lyellgeo

In at GSU!! I finally have my first legitimately funded offer...

Awaiting without horizon of the waitlist, awaiting what one does not expect yet or any longer, hospitality without reserve, welcoming salutation accorded in advance to the absolute surprise of the arrivant [admittant] from whom or from which one will not ask anything in return and who or which will not be asked to commit to the domestic [department] contracts of any welcoming power (family, State, nation, territory, native soil or blood, language, culture in general, even humanity), just opening which renounces any right to property, any right in general, messianic opening to what is coming, that is, to the event that cannot be awaited as such, or recognized in advance therefore, to the event as the foreigner itself, to her or to him for whom one must leave an empty place, always, in memory of the hope—and this is the very place of spectrality. Jacques Derrida, Spectres of Graduate School

The only thing I will say is that I think it's a good idea (unless perhaps, one is going to a top 20 program) to be comfortable with the idea of non-academic work before and after graduate school. There is a very significant chance—probably somewhere between 30-60% or higher, depending on the program—that, on finishing a phd, one will simply not find permanent academic employment (regardless of their personal merits and work ethic). That's assuming one even finishes the program, which many students do not, often for reasons outside their control. So, while not commenting on others, it's important for me personally to be entering a phd program with the full awareness that I might be more or less where I am now at the end of it. Also, there are many jobs in the private sector that can be meaningful—it's not just an all or nothing choice between philosophy and manual labor. For example, the schedule of my current job fortunately gives me plenty of time to do my own reading and writing, probably around as much as I would get if I were teaching classes full time anyway. (I also feel that it's at least somewhat personally fulfilling, though perhaps not as much as teaching.) One of the major problems of philosophy as a discipline is that it gives students very little guidance on how to navigate the private sector after graduation, resulting in a "academia or nothing" mentality which often just postpones the ultimate problem. One last point (although this is more minor), is that I don't really see a hard distinction between private/for-profit work and academia. Academia is a system that, in many ways, exploits and profits off of well-meaning students (primarily by charging them huge amounts in tuition and burdening them with long-term debt). Moreover, universities at all levels are increasingly being run by and beholden to corporate interests. So, I guess my main point is that it's important not to idolize academia, because many of the main problems of the so-called "private sector" are endemic to the academic system at large. Edit: adding another recent but relevant essay on this

I agree with the above comments. This is completely anecdotal and may not be true, but I heard something like the reason the university is so financially strained is because they actually rent a large amount of their property to NYU*(I guess this goes way back?), which is obviously a huge expense given the location of the property. But I have met a professor and a few students there who seemed nice.

Also: even if you were to have an open window into their thought process, it might not be very helpful. It would probably break down into a few simple things like concerns about fit, concerns about philosophical background/preparation for phd work, or maybe just not (for whatever reason) finding anything especially outstanding in your application. Unless you've made it very far into the process, the admissions committee is unlikely to have spent any significant amount of time on your writing sample, or even your application more generally. Usually there are just too many applications to sort through.

That is fair, but I think the main point was that a career in academic philosophy—or even academia more generally—is neither necessary nor sufficient to "make something" of one's life. In fact, in some cases, the former may even be detrimental to the latter! (See this essay for just one example.)

Let me know what they tell you! (Assuming it's Duquesne)

It depends on how you define actual. Right now I have one actual (financially sound) decision. But there is a chance that others could open up. Edit: thought you meant decision to make, not having received an official decision on one's application. I think I've "officially" received a decision by 3-4 places

I think it was just an ill-advised part of the form rejection letter. Though it is possible they had a separate rejection letter for others.

That was Stony Brook, correct? Though I doubt they meant anything mean by it.

Also: accepted at Memphis, but on a waitlist for funding. Even if I don't get into a funded phd this year, I'm feeling much better at this point about going to one of the several MA programs I applied to (such as KU Leuven) before reapplying in a year or two.

Just to add to this: there's a (often not well appreciated) tension between being a philosopher and an academic professional. Many philosophers (e.g. Mill and Spinoza, just to name a couple) had day jobs or did their most important work outside of academia. As the neoliberal pressures on the academic job market are only increasing, it's becoming more likely that the tenure-track professor route to being a philosopher will be increasingly become less sustainable.

Thanks for sharing—it's great that you're so supporting of her interests! My emotional process was similar, as I had a professor (not necessarily a huge name, but someone good enough to have multiple OUP publications) more or less tell me the same thing. There's definitely the frustration of someone close having gotten your hopes up. I think many professors who give that advice may be out of touch, though it's hard to say, especially given that those professors are themselves frequently on admissions committees. Anyway, hoping that she at least hears back something positive from somewhere.

Yeah. Along with that, I would likely blame the increasingly stagnant/shrinking academic job market, especially considering that applications have gone up quite a bit since the crash in 2007 (whereas the job market hasn't really recovered), both of which put more weight on the admissions process. Then there's also increasing costs of tuition (party due to the expansion of the student loan system), making funding more of a necessity. And it seems likely that, aside from any crisis or major restructuring of our education system, things will continue to get more competitive. I don't have anything wrong in principle with working part time while going to grad school, or even paying something for tuition while doing so. But 40-50k a year in tuition (e.g. Chicago's MAPH program) just doesn't seem reasonable.

One of the eye-opening (but also frustrating) things about the process is just how many good students there are applying. For example, multiple professors have said I'm the "best undergrad student they've ever had," "better than the majority of their grad students," or whatever other (somewhat useless) cliches you'd like to throw out in instead. But I also come from a relatively average state school, where it was easier to stand out, but where there also weren't as many options to make connections within my areas of interest. Whereas many others are not only standing out at their programs, but are also coming from much better schools where they've had the ability to develop better philosophical training, get better letters, develop stronger connections, get a better sense of the current state of scholarship in their areas of interest, and so on. Not a complaint so much as it is just an observation.

Hope you feel better! I was pretty anxious as well, at least over the first month or so. But regardless of outcome, your health is much more important than any graduate program, and it's helpful (at least in my own case) to not take the application process too seriously.

People above make good points, but I think it's more of a structural problem with the (American flavored) intensity of competition rather than with the GRE itself. Is the GRE probably not the best indicator of success in graduate school? Yes Are many of the other components of the application--inflated letters, grades, and so on--also not necessarily the best indicators of success? Yes Unfortunately we live in a seller's market where programs have every incentive to add unnecessary components to the application in order to cut down the number of applicants, even if those components are only marginally helpful. It's one of the reasons I feel the U.S. education system is structurally flawed at a much deeper level. Rather than have a system where students can pay relatively little (say, under 2k per year, following the model in better EU countries) a semester to pursue a MA program before deciding whether the phd is for them, we force well-meaning, often naive students to i) apply for phds programs with 4% or less acceptance rates (even at unranked programs), ii) take out student loans for 20k or more per year at an unfunded MA (leaving aside the handful of good MA programs that are completely funded, like GSU--the same programs which are also becoming more competitive to get into), or iii) rely on their parent's wealth to carry them through the process, already exacerbating the economic inequality problem in graduate education--that's all without even mentioning the ever increasing costs of undergraduate education (especially when it comes to going to undergrad programs which can give you the background and expertise needed to pursue graduate education in the first place). And, in the end, even if one does get into a good phd program, you're still getting way underpaid for the amount of work you're doing, and in a situation with huge psychological pressure to succeed AND absolutely no guarantee of a job at the end. So sure, the GRE is a private company that uses its monopolistic position to exploit students, but that's basically true of the system on the whole. Which is not to say that one can't be happy while pursuing graduate education, but it's at least helpful to be aware of the structural problems before pointing out minor injustices with the application process.

It probably depends on whether you are still waiting on other top choices (or close enough to still be worth considering). If a program is your top choice, or if you've been rejected at your other higher choices, then there seems like no reason to wait until April before making your decision. That said, I've also heard visits can be useful--particularly as an opportunity to talk to other grad students and find out some of the things going on behind the scenes (whether positive or negative) at the program. E.g. you might find out that your POI is a serial harasser, or that faculty in the department are currently threatening legal action against each other, or that grad students feel they have no support, and so on, which might very well impact your decision.

I think, aside from the MAPH referrals (which seem to be going out), they tend to wait to send out rejections until the end. Most schools (at least based on the results posted here) prioritize sending out acceptances quickly much more than they do rejections, and so sometimes there can even be a month or longer delay before the program releases its rejections.

That is true, but I would be very surprised if all Chicago's acceptances weren't already sent out, based on how the interview process usually goes.

Yeah, I think it was their first year doing interviews, so I'm not sure. I don't want to post details publicly (not that it would matter at this point), but feel free to PM with specific questions.

I don't think (or at least am hoping for my own sake) that Penn State has sent out philosophy acceptances yet. Usually they do interviews first, anyway. Your note indicates Political Science, so you may be in the wrong forum.

It would be helpful if someone knows the non-Leiter ranked programs (either because they choose not to be included, or because they wouldn't be ranked) that have strengths in Kant, which I understand as having at least 2 people actively working and publishing on issues in Kant scholarship. I don't know myself what programs those would be, but the information would be helpful. Also, as others have mentioned, it matters what area of Kant you're interested in (whether moral philosophy, metaphysics, aesthetics, and so on). The very top Kant scholars (people like Guyer and Allais) will know it all anyway, but most other people will tend to have a specific part that they focus on. Take that all with a grain of salt though, as I don't really know the current state of Kant scholarship that well myself.

Yeah, it might depend whether you've taken philosophy courses (and if so how many) before. This is from the GSU website, in case it applies to your situation: We sometimes have applicants who have never taken philosophy classes before (or have taken just one or two classes), having majored in some other field, but who have read philosophy on their own and have an interest in pursuing graduate studies in philosophy. We do not admit students in this sort of case: some prior academic background in philosophy is necessary for admission. However, these students are urged to enroll as postbaccalaureate students at Georgia State, or at another university or college if coming to GSU is inconvenient, in order to take additional undergraduate classes. ("Post-bacc" status students are students who already have a bachelor's degree and may take additional undergraduate classes but are not enrolled in a degree program.) With those classes, the student will be able to a have a philosophy writing sample, letters of recommendation from philosophy faculty, and a track record in philosophy, in order to be able to make a stronger application for our M.A. program. Students who are interested in pursuing this route should contact the Director of Graduate Studies in order to arrange a suitable course of study to prepare for graduate-level work.

Yeah, I agree with this as well. If the question is whether you should work hard to earn an A in those courses, then yes, you should. Other than that, there are maybe some other things that might affect how they read the transcripts: -how reputable your undergraduate institution is -how recently the poor grades were (senior/junior grades will likely matter more) -how advanced the courses were In my own case, I had a a poor semester a few years ago, with one C in Russian and a B- in Calc II and another philosophy course. At my previous undergrad institution (a religious school), I also had some poor grades in religion courses (these weren't academic courses but were required due to the religious nature of the university, and I couldn't bear to take them.) Aside from my first semester after transferring in 2013, it's been nearly all As, with straight As over the last couple of years. Are the early poor grades enough to sink my application? I don't know, maybe. I didn't bother mentioning the bad semester in my personal statement, though I guess I could have. It felt more important to use the space to explain and articulate my research interests and how they match onto the specific programs I'm applying to. But it's also worth nothing that I didn't really apply to "top ranked" (at least in the top 20) programs, and I applied to several other MA programs as a backup. Anyway, just my thoughts as I'm new to the process as well.