TomKatze

Yes, both UWM and U of H fully fund you, although keep in mind that MA stipends are pretty low--lower than PhD stipends--and may not be sufficient to pay for everything you need.

You should consider adding VT to your list of MA programs. I'm a second year student there now, and I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. In regards to funding, every person in the program this year is fully funded (tuition plus stipend), and last year all but two students received full funding. I believe we do require the GRE, but I may be wrong. It certainly isn't the most important aspect of the application, but it may be required by the Graduate School. 
As for where you should go for a Masters. As much as it shouldn't be this way, PhD programs do care about the strength of the program you came from. Given that your interests may change, so you can't really say for certain where you want to go for a PhD, I definitely recommend trying to get into the best MA program possible. Coming from a continental undergrad university and being at a highly analytic program now, I feel like it is easier to go from an analytic school to a continental school than vice versa, so if you aren't entirely sure or want to do a combination of both, I recommend going to a strong analytic program.
Best of luck! 

Hi jackb97,
I am glad to hear that you have interest in UMSL. I am currently a graduate student at UMSL. One helpful note about our program is that funding is usually only given to people who take the GRE test. So if you would like to go to UMSL with funding(tuition remission and stipend), I would strongly suggest that you take the GRE. I know of someone who applied and was accepted, but because that individual didn't take the GRE, the individual was not given a full funding package. Also, in regards to the programs at San Fran and LA, there is no official funding that they will give. However, they will typically hire students to work as TAs and such, but they don't offer tuition remission packages that UMSL, NIU, Georgia state, and other programs do. Funding may not be an issue for you, but for many students including myself, funding is important.  I hope this helps you, feel free to ask me specific questions about UMSL if you have any. 

A 3.7 is a decent GPA, and you can still get into good programs. Of course, anything you can do to make your application stronger is a good thing, but a 3.7 is not going to sink you. Furthermore, your grades for philosophy courses, particularly upper-level philosophy courses, will matter more. Here's a relevant thread:
 
These days, getting a TT job in philosophy is hard for anyone, even from a top program. Is going to a program outside the top 20 or top 50 worth it? I suppose it depends on what outcome you're looking for. There are good programs with very smart people that aren't in the top 20, or even in the top 50. I'm friends with some of those people, and they're happily doing interesting work in those programs. Job placement outcomes can vary for unranked programs as well. If you go somewhere unranked, you're probably not going to end up teaching at a ranked school, but the job market is bad enough that it's going to be hard to find a TT job no matter who you are. If you're considering a PhD in philosophy, think hard about how you'll feel if you don't/can't get a job after you finish. Take a look at job placements on department websites. That should give you a rough indicator of what the market is like.
Also, you're in your first year, so my advice is to enjoy learning, explore your interests, and see how things go for the next few years. Aim to do well, certainly, but there's no need to commit yourself to going to grad school just yet.
 
Unfortunately, this isn't a great way to figure out where to go to school. Current professors started programs 5-30+ years ago, and the job market for academic philosophy has changed quite a bit. Furthermore, the strengths and composition of departments also change as people retire or leave and get replaced. You're better off looking at current rankings for departments which have people working on your areas of interest, and seeing where they've placed people in the past several years. That will give you a better idea.
Also, here's a good resource for info about applying to PhD programs in philosophy:
http://schwitzsplinters.blogspot.com/search/label/applying to grad school
 

Hi all,
*Firstly, I'm sorry if it seems like I'm inundating this forum with questions; I was wavering between applying to law school and grad school, and I finally chose the latter.
Say that I want to concentrate in metaphysics. Would it be advisable to get a letter from the professor who taught my metaphysics class? What if I did better (grade-wise) in a different class? (I got an A- in metaphysics.)
Thank you so much!
 

^ There is little point in getting a letter from someone who can't say much more than that you got an A- in their class. Can this person speak to your qualifications as an academic? It's best to get letters from those who know you best and can make the strongest case that you will make a strong candidate in your field, and/or as an academic. Adcoms can see your grades on your transcript so a letter that can't say much more than how you did in a class won't get you very far. 

Get letters from the profs who are most familiar with your work, and who are comfortable saying great things about you and your work.
It's great if a rev or two are from people working in your AOI (working in it, mind, not just teaching it). But a strong letter from someone familiar with you and your work is much more important.

Looks like I'll be headed to Fordham too right now! So perhaps we'll meet. 
(Unless some miracle happens and LA Paul emails with good news from Chapel Hill tomorrow. Though the chances of that are pretty much .0001)

All of the places I applied to this year asked for all transcripts of higher learning, so I think usually yes.

TL;DR: make sure your writing sample is good, make sure it reflects what you actually want to work on - this may require writing from scratch, make sure you apply to schools that do what you actually do as shown by your writing sample and not just what you think you do - do not just shotgun the PGR 20 programs in what you think is your subfield or otherwise apply based on wishful thinking.
I wrote an entirely new writing sample and changed my list of schools fairly substantially, and I credit these two changes for my acceptances. I also joined these forums, which is definitely the best thing I've done for my professional development so far, as I get to network with people who got into much more highly-ranked programs than I did, put people whose work I dig into contact with each other, and hopefully help some good applicants do well in the next couple years.
My very first writing sample was a barely edited paper from a graduate seminar that I took for undergrad credit. In hindsight, it was almost more of an English paper than a philosophy paper: the argument boiled down to "some of the things Madison says about 'faction' in Federalist 10 are similar to what Aristotle says about stasis in Nichomachean Ethics, and some of the things Madison says aren't similar at all." (I still think this is really interesting, but it was not an interesting paper.) I solicited feedback from multiple faculty at my undergrad and proceeded to ignore about 95% of it. I deservedly struck out in my PhD applications; I have NO IDEA how I got into UWM with it.
My second writing sample was just the seminar paper I hated least, with a good amount of polish put on it to make it seem like I was actually interested in the problem it addressed. (I was not interested in the problem.) This paper was not my first choice, and it still showed, even after revisions. UWM has a semester-long writing workshop in the second fall semester for everyone who's applying out, and it was really helpful - probably the single most beneficial thing about doing the MA. Unfortunately for me, what I learned from it was that my original choice of writing sample was just totally incoherent (which was true) and wouldn't be of interest to many people (which was also true). There were several other people in my cohort writing on the topic that I switched to, we were applying to many similar schools, and their papers were better. They got in and I did not.
To do my last writing sample, I met with my advisor, talked about what I wanted to write about, and really started hashing out some ideas that I'd had scratching around the back of my head for years. He helped me work out what I should read and react to so that I wasn't just vomiting out my ideas without any context, but he also helped me work out my view so that there was more than just exposition going on. That allowed me to write a paper that's actually a piece of original scholarship which advances and supports a view that nobody else holds, in an area that is finally starting to see a bit of mainstream consideration.
Getting good advice on your writing sample is critical. If at all possible, get it from someone you can actually talk to in person. If that's not possible, do not be shy about contacting people elsewhere and doing it early. Like, now. You need time to get feedback and time for rewrites. No matter what, if someone's not being helpful, be ready to "dump" them and move on quickly. You need professional eyes on your work and you need them to belong to someone who understands what you're trying to write about. Also, they make you better at philosophy. So much better. Those conversations and reading suggestions alone were probably worth the three years I spent in Milwaukee.
I did a lot more research on programs. I looked less for programs that did the work I had always thought of myself as wanting to do (phil. of mind/cogsci/AI stuff), although I kept the ones that I thought could support me. Instead, I looked at programs that seemed likely to be interested in the work I was actually showing I was already capable of in my writing sample. I don't think it's a coincidence that all three of my acceptances came from schools that were new to my list from the previous year, because I was able to show concretely not just how the particular program would be good for me, but also how my work fit into what they wanted to be doing as a department. I think this is my single biggest piece of advice. Everyone will tell you to write a better sample, and they're right. But I think the best bang-for-buck change is to think carefully about where you can demonstrate a strong mutual fit between the program and the actual work that you do as opposed to the work you imagine you do.
I did not retake the GRE, and I don't think it's worth the time, effort, or money unless one of your scores is definitively bad. A better writing sample can save a borderline GRE at most programs; a stunning GRE will not help with a mediocre writing sample at most programs; a marginal improvement will have a marginal effect. On the other hand, my first set of scores was good enough for everywhere except a few really quant-heavy programs like MIT, so I'm biased. I suppose if it would make you feel better to retake it and you can afford it, you may as well.

Most of the advice given here is how to land in a top 20 analytic program. You sound like you might prefer working in the history of philosophy. If so, that might change your plans. Universities like DePaul and Villanova are stellar continental programs to land for a PhD. 

Funding, perhaps? You'd usually have to pay at both, but Tufts typically offers at least a partial remission.

It's seeming increasingly unlikely that I've gotten funding from Oxford, so I'll probably choose Tufts for that reason. 

It's so kind of you.Thanks a lot!
I'm hesitating to apply for a TA. I'm a international student and my spoken English is not as good as native speakers. Maybe I will have trouble with listening and communicating with professors during classes at begining. Is it a better choice to do a TA in the second semester? I aim at applying for good PhD programs. If get a TA will help me a lot, I will try my best to do so.
Sorry to bother you to ask other thing. I hear that the program has many graduate students. How many will be showing in a class? I want to prepare myself better before attending.
btw. What's your WS about? Would you mind tell me that doing what areas will get most help from sfsu?
I saw you were accepted in Toronto. A top program! Congratulations too! 

Nice, sounds like you'll be a good fit there. And I'll be starting my PhD in the Fall.
Piece of advice in SF - TEACH. You'll have the opportunity to teach a few sections of critical thinking or intro applied ethics/social phil/phil art classes if you have the time. That, imo, is a main part in what makes that program great. I can't stress how important that is for your own philosophical well-being.
Also, you'll have the opportunity to take upper-level lecture courses in lieu of grad seminars in some cases, and I'd personally recommend against that. Fill your course load (2-3 classes per semester) with the graduate seminars (unless you've got pre-recs to cover, obviously). You'll not only get a better, more hands-on approach to the subject matter, but you'll be writing papers that might a.) turn into your MA thesis b.) turn into your writing sample c.) flesh out your AOCs d.) give you excuses to go present at conferences and network with other graduate students (essential for when you jump into applying for PhD programs!). Many times all of the above is what occurs. Finally, if you find that your area you really like isn't being taught that semester, feel free to ask for personal study projects for credit. Also, TA-ing is a good way to establish a report with professors you might want on your thesis committee that you haven't had a chance to take a course with (two years goes by fast).
Ok, stepping off the soapbox now. Again, good luck, and congratulations. Most bars in SF are cash only and the ATM fees are a kick in the dick, so heads up on that.

yup. usually it's a couple weeks after you've sent in your app.

Or an "implicit rejection," or whatever the term is. I don't think they would reject you without notifying you, at least not on purpose. An "implicit/silent" rejection is when acceptances and/or waitlists appear to have been sent out and you currently don't have either (meaning you will probably receive a rejection a few weeks down the line). 

No, they will inform the applicant, but maybe not until well past the time when the applicant figures out that they’ve been rejected. 

Many thanks
NIU is one of my dream school, it's better to hear that it lies in a small town and has faculty working in these areas.

An MA and a PhD are different beasts, and your interests matter differently to each enterprise. They're much less important for the MA, which is an introduction to the academic world and is supposed to end with you having mastered the subject (and begun to specialize). You want to attend a program that can support your interests (e.g. through an independent study course), but don't need a program with several faculty members working in your area(s).
Like machineghost said, it'll be hard to find an MA program that's strong in all of those interests (but easier to find one which will support them, which is all you need). NIU, SFU, and SFSU are all very strong programs with a very good record of placing students into PhD programs. You might also consider Toronto, Georgetown, and Georgia State University.
SFU and SFSU are fantastic programs. CSU LA is a very small program that doesn't look like it will really support your interests. Its recent placements look pretty good, but the tendency has been for so-so placements.

It might be difficult to find an MA program that is strong in all of those areas. It might be helpful for you to rank your interests. If, for example, it is more important to you to be able to take seminars on Plato, Aristotle, and Kant than it is to find a place that has seminars on metaphysics or philosophy of religion, you’d likely find some programs more attractive than others. But the opposite would be true if you ranked your interests the other way around. Speaking from a placement perspective, NIU seems to be on fire lately compared to some other MA programs. On the other hand, you’d have to live in DeKalb, Illinois. 

Brandeis has big strengths in Metaphysics  (Eli Hirsch) Kant (Kate Moran is here and Jens Timmerman is here for a semester each year, he regularly advises students), Professor Hirsch teaches a course of philosophy of religion and Palle Yourgrau teaches courses and supervises theses on the Ancients! Brandeis might be a good fit, though -- of course -- as a current student I'm biased. Let me know if you have any other questions!