Philosophy Interviews, What's the point?

[Phaedrus94]

Hi all,

I was wondering if any of you had any experience with interviews for philosophy PhD programs? Thoughts on how they serve the admissions committee?

I had a strange one last week and got my rejection letter today. I was actually looking forward to it since it seemed like the only interpersonal interaction I'd get with a school, which I took meant they were interested. The program didn't say on its site that it would interview students, and my interview email told me to save the date for a campus visit, so it seemed very eager. I expected it to be rather informal but it was in fact very formal.

Four professors in a board room asked me precise questions about my paper, one related to his field of study...  I now wonder if this was a chance to "redeem" myself but the whole procedure was very unclear. They mostly wanted to know where I was applying-- this is where they really pricked their ears and put their pens to paper. I told them the few schools, and they were surprised about how selective I was and made clear that they wanted me to inform them ASAP about those other schools. I didn't want to be dishonest so I told them I already had an offer from another (much better) school-- but the grilling didn't seem fair.

What's more, it seems like that's all they wanted to know. They read my paper but asked me about my language skills and coursework in a way that seems like they didn't look at the application (I did an MA at a francophone institution and had to remind this of them). I would have been happy to attend the program, but the interview seemed surprisingly shady. 

 

[Neither Here Nor There]

I wonder if they rejected you because you had an offer somewhere else. I would love to hear others stories. Questions about the writing sample are fair, though sounds painful, but drilling you about where you are applying is so odd. So odd. 

EDIT: P.S. How long was this interview/

Edited February 14, 2018 by Neither Here Nor There

[Phaedrus94]

Interview was maybe about 30 minutes. I'm also curious about whether all kids that are admitted must pass through the interview... that would be the most revealing information. If all who are admitted do not go through the interview, it seems like it's only about deciding on the kids who might be worth a little bit more prying (and it seems like it could potentially be more harmful than helpful for them). I saw someone got on the waitlist over a week before I had my interview which I think is strange. Also the time between the deadline of the app and the interview seemed very short.

Am I wrong to say I think the urging about the other schools was unprofessional? It's hard to say what role the other acceptance played in this — I would imagine it could also have pushed them further to offer me admissions. I gave no signal about my rank of schools or anything. I knew the program well. But also, one of the professors was a Derrida scholar. I mention Derrida in a single sentence in my Plato paper,  because he's relevant, and he grilled me on expanding on Derrida. I wasn't going to bullshit through it, but he certainly didn't let me get away with not trying. It was a very pedantic and strange power dynamic, since that is not my philosophical strong suit, nor did I indicate that in my research interests. To be fair, they told me to review my paper before hand but I was taken aback that they would really hone in on a specific reference, and not the structure or cogency of the argument more broadly. The connection also made thins awkward in regards to delays and eye contact. 

Other q's I remember: 

- What classes would you like to see being offered. I responded by saying that I'd like to see more courses on neoplatonism and the intersection between phil and religion in the 18th century. One of them replied that such courses will in fact be offered— the tone seemed to either suggest that he was trying to convince me but also challenging my answer in some way... 

-What other branches of philosophy do you hope to explore at this school - I mentioned areas they were strong in, they seemed happy about it. They told me more, which is strange, because it seemed like they were teaching me about the program as if I had applied blindly and didn't do my own research. It seemed again like they didn't read my application. 

-Why this school - which I answered pretty clearly. They didn't ask to elaborate about why I wanted the PhD in particular or why philosophy etc.  So this maybe is another way of them trying to pry and see if I were really interested. But again, my stats/credentials are pretty non-spectacular, although my letter writers have close ties with the school. 

-Whether I was okay with living in such a rural environment (again, they didn't seem to realize that my undergrad education was in that environment). 

^these all in retrospect seemed routine and covered up the prying about my schools, which I intentionally left blank when I applied. Then they let me ask some questions, which I did but mostly out of formalities, since again, I knew the program well. 

There was one instance that might have been construed as awkward, where I mentioned that I looked up to a not-so-hot/very mediocre scholar who graduated from the program. They were quick to correct me, and I realized that I may have been wrong. Which I think was fine, especially since said scholar's work would make a lot of sense coming out of that particular program. All in all it wasn't a good experience, and I'm truly not saying that because of the rejection. I do hope more schools do interviews because I liked getting the opportunity to meet the profs that I wouldn't be able to because of travel costs, but I'm not sure they did it the right way. 

Anyways curious to here more narratives about phil interviews. 

Edited February 14, 2018 by Phaedrus94