my knowledge, it's expected that you are in contact with POIs in the UK, but that's secondhand info.
  14. Lots of factor play into this. 1) Would her letter be as positive as the tenured American? 2) Are you applying to programs in which she's known? 3) Did you carry out substantial work in her class? I don't think it really matters if she's TT or not-TT, what matters is if she can say good things about you and her opinion will mean something to those who read her letter. Personally, I have two tenured professors and a TT professor as my letters, but that's just because they're the professors who best know my work.
  15. Even with your qualification of "relative safety", it still seems a stretch to call any top 50 department a safety school. When I got in to my PhD program (near the bottom of the top 50), there was an admissions rate of about 5%.
  16. I had about 75% of my citations figured out before I wrote. Others were added when they became relevant, though I had read all but one or two beforehand.
  17. If you can skip 3 entire pages, why not just remove them?
  18. At least a lot of the schools I'm applying to asked for 20 page samples! I'm at about 7k words, and that's about 17 pages (LaTeX single-spaced). I asked a few professor if they thought I should shorten it for some schools which ask specifically for 10-12 page samples, and all of them said (quite emphatically) no. UK programs, however, are a different beast. A lot ask for multiple writing samples, and some have a cap of 4k words—which would of course make my 7k sample much too long. It's the main reason I'm not applying to St. Andrews: I thought I had a good sample at 7k words, and I don't think I have anything as strong in the 4k range. NathanKellen makes an excellent point, though—it could be seen as disrespectful/rude to send a sample longer than the page/word limit. I imagine there's a little bit of slack in everybody's minds, but that isn't guaranteed.
  19. Well, I've been in a PGR PhD program for over a year now, so I've taken a lot more philosophy courses and in general gotten much more serious about philosophy. My interests have narrowed, allowing me to produce a cohesive narrative in my statements. My writing sample is much stronger than the one I used last time, and that's to be expected—my first writing sample was written in my junior year of undergrad and revised a little over the summer, and this new one was written near the end of my first year in grad school and heavily revised over the summer (still a WIP, though). And I've presented at two conferences in the last year, which I'm hoping will at least make me look active in the profession. I actually see myself as a pretty different applicant than I was two years ago, but I also think self-assessment is incredibly difficult. So who really knows.
  20. I should add that I asked that question out of honest curiosity. As I'm going through the application process for the second time, I know I've put a lot of thought into the ways I've changed as an applicant/how my materials reflect that, and I'm wondering what that experience is like for others.
  21. What do you think you changed the most in your apps between this year and last?
  22. Do you mean Michigan State?
  23. I imagine rolling admission changes the process significantly, but AFAIK no philosophy PhD programs use a rolling admissions system? If it's a non-rolling system, then I can't see applying early being an advantage.
  24. I wholeheartedly agree with the last point. Take the extra month to revise your sample, take a week off, and revise again. Give it a final pass!
  25. I can't see time of submission mattering at all to departments. I doubt they start looking at applications until all are submitted. Professors are busy people, and they don't spend more than the required amount of time fulfilling departmental duties (including admissions).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use