753982

Still waiting on UCSD to send out rejections...

It sucks because you start to feel kind of hypocritical for caring about going to a prestigious program while also wishing those programs didn't care about your not going to a prestigious undergraduate institution. But of course, one who's applying to graduate programs in philosophy almost has to care about prestige insofar as it affects one's chances of ever securing TT employment (although there are NYU grads who are still looking for TT jobs).

I strongly considered SFU, but I ran out of money for apps and their app fee was around $120 for US applicants, so I didn't end up applying there. Their placement record seems impressive, though.

Does everything have to be so teleologically motivated? I think that doing an MA is valuable for those who went to low-tier, smaller, or unrecognized state schools, or those who didn't major in philosophy, in that they can expose themselves to more areas of philosophy, try to compete against better students (and get better themselves, hopefully, as a result of being around other serious, smart philosophy students), possibly try out teaching, get exposure to graduate school in philosophy, and so on. Many may find out that it isn't really what they want to do for a career and save themselves the opportunity cost, time, and money they'd have invested in a PhD program. So respectfully, I don't agree that people shouldn't do a master's degree in philosophy just to do a master's degree in philosophy. Some people just really like philosophy and need to go to that next level so they can see if they want to keep pursuing philosophy after moving up to the MA level, in my opinion. I'm not saying you'd disagree with that, but I wanted jump in and give my input after reading your post.

I really wish some of these schools would just reject the people they're going to reject at the same time they're accepting and waitlisting people so that those folks don't have to sit and wonder what's going to happen to their applications. I understand that unsuccessful applicants aren't prioritized as much, but I think it would really be appreciated.

Right? I like going through this miserable process with the rest of you.

I'm wondering what the situation is with UCSD now. If they stick to what they did last year (releasing everything in 2-4 days), they may release a lot of decisions either tomorrow or on Friday.

Nope. I only applied to a couple MA programs. I was going to apply to a third, but its usual funding package doesn't seem like much to me given the area it's in, so I may not. I'll likely prep for a GRE retake if I get shut-out in PhD admissions - I agree that a higher quantitative score would help if I were to reapply in the future.

Yeah, I think I largely agree. The question is if one agrees with the view of someone like Ian Faircloud (old regular on here), who claimed that if you're in the 160s in verbal and 150s in quantitative, that's good enough and you should focus on other things, and that even if your GREs are perfect it won't guarantee anything. Maybe he was right to think that it won't, but surely people with really impressive GRE scores get more fellowship money, and I would assume that there was something else about Ian's application that led to his not getting in to any of the schools to which he applied. Right - I would agree that those components should play a larger role, but I can only imagine how difficult it is as an adcom to try to discern who's better when considering, let's say, 20-30 strong applications, all of which have writing samples that have addressed a problem in a sophisticated way with clear writing, good reasoning, and so on. Having good GRE scores can only help, no? And I would disagree with the claim that those aspects are what it comes down to with respect to the whole application. Bad GRE scores relative to your competition are going to be a strike against you, and you'll probably have to really be strong elsewhere to make up for it. It affects your entire application.

I've only heard back from one of the schools to which I applied, but one of the weakest parts of my application this year, in my opinion, was my score in the quantitative section of the GRE. I really didn't do nearly enough to prepare for that section, so I ended up in the low 150s. I think I could do better than that with better preparation, but at the same time, I was pleased with my verbal score and am not really sure how much of a difference it would make even if I were to manage a 160-something in quantitative. I think I could also bring up my AW score because I didn't prepare for that section in any way, as I'd read that it didn't really matter. I'm wondering if any of you who're looking at MA programs who aren't wholly pleased with your scores, or those of you who may reapply, are considering retaking, or are already in the process of prepping for a retake. My thinking is that it might be worth it since I could always just go with my first score if I don't end up doing any better. Plus, if you look at some of the stats of people who're getting into top programs, they tend to be pretty good.

As mentioned above, Sam's an undergraduate, so I doubt that's something to which he/she could speak. But if you look at last year's results for Rochester, someone was accepted via a phone call in March, so you should probably not assume anything yet.

I got kind of excited by an email in my spam folder this morning, but when I checked it, it was just some silly email asking me if I'd want to get paid to take notes in classes!

Interesting that you mention that, Dysexlia, because I know that UCSD moved theirs back from the 7th of January to the 27th. They may end up releasing decisions later than expected.

I wish Brown and UCSD would just go ahead and reject me. I should've known not to apply to UCSD anyway, given their fetishization of really high GRE scores.

Welcome to TGC! What made you decide to apply to KCL? I feel like a lot of American applicants wouldn't have even thought of that as a possible option.

Dailynous made a post recently, for those who may be interested, seeking information about funded programs in Europe that're still open to applications. There are several in the comments. They mentioned that some Canadian departments have pledged to support students who're affected too. @gughok this may be of interest to you, if you're hoping to transfer.

What I suspected, or perhaps hoped, was that once you hit a certain level with your scores (what might be called the "acceptable scores range"), focus would shift to the other components of your application. Ian Faircloud said something like a 160+ V and 150+ quantitative probably makes the optics good enough. What I'm actually suspecting now that the app season is underway, though, is that your GRE scores probably, to some degree, color the interpretation of the rest of your application, especially with the applicant pool being as good as it is. With a 169 or 170 in verbal and, let's say, a 160+ in quantitative, they'll probably be more optimistic about the rest of your app. It gives you a way to stand out from the other applicants, which helps when there are often 250-300 people applying. I could be wrong, and it could be the anxiety of waiting on decisions that makes me think that, but that's what I suspect happens in some cases. People with great GREs will probably be interpreted with rose-tinted glasses compared to those with "acceptable" GREs.

See, I've never studied any philosophy of law (the only encounter I had was perhaps reading The Apology and Socrates' comments on "Law" as a form), but I found political philosophy interesting, so I wouldn't doubt that I might find philosophy of law interesting as well. With regard to your Dad, I know the feeling of not really knowing anyone who can really "understand" the philosophy thing. A family friend told me he could understand wanting to be a philosopher, though, as I guess he himself had taken some philosophy classes in college and enjoyed them, but he did warn me that those jobs are probably pretty hard to come by (definitely true). He ended up in a professional field. It's disappointing that your Dad doesn't understand the value of philosophy (or even see it as marginally valuable). Out of curiosity, did you enjoy law school subjects? I suspect one of the worries for those interested in law school as a "back-up" option to graduate school or employment in philosophy is that the material could seem pretty dry and tedious in comparison to reading Plato or thinking about free will. I encountered philosophy first through the Internet I think, and so, after that, I took a class on it as a general education requirement (as a result of being exposed to it some online) and really enjoyed studying and thinking about it, so I decided to major in it. I wish that I would've known about philosophy before college, because I could've finished up everything sooner. My research interests are in ethics and epistemology primarily. I find about every area of philosophy interesting, though, lol. I would say I lean towards being more analytical, but I find continental philosophers' work substantive and interesting too. My hope is that the broadness of my interests at this point in time won't present a huge issue for me if I end up getting accepted. It's probably hard to do substantive work in an area of philosophy without specializing some, given the knowledge-upkeep requirements.

I feel the same way about my GRE scores. I scored similarly to you (only I had a very slightly higher total score). I definitely think I could score better with more prep and better peri-testing nutrition, but given what I've read on here and on philosophy blogs about the importance of the GRE I doubt I'd retake it myself, nor would I likely want to go through this process again without an additional qualification, like an MA from a reputable terminal MA program. Props to those of you who can bear putting yourselves through the application process more than once, though (especially with the expenses being what they are). I suppose we may be allowing ourselves to fret too much, given many schools still haven't released any decisions. But that doesn't change the stressfulness of the process, unfortunately. Are you interested in the philosophy of law, or perhaps a law-philosophy academic career (ala Brian Leiter)?

No stomach issues here, but my anxiety's certainly been becoming rather palpable recently. It's been stressing me out pretty badly; I find myself less able to focus on things on which I'd like to spend more time. I really thought that I would've heard something by now. I suppose I should be glad no one's rejected me yet, but no news doesn't necessarily strike me as good news. I've been questioning the quality of my letters and my sample, whether I should've applied to different schools, and so on. I'm already working on Plan Bs and Plan Cs (granted, I think this is a good idea for applicants either way).

Given your exceptional GRE scores and the interesting-sounding title of your writing sample, I'd bet your recent acceptances are a sign of what's to come for you the rest of the app season. Congrats!

I'm not sure which probability calculation would be the most accurate, but I do know from reading past threads that people with great applications, like Ian Faircloud, who seemed like good bets to get accepted somewhere got shut-out in previous cycles. There's nothing about someone's seeming to be an impressive applicant that guarantees they'll be accepted to a program. My guess is that it's only those who've worked on admissions committees and supervised a large number of graduate students who can fairly reliably predict someone's chances of success. But perhaps even elite philosophers are sometimes wrong about the success of prospective graduate students.

I definitely need to do this. At least that way, you know that you would've been notified if you had received an email, so you don't have to stress as much about it.

It's not just the anxiety associated with waiting on results but the diffidence with which you start to think about your future as a result of not having any clue if you'll get accepted to a single one of the schools to which you applied. I really need to stop checking my email so much. An early acceptance like Turretin's definitely seems like it could ease the stress of the process greatly.

I'm glad you got accepted, Turretin, but I must admit I'm not sure how to feel about lumping acceptances and rejections into one thread. It seems like there was something humorous and cathartic about the threads from past years in which people would post their rejections as if they were excited about them. I've never applied before, but looking through those threads gave me that impression. The irony of that might not be as fun in a thread in which people are also sharing their acceptances, about which they're actually genuinely happy. It's up to you, but maybe we could make another thread for rejections once people start getting them?