All phd applications are turned in, and we are in the waiting game. I applied to 20 schools (mid to top tier). But now I wonder how my profile really looks to the admission committee and want to hear some honest opinions. I already got rejected from WUSTL.
Undergraduate GPA: 3.31 (Major GPA: 3.43) -- from one of the top public universities in US
MA GPA: 3.87 -- from one of the top 10 programs on PGR
I didn't take GRE since most schools did not accept it or made it optional.
I showed my writing sample to 5 professors, 1 postdoc, and 1 classmate. The general reception was very positive. I had to revise here and there. But the comments ranged from "good," strong," and "solid" to "really good." The topic is on McDowell. So, naturally, I applied to programs where professors work on related topics.
No research or publication experience. But I worked as a lecturer and a TA for one year.
There's no way I can tell whether my letters are strong. But two of my letter writers were on my thesis committee and the other writer was my professor for one semester (I got A in his class).
On my SOP, I mentioned and explained two research interests (primary and secondary). And I mentioned in average 4-5 professors I want to work with in detail + if necessary, a few more whose work I am interested in.
Looks like this year cycle is tough, and there are so many candidates whose profiles look much stronger than mine. I just want to know what ppl think how likely (or unlikely) I will get in--so that I can start planning my next step I guess. It's a bummer that I already heard from WUSTL and they rejected me. (But I understand that, of all 20 schools I applied, WUSTL is farthest from my research interest.) It's kinda scary that I haven't heard back from other schools that already began sending emails to their first rounders. Overall, I want to know how things look like for applicants like me, who--GPA-wise--didn't do well in undergrad, but show an upward trajectory that ended up decently well -- whose research interest is in no traditional branch of epistemology (since conceptualism is a controversial view).