I dont want to give up the dream, need some advice.

[Puggy]

• 3.249 GPA 
• 81 credits at big ten university
• 3.7 philosophy GPA maybe
•  Got diagnosed with major mental illness

I really want to be a professor but I kinda shot myself in the foot and got diagnosed with a severe form of manic depression. Almost dropped out. I have a full year of straight Ws on my transcript. 

 

But here's the positives:

• I am arguably the best philosophy undergraduate in our program. Grad students tell me this. Some professors have noticed.
• I am really good at philosophy, creating crafty arguments, and analyzing logic.
• If I spend the next three years taking 16 credits of philosophy a year I could boost my GPA up to 3.68 (if I get straight A's)
• I have read everything produced by the leading University of Arizona scholars. Every paper. Every word. I've read the people they say to read. 
• I'm excellent at PPE (philosophy politics and economics) 
• I have a top 0.1% knowledge of specific debates in political philosophy. Very acute knowledge of the contemporary literature on, say, ideal theorizing.

 

Is it worth it to try to repair my GPA by staying extra years in college to try to get into a top MA program to hopefully get into the U of A? 

 

 

[maxhgns]

Your philosophy GPA matters a lot more than your overall GPA. Just have a letter writer address your Ws and diagnosis, and mention it in your cover letter, too. Mental illness isn't a shot in the foot, it's something that happens to a lot of us.

I hardly see the point of taking three years of additional courses to bring up your GPA; we're always telling students not to take on debt for a degree in philosophy, and it seems to me that you'd be taking on a fair bit of tuition debt to do that. Just finish your degree and apply to a good mix of MAs and PhD programs. If you don't get in the first time, then work some more on your writing sample and letter of interest, refine your list of programs, and try again. And if that still doesn't work, well, you can always try again, but realistically you'll have dodged an employment bullet.

Having said all these things, I'd be remiss if I didn't tell you that depression is quite common among PhD students, and a big part of why so many don't finish the degree. It's also incredibly common among people on the job market, because you're an excellent, stand-out candidate with tons of pubs and prizes, and you've worked hard to send out 100+ applications, and yet you still get zero interviews and don't know what you'll do for money come the fall. And I'm sorry to say that you're not exceptional in these respects. You will almost certainly struggle as much as everyone else does. And you'll probably struggle more than people do today, because the market's not going to be better in tennish years, when you're on it. So be prepared for the recurrence of depressive episodes. I'm not saying this to discourage you from trying the academic route, but just so that you've got some warning of the trials ahead.

[Sigaba]

16 hours ago, Puggy said:

• I have a top 0.1% knowledge of specific debates in political philosophy. Very acute knowledge of the contemporary literature on, say, ideal theorizing.

If this statement accurately reflects your level of expertise, your GPA will not matter because your other application materials will reflect your skills.

However, the statement itself is controversial. It implies that you think that know more the debates than established scholars who are participating in those debates. 

In combination with your proposed disclosure of your mental illness, the continued stigma surrounding mental illness in the Ivory Tower, and the unknowable experiences of departments to which you may apply, your self assessments of your skills may all combine to make you a less competitive candidate than you actually are.

IME, established academics do not discourage undergraduates, aspiring graduate students, and graduate students from thinking that they're the bees' knees. Instead, they frequently give a slight nod, take a step back, and let the dynamic take its course.

[Puggy]

On 6/1/2019 at 1:54 PM, Sigaba said:

If this statement accurately reflects your level of expertise, your GPA will not matter because your other application materials will reflect your skills.

However, the statement itself is controversial. It implies that you think that know more the debates than established scholars who are participating in those debates. 

In combination with your proposed disclosure of your mental illness, the continued stigma surrounding mental illness in the Ivory Tower, and the unknowable experiences of departments to which you may apply, your self assessments of your skills may all combine to make you a less competitive candidate than you actually are.

IME, established academics do not discourage undergraduates, aspiring graduate students, and graduate students from thinking that they're the bees' knees. Instead, they frequently give a slight nod, take a step back, and let the dynamic take its course.

True. I should clarify. I know all of the positions of a handful of philosophers. And some of those philosophers are the top in the field in what they're debating. And I could recite their arguments backwards.

Also I certainly don't think I am the bees knees. I'm not at the level of some of these wicked smart professors and I likely will never be. 

Do you think it is worth it to try to keep going? What percent chance would I have of getting into a semi decent MA and then getting into a top 50 PhD program if I get straight As from here until the end of graduate school? 

[armchair_revolutionary]

I have to say with the level of grandeur involved in the self assessment from the initial post this kind of reads like a well written troll post.

[Puggy]

Haha alright I'll say I came in a little hot on this post. But dont you have to be top in your program to get into a good school? and shouldnt you have a good working knowledge of the contemporary debates of the field you want to go into? 

[Warelin]

1 hour ago, Puggy said:

But dont you have to be top in your program to get into a good school?

No. There are a lot of factors which determine one's acceptance or rejection into a program. If it was based on just x grades, only the top 20 or so students from the top 10 schools would be considered for grad school.

A good working knowledge is good to have. However, I doubt very few full professors would go to say that have the "top 0.1% knowledge of specific debates" within their specific subfields.  The brightest professors I know are still reading and digesting new information on a daily basis. Stating that you're in the top 0.1 percent implies that you don't need a PHD. It sounds as if you believe you're more than ready to contribute scholarly articles right now and become a leading scholar.  A PHD is meant to help those who have a good fit with their program achieve this goal but it sounds to me that you wouldn't benefit from going through a PHD.

[Puggy]

16 minutes ago, Warelin said:

No. There are a lot of factors which determine one's acceptance or rejection into a program. If it was based on just x grades, only the top 20 or so students from the top 10 schools would be considered for grad school.

 

A good working knowledge is good to have. However, I doubt very few full professors would go to say that have the "top 0.1% knowledge of specific debates" within their specific subfields.  The brightest professors I know are still reading and digesting new information on a daily basis. Stating that you're in the top 0.1 percent implies that you don't need a PHD. It sounds as if you believe you're more than ready to contribute scholarly articles right now and become a leading scholar.  A PHD is meant to help those who have a good fit with their program achieve this goal but it sounds to me that you wouldn't benefit from going through a PHD.

I will walk back the 0.1% comment. I was trying to make a point about the amount i've read about specific debates (some debates I've read more than 10-20 books and dozens of articles). I do not believe I can skip through the PhD process nor do I believe I have what it takes to become a leading scholar at the moment. All I am saying is I have spent a serious amount of time studying specific debates. 

[Warelin]

4 minutes ago, Puggy said:

 I was trying to make a point about the amount i've read about specific debates (some debates I've read more than 10-20 books and dozens of articles).

I think you'll find that graduate admissions functions very differently from undergraduate admissions. I think that you'll also find that most people attempting to apply for a PHD program are fairly well-read within the specific areas they're interested in. I think most would also admit that they also wouldn't place themselves among the top ten percentile within that specific field. That is to say, that should you get accepted into a program, you'll likely find that most people have read dozens of books and articles within their field and it's likely that your coursework may see you reading a dozen books a semester and a couple of dozen articles per class. It sounds like you've started a good habit by reading now because grad school will expect no less. It's encouraging that your professors are encouraging you but it's also important to note that your potential graduate professors might be more strict because the objectives are different.

 

3 hours ago, Puggy said:

What percent chance would I have of getting into a semi decent MA and then getting into a top 50 PhD program if I get straight As from here until the end of graduate school?  

There isn't anyway that anybody would be able to answer this for you. It would depend on your writing sample, SOP, letters of recommendation, your academic fit within the university as well as who else applied that year.

[Puggy]

Just now, Warelin said:

I think you'll find that graduate admissions functions very differently from undergraduate admissions. I think that you'll also find that most people attempting to apply for a PHD program are fairly well-read within the specific areas they're interested in. I think most would also admit that they also wouldn't place themselves among the top ten percentile within that specific field. That is to say, that should you get accepted into a program, you'll likely find that most people have read dozens of books and articles within their field and it's likely that your coursework may see you reading a dozen books a semester and a couple of dozen articles per class. It sounds like you've started a good habit by reading now because grad school will expect no less. It's encouraging that your professors are encouraging you but it's also important to note that your potential graduate professors might be more strict because the objectives are different.

 

There isn't anyway that anybody would be able to answer this for you. It would depend on your writing sample, SOP, letters of recommendation, your academic fit within the university as well as who else applied that year.

Thanks I think thats what I needed. Now how do I delete this post because it no longer reflects what I want it to reflect

[Warelin]

Just now, Puggy said:

Thanks I think thats what I needed. Now how do I delete this post because it no longer reflects what I want it to reflect 

A copy of TheGradCafe's Edit/Delete policy can be found here:

If you report your post, another moderator will look at it. Reporting does not guarantee deletion.

[Sigaba]

2 hours ago, Puggy said:

Thanks I think thats what I needed. Now how do I delete this post because it no longer reflects what I want it to reflect

Welcome to the Grad Cafe! Everyone who has been here for a while has written plenty of posts that fall into that category.

(Except me, of course. #denial.?)

Ideally, you won't let a rocky start get in the way of using this BB's resources to find information relevant to your situation. Along the way, you'll encounter posts by active and inactive members who are traveling/have traveled similar paths to graduate school. You'll also find myriad examples of how to say what you want in an academic environment--sometimes with a little swagger, sometimes with a little salt.