Marcus_Aurelius

Seems like you might be best served by a funded MA program in Classics, if your still have (or can regain) the familiarity with the languages you acquired in undergrad. Otherwise a post-bac might be the only way, indeed. Age and previous PhD program experience don't seem like problems, as long; you can address in statement of purpose why you left the previous program (incl. that you realized your true passion is Classics).

Also can't generalize to other schools, but my dept has a target number for next year's cohort that's one less than normal (20% reduction).

Mentioning specific details about the program or professors likely won't help, but it very probably won't hurt. I recommend mentioning some details based on basic research, but no need to go too in-depth or to stress about it.

@PolPhil I agree about non-PhD postgraduate programs, and how a PhD doesn't help career prospects much if one goes into one of those. On the other hand, many of those programs are expensive (e.g. law, social work, education), so a few years out of undergrad can help one figure out if one wants to spend that money, and (ideally) save a bit, though that's dependent on situation, including the factors I mention above. That's definitely unfortunate to hear you know lots of people who take out loans on top of $30,000 stipends. @Glasperlenspieler Totally agreed; that's why I included family factors above as one of the (largely foreseeable) points that should affect grad school economic decisions. Can also apply to, e.g., caring for aging parents. I don't want grad school to be a place where families are discouraged (and indeed, being a grad student parent seems to be gaining more acceptance), but it's undeniable that it's tough to be one, and someone who deems parenthood/partnership as sufficiently important should take that into account.

"Even with a good stipend, most people come out of a PhD with PhD debt..." Do you have some evidence for this? Honest question; I'm legitimately curious. It's clear that many PhDs have debt: According to National Center for Education Statistics data, average total loan balance for PhDs not in Education increased from $48,400 to $98,800 from 2000-2016. But how is this debt distributed, particularly with reference to quality of stipend? A PhD in Philosophy certainly isn't a good financial investment. But, for many people, it's really not a bad one. We're only talking here about good stipends, which I'll say for the sake of argument means about $30,000+. (Extra paid teaching opportunities are also possible some places.) Starting salary for recent BAs seems to average about $50,000, but that's dependent on getting a decent job, which is difficult for many. Anecdotally, I'm two years out from undergrad, and several of my friends with Humanities BAs haven't found jobs they're happy with; the pandemic made finding a job even harder. Someone in a PhD program with a good stipend may be pretty financially secure, depending in part on whether they have significant other costs, e.g. large undergrad debt, a family, very expensive housing market, or high personal medical expenses. Most of the costs I've just outlined are reasonably predictable at the time of admission. (It seems perfectly doable to begin paying undergrad loans on a good stipend if one's other costs are not too high; federal loans can also be deferred while in a PhD.) Anecdotally, I'm exceedingly fortunate to be making close to $40,000 this year (incl. some summer TAing and a part-time job outside the program ~7 hrs/week). I quite want an academic job, but I'm content to have to leave academia if needed, and as far as I can tell I won't be financially harmed if that happens. Many programs have shamefully low stipends. It's a problem. So the share of programs worth attending might be pretty small, and it's likely skewed toward prestige and institutional resources. But getting a stable job for 6 years that pays a fine entry-level salary shouldn't be undervalued, especially in an economic downturn. The pandemic sucks for many reasons, but last spring I was able to find comfort in knowing I had a job for several more years that wouldn't be downsized. All of this is to say that professors should be frank with undergrads about their chances of admission to good programs. But acadmic jobs should be one criterion among several for potential PhD students; one can want an academic job without being devastated at not finding one. I'll conclude by saying that attending a PhD program is good career experience, as is being increasingly recognized, seemingly by both employers and graduate programs. Plus people change careers a bunch of times (Boomers have held about 12 jobs, on average), so there's nothing odd about spending 6ish years on one job and then transitioning. Adjunct hell is awful, but if one is willing to go outside academia and can explain why the PhD is relevant experience, the 5-7 years aren't at the expense of other opportunities for career advancement. Odds are only very high that graduating PhDs won't have a job if you're defining "job" as "stable academic position." (I'm assuming that finding a job is at least not harder for a PhD than it is for someone with just a BA. Although a PhD can lead employers not to hire someone for being overqualified, eligibility for other jobs seems to balance out that factor. I defer to any research on the topic.) TL;DR: Attending a program with a good stipend is a reasonable economic choice for many.

It's worth distinguishing between personal statement, and diversity statement (which as you note is only asked for by some programs. Transcipt anomalies can be accounted for in the personal statement if desired (as PolPhil mentions), but doesn't seem advisable to go into detail there. Diversity statements are not really about representation. I didn't realize that when I was applying. But a successful diversity statement is about how one approaches research/teaching/etc., not about one's own identity. Some places, where the university requires one but the department doesn't care, may not even really read it. But it can't hurt to think deeply about your perspective toward performing the role of a PhD student in an inclusive way. So I'd mention your struggles only if you have something to say about how you view the academic world based on your experience. (Would you build syllabi in such a way that incorporte perspectives on addiction? Is there a paper you want to write related to treatment? etc.) But don't stress much about diversity statements. Set yourself apart philosophically with your writing sample (especially), plus your letters and statement of purpose, because your perceived philosophical potential is what'll get you in or not.

I really have no direct experience with Classics MA programs, so hopefully others can address specific programs. I will, say, though, the standard advice on this site, that one should never pay for a Humanities MA unless one is independently wealthy (and even then maybe not). U Chicago's MAPH is notorious for being expensive. And for the others, if a program is two years, even paying for one year is going to be crazy expensive, relative to the value. I think you should absolutely do what you want, but I strongly urge you to ask yourself whether the time and money pursuing a PhD program in Classics is the best way to achieve your goals. It'll be tough to get there, especially with some programs potentially reducing admissions in the short term. It's possible, but it may or may not be worth it to you. Good luck, no matter what!

Are funded Master's programs in America an option? There are a few, like Texas Tech, Notre Dame, Georgia, and Kansas (not sure about others). Your language skills might be a bit under the mark for those, but you could explain in statement of purpose why you were only able to advance as far as you have, which I imagine admissions committees for MAs would be sympathetic to. A B.Phil. in UK also might be an option, though could be expensive. A second BA seems perhaps a bit over-the-top, but you certainly could pursue that if you wanted. Post-bac programs don't tend to be competitive but are sometimes pricey. Some of them are cheaper than others, though. Here's a list of all Classics grad programs in America, and then you can check websites for details, funding, etc.: https://classicalstudies.org/education/graduate-programs-north-america Good luck! EDIT: This reddit thread also has some limited info, including some funded MAs I didn't know about: https://www.reddit.com/r/classics/comments/dlhqlo/funded_masters_programs/

Yeah, having a clear plan for a paper is important for me, with different sections (4-6, on average, for me), each of which has a specific, attainable goal. Setting writing blocks is also important, either bh time (60-90 mins before a break, perhaps) or page count (1-2?). Also setting such goals on the scale of a whole day, if applicable. Also, having a good sense of the secondary literature, taking notes on papers and checking out the papers they cite, is quite useful to me for developing my ideas and figuring out how to say something novel. Talking about ideas with others is important too. In any case, I recommend asking those who are further along in your program for advice.

A few brief responses: --No, it needn't be near-publishable, because that's an unattainable standard, as you note --Philosophical creativity is a hugely important feature of a good sample, since it demonstrates philosophical aptitude transcending the sample's topic --A good sample engages with scholarly literature (preferably recent), showing grasp of relevant literature but spotlighting the applicant's own arguments, which should address a problem, lacuna, etc. in the literature --A good sample shows why non-specialists and specialists alike might care about the topic, esp. via illuminating writing style

I imagine this situation is relevant similar to transferring between PhD programs. If you can frame a compelling reason why your MA program isn't a good fit and a PhD program would be, can probably work. But if you went into an MA because you didn't have enough philosophy in undergrad, for instance, or the MA program is a great fit, then not completing the MA might look odd.

To echo many posts on this forum: writing sample writing sample writing sample. That's what will largely determine your fate.

I strongly recommend against long footnotes. If an argument is interesting and important enough to go in the main body of your paper, great. Otherwise, cut it (or just gesture at it briefly). Footnotes are often distracting from one's argumentation, and they're important (especially for mentioning relevant literature), but should be kept pretty trim because the writing sample's main goal is to show off your interesting philosophical argumentation.

Rutgers has Jill North and Barry Loewer and is generally strong in metaphysics.

I echo what other commenters have said, especially PolPhil. A few extra comments: 1) Applicants aren't expected to have done other interesting things beside a solid major, so that's not something to be worried about. One question is whether you were able to take a wide variety of courses at UW, even if they weren't quite your interests. But, especially if you can address the early academic instability in your statement, the GPA is nothing to worry about. 2) Writing sample writing sample writing sample. Like almost every other applicant, your competitiveness will mainly be determined by the quality of your sample. Because you think yours is somewhat lacking, others' advice to focus on MA programs is sound. 3) I wouldn't fixate on any one program (in this case CU Boulder, but this is a general claim too). Your reasons for being interested in that program don't seem too deep, and there are presumably many places where you could pursue those interests (and of course your interests might change). 4) If you're uncertain, don't do it. But MAs are s good option if you're passionate, and also you can explore fee waivers. Some of them need to be requested a while in advance, though, so watch out for those separate deadlines.

Contacting professors at a program before applying is not at all expected in the US, as far as I'm aware. Some people do, but I don't think it gives them an edge in admissions. That sort of time is generally better used polishing the writing sample.

I don't have inside info, but I'm guessing it's going to vary a lot by school. I'd expect elite PhD programs to cut admissions hard (as part of general budget cuts), but, in line with Wafflotron's point, it's possible schools that need lots of TAs (like some of the places with funded Classics MAs) won't change their admissions too much. If you could be doing other things, I'd probably recommend waiting a year, just to maximize your chances, but if you don't, then you're probably ok going for the admissions, with the caveat that grad admissions are always dicey and museums are likely to be particularly hard-hit now (but again, I have no inside info). EDIT: Oh, and this is clear from the rest of the thread, but I want to restate the general advice to never get (or really consider getting, unless one is independently wealthy) a Humanities grad degree without solid funding.

I generally assumed that bibliography wasn't included in length (unless otherwise specified) but notes were included. Others may have different experience, though.

Hi! There were so many positives that I was wondering how the negatives could compare ? In all seriousness, you seem fine. Re: writing sample, philosophy of addiction is a rather hot topic right now from what I've seen, so that topic seems like it could be a strength, especially if you're able to engage with recent literature (it seems to often be raised re: weakness of will, as well as generally in ethics and legal and political philosophy). Although it's possible some committees would be turned off, I rather doubt the vast majority will be, as long as the work is of philosophical quality. I'd recommend including no autobiographical details in the writing sample; in your statement of purpose you can touch on your personal experience. Certainly you seem well positioned for MAs. PhDs might be more difficult because of the general competitiveness and perhaps the letter writers. Finally, the obligatory warning that admissions are extremely competitive, you should really deeply consider whether you want to be doing this (especially this year when admissions are going to be extra-brutal), and admissions results are not necessarily a reflection on you. That being said, your strategy of applying to a variety of programs sounds wise, and, if you don't get into a PhD program you like but do get into an MA with good funding, you'll hopefully face a better admissions year if you do go for PhD admissions again down the road. EDIT: Not sure why you say German might be a weakness? Seems like it can only be a strength. Philosophy admissions don't generally require language skills, except in specific subfields like Ancient, so any language skills are usually a plus (albeit a very minor one).

Agreed with Losebeforeapply's advice, and I'll add that the approach they outline works even if there aren't paper(s) that defend the specific conjunction of claims. As long as each of the claims separately is attractive and has defenders, then it's reasonable that there'll be some people who want to hold both claims (assuming there's no conflict between them, of course). I'd also generally recommend that the papers in defending the claim(s) should be in footnotes, so you can reserve the main body text for motivating a little why the views are plausible.

I edited my sample to fit the length requirement for each program (the "full" version was about 17.5 pages, so couple programs involved cutting 2.5ish pages and a couple involved adding 2.5ish pages, of material that I had previously cut for space). I have no inside info here, and it presumably varies so much based on who's reading the sample, but maxhgns' advice seems sound.

Yes, I expect other programs to follow suit. Just as importantly for applicants, many (if not most) programs that do admit new folks will admit fewer than usual. It will be a rough year for applicants. I agree with maxhgns' point.

To be fair, people in PhD programs sometimes stop at an MA.

When I applied, my main advisor was an older professor who wasn't good with technology. He asked the department administrator to upload letters for him. Is something like that an option for you, where your advisor could send their letter to a staff member in the dept. who could upload to more sites?

I applied to 13. Given that I was applying for Ancient programs specifically, it was the right number (a program weaker than those in Ancient wouldn't be particularly helpful for a specialist in that subfield). If your interests are such that most/more strong programs would be a good fit, go for it, as platonetsocrate and PolPhil mention. As they note as well, involve your advisors in the decision.