Writing Sample Question

[759]

Here's the situation. I'm currently in the final semester of my MA, writing my thesis, and I plan to apply to PhD programs in the fall of 2018. My plan, originally, was to use an edited-down version of my thesis as my writing sample. When I mentioned this plan to one of my thesis advisors he thought it was a pretty bad idea. Basically, he thinks that my thesis---considered as a thesis and nothing more---is solid (even "very rich" to quote him), but as a writing sample has a number of limitations. My thesis defends a pretty fringe interpretation of Kant and further claims that this interpretation solves a number of classic problems in making Kant's theoretical philosophy consistent. My professor thinks that a thesis like this would make a poor writing sample for three reasons: 1.) It limits me to schools that have a significant number of Kant scholars (since schools with only one Kant scholar might not think my interests are sufficiently wide enough), 2.) While German philosophy (from Kant to Heidegger) constitutes one part of my AOS (along with American pragmatism and epistemology/metaphysics), I have no plans of pigeon-holing myself as a Kant scholar. So I would be misrepresenting myself. and 3.) A good writing sample, even if it includes exegesis of a historical figure, should address a more general/accessible topic; so, if you're writing about Kant, it should be with the aim of giving a new perspective on a more or less current problem in metaphysics/epistemology/what have you. This is all about appearing open to new influences/teachable, etc. As evidence for this, my professor rattled off a pretty long list of former MA students who submitted writing samples on a historical figure and were either only accepted into one school (never even near their top choice) or were shut out completely. 

 

Is this a legitimate worry? It's too late for me to begin work on a new thesis, so if the consensus is that my professor is correct here, then I also need to write something completely new over the summer.

[ProspectGrad]

Tough to say, as there are a lot of factors to consider. Kant is certainly mainstream enough that I don't think you need to be too worried about it. If you think your Kant piece is going to be the better piece, then by all means stick with it. It's not going to help you to submit a worse piece of writing even if it aims to resolve some current problem. 

For what its worth, my writing sample was a technical essay on Kant's theoretical philosophy, and was admitted to a couple top 25 programs (and, as it turns out, UCSD wasn't one of them). 

 

[maxhgns]

Those seem to me like concerns worth addressing. The problem with editing down a thesis is that theses are long, and the powerful conclusions you draw depend on quite a bit of prior work. It's hard to boil them down, especially without much prior experience doing so.

To my mind, your advisor's concerns don't necessarily sound like reasons not to use part of your thesis as a writing sample. They sound like concerns you should aim to address in the paper you spin out of your thesis. In fact, to me they sound like versions of the same concern: you don't want your sample to be too esoteric. So careful exegesis is not ideal, and neither is the stereotypical (for history) tactic of asking what X really meant by Y, or what happens to W's system if you tweak premise P.

That seems right to me, but I also don't think it's anything to freak out over, nor do I think it means you need to write anything from scratch. Just bear it in mind as you're revising your chunk down, and work to make it broadly accessible. Don't assume that your readers will know much of anything about Kant, limit your use of specialized terms, etc. Write it so that a smart undergrad with no Kant background can read it, understand the significance of the problem, and make sense of what you're trying to do.

[shifgrethor]

Disagree on (3). My writing sample was pure Hume exegesis: I wrote on a relatively-forgotten passage buried in the Treatise, with no attempt to make it relevant to contemporary philosophical debates. I just tried to make the passage coherent and consistent with the rest of the Treatise.

On (2), the admissions committee will know that this is only one paper, and therefore not necessarily representative of your capabilities. If it is your best work, I don't see why you should substitute it out for another paper (not to mention - by the same reasoning, wouldn't you be pigeonholing yourself into whatever field that other paper falls into?). This is why you should use your SOP to clarify what your other areas are. Don't try to cram more into your writing sample just to prove you are not one-dimensional.

(1) is true, and if you're not committed to working on Kant you should definitely consider this (though as a quick aside, I was admitted to Pitt which has no one working strictly on Hume, so who knows). 

I do agree that there are lots of things that might be virtues for a paper/thesis but vices for a writing sample. For example: your paper should have clear philosophically clever moves that are original to you. You should also be careful not to use polarizing language or terminology. I don't want to say 'don't be controversial', but there is something to be said about not being too radical in your writing sample. It could come off as arrogance. A prof told me this when I was thinking of using a paper on Kant as my sample, which argued for a super controversial reading of the practical philosophy. You don't want the person reading it to think "who is this person to think they are better than 200 years of Kant exegesis?" So based on that I could see why your thesis might be problematic as a writing sample.

[Kantattheairport]

For what it's worth, the professor who was advising me specifically told me not to feel restricted about what I wanted to write my sample on. He mentioned casually that the sample can be a good way to show that you're up-to-date with hot current topics in philosophy, or that it can be useful to be writing on something that one of your advisors can closely critique you on - but that these were secondary concerns, and that you should really just write on whatever you think you can write best about. Importantly, you don't need to feel like you're making an original contribution to the literature or anything: you should focus on whatever will best showcase your ability to clearly lay out and engage with philosophical arguments. Topic-wise, this can be anything, as long as you're properly introducing and laying out everything.

Just the advice I was given though!

[Gingergin]

My paper was on a history figure and just gave a new interpretation of an argument which seems to have nothing to do with the current philosophical discussion.  I received several offers from top schools.  So I don’t know whether you should really change your topic because it worked well in my case.  But I applied a few times...

Edited March 20, 2018 by Gingergin

[syn]

I want to start by being very explicit: you're asking a bunch of [mostly] prospective grad students whether the worries of your advisor are merited.  Not to fall into the logical fallacy of arguing from authority, but I'm not sure we're the most qualified bunch to be questioning your advisor.  That said, what I can do is relay some things that my own advisor said.  I will also say that I had tow advisors who, at times, gave me conflicting information, but it was information I could parse and, in some ways, put them together to create a far stronger writing sample.  So I'll base my comments on what my advisors said and then what I did.

1 and 2. I've definitely seen how a writing sample can shape one's application.  In fact, I think we've seen that in some people's comments here, especially in one case where a person wrote on aesthetics even though that isn't their main AOI.  I think if you're going to submit a sample that isn't your AOI, you should explain that in your SOI/SOP just so there isn't too much confusion.  But, still, if what should be your best writing sample isn't in your AOI, and you are devoid of other accomplishments in your AOI, that might raise a flag to the admissions committee: you might have an interest in an area, but are you actually good at it?  Do you have a sufficient background to show that you're adept at learning and succeeding within your AOI?  Those questions have to be answered.

3. I think 3 is related in a lot of ways to 1, and for the reasons I explained above.  Remember, too: if you write on a historical figure and there's no faculty in the program interested in the figure, then it's difficult for that faculty member to judge whether or not you said anything new or interesting.  They might very well get a sense of your writing style, ability to argue soundly, and structure a paper cohesively, but they will know less whether you said anything that hasn't been said before.  I think that might be why your advisor said to make it more general: it would then be more accessible across philosophical fields.

One other note about using a thesis as a writing sample: in most applications I saw that the writing sample should be somewhere between 15-20 pages-ish.  Meanwhile, a thesis is often 30+ pages.  Even if you spend a lot of some paring it down, it's a risk that your argument won't be as strong as it was before; after all, you wrote it that specific way for a specific reason.  Submitting it as the original risks faculty only reading a portion of the thesis, and they won't get to the "good part" where you tie everything together.  You might, then, consider, when doing a thesis, writing it as an article first, thesis second.  The former being concise and palatable to an admissions committee; the latter being an exegesis fitting for a thesis committee.  And, preferably, it would be within your AOI.

Hope that helps!

Edited March 21, 2018 by syn