SexandtheHaecceity

Thanks! It feels good

As of this morning I was officially made an offer and accepted at Fordham!

Thanks! I'm not stressing too badly as I've got a spot at Duquesne's MA program that I'll be happy with if Fordham doesn't break my way.

Don't know if this person is on TGC but I'm waiting to make a decision whether someone ahead of me accepts/declines their offer at Fordham. If that's you, could you please PM me your plans?

Me too!

Delayed rejections for most cases, though there are some "secret waitlists." Varies by school.

I don't think it's controversial to say that if all (or possibly all but one of) your elements are undeniably stellar, then you're golden. The mysteriousness comes in when you have two or more flaws and how adcomms weigh those up. It becomes highly speculative because apart from undergrad prestige, the most important elements are non-numerical.

Lol would love to know myself but committees are just a black box. Don't want to drag the thread off topic, but the short version is that this process is not law school admissions where your numbers decide your fate. Gotta weigh that up against factors like my LoRs which I'm fairly certain were weak given I've been out of school for the better part of a decade, writing sample, etc. I ruminated on this over at the "Dear 2020.." thread.

Would love to be forced into the decision and I think I would be very happy at either. Fordham's job placement is good, New York is a plus for me, and @Rose-Colored Beetle @soproperlybasic have spoken glowingly so its reassuring to know that current students are happy there. The only big reason I'd still say Purdue edges out is that I want to study Deleuze and the DGS, Dan Smith, is one of the best Deleuze academics in the English speaking world. I'm traveling east from California next month, so I'm going to try to visit both.

Now officially WLd at Fordham

WL'd at Purdue. If you know you're not going to West Lafayette, you know what to do.

@Marcus_Aurelius @Prose how would you advise applicants choose a "good topic"? Some things (clarity of writing, interesting and forceful argument) seem like givens if you want to succeed, but how does one determine what topic within their field of interest is a good basis for a paper?

Think you might be in the wrong thread forum. Philosophy is a very different ballgame in this respect.

I hope my experience might be helpful especially to someone like me who has spent close to 6 years out of the academy and is looking to go back. I'll start off by mentioning that my cycle has been a bloodbath so far. Given that my GRE/GPA was good, the obvious culprits are a deficient writing sample, bad LoRs, bad SOPs and/or just a lack of easily referenced experience compared to someone coming out of an MA program or undergrad with publications. I suspect all played a part, but I'll address them all briefly. 1. Writing Sample - find a professor, or someone as close to the academy that you can find that can both edit and advise what kind of paper you should submit. This will be harder if you are removed from school or your professors aren't interested in related fields. Both of these factors were a problem for me, so I recruited a friend who was a doctoral student in English and an expert in a related but nonphilosophical field to read and give my paper notes. These were helpful, and my paper was much better for it, but it probably was still not up to journal quality, which is what you should be aiming for, and I feel as though only the guidance of an actual philosophy professor with familiarity of the topic could have gotten me there. Take advantage if you are still in undergrad (or graduated recently) or have such a professor in close proximity. For the rest of us, you're gonna have to work much, much harder. Go to conferences, go to office hours of professors you don't know, take off/skip work if you have to. Otherwise, you better be really really good if you want to go straight to a PhD program. 2. LoRs - not much to be said here. Soliciting professors who half remember me from 6-7 years ago was always likely to be a problem, but there was not much else to be done here. Get to know your professors and keep in regular contact with them if you think grad school is even a remote possibility. This was probably significant given that I would assume 2/3 of my letters were "this student took my class and he was fine," but I don't know what else I could have realistically done on this front. The only way to realistically fix this problem is to get your MA first or audit classes locally. 3. SOPs - I'm curious to hear what advice people have on this subject. I don't have much to add here. 4. Experience - Attend conferences (if you can), address on going projects (if you have them), mention your publications (if you have them). If none of these apply, try to get them ASAP. Other thoughts: Get your sample paper done early and leave plenty of time for editing. Be ready if you need different versions of your paper for different length requirements. Save ~$85 per application (don't forget you gotta send your GRE scores) The accepted wisdom is definitely true that good GRE/GPA is (basically) necessary, but far from sufficient. These aren't law school apps.

So the old thread is a treasure trove of advice, but I think half a decade and mostly dead discussion calls for a new iteration of this thread. As March is now underway and people are getting a good idea of their cycle, I'd like to get your perspectives on what went right, what went wrong, and what has been helpful/unhelpful to you. If you could, please provide what your aspirations and/or expectations were going into the cycle and how you believed you performed relative to those goals. What advice would you pass on for someone going through this process at the end of the year? This can cover anything from the start of the process until now that you think might be helpful to the novice applicant. Also, big shout out to @MtnDuck for maintaining that behemoth of a spreadsheet this year.