ScaredyCat
-
Posts
19 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ScaredyCat
-
-
8 hours ago, Abendstern said:
I think you guys are reading way too far into this. Hits mean nothing (especially ones from New York). Honestly, in your case that could have been me. I was just in Arizona and I looked at your Academia profile after I clicked on the writing sample from your signature. I am very sure that great majority of professors couldn't care less about Googling us. There's a discussion on Leiter's blog about this in case you don't believe me: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2010/01/do-phd-admissions-committees-google-applicants.html
Edit: The upshot of the Leiter discussion was that you are far more likely to be Googled by current grad students or your fellow applicants than any professor.
While I think academia.edu hits may mean nothing I am not convinced of that. But, FWIW I had a hit from academia.edu from Nashville and I wasn't accepted to Vanderbilt. It may be me but I rarely get hits. I have only got them when I was going to a conference or something. It may be because I have a very rare name: I know only one other person with my first name and I am named after her! My last name and first name have different ethnic origins. I saw that article before but six years seems long enough time that the culture of admissions could have changed--younger professors will probably me likely to google applicants compared to the older full professors. There are however multiple contingencies to keep in mind.
-
6 minutes ago, majorshake said:
Not to take away from the other thing going on, but does anyone have any idea how ad-coms look at international students vs US students (or those who went through the US system)??
Wish I knew more. The only thing I know is that with international students whose first language is not English, they tend to discount the GRE scores.
-
22 minutes ago, philstudent1992 said:
You make a lot of good points. However, I'd like to point out that it's irresponsible to quote studies that claim things like "When people look at a resume/cv from someone name Maria Rodriguez and John Smith, and both have the same qualifications, they are more likely to judge the former more harshly" as if they're indisputable fact. These social psych results are notoriously hard to replicate, and there are plenty of studies that claim that the opposite is true (e.g. Williams and Ceci 2014 made a big ole stink a while ago). So, while it's definitely not the case that women and minorities who get PhD spots don't deserve those spots, and it's hard to really know how adcoms are judging people, I think it's unfair to assert right out that women and minorities are automatically viewed as inferior even when they have the same credentials -- while it would explain some things, and it would probably fit some people's prior beliefs, things just aren't equivocally proven one way or another.
Not proving something unequivocally does not mean people need to remain neutral. Evidence can swing to one side or the other. The research on implicit bias is extensive and I accord my beliefs to evidence. So I do not think it is irresponsible to assert that people have negative implicit biases towards women and minorities and positive biases towards men and white people. Of course I should frame it differently in the future.
- shitandthings, blubed and majorshake
-
3
-
16 minutes ago, dgswaim said:
My thread. My beautiful thread...
Sorry. I won't say anymore on the subject matter.
-
3 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:
And philosophe - your concerns about diversity are legitimate, and I appreciate the cordial tone of your posts. I will still say, however, it is still not clear to me that abandoning the principle of evaluating applicants based on academic merit alone is morally justified. Far from it.
I know you said that you are bowing out, but I figured I will try to engage in your argument.
First I will say that this is a topic that affects many of us. It is not something merely abstract but a lived experience for us women and us minorities so it will ignite passion in us. It has clearly ignited passion in you! So while I understand that you were trying to be sensitive I hope you understand that people like me, I am Latina, are suggested all the time that we only have something because of our minority status. We have earned none of what we have.
Anyways, you begin by saying “In an application to any sort of university, the only relevant features of the applicant should be those over which he has some control. (And back off, determinists.) Being a female or black or Latino or whatever should mean absolutely nothing. But this is not the case.” This has never been the case that the only relevant feature is the application features. One of the most relevant features is something that none of us has any control over: fitness. The department needs people with varying interests that still fit into the department. I could have a better application, at least how you seem to define better, having better GRE scores but maybe I do not fit into the department. And fit is something not as easily determined by a quick online view of the program’s website as people believe. For example, maybe one of the professors who works in your AOI is leaving soon so will not be willing to take more students on, etc. These are things that only an admissions committee would know. Maybe one of these women’s specific topics of interests intersected with several professors. And there is nothing morally reprehensible about reviewing an application against the department's interests
My second point merely mirrors what other people have pointed out: you cannot know if your application is better because you do not have knowledge of either of your recommendations. Of course you can guess at what your says but unless you read it you do not really know. From what I have read by professors on Leiter’s Report, that aspect is the only one that definitely sinks an application all by itself! Even a relativiely low GPA will not necessarily doom you. So you are missing one of the most important pieces of the puzzle and judging without it. Not to mention, you cannot know if your application is better because you do not know how the adcomm people judge “potential.” That is what they are looking for. Potential is not easily given by numbers though numbers do help. Potential is not merely based on academic merit. Maybe the person on the adcomm read the woman’s sample (the one with only a BA) and saw that while maybe her sample was not as polished, or whatever, that her ideas showed potential as a philosopher. You cannot know.
Lastly, anecdotal evidence is not proof for anything. It takes a small sample size and extrapolates from it. If we trust anecdotal evidence then we would have to trust that merely being outside when it is cold will make you sick, seating too close to the television will damage your eyes. Also, it is fallacious reasoning (hasty generalization fallacy). The scientific research backs up that implicit bias happens. When people look at a resume/cv from someone name Maria Rodriguez and John Smith, and both have the same qualifications, they are more likely to judge the former more harshly. Mind you these are CVs in which they had the same credentials on both. That is only one example in the implicit bias literature. There are many more. These biases are against minorities and women when they apply to jobs, graduate programs, etc. There are some people who may give just a little bump to a woman or minority if they know the literature on implicit bias. However, it would not be used to give someone something they do not deserve.
However, many people are against affirmative action and those policies are actually not enforced at many universities. Well, that is not completely true, the quota policy of legacies at universities are enforced at the Ivies for undergraduates. The evidence does not support that white men are being discriminated against. It supports that women and minorities are not welcomed in philosophy and are discriminated against. Only 30% of PhD's earned in philosophy are earned by women (http://www.newappsblog.com/2011/05/the-low-percentage-of-women-earning-phds-in-philosophy.html). I cannot find this other source but I remember being shocked by the percentage. Only approximately 2% of PhD's philosophy are given to Hispanics/Latinos. It is the same for Blacks. Thus it is not clear that minorities or women are being favored in the admissions process. There are not that many women or minorities in PhD programs in philosophy to support what you are saying
Also you said that these girls are equal caliber to you (maybe lower). That means that they deserve the shot they have been given.
By the way I am a Hispanic woman who has not been accepted into any programs. I think it is safe to say that it is not always the case that race/ethnicity and gender are major factors in admissions. You are right. The system is corrupt. However, it is not corrupt in the way you think it is.
-
56 minutes ago, Nat_Foot said:
Indiana: Not all acceptances have come out; they're still processing them.
Berkeley: Berkeley still has not been informative. The answer is "the first week of March." I asked about the fact that a lot of acceptances and waitlists have already come out, and I was wondering whether only rejections are left. She claimed they weren't done and reiterated: "the first week of March." So, it sounds like no progress will be made on the Berkeley front. I'm not sure if I believe her, but if you want to hold on to some hope...
USC: I asked when acceptances are coming out. The secretary had a (somewhat lengthy) discussion with a philosophy professor (I overheard some of it), and eventually the answer became "within the coming week," though initially it was "within 2 weeks." I'm not sure if that means by the end of this week or by next Tuesday, but hopefully, it's the former.
Are we confident that all rejections have been released? It seems to me that's plausible, but another was just posted today. I could try to find out about that, but I'd probably need to contact the DGS directly for that one.
Alright, that's 1 through 4 off the list for today (recall the Brown edit).-
Indiana (2/16) -
Berkeley (2/16) -
USC (2/16) -
Brown (2/19)
That leaves:
7. Riverside
10. U Chicago Committee on Social Thought
12. Arizona
13. Boston College
14. DukeThank you so much. Do you know if Vanderbilt has sent all their offers?
-
-
14 minutes ago, bechkafish said:
Oh man. Still 6 out of 7 applications outstanding. I really, really need a win this week... I'm not getting any work done, I'm not sleeping well, my chest feels like it's in a vice all the time. This whole process is cruel and unusual.
Ugh. It really does suck. I have been trying to distract myself from this cruel process, but nothing works. I hope this week ends with a win for both of us.
-
-
1 hour ago, dgswaim said:
I just got an email entitled "Penn Philosophy Admissions," and my heart almost stopped, and then it was just the DGS acknowledging that I'd already acknowledged that I'm on the waiting list. GAAAAHHHH!!!
Ooh. I'm sorry. I have had similar experiences recently.
-
Should I assume that I have been rejected from Vanderbilt since I have not heard anything?
-
50 minutes ago, Nat_Foot said:
As it turns out, USC and Berkeley are on holiday, so I have to wait to contact them until tomorrow.
Here's the updated list.
- Indiana
- Berkeley
- USC
- Brown
- Princeton
- Yale
- Riverside
- Wisconsin-Madison (ask how many people were initially notified)
- WUSTL (thanks @roundtwo)
- U. Chicago Committee on Social Thought
Can you contact Stony Brook? Contradictory information about their admissions decisions are going on. Thanks
-
29 minutes ago, majorshake said:
Sounds like a solid plan. May I ask why you were kicked out? (Feel free not to say, I realise I'm being nosy!)
I'm going to apply for a few Australian PhD programs. There are lots of good people to work with here, but I wanted to try overseas first because the application deadlines didn't match up in a good way.No problem ;). I hope my story teaches future applicants a thing or two. The story is long and short (I am a Hegelian after all).
Short story: I failed the history comprehensive exam twice and twice is the maximum.
Long story: I guess the long story may be more of a rationalization than anything else but I do think it is important.
I went into a program that was not really compatible with my interests. I did not do as much research as I should have the first time around. The program is an analytic program (While I do recognize that the distinction between analytic and continental can be said to be a false one, all I really mean is that the program teaches thinkers that are associated with the analytic tradition such as Frege and Quine and ignores those that are associated with the continental tradition such as Husserl and Hegel). My interests are in German philosophy especially Hegel and feminism particularly French feminism. I got a masters from the New School and did my thesis on Hegelian recognition in The Second Sex. Anyways, since I had an MA I was expected to be ahead of the curve. But instead I fell behind learning a new canon essentially. Also I was not as interested in the material. Not that there is anything wrong with philosophy associated with the analytic tradition; most of it just does not intrigue me. So I did not do so well my first two semesters. Even got a C in a class which is failing in grad school. I did improve in time including my writing skills and learning more of the canon.
By the way, I have always been the type of person to try to do things quickly. I got my high school diploma in three years and my BA in three years. The MA at the New School is expected to take 3 years; I did it in 2.5. So I felt like I was in a groove when my 2nd year rolled around. I became grad student rep, my TA responsibilities started, and took more classes than usual and I took the history exam early thinking I would pass because I read more of those works than my colleagues did. I mean they told me they used Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to study for the comps. I ended up failing the first time by 1 point. Funnily enough, when someone fails by a single point they relook at questions that profs. were on the border with any try to find a way to reward another point. They did that with me and took 1 point a way from one question and added 1 point to another question.
Next semester rolled around I kept a similar schedule ( I know it was a mistake) thinking that I would pass this time because I would simply study more. And I did study more! But I ended up getting into a major conference on Hegel in Brazil. I did not want to pass that up. Since the program does not have anybody who does Hegel I did not have any prof that could look over my work. It is so important to find a good fit for a program for many reasons. Besides the obvious, it puts less work on you because then you do not have to work as much to keep up with your own research. Plus I was studying and trying to stay interested in courses that I did not like and I started TAing for logic which is not one of my strengths. This ended up working out for me because then i could take the logic exam at the end of the semester. Between all that I was exhausted. Even though I studied more I failed by a lot more than I did last time. I was more nervous that time around and I did not sleep much the night before (2 hours). I really believe the mental exhaustion (not just one night's of sleep) caught up with me. I read my responses after the exam like a month later and they were barely coherent.
It was a new policy started that 2 times means getting kicked out. While that policy is in the books I believe, based on evidence I have seen, that if I had a prof. in my corner backing me up they would not have kicked me out. Someone else in our department has been taking a long time on her dissertation and she was not kicked out. She has gone pass the time requirement on the books but she has a professor that believes in her. The department has even issued her a warning that she will be thrown out if she has not defended her prospectus by a certain point. She did not comply but did not get thrown out. I did not have a prof. in my corner because of my initial poor performance. They did not believe that I could do philosophy, and I cannot really blame them for that.
Not having a professor in my corner became even more clear when I started applying to programs. I asked two profs. in the program and they both said no.
-
13 minutes ago, behindclosedoors said:
Lawyer jumping in here. Whilst I understand why you might be attracted to certain types of law and not others, I'd say that it is way too early at this stage to make any judgement calls on what you would end up enjoying practising as a lawyer. True, contract law features heavily in the commercial context (particularly if you want to work in biglaw), and I confess I wasn't particularly enamoured studying it in my first year of law school, but it's actually one of those areas that allows for a lot of creativity, which I am starting to believe more and more is a hallmark of a great lawyer.
There is a craftsmanship to drafting and a skilled lawyer in this regard is like an artisan. Even litigating contract law cases is particularly interesting because there is often a wealth of interpretation in those disputes, and the arguments that you put forward can be interesting (and quite important in the wider context of precedents, common law etc.) I've been on both sides of the equation.
Not that I'm pushing contract law or anything, but just citing it as an example of not judging a book by its cover.
(Btw, i should add for clarification that there is no "contract law practice group" in a law firm - it is integrated with the firm's practice groups based on other subject matter, e.g. M&A, telecommunications, banking and finance etc. I had a potential applicant, a law school student, enthuse to me about working in the "contract law practice group" in one of those recruitment events - it demonstrated a real lack of awareness of the commercial reality, not to mention a lack of bother to do a simple Google search on the firm that you are supposedly so "excited" about (or even any other law firm) to reveal that there is no such thing as a "contract law practice group". Needless to say, he did not even make it to the first cut).
I understand. I was not trying to be judgmental as much as cautious because I know law school is a big commitment. I worry about taking on a lot of debt and then ending up not being a lawyer. Not to mention the time commitment in studying whilst in law school and for the bar. I am still in debt for my bachelor's. Because of the aforementioned I feel I should be careful on embarking on such a huge commitment when I am not even sure about law school. Mostly I was extrapolating from my experience in political philosophy.
But you did make contract litigation sound more appealing.
-
16 hours ago, majorshake said:
We're all here together.
What's your backup plan?
My backup plan is law school. However, I am not sure about law school because it is something I only kind of like. I find certain aspects of law interesting but I know a lot of it, or so I heard, centers on contracts and I am not interested in that so much. But I will start studying for the October LSAT soon. Right now I am working on a paper for an international conference on Hegel. It is time consuming, because the research includes psychology, namely Jung, and I have never done psychology before.
Soon I plan on taking NYS exams in order to possibly get a job with the state. My friend said that these jobs normally take years to get so I need to start now. I just want to make sure that if things do not work out for me in the next few years that I have options. As of now I have few options.
I do not think that I will try again namely because I was in a PhD program in philosophy and I was kicked out so if I do not get in somewhere this time then I am done with professional philosophy unfortunately.
What is yours?
-
1 hour ago, majorshake said:
Another DePaul interview has been posted. I'm guessing they sent them all out today, and so, based on how I haven't gotten one, I'm assuming a rejection.
So far 3 rejections out of 6 applications.
Starting to write a proposal for a non-american phd.
I have not heard from DePaul either. Or Penn State, Vanderbilt, Stony Brook, and Fordham so I am assuming rejection from those as well. The only schools I have heard from (Northwestern, Emory and Chicago), I have been rejected from.
The application process really sucks.
-
On February 11, 2016 at 11:36 PM, MVSCZAR said:
Just wanted to bump this and say that I got some searches from Nashville a few days after sending my Vanderbilt application and was eventually accepted. Maybe they do search??
Yeah. I think they do search, but now I am wondering if it means anything. Idk. I haven't heard anything from Vanderbilt.
-
Thanks guys. You both are probably right.
-
Hi everybody! So I have a question. I am applying to Continental programs including Stony Brook, Fordham, and Vanderbilt. I submitted my Vanderbilt application on January 7th, 8 days before the deadline. Anyways I have an academia.edu, which allows you to see that someone has found your page and how (e.g., google search). The day after I handed in my application I got a notification from academia.edu that someone google searched me in Tennessee. Now I have not met anyone in Tennessee recently and because of the close timing it makes sense to assume someone from the committee was googling me.
Leiter about this in his blog but it is from six years ago. Many professors said that schools would not google search you because they have all the pertinent information. No relevant information can be gleaned from an internet search and i am apt to agree. My question is why would they google search me? Have any of you been google searched as far as you know?
I had a friend that told me this is a good thing. Apparently she was google searched by Vanderbilt, and she got in.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
Venting Thread
in Philosophy
Posted
i said there are many factors to keep in mind. Never said it was impossible. I am not sure why you are sensitive to disagreement.