Artifex_Archer

Hey @Psychological Yam, I know you posted this a while ago, but if you spot this and it’s not too much trouble, would you mind linking/sharing the Google doc? That’d be great! 
Have a blast this fall, guys ?

No, you shouldn't worry about that.
First: More people should study Strauss for a number of reasons, very few of which have anything at all to do with whether one should 'agree' with him or not. Strauss is a very valuable resource for learning how to interrogate texts—and I use that term in the most holistic sense possible—in new ways. He wrote critically about the necessary tension between the philosopher and society, which is certainly worth reflection in an age where so many people believe they lead 'philosophic' lives—just as long as their 'philosophizing' remains in normative lockstep with the rest of society/the academy.
Second: The schools you list—including Chicago—don't have the 'Straussian departments' that they may once have had. I was at Chicago a couple years back, and while there were a handful of OG Strauss students and Strauss-based courses, not even the Committee on Social Thought was really 'Straussian' as a whole. 
Third, and related to the second point: The OG Strauss students I mentioned above, those who studied with him personally, are invaluable resources for Strauss myth-busting. Just as Karl Marx once quipped that he wasn't a Marxist [which may or may not be apocryphal, but it makes for a good anecdote], Leo Strauss, the man, seems to bear only a faint ideological resemblance to today's 'Straussians.' IMHO, Strauss, and his works, are meant to be argued about—not taken as having ONE true, fundamental meaning that is utterly obscured by a surface-level analysis of the text. [Strauss' point isn't that the surface-level text is there to trick you; it's that meaning is layered. Nor, by comprehending a deeper 'layer' of text, are the previous layers' meanings negated—in fact, the deeper you go, the more you realize the unity between each of those layers.] 
That last bit was a digression, and I apologize—Straussians, anti-Straussians, and Strauss the man himself all frustrate me equally in turn. But the point is, you shouldn't run from these departments and schools—they're not nearly as 'Straussian' as they once had a reputation for being; and even if they were, I haven't heard of many Harvard and Yale grads losing out on jobs because they went to Harvard or Yale. 

I guess one other thing to consider here is whether or not you find some modicum of joy, satisfaction, or meaning from being in a doctoral program.  In other words, might it be intrinsically worthwhile?  I for one am thankful to be a doctoral program right now.  It's stressful, to be sure, but I appreciate the opportunities I have here that I almost certainly would not have in the private or public sector, namely a guaranteed income and health insurance for five years to take classes that interest me, write (and try to publish) about things I am passionate about, develop in-demand and non in-demand skills, be in a city and area that I really like, and be around really smart people all day that care about my success.  I know a lot of people have strong feelings about this, but I just wanted to throw my two cents in.  Like most other people on this forum, there's definitely an opportunity cost for me.  I could be making more money, possibly a lot more, in the private sector.  But for now, I'm happy where I am.    

As someone who studied at a college with lots of Straussians, I'd agree with everything Artifex_Archer said.  Don't worry too much about this.  Look for people that fit with your interests and apply there.    

No, you shouldn't worry about that.
First: More people should study Strauss for a number of reasons, very few of which have anything at all to do with whether one should 'agree' with him or not. Strauss is a very valuable resource for learning how to interrogate texts—and I use that term in the most holistic sense possible—in new ways. He wrote critically about the necessary tension between the philosopher and society, which is certainly worth reflection in an age where so many people believe they lead 'philosophic' lives—just as long as their 'philosophizing' remains in normative lockstep with the rest of society/the academy.
Second: The schools you list—including Chicago—don't have the 'Straussian departments' that they may once have had. I was at Chicago a couple years back, and while there were a handful of OG Strauss students and Strauss-based courses, not even the Committee on Social Thought was really 'Straussian' as a whole. 
Third, and related to the second point: The OG Strauss students I mentioned above, those who studied with him personally, are invaluable resources for Strauss myth-busting. Just as Karl Marx once quipped that he wasn't a Marxist [which may or may not be apocryphal, but it makes for a good anecdote], Leo Strauss, the man, seems to bear only a faint ideological resemblance to today's 'Straussians.' IMHO, Strauss, and his works, are meant to be argued about—not taken as having ONE true, fundamental meaning that is utterly obscured by a surface-level analysis of the text. [Strauss' point isn't that the surface-level text is there to trick you; it's that meaning is layered. Nor, by comprehending a deeper 'layer' of text, are the previous layers' meanings negated—in fact, the deeper you go, the more you realize the unity between each of those layers.] 
That last bit was a digression, and I apologize—Straussians, anti-Straussians, and Strauss the man himself all frustrate me equally in turn. But the point is, you shouldn't run from these departments and schools—they're not nearly as 'Straussian' as they once had a reputation for being; and even if they were, I haven't heard of many Harvard and Yale grads losing out on jobs because they went to Harvard or Yale. 

No, you shouldn't worry about that.
First: More people should study Strauss for a number of reasons, very few of which have anything at all to do with whether one should 'agree' with him or not. Strauss is a very valuable resource for learning how to interrogate texts—and I use that term in the most holistic sense possible—in new ways. He wrote critically about the necessary tension between the philosopher and society, which is certainly worth reflection in an age where so many people believe they lead 'philosophic' lives—just as long as their 'philosophizing' remains in normative lockstep with the rest of society/the academy.
Second: The schools you list—including Chicago—don't have the 'Straussian departments' that they may once have had. I was at Chicago a couple years back, and while there were a handful of OG Strauss students and Strauss-based courses, not even the Committee on Social Thought was really 'Straussian' as a whole. 
Third, and related to the second point: The OG Strauss students I mentioned above, those who studied with him personally, are invaluable resources for Strauss myth-busting. Just as Karl Marx once quipped that he wasn't a Marxist [which may or may not be apocryphal, but it makes for a good anecdote], Leo Strauss, the man, seems to bear only a faint ideological resemblance to today's 'Straussians.' IMHO, Strauss, and his works, are meant to be argued about—not taken as having ONE true, fundamental meaning that is utterly obscured by a surface-level analysis of the text. [Strauss' point isn't that the surface-level text is there to trick you; it's that meaning is layered. Nor, by comprehending a deeper 'layer' of text, are the previous layers' meanings negated—in fact, the deeper you go, the more you realize the unity between each of those layers.] 
That last bit was a digression, and I apologize—Straussians, anti-Straussians, and Strauss the man himself all frustrate me equally in turn. But the point is, you shouldn't run from these departments and schools—they're not nearly as 'Straussian' as they once had a reputation for being; and even if they were, I haven't heard of many Harvard and Yale grads losing out on jobs because they went to Harvard or Yale. 

I know this forum is generally for people applying to PhD programs, but just wanted to ask if anyone has found it difficult to navigate their PhD program during Covid...all online classes, very limited opportunities for socialization, no library.  This has been a big adjustment for me, and I can't say I'm doing as well as I'd like.  

Yes, of course. My whole cohort is experiencing this. Especially went the sky literally turned orange last week. 

My advise is not to engage with this guy, he's a troll. He shows up once in a while just to be rude and upset people. It's just not worth it.

It probably goes without saying, but at this point—especially given that it has to do with 2021 enrollment—this likely has much less to do with COVID numbers and much more to do with financial ones. Many departments are probably facing extreme under-enrollment, exacerbated by unanticipated health and safety expenses. It's upsetting, to say the least.
 
As for which other schools/departments will follow Columbia's lead, my guess is that they'll be, well, like Columbia—universities that have excellent reputations across the disciplines, and that are therefore willing to trim, or freeze, their humanities departments in order to find the necessary funding to keep the STEM ones afloat [where stipends—and placement rates—can run much higher]. 

Schools: Those are all within reach, and I agree with @Theory007 that you should consider UCLA, given what I recall your interests being. Brown might also be a contender. A lesser-known program that actually sounds like quite a good fit for you is UCSD. Unless I'm confusing them with another four-letter acronym university in California [there are several...], they've got a very strong social theory program sandwiched between their philosophy and polisci departments.  
GRE: It's a slog, but I strongly suggest getting both your V and your Q up. The GRE is learnable—and even lovable. It's also hotly debated whether it matters at all, especially this year. I belong to the 'it matters and it's worthwhile' camp. 
LoRs: Probably matter more than I initially thought. A lot of people underestimate the importance of rec letters; I think it's easy to do because it's not something that feels as directly manipulable as an SoP, GRE, or what have you. Is there any way to reach out to your writers and provide them a bit of additional information, especially any current accomplishments, that would help them to individualize and strengthen the case they make on your behalf? Have they indicated that their recommendation will be 'very strong,' or simply 'good'? The two major factors to consider when finding letter writers are strength of the letter [often, a function of the nature of your relationship to the writer], and the clout of the writer themselves. If, by finding a different writer, you can dial up one of these factors without turning off the other completely, it might be worthwhile to consider switching out a letter. Also, I'm not sure whether this made any difference or not, but even for those schools that accepted letters from Interfolio, I always felt better when my writers uploaded their letters directly onto the school's portal. 
POIs: If, hypothetically, you've applied to one of those schools on your list before... it's a very good idea to keep in contact with your POIs there, as well as to write to POIs at your other target institutions soon. This advice is more valuable—or at least it was in my case—than it seems at first blush [disclaimer: yes, some people will say that you shouldn't write to profs; and no, you shouldn't always expect to hear back if you do write, especially now]. It doesn't have to be a daunting task, either: last cycle I put together a basic template that I used to make initial contact with faculty members, and of course I tweaked it quite a bit depending on the particular professor/school. Sort of like... grad application ad libs? Ugh. Anyway. I'm always happy to circulate that for use as a general guidepost [with the obvious caveat that it will sound infinitely better when put in your own words]. 
To make your application stand out, I would focus very strongly on tailoring your SoP to each school, developing a rapport with faculty members if possible, and leaving no stone unturned when it comes to any 'optional' materials like diversity or cluster statements. [Yay, the Northwestern Cluster Statement: long may it reign.] 
Sending lots of good thoughts your way this cycle. 
 
 
 
 

It's unusual, but not unheard of, depending on the professor and relationship to the student [I've had similar experiences]. Given what @wwfrdhas said about this professor's stature in the field, I'd still use him as a recommender. At absolute worst, it sounds a little bit like he's guarding his own turf and wants to 'tag' the OP as one of his students, which is complimentary if not territorial. And that's probably not even what's going on; it's simply my most cynical interpretation. Given his age, it's more likely a generational thing. 
I'll admit that I preferred having my professors upload their letters directly, but that isn't always feasible, especially when applying to a great many schools. For some universities/committees, it seems not to matter much at all whether a letter comes from Interfolio or the professor themselves; others will outright refuse to accept Interfolio letters.
If this professor has given you a 5-university cap [in terms of individually-uploaded letters], I suggest making sure you direct him to those universities that won't accept Interfolio letters; then, if there are any left over after that, have him do a direct upload to your first choices among those. 

this shouldn’t be a problem at all. it’s troubling that there is a question about whether such people should be stigmatized in higher education more than they already are. being convicted of a crime isn’t the same as having “bad ethics”

It's unusual, but not unheard of, depending on the professor and relationship to the student [I've had similar experiences]. Given what @wwfrdhas said about this professor's stature in the field, I'd still use him as a recommender. At absolute worst, it sounds a little bit like he's guarding his own turf and wants to 'tag' the OP as one of his students, which is complimentary if not territorial. And that's probably not even what's going on; it's simply my most cynical interpretation. Given his age, it's more likely a generational thing. 
I'll admit that I preferred having my professors upload their letters directly, but that isn't always feasible, especially when applying to a great many schools. For some universities/committees, it seems not to matter much at all whether a letter comes from Interfolio or the professor themselves; others will outright refuse to accept Interfolio letters.
If this professor has given you a 5-university cap [in terms of individually-uploaded letters], I suggest making sure you direct him to those universities that won't accept Interfolio letters; then, if there are any left over after that, have him do a direct upload to your first choices among those. 

It's unusual, but not unheard of, depending on the professor and relationship to the student [I've had similar experiences]. Given what @wwfrdhas said about this professor's stature in the field, I'd still use him as a recommender. At absolute worst, it sounds a little bit like he's guarding his own turf and wants to 'tag' the OP as one of his students, which is complimentary if not territorial. And that's probably not even what's going on; it's simply my most cynical interpretation. Given his age, it's more likely a generational thing. 
I'll admit that I preferred having my professors upload their letters directly, but that isn't always feasible, especially when applying to a great many schools. For some universities/committees, it seems not to matter much at all whether a letter comes from Interfolio or the professor themselves; others will outright refuse to accept Interfolio letters.
If this professor has given you a 5-university cap [in terms of individually-uploaded letters], I suggest making sure you direct him to those universities that won't accept Interfolio letters; then, if there are any left over after that, have him do a direct upload to your first choices among those. 

No you are not. 
GRE may not be that important if you read one person's application only. But if you put it in a pool with 200-300 students whose score averagely are V155-170, you will know how important it is. 
I have a professor who worked as a student helper in PhD admission in a Top6 school, (you know which 6  ). She told me facing hundreds of applications, student helpers are firstly asked to narrow the pool to less than 100 , or even 50. They look at GPA and  GRE mainly.  Finally people who entering the smaller pool almost all have a nearly perfect GPA and GRE. (both V and Q are over 160). 
So it's not GRE per se is important. It is important that everyone else has a very good GRE score. That is what makes us all have to work super hard to get it as high as possible. (Again, I took it 4 times.) 
If it is only your first time, dont be afraid and frustrated. You got plenty of people like me who failed many times before the last shot. 
 
Good Luck! 

Not something I would have done differently, per se, since I had to do it, but: WRITE AND EDIT. Get a gig doing so if at all possible. I've been very fortunate in that my job involves a lot of reading, writing and editing [I mean, essentially, that is my job. I work at a think tank and for a short time before that I was a writer at a PR firm]. The best way to become a better, more thoughtful writer—and the best way to desensitize yourself to the chagrin of reading/editing your own bad writing, which will be bad from time to time, or at least mine is—is to write. And edit. And read other academics' work.
Another little tip: right before you write/tailor your SoP for School X, re-read your School X POIs' work. You'll organically pick up on one or two of their stylistic mannerisms, without sacrificing your own or, obviously, plagiarizing. Generally, these sorts of tonal similarities can convey compatibility.
This can also help you to determine what level of rhetorical flourishes the faculty at a given school are/aren't okay with when it comes to apps. SoPs are typically NOT the place to worry about style or sounding poetic, aside from maybe the final paragraph—focus on substance, and style will follow. That said, if you work in a field that occasionally necessitates using some $500 words, reading your POIs' work can give you a clue as to how much jargon/loquaciousness they'll tolerate, and how to trim away the rest.

Hey @Psychological Yam, I know you posted this a while ago, but if you spot this and it’s not too much trouble, would you mind linking/sharing the Google doc? That’d be great! 
Have a blast this fall, guys ?

Thank you very much! I appreciate that you suggest thinking about how much time I can save to do something else. online things suck but I am really happy to see more scholars are still utilising online opportunities to arrange presentations and other things. Thats a great inspiration! 

Another thing to remember is that usually, if you defer your admission, you also forfeit your current funding package. That means your package will be re-evaluated the subsequent year, when—let’s face it—schools are likely to have a far more competitive pool, and far fewer dollars to throw around. Even if you’re still guaranteed a spot, you may not be guaranteed the money you are now. 
 
My guess is that even for those schools that will be online for fall quarter, there will still be active near-campus community within your cohort/department, and classes will likely resume in-person within the next year. And think about all that you can do to get acquainted with the area in the time you’ll spend *not* commuting to class, or between classes. You could ‘attend’ seminars wherever, build a stronger relationship with your classmates and professors by virtue of being one of a likely smaller cohort of students, and maybe use the free time to do a bit of side-hustling, working out, volunteering, or gig economy work [depending on how much free time you have]. 
 
This from someone who never thought we should be under house arrest to begin with [but advocates for personal responsibility/human decency measures like choosing to wear a mask], and wants very much for classes to be held in-person this fall: If it were me, I wouldn’t think for a second about deferring, no matter what. This is a rad opportunity. 

Just finished reading everyone's tips and putting them into a Google Doc for use this fall. Thanks so much for sharing your input! ❤️

@needanoffersobad just wanted to elaborate on a few things I mentioned earlier. Each school and academic department in North America has to make its own choices with regards to how it will offer courses during the 2020-2021 school year. Some will not offer classes at all in-person. Some, like my school, will offer online and in-person. Some will go with the majority in-person as if nothing has changed. I'm lucky that I have a choice; I think your perspective will vary depending on how much flexibility your school gives you. For those who have to go back to campus when they don't particularly want to during a pandemic, their attitudes might not be great, and similarly, those who only have the online option might not be thrilled. Totally understandable either way, but for those users who are trying to be provocative in their comments on here, I'd remind them that everything is relative, including perspective. The world does not revolve around any of us, or our opinions. For those of us in particular who might be older, who might have weakened immune systems or something like diabetes or a congenital heart condition, the prospect of being on a large campus right now in a world without a vaccine is terrifying and the opportunity to not miss out on a year of education during a pandemic is absolutely, positively awesome. 
With that said, if your entire future career is predicated on having every single year of your PhD studies in-person, or if you feel your ability to benefit from online courses is so severely diminished because they are online, then maybe deferring a year until you can hopefully attend everything in person is the best bet for you.
My perspective is different from some, and I do not intend for this to sound condescending or arrogant, just manifestly different. I already have a T10 master's degree from a quant intensive program and half a dozen years of quant research/work experience in this field, including several years at a big 4 consulting firm and a few more in government. I'm also already published in this field. I personally do not need the on-campus/in-person experience as badly as some might. I don't have pre-existing health issues, but I'm already statistically at higher risk simply because I'm older. For me, the opportunity to live anywhere I want during a pandemic and take my first year online if I want to is indeed an awesome opportunity because this offers me an unprecedented amount of flexibility, and if I so choose, I can still take everything or whatever I want in person. The majority of my PhD will still be in-person, from a great school, in a field I love. I am grateful simply to be in this position. For others who are straight out of undergrad or who are younger with no professional/research experience and who will be attending an institution that will be going exclusively online this next year, I can see how online-only classes could be deflating, disappointing and inadequate. In that case, I guess it comes down to whether the benefits you'll receive by waiting a year for in-person courses (if you defer) outweighs the year that you will miss out on while the remaining members of your original cohort move on while you do other things for the next year. Either way, good luck and I wish you the best with your decision and the next year. 

Hey now. That’s not the positive opportunity. You’re absolutely right—a lack of scholarly community and in-person training is not, itself, an opportunity. And frankly, it sucks. The ‘this’ I was referring to is graduate education itself, which is likely to resume in-person ASAP [not least because so much university revenue comes from the intercollegiate athletics industry].

AND, even so, there are other opportunities that present themselves as a result of the necessity to become more digitally adept, as well as the flexibility of location/schedule/learning environment for the first quarter or semester. 
 
Finally, just because some schools won’t be offering in-person classes in the fall [or as many of them] doesn’t mean there won’t be in-person gatherings, period. You can still convene for research groups. You can still meet with professors.
 
“Once again, the question should be whether this is a big deal to you, and what the associated costs (if any) there are for deferring.” —Totally agree here.
 
Believe me, I am the last person to be excited about this and I think it’s pretty absurd to cancel in-person classes. But opportunity is, after all, created rather than given. Which means it’s something we have a choice over. 
 
 

@needanoffersobad Yep, University of Toronto   And yes, that's pretty much exactly it. My department is going to conduct every class both in-person and live/synchronous at the same time using live video via zoom. Undergrad and grad students have been given the option of attending in-person or online at their own discretion. So, if you want to attend in person, you can (as long as the class size is relatively small; the 50+ person undergrad classes will only have the online option) and if you don't want to be in Toronto right now or attend in person, you can attend purely as an online student. For grad students, given none of our classes are very large, all will be offered with both options. @Artifex_Archer makes some great points. This is an awesome opportunity and probably the only time (short of another crazy, once in a century unforeseen event) where many schools will be giving students these options. My advice remains, do not defer!

Another thing to remember is that usually, if you defer your admission, you also forfeit your current funding package. That means your package will be re-evaluated the subsequent year, when—let’s face it—schools are likely to have a far more competitive pool, and far fewer dollars to throw around. Even if you’re still guaranteed a spot, you may not be guaranteed the money you are now. 
 
My guess is that even for those schools that will be online for fall quarter, there will still be active near-campus community within your cohort/department, and classes will likely resume in-person within the next year. And think about all that you can do to get acquainted with the area in the time you’ll spend *not* commuting to class, or between classes. You could ‘attend’ seminars wherever, build a stronger relationship with your classmates and professors by virtue of being one of a likely smaller cohort of students, and maybe use the free time to do a bit of side-hustling, working out, volunteering, or gig economy work [depending on how much free time you have]. 
 
This from someone who never thought we should be under house arrest to begin with [but advocates for personal responsibility/human decency measures like choosing to wear a mask], and wants very much for classes to be held in-person this fall: If it were me, I wouldn’t think for a second about deferring, no matter what. This is a rad opportunity.