759

Anyone hearing back from UConn?

I've heard from many of my professors, and graduate students, that it is one of the best places to study logic. I was going to apply there myself, but decided not to at the last minute due to unrelated external factors. But yeah, basically every professor/mentor I've spoken to about grad school has said that with my interests---logic, natural language semantics, philosophy of math, frege, etc.--Amsterdam is the place to go. Also, they have great placement into PhD programs (the guy who started the program teaches at Stanford).

Would it be just way too neurotic to start a thread where people announce which of their offers they plan to decline? This info probably won't actually help any of us know if we'll be bumped up, but so far we have an acceptance thread, a wait list thread, a rejection thread,...seems like it would close the neurotic loop.

I got a rejection via e-mail this morning

You've heard back, nice! Was it an automated e-mail or personal?

Does anyone have some insider info re UC Davis? 3 people who post on this site have claimed acceptances, but there are no wait lists or rejections posted. Should I give up all hope for a wait list/late acceptance?

In that case, why not just wait list more people? Nothing is guaranteed to people on a wait list, so if they were really worried about not filling a quota then why wouldn't they just maintain a large wait list? If they give someone no answer at all, that person may be more inclined to direct their hopes elsewhere since silence is usually a presumed rejection...

It doesn't make very much sense. After a school has decided who to accept and who to wait list, why stagger rejections? There are schools that I haven't heard anything from, but who have accepted, rejected, and wait listed people already. I'm assuming a rejection --- but why not send out all rejections at once? What motive could they possibly have for sending some rejections out at one time, and others weeks from that time? Shouldn't sending out rejections be as easy as sending out a mass e-mail with more or less the same letter?

Is it just me or is UCLA's process strange this year? There were reported, at roughly the same time, an acceptance and a rejection (and now a wait list (congrats btw)). I've yet to hear anything myself. Isn't the trend usually acceptances > wait lists > rejections? I realize more people apply to these schools than post on this website...but still, UCLA is a big school that I'm sure a lot of us have applied to and I haven't heard much? I'm sure this is just my paranoia kicking in...

Does anyone want to claim the Rutgers acceptance? Seems strange that there's only one, even after a few days of posting.

Congrats! Are you the Rutgers post? I just saw it go up this morning

This was my fear. I mean, realistically, the only reason an applicant contacts a POI in the first place is to get a bit of name/research recognition out there for when their application is at the top of the pile...but by making the contact before sending off the app you can at least preserve a more disinterested image...

Is it too late to begin contacting POIs at schools that I'm applying to? I've already done this for a few schools, but not all of them. All of my applications are complete, so it seems a bit awkward getting in touch with a POI at this point. What do you guys think?

I had similar problems when applying to UConn. The tech support people basically said that the .pdf is an unofficial document, and that I shouldn't worry so long as I filled out the actual form correctly.

I don't know what it is about the scanned copy of my transcript, but at 100%-size it is unreadable. This doesn't seem to have anything to do with the resolution, since by zooming in to 150%-170%, it looks perfectly fine and is clearly readable. In any case, I received an e-mail today from one of the schools to which I applied asking me to fix it since it is 'unreadable'. I tried a few things--put it in color, upped the resolution--but at 100% it is still too small. I honestly can't enhance it anymore without the file going over the 15 MB limit. After uploading this copy, I added the note that one need only zoom in a bit for it to be perfectly legible. (I really hope this didn't come off as condescending). Any advice? Has anyone else had similar problems with supporting materials? A transcript scan at 100% just isn't big enough to be read on a computer screen...or at least this has been my experience...

What I'm about to say may be very naive, since I'm no phonologist, but isn't OT sort of the predominant theoretical approach? Wouldn't finding a place to work on OT be as simple as finding a theoretically inclined department? Like I said, this may be naive on my part. OT applied in a wider sense (beyond phonology) would be another story though...

I have to second this and add, from what I know about Rutgers, that one of their primary goals is to produce 'well rounded linguists' instead of 'semanticists' or 'phonologists'...meaning you'll be taking quite a few courses outside your interests. This is what I've been told, anyway.

Thanks for the advice. I haven't considered UConn yet, but after checking it out it does sound pretty impressive. I'll be sure to send you an email.

This is my second year applying to graduate school. Last time around, I made the mistake of following the advice of professors at my undergraduate university and only applied to the top ~10ish ranked schools in linguistics. In retrospect, I was probably only a really good fit for ~3 of them, and these were all schools that only accept like 4 of the 200 people that apply. A waste of an application cycle to be sure. Now that I've gained a bit of experience I'm trying to do things right this time around. I'm only applying to universities that I believe I have some chance of getting into and I've added a bunch of MA programs as well. So here's my question, should I still apply to my 'dream programs'? N.B. None of my 'dream programs' are from last year's list of failures. A bit of background about myself: As an undergrad I double majored in linguistics and philosophy. My interests lie in the philosophy of language, formal semantics, logic, pragmatics, and philosophy of linguistics (sometimes referred to as linguistic meta-theory, I think). I went to an undergraduate program with a stellar reputation in linguistics, but a rather obscure continentally-inclined philosophy department (they only had one logician, who I essentially learned everything I could from, and so I had to do a lot of supplementing in upper division semantics). I have a 3.75 gpa, with something like a 3.8 or 3.9 in linguistics and philosophy; solid letters of recommendation (3 linguists and 1 philosopher); three solid writing samples (2 linguistics, 1 philosophy of language); 2 paper presentations; and I collaborated on a linguistics paper that won the university's award for undergraduate research. All this being said, I failed to get in anywhere last year. (Again, I blame no one but myself). Now, my 'dream program' at this point is probably Stanford's philosophy of language MA. They require applicants to have a strong background in the philosophy of language and linguistics, which I think I've got covered. However, my failures last year have sort of shaken my confidence in getting into anything resembling a top tier program like Stanford. (I mean, this is a program that only has like 2 MA students at any given time). Given my stats should I go for it anyway? I'm sort of 'too close' to this issue to objectively determine whether or not this is a waste of time and money. Thanks in advance for the advice. I understand that these threads are tiresome and mostly just people venting nervous energy!

Thanks for all of the input. I understand the role prestige plays in getting a job, I mean it's the same in non-academic fields as well. I guess I was more wondering if getting a PhD from an obscure university is pointless (aside, of course, from the inherent value in studying philosophy at all). If there are literally 0 jobs for people who don't go to top 25 universities, then how do these non-elite universities even attract students? And I'm not just talking about getting a job teaching at Princeton or whatever, but jobs at mid-ranked research universities, state colleges, community colleges, etc.

First off, I want to apologize if this topic has already been discussed to death. Basically, my question is about obscure PhD programs--programs that don't have a whole lot of prestige (aren't on the philosophical gourmet report, etc.). I know the popular advice seems to be 'screw rankings, go where you best fit in with the faculty/research', which sounds nice, but what does this mean professionally? How difficult is it to find a job with a PhD from an obscure philosophy program? (Of course I don't mean that the larger university necessarily be obscure, but the philosophy department specifically). If I eventually would like to work in academia (teaching, researching, etc.), is it imperative that I go to a highly visible PhD program? Or is finding a job more about the quality of your work? Perhaps equal parts program prestige/work? Sorry for all of the question! I know there probably aren't completely concrete answers to these questions...

I'm not sure if this changes anything, but I'm not Canadian. I went to a four year university in California. Is it strange or problematic to do a MA in Canada if their system is different (especially if I intend to return to the US to do a PhD)? Would a US PhD program see less value in Toronto's program since it is only one year?

Thanks for all of the information. I already have McGill, Toronto, and Amsterdam (for logic) on my list. I also have ucsc and stony brook for US schools (it was these American schools I was mostly referencing). I guess since the MA is a more unconventional route for american students there isn't much demand for info re ratios of applicants vs offers. Whereas for PhD this sort of information is almost proudly displayed on the departments websites (e.g. We typically choose 6 students out of a pool of 200 applicants). But if the MA is just as selective as the PhD, I may be taking an ill-advised route here...

It seems to me that MA programs are typically recommended to those who would like to eventually pursue a PhD, but feel that they need to strengthen their application/knowledge base first. Since the pool of applicants to MA programs (supposedly) fit this criteria, the conventional belief seems to be that they are easier to get into (relative to the PhD). Or another way of saying this might be that the competition isn't as stiff (people applying to an MA probably don't have perfect numbers (gpa/gre), nuanced research, published work, etc.). I think of myself as falling somewhere in the middle (good academic record/education re linguistics, but probably not super competitive at the PhD level. During my last round of (all PhD) applications only one school gave me a 'provisional' acceptance, which couldn't be granted due to budget issues), so I've decided to apply to MAs. However, after looking around a bit, it seems as if there are very few MA students in linguistics (considering only, of course, those schools that offer terminal MA degrees). While the in coming class of PhD students is usually something like 6-10, the MA only takes on like 1 or 2 people. Is the MA actually more competitive...or do radically fewer people pursue the MA? Why is it that some years not a single MA student is admitted? Is it simply a financial issue (many MAs are admitted, but not many accept due to no funding)? Sorry for all of the questions; I'm just a bit confused.