Sam Anscombe

What?

1. That is definitely not a usual thing to do. I get it with your situation, but I think many schools would view this as presumptuous considering that some of the best programs admit only 2-3% of applicants. Apply and then decide based on stipends once you're in if that's your primary consideration. There is also some information on stipends on phdstipends.com (though there aren't many entries for Philosophy on there). There was also a stipend survey done a few years ago that you might try to dig up. If you want to message me about particular schools and I can check the email archives since one of the last people who ran the admissions blog ran the survey. 2. An A+ and good letters are great and put you in the running, but those alone won't get you in. Your writing sample is the most important part of the application and your letters should be glowing. Bear in mind there are many applicants who have a near-perfect GPA and near-perfect GRE score and (likely) a good writing sample and letters who still are not admitted to every school to which they apply. 3. Not sure about this one. You've probably seen this resource already but in case not, it's a good one and I recommend checking it out. Best of luck to you!

I spoke to someone who is visiting now and I'd be willing to bet that most who have not been accepted or waitlisted will be rejected. Perhaps there are a few on a "hidden" waitlist, but I wouldn't count on it.

Based on the Facebook group, there have been a few waitlist notifications via email. People seem unsure about whether there will be another round of acceptance calls since only one round of calls went out and since UMich just returned from their Winter Break. I wish I had more information for you.

It looks like there were a few listed on the Facebook page.

Leiter posted an estimate for 2016-17 rankings based on faculty changes. It's linked somewhere on the first page of his blog.

I received an anonymous tip that my prediction is likely to be accurate for Stanford, and at the very least, that decisions are unlikely to be released before March 5.

USC isn't too late (they've released on February 23 and February 24 in past years, but earlier the last two years). Last year, MIT made their initial phone calls on Wednesday, February 24th, which is the latest they have released decisions since 2012. And since 2012, the first decisions have always been released on a Wednesday (except for one year). I would be surprised if no one heard from MIT by the end of the week. But, I could be wrong since this cycle is full of surprises with Pittsburgh (which at least has a pretty big range of past release dates, to be fair), Toronto, and Indiana all being quite late. We can only hope that there will be an influx of decisions in the near future.

When graduate programs are asked about decision release dates, mid-March is the standard (and safe) response. For what it's worth, Mich released their initial decisions on March 5 in 2015 and March 7 in 2016.

An anonymous graduate student contacted me to let me know that the committee at Princeton is meeting next week or the week after to finalize decisions, but does not know how soon after that they will send emails. So, the initial notifications might be sent earlier than expected.

Since 2012, Toronto has always released their first (non-fellowship) decisions on Fridays. Because they did not release any decisions today (to my knowledge), I am inclined to informally shift my prediction to Friday, February 24th.

I received a very considerate email from Dr. Eric Watkins on Feb 2 letting me know that, in the interests of transparency, no decisions would have been made about UCSD until February 13th at the earliest. This information serves no functional purpose now that decisions are out, but I thought this was thoughtful and I wanted to give due credit. (By the way, my sincere apologies for falling behind the last week or so—I had the flu for about a week and a half and I wasn't able to do much of anything).

Hi there, In the past, we have only done PhD programs. It's a little late this season, but I will pass on the suggestion to whoever takes over the blog next year. You are more than welcome to calculate predictions based on the TGC Survey Results, though! - S

I will talk to Jac about the protocol for this in previous years, but thank you for the heads up.

Someone privately messaged me.

This has been confirmed. I have also heard that Harvard plans to start releasing acceptances tomorrow (and I will update all of the new releases the main page of the blog soon—I've only gotten the chance to update the Predictions page so far today).

Does anyone want to claim that Harvard acceptance before I post? Last year, there was another early admittance so I'm wondering if the same thing happened and/or if there have been others. Feel free to message me if you don't want to post it. Congratulations to all others who heard yesterday (and have started hearing today)!

Correct, I am an undergraduate. I base my advice on data from previous years, conversations with applicants from past years, and information gathered from an unhealthy amount of time spent browsing TGC over the last three years. Based on this, I know that some people are never notified about certain schools and assume a rejection at the end of the season. Rejections also tend to be sent quite a bit later than acceptances and waitlist decisions (with the exception of schools that don't use waitlists, like the University of Chicago). As early as last year there were instances of some people being accepted from something like a secret waitlist—a waitlist for the waitlist, if you will. I can't tell you what to assume, but as someone also going through this process, if a hypothetical university released 5+ acceptances as well as waitlist decisions and it had been over two weeks since the last posted result, I would assume a rejection for my own sanity. If I were eventually accepted from a secret waitlist, it would be a pleasant surprise. This approach is based on general trends and my proclivity to expect the worst, but I would still agree with 753982 that it is too early to assume for Rochester.

Good call. Thanks! Everything should be caught up now, by the way. If predictions go as planned, this should be a fairly big week for decisions.

Hi there, Good question. I will consult Jac (previous blog owner) about it, and when I do the large update tomorrow, I can update that as well. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. - S Hi there, In the past, the Philosophy Admissions Blog has not included additional UK and Canadian schools. If you calculate the predictions (based on the TGC Survey results page), I will post them as I have done for other schools. - S

Hi there, Yes, I meant to update, and then many more results were posted, which meant it would take more time to upload, so I put it off, etc. So, guilty as charged. I am going to update the site tonight (if not tomorrow morning). Bear in mind that I am still an undergraduate, so I'm doing this on top of my own coursework and working (I might be wrong, but I don't think Ian or Jac were in school while working on the blog). Thank you for the patience (and for the gentle nudge). - S

Does anyone want to claim that UNC acceptance?

In years past, it looks like they staggered acceptances over a couple of days (last year, someone didn't find out until three days after the first decision, and a couple of wait list decisions were released the day before that later acceptance). Based on this data, I wouldn't assume anything either way until Feb 6 or 7.

Oops, my bad! Will fix that.

Don't you mean, "Sad!" In all seriousness, Berkeley is consistent but I do wonder if decisions might be delayed because of the major protest yesterday against Milo Yiannopoulos (Breitbart editor).