bluwe

In my view, placement records are worth little. They may instill in you a false sense of security if you go to a place like Tufts (not that SFU wouldn't do the same). Like others have said, a good applicant is a good applicant. Now the question for you is whether you think that the resources at Tufts are that much better that you would be a better applicant just for going to Tufts. It seems like the answer could be yes if you go into your MA aimlessly, but if you show up with purpose and actively try to be the best applicant you can be (which sounds like what you're planning), I'm not sure there would be any difference. Even if you think there would be a difference, the Tufts price tag is probably not worth the difference.

Rejected @ Penn

It seems pretty clear that you will be receiving good news soon (if any news that is not a straight-up rejection is good news). I know it probably seems crazy to be optimistic, but I would be in this particular instance.

Yeah that helps. You also need your UM ID from the receipt email after you go through the prospective students link.

Georgetown says NO!

There's a list on this forum somewhere of all funded MA programs...its a few years old but I don't think much has changed.

There is no update on my portal either.

Congrats! Did you get your call from DGS, POI, or someone else? Did they give any information as to whether there are any more offers to go around?

rejected from Irvine via email @ 3:30 am EST. Sweet dreams.....

I've not been notified either and I'm kinda happy about it ?

Where are the editors, and board members of well-regarded journals, and anthologies, etc? You talk about publications like knowing the editor of Ethics doesn't give you a big in (just an example--I know the editor was at Georgetown but the editorship has recently changed hands). You'll see they're mostly the ones sitting at the top universities. So, while they may be just as good philosophers as some at lower ranked universities, I'm not sure that correlates to the kind of resource that is most important in landing a job after PhD.

Rejected from Yale and Minnesota this morning via email to check portal.

Congrats, so you see I'm right. Peter Singer Thanks for actually providing a substantive answer rather than just appealing to the fact that you went to law school. Again, people seem to be misunderstanding me--I'm not against AA, I never claimed AA per se is against the law, all I claim is that it is legally questionable, and the fact that questions of AA have been in and out of courts for decades, as you have noted, provides enough evidence to think that.

Yeah, I understand the loopholes that are available to make decisions based on factors that aren't allowed usually. And I'm not saying that the female candidates aren't qualified--in fact, for various reasons they may be more qualified than their male counterparts (especially if they're a double or triple threat, which, in academia, is someone diverse in two or three respects). But this is not supposed to be an explicit consideration, and the fact that it is just means that males with equal qualifications are not being considered. Even if it is not an insidious plot and more just a consequence of human psychology, it is still problematic; since, particularly, it is legally questionable, and we're all supposed to follow the laws. I'm not sure you understand what it is for something to be illegal. If something is easily the source of lawsuits then it is probably illegal; if not there will be plausible arguments to be made for its illegality. Minimally, it is weird to hold both that you don't think it is likely to be illegal, but will also easily be a source of lawsuits. Maybe affirmative action is normatively justified, but I know philosophers more accomplished than you that think raping an unconscious woman is sometimes morally neutral. So, I'm not quite sure how we should handle normative claims in the real world.

This is partly why I'm interested because it is also probably legally iffy even if they didn't announce it ahead of time. To admit that it was a consideration is enough to tick the boxes if it is indeed against the law.

I'm not saying gender diversity isn't important. I'm saying that if they knew they were going for such a class they could have said something so that people can make an informed decision about where to apply, especially given UC's ridiculous application fees. Seems like I threw $100 in the trash.

Would have been nice to know this ahead of time so I could apply to a program that didn't prioritize "gender diversity" even more than programs already do. Stay classy, Irvine.

I thought we'd be free from rejections--today of all days! Heartless, really.

I applied to a lot of programs, and sort of regret it as I foresee a large number of rejections to roll in soon, and can probably guess what schools (so why did I even apply to those?). I think fit matters so much that if you have interests more specific than broad fields of study, you're probably better off applying to just the ones you're a fit for since the rest will just reject you on the basis that no one at their program has that particular interest. That said, if you're willing to put in the work to make your interests seem of broad interest to a large number of diverse faculty then maybe you should apply to a high number, since you won't be rejected based on your interests in lieu of any other reason to reject you.

I just found that you can set up your Apply Web preferences so that it sends you a text when there are changes/updates to your applications. Unless of course you enjoy obsessively checking it day in and day out.

Does anyone know how slow these Michigan phone calls are going out? Have they all been made?

Unfortunately, everyone I know that's gone through this process says that an unfortunate amount of schools just won't ever officially notify rejected applicants. Or, if they do it's obscenely late including after April 15th.

I'm skeptical too because I was supposed to get in there, but I haven't heard anything... Even so, phone acceptances usually happen at a slow rate so even if the post is legit it doesn't really tell us much.

Same. My rationale was simple for applying to a large number of programs. Some programs fairly assess materials, and some make arbitrary/semi-arbitrary cuts that might get your application thrown in the trash. If you think your application fairs decently if holistically evaluated, then you just have to apply to a high number of programs in order to raise the probability that you apply to a good program that holistically evaluates applications, and, of course, admits you. So, even if it is financially strenuous, the investment sometimes seems justified. The other general strategy seems to be to apply to a smaller number of best-fit schools, but it seems like tailoring to fit would already be taken into account in the 20-30 schools you apply to. The probability of admission remains fairly constant, I think, no matter how you tailor the apps (on the assumption that you are already a good fit for some programs just based on your real interests). That said, if this strategy would substantially increase the number of top programs that you are a good fit for, then it seems fine. Otherwise, it seems like it is a better choice to apply to a larger number of mid-rank programs--at least if your goal in applying is to increase your chance at an academic job in the future.

But this is why it couldn't affect admissions, right? Unless the grad schools give those answers to departments, then I wouldn't put it past ad coms to use that information. I started off giving that information, under the impression that both the information wouldn't affect admissions, and that the information would help grad schools' research in some way. Luckily (I guess), I got super lazy at the last set of applications and stopped giving it.