SmugSnugInARug

That’s incorrect. First off, the ‘cash cow’ bit is only mildly true, but not any more than any other unfunded MA programs. Which, granted, should all be free, but to lay that at the feet of U. Chicago is to blame an instance for a trend. Additionally, as someone who DID pay (and still is paying) for MAPH, its worth it. Seriously.
Secondly, the resources provided to U. Chi MA students are incredible, I still get weekly emails of potential jobs. Not only do you get the full support of the MAPH/MAPSS faculty, but you also get the immense resources of U. Chicago itself, which is a massive global network. As for direct attention for MA students: it varies mostly by professor, but the vast majority of them are extremely helpful and do actually have time for MA students. I met with most of my professors regularly, including people like Marion and Pippin. And, if that attention isn’t enough, you have 1. A post-doc, in your general area, who has been hired literally to help your small group (6-10) succeed. Plus, and I cannot stress this enough, the community formed by each cohort is incredible. I’m still incredibly close with many of the people from my year, and at my current job, 6 of the 18 people who work in my department are MAPH alums. 
Placement rate into PhDs in Philosophy is also NOT poor. Of the 11 philosophy students in my year, 7 decided to apply in the year following the MA program. One is at Riverside, one is at U. Chi (in Social Thought), one is somewhere in Tennessee, one is at Western Ontario, and three of us didn‘t get it (But I have gotten in since to Duquesne). 4 out of 7 is not a bad placement rate. The issue is, in part, that the numbers get skewed because of the varying sizes of philosophy students in each class.
Now, I will admit, there is some tension between MAPH and the philosophy department, but this is mostly for two reasons: 1) MAPH students are often much more interested in continental philosophy and the history of philosophy than analytic. (I think my year was 7/4 Continental/Analytic.) Obviously this causes some tensions between the two departments, as some of the Phil. faculty are less than helpful as a result. However, the Divinity School just does Continental stuff, so for those students who wish to pursue that, there isn’t actually any issues on the ground. 2) Some of the older Philosophy faculty look down on students getting MAs, basically assuming that if you didn’t get in to the PhD you are an idiot and will never get in anywhere. There’s not a whole lot you can do about this other than to just ignore those professors, which is super easy. On a day to day level, those problems really don’t exist though. The vast majority of the faculty are not like this though.

Thank you so much for your responses! I've been trying my best to stay motivated and not let the results get to me, but it can get really difficult at times.

This is a perfectly normal part of the experience. The application process is not designed to promote applicant mental health nor to provide clear, actionable feedback on your application.
At best, there’s a general sense of what is valued for programs, but the whole variety of factors at play can make it extremely difficult to determine why a decision is made.
 
This is especially true because there are often so many more applicants who are perfectly qualified than there are slots available.
You could have a great application, but they may already have 6 students studying that topic, so they have to pass in favor of someone else whose focus is less represented (this example is less true for MAs, but still holds).
Unfortunately, this means you have to rely on analysis that doesn’t come directly from the programs themselves. Speak with your letter writers, especially anyone who has served on a graduate acceptance committee (which can be hard when you attended an undergrad where there isn’t a graduate program).
The two best things you can do for your application are:
Figure out what you can do to improve your application based on general standards (do you need to edit your writing samples? Do you need to get a different letter of rec? Do you need to retake the GREs?)
Make sure that the programs you are applying to are the best ‘fit’ for you, where you have the greatest chance of being picked from a pool of equally qualified applications, based on your research interests and the department specialities. (Again, this is less true for MA programs than PhDs, but it is still somewhat true.)
And yeah, it sucks. I’ve been shut out before, left alone with basically no understanding of why I wasn’t successful in my application, which was a terrible feeling. You are definitely not alone in this.

Chiming in to say that I agree with everything @SmugSnugInARug has said. I have been through a shutout too, and it's important that you work at not associating your success in philosophy graduate admissions with your own self worth. I know it is hard to do, but it's something to work on.

This is a perfectly normal part of the experience. The application process is not designed to promote applicant mental health nor to provide clear, actionable feedback on your application.
At best, there’s a general sense of what is valued for programs, but the whole variety of factors at play can make it extremely difficult to determine why a decision is made.
 
This is especially true because there are often so many more applicants who are perfectly qualified than there are slots available.
You could have a great application, but they may already have 6 students studying that topic, so they have to pass in favor of someone else whose focus is less represented (this example is less true for MAs, but still holds).
Unfortunately, this means you have to rely on analysis that doesn’t come directly from the programs themselves. Speak with your letter writers, especially anyone who has served on a graduate acceptance committee (which can be hard when you attended an undergrad where there isn’t a graduate program).
The two best things you can do for your application are:
Figure out what you can do to improve your application based on general standards (do you need to edit your writing samples? Do you need to get a different letter of rec? Do you need to retake the GREs?)
Make sure that the programs you are applying to are the best ‘fit’ for you, where you have the greatest chance of being picked from a pool of equally qualified applications, based on your research interests and the department specialities. (Again, this is less true for MA programs than PhDs, but it is still somewhat true.)
And yeah, it sucks. I’ve been shut out before, left alone with basically no understanding of why I wasn’t successful in my application, which was a terrible feeling. You are definitely not alone in this.

This is a perfectly normal part of the experience. The application process is not designed to promote applicant mental health nor to provide clear, actionable feedback on your application.
At best, there’s a general sense of what is valued for programs, but the whole variety of factors at play can make it extremely difficult to determine why a decision is made.
 
This is especially true because there are often so many more applicants who are perfectly qualified than there are slots available.
You could have a great application, but they may already have 6 students studying that topic, so they have to pass in favor of someone else whose focus is less represented (this example is less true for MAs, but still holds).
Unfortunately, this means you have to rely on analysis that doesn’t come directly from the programs themselves. Speak with your letter writers, especially anyone who has served on a graduate acceptance committee (which can be hard when you attended an undergrad where there isn’t a graduate program).
The two best things you can do for your application are:
Figure out what you can do to improve your application based on general standards (do you need to edit your writing samples? Do you need to get a different letter of rec? Do you need to retake the GREs?)
Make sure that the programs you are applying to are the best ‘fit’ for you, where you have the greatest chance of being picked from a pool of equally qualified applications, based on your research interests and the department specialities. (Again, this is less true for MA programs than PhDs, but it is still somewhat true.)
And yeah, it sucks. I’ve been shut out before, left alone with basically no understanding of why I wasn’t successful in my application, which was a terrible feeling. You are definitely not alone in this.

This is a perfectly normal part of the experience. The application process is not designed to promote applicant mental health nor to provide clear, actionable feedback on your application.
At best, there’s a general sense of what is valued for programs, but the whole variety of factors at play can make it extremely difficult to determine why a decision is made.
 
This is especially true because there are often so many more applicants who are perfectly qualified than there are slots available.
You could have a great application, but they may already have 6 students studying that topic, so they have to pass in favor of someone else whose focus is less represented (this example is less true for MAs, but still holds).
Unfortunately, this means you have to rely on analysis that doesn’t come directly from the programs themselves. Speak with your letter writers, especially anyone who has served on a graduate acceptance committee (which can be hard when you attended an undergrad where there isn’t a graduate program).
The two best things you can do for your application are:
Figure out what you can do to improve your application based on general standards (do you need to edit your writing samples? Do you need to get a different letter of rec? Do you need to retake the GREs?)
Make sure that the programs you are applying to are the best ‘fit’ for you, where you have the greatest chance of being picked from a pool of equally qualified applications, based on your research interests and the department specialities. (Again, this is less true for MA programs than PhDs, but it is still somewhat true.)
And yeah, it sucks. I’ve been shut out before, left alone with basically no understanding of why I wasn’t successful in my application, which was a terrible feeling. You are definitely not alone in this.

This is a perfectly normal part of the experience. The application process is not designed to promote applicant mental health nor to provide clear, actionable feedback on your application.
At best, there’s a general sense of what is valued for programs, but the whole variety of factors at play can make it extremely difficult to determine why a decision is made.
 
This is especially true because there are often so many more applicants who are perfectly qualified than there are slots available.
You could have a great application, but they may already have 6 students studying that topic, so they have to pass in favor of someone else whose focus is less represented (this example is less true for MAs, but still holds).
Unfortunately, this means you have to rely on analysis that doesn’t come directly from the programs themselves. Speak with your letter writers, especially anyone who has served on a graduate acceptance committee (which can be hard when you attended an undergrad where there isn’t a graduate program).
The two best things you can do for your application are:
Figure out what you can do to improve your application based on general standards (do you need to edit your writing samples? Do you need to get a different letter of rec? Do you need to retake the GREs?)
Make sure that the programs you are applying to are the best ‘fit’ for you, where you have the greatest chance of being picked from a pool of equally qualified applications, based on your research interests and the department specialities. (Again, this is less true for MA programs than PhDs, but it is still somewhat true.)
And yeah, it sucks. I’ve been shut out before, left alone with basically no understanding of why I wasn’t successful in my application, which was a terrible feeling. You are definitely not alone in this.

A gentle reminder that this is the rejection thread.

Admissions are, and always have been, a chaotic shot in the dark for everyone applying with a ton of variables including arbitrary ones like who read the sample, who remembered to show up to the faculty meeting, who is on the admissions committee, etc. in addition to the application itself.

Folks are invited and encouraged to take a look at the conversations from years past on this matter and to take the conversation either to DMs or the venting thread. This isn't the place for it.

L

This is my second round of applications, so I understand how you feel. It is good that you are applying to MAs. I applied only to PhD programs (four in total) two years ago, and I was waitlisted from all of them. Luckily I got into the MA program at one of them (Duquesne). Going to an MA program really helps you prioritize what aspects of philosophy really drive you to pursue a degree in the field. Going in, I had no idea what I wanted to study. Now, I have a very firm grasp of my interests and my own capacities. If I was trapped in a PhD program right out of undergrad, where no one was working on things that I am interested in, then I doubt I would want to finish my degree. Luckily now I know what I want out of a school. 

The advise I was given from two separate grad acceptance committee directors is to NOT mention specific faculty members. Focus instead on the general strengths of the program.
They gave several reasons:
1. If a particular faculty member currently has enough students, is secretly retiring, or even just not on the committee, you can hurt your chances.
2. If, say, you mention Kant but only mention 1 of the 2 Kantians on the faculty, you might slight the other professor. The annoying reality is that this is just a part of the process. This was emphasized to me as the most important of the reasons.
3. Unless you are actually familiar with said professor (from recent conferences, actually being familiar with their work, or other professional contexts), you might misjudge or mischaracterize them. This is apparently quite common.

The advise I was given from two separate grad acceptance committee directors is to NOT mention specific faculty members. Focus instead on the general strengths of the program.
They gave several reasons:
1. If a particular faculty member currently has enough students, is secretly retiring, or even just not on the committee, you can hurt your chances.
2. If, say, you mention Kant but only mention 1 of the 2 Kantians on the faculty, you might slight the other professor. The annoying reality is that this is just a part of the process. This was emphasized to me as the most important of the reasons.
3. Unless you are actually familiar with said professor (from recent conferences, actually being familiar with their work, or other professional contexts), you might misjudge or mischaracterize them. This is apparently quite common.

This. Definitely agree.
I usually have three documents. A master note document with citations, as well as quotes or even full pages from key texts. This will often include an outline. I usually make a clone of this document, and every time i use a passage or quote, i delete it from the clone so that i can keep track of what I haven’t added into the paper.
An ‘operating table’ type document, where i will, say, place a key quote i want to analyze or an argument i need to summarize or refute, and do the actual writing in that document, sometimes doing several variations on the same bit to see what is successful. I let all of the detritus collect below a page break, just in case.
A proper ‘essay’ document, usually written in 6-8 point font, single spaced, two pages visible, so that i can get a birds-eye view of the paper, focusing on the paper structure.
As the paper comes into focus, these will slowly consolidate into a single document, at which point I shift to editing.
 

This. Definitely agree.
I usually have three documents. A master note document with citations, as well as quotes or even full pages from key texts. This will often include an outline. I usually make a clone of this document, and every time i use a passage or quote, i delete it from the clone so that i can keep track of what I haven’t added into the paper.
An ‘operating table’ type document, where i will, say, place a key quote i want to analyze or an argument i need to summarize or refute, and do the actual writing in that document, sometimes doing several variations on the same bit to see what is successful. I let all of the detritus collect below a page break, just in case.
A proper ‘essay’ document, usually written in 6-8 point font, single spaced, two pages visible, so that i can get a birds-eye view of the paper, focusing on the paper structure.
As the paper comes into focus, these will slowly consolidate into a single document, at which point I shift to editing.
 

Describe exactly what you mean when you write. Avoid phrases like "that is to say" "as well as" etc. Most people have at least some of that kind of fluff in their writing. Look for places where you're not actually saying anything and chop out those words. Same goes for summaries of others' work. Is each sentence/paragraph contributing to your overall paper, or is it just there to fulfill a summary/review requirement? 
In terms of editing papers down, I find I can get distracted when words start moving around on the page so I set up an "operating table" which is a blank doc where I copy-paste paragraphs or sentences I'm trying to rework so I can focus on that section alone. I find it helps with hacking away at word counts and precise writing.

Hi. I know just a few guys who can help you with your issue. Not so many peoples even try to write something for PhD grade, it's too hard. But you can try that for example, probably they will help you with your paper or PhD dissertation.

I guess the thing I’d offer is that if one person on a committee is a stickler for page-length (and who hasn’t run into a professor like that?) that person is gonna throw out your application.
So while there might be many successful applicants who get in because they never got those people, do you really want to risk it? Do you want to be one of the 1/5/10% of applicants this happens to?
Obviously pinning down a number on this percentage is (basically) impossible, but the risk just isn’t worth it. And I get it, cutting sucks, its so hard, but its really an essential skill.

One resource worth mentioning here, I think, is the Unlikely Academics podcast. The primary audience of the podcast is people who are under-represented, from non-research intensive schools, or are first generation post-grad students. The focus skews a bit more to advocating for those under-represented from rural areas, it does try to provide information to a broader audience. It should also be paired with podcasts like Blk + In Grad School which covers some other elements. They try to address issues from how to approach applications, to the unspoken cultural norms of grad school, and even how to talk to friends who didn’t get in during a round of applications.

I don’t know if any of the schools are up your alley philosophically, but some schools have joint Phil. MA/Law degree programs (including Georgetown, Stanford, UCLA, Boston College, Duke, and Duquesne and i’m sure plenty more).

Yeah, your background is sort of proof that having a passion for the material (as opposed to any specific trainging) is key. Though, not everyone is as heavy duty continental as you, Sparks ?

I am at a heavy continental program. We have a number of people who went to predominantly analytic departments (Harvard, one of the UC schools, Amherst). As long as you are interested in the field, and you have a solid background, you should be fine. There are very few people that go into programs already "experts" on Husserl. Unlike, say, Kant or ancient philosophy, you probably won't need to have a strong background in Husserl to be successful.

Actually you may be more important than ever. If you have large class sizes and multiple discussion sections then you are much more likely to see students online through Zoom or BBCollab or whatever program your school uses. This is because the small sections are easier to manage in these high enrollment classes through the online programs, which can be glitchy and chaotic.
Additionally, it will be much harder for professors to keep an eye on all the student class contributions. So you may need to pay even closer attention to students because it is easier for them to fall through the cracks online without ever being noticed. Also, many professors have adjusted by increasing the number of online prompts. Most, if not all, of which the TA will need to read and grade.

I think Glasperlenspieler is right. There are cases that I know where people get two MA degrees, and both in philosophy. But that's because they do their first MA in the native country (in non-English world), and do the scond one in the US.
The MA programs may not admit you. Even if they do, given that your program has a good placement record, doing a second MA might not do anything good when applying for PhD, with respect to the impressions.

Given the cancellations, I just want to put it out there that I’m more than happy to talk to anyone who wants to learn more about Duquesne and Boston College.